PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2020-09-19, 17:30:19
News: Registration with the OUR forum is now by invitation only.

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 [43] 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 ... 100
Author Topic: 9/11 debate - enter at your own risk!  (Read 755080 times)

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Introducing Bitgold. Bitcoin backed by gold.

We are proud to announce that Bitreserve’s cloud money system now supports gold. Starting today, our members can hold their bitcoin as stable gold value and spend this historic precious metal anywhere bitcoin is accepted.

With our Gold Card, we are reviving gold for the purchase of goods and services. Bitreserve members can convert their bitcoin to bitgold, whose value is substantiated by bullion in our reserve, but still spend it as bitcoin. By creating a bridge between the revolutionary Bitcoin protocol and good old gold bullion, we enable our members to instantly send or spend bitcoin from the ounces of gold held in their Bitreserve wallet.

Our Gold Card makes this ancient store of value instantly transferable, infinitely divisible and accessible to anyone with a networked device. Now anybody with some bitcoin and a Bitreserve wallet can have the Midas touch. Old King Croesus would be chuffed.

Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/introducing-bitgold-bitcoin-backed-by-gold/#vqBBXXz5bgiIAJvz.99


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The Nuremberg Trials

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials

The Nuremberg trials were a series of military tribunals, held by the Allied forces after World War II, most notable for the prosecution of prominent members of the political, military, and economic leadership of Nazi Germany. The trials were held in the city of Nuremberg, Germany. The first, and best known of these trials, described as "the greatest trial in history" by Norman Birkett, one of the British judges who presided over it, was the trial of the major war criminals before the International Military Tribunal (IMT). Held between 20 November 1945 and 1 October 1946, the Tribunal was given the task of trying 23 of the most important political and military leaders of the Third Reich, though one of the defendants, Martin Bormann, was tried in absentia, while another, Robert Ley, committed suicide within a week of the trial's commencement. Not included were Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, and Joseph Goebbels, all of whom had committed suicide several months before the indictment was signed. The second set of trials of lesser war criminals was conducted under Control Council Law No. 10 at the U.S. Nuremberg Military Tribunals (NMT); among these included the Doctors' Trial and the Judges' Trial. This article primarily deals with the IMT; see Subsequent Nuremberg Trials for details on those trials.

The Nuremberg Principles

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_principles

The Nuremberg principles were a set of guidelines for determining what constitutes a war crime. The document was created by the International Law Commission of the United Nations to codify the legal principles underlying the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi party members following World War II.

The principles:

Principle I

"Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment."

Principle II

"The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law."

Principle III

"The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law."

Principle IV

"The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".

This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders'".

Previous to the time of the Nuremberg Trials, this excuse was known in common parlance as "Superior Orders". After the prominent, high profile event of the Nuremberg Trials, that excuse is now referred to by many as "Nuremberg Defense". In recent times, a third term, "lawful orders" has become common parlance for some people. All three terms are in use today, and they all have slightly different nuances of meaning, depending on the context in which they are used.

Nuremberg Principle IV is legally supported by the jurisprudence found in certain articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which deal indirectly with conscientious objection. It is also supported by the principles found in paragraph 171 of the Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status which was issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Those principles deal with the conditions under which conscientious objectors can apply for refugee status in another country if they face persecution in their own country for refusing to participate in an illegal war.

Principle V

"Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law."

Principle VI


"The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

    (a) Crimes against peace:

        (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

        (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

    (b) War crimes:

    Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

    (c) Crimes against humanity:

    Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime."

Principle VII

"Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law."


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The US must end its illegal war in Libya now

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jul/06/libya-nato1

President Obama has ripped up the US constitution for Nato's ill-considered Libyan adventure. Congress must restore sense

Dennis Kucinich,
theguardian.com, Wednesday 6 July 2011 14.00 BST

This week, I am sponsoring legislation in the United States Congress that will end US military involvement in Libya for the following reasons:

First, the war is illegal under the United States constitution and our War Powers Act, because only the US Congress has the authority to declare war and the president has been unable to show that the US faced an imminent threat from Libya. The president even ignored his top legal advisers at the Pentagon and the department of justice who insisted he needed congressional approval before bombing Libya.

Second, the war has reached a stalemate and is unwinnable without the deployment of Nato ground troops, effectively an invasion of Libya. The whole operation was terribly ill-considered from the beginning. While Nato supports the Benghazi-based opposition (situated in the oil-rich north-east), there is little evidence that the opposition has support of the majority of Libyans. The leading opposition group, the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (which had reportedly been backed by the CIA in the 1980s), should never have launched an armed civil war against the government if they had no chance absent a massive Nato air campaign and the introduction of Nato troops. Their reckless actions, encouraged by western political, military and intelligence interests, created the humanitarian crisis that was then used to justify the Nato war campaign.

Third, the United States cannot afford it. The US cost of the mission is projected to soon reach more than $1bn, and we are already engaged in massive cutbacks of civil services for our own people.

It is not surprising that a majority of Republicans, Democrats and independents alike think the US should not be involved in Libya.

This war is misguided. An invasion would be a disaster. Nato already is out of control, using a UN mandate allowing for protection of civilians as the flimsy pretext for an unauthorised mission of regime change through massive violence. In a just world, the Nato commander would be held responsible for any violations of international law. As a means of continuing the civil war, Nato member France and coalition ally Qatar have both admitted shipping weapons to Libya, in open violation of the United Nations arms embargo.

In the end, the biggest casualty of this game of nations will be the legitimacy of the UN, its resolutions and mandates, and international rule of law. This condition must be reversed. The ban on arms supplies to Libya must be enforced, not subverted by Nato countries. The US must cease its illegal and counterproductive support for a military resolution now.

The US Congress must act to cut off funds for the war because there is no military solution in Libya. Serious negotiations for a political solution must begin to end the violence and create an environment for peace negotiations to fulfil the legitimate, democratic aspirations of the people. A political solution will become viable when the opposition understands that regime change is the privilege of the Libyan people, not of Nato.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Will Russia’s Response to Washington’s Aggression Be to Release Black Swans?

audio interview at link:

http://kingworldnews.com/dr-paul-craig-roberts-12-20-14/



---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The Holocaust & Israel

http://www.world-religions-professor.com/holocaust.html

The Holocaust, or shoah, that occurred in Nazi Germany during the years of World War II is a watershed event for Jews and Judaism in general. Approximately 6 million Jews - along with hundreds of thousands of others including homosexuals, gypsies, Jehovah's Witnesses, and political dissidents - were rounded up and murdered in extermination camps. The shoah is arguably the worst act of antisemitism in the history of the Jewish religion, and one of the worst human atrocities in the history of the world.

The horrors of this event completed the efforts of zionism to establish a permanent homeland for the Jews in their biblical land called Israel. Zionism - literally, a call or desire for Zion (which is another name for the biblical homeland) - began earnestly in the 19th century after Russian Jews endured pogroms and had to flee for their lives. Many began immigrating to the area now known as Israel, but which was then under Ottoman rule.

After the Holocaust, members of the international community that had been central the ending of World War II exerted the political will to establish a Jewish homeland. Thus, the modern state of Israel was established in 1948. Although Israel's founding included provisions for the founding of a state for native Palestinians in the region, such a state has yet to be established. Moreover, many Palestinians and other nations in the region rejected the establishment of the state of Israel for various reasons.

Therefore - and quite ironically - the state of Israel, which was founded to once and for all provide a safe place for Jews, has been a contested and sometimes besieged state since its founding.

Dr. Jill Carroll is a Houston-based scholar, writer and speaker who specializes in world religions, religion and world politics, religion in public life, and applied life philosophy.

She is an Adjunct Associate Professor in the Department of Religious Studies at Rice University, where she also directed the Boniuk Center for Religious Tolerance until June 2009. She is a recognized expert on issues of religious tolerance, philosophy of religion, American religion, and religion in public life. Her areas of specialty include: the role of religion in world politics, comparative world religions, trends in American religion, the impact of religious diversity in global business, and applied life philosophy.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The history of Britain's national debt

http://www.debtbombshell.com/history-of-national-debt.htm

Before the late 17th century, it was customary for the state to fund its war debts by levying new taxes. But by 1694 the Nine Years' War had left the English Government's finances in tatters. We were forced to borrow £1.2 million at a rate of 8% from the newly formed Bank of England and national deficit financing was born.

National debt in the modern sense emerged in the the early 18th century, as banking and financial markets enabled the creation of debt through the issue of bills and bonds. Subsequently, the national debt rose from £12m in 1700 to £850m by the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815.

War debt

The First World War saw another major increase, from £650m in 1914 to £7.4bn in 1919. We borrowed heavily to beat the Nazis in World War Two and by 1946 the debt had grown to £24.7bn, or 250% of GDP. The debt then declined rapidly in GDP terms, but the period of high inflation in the 1970s and 80s ensured net debt continued to rise, from £33.1bn in 1970 to £197.4bn in 1988.

Historically, Britain has borrowed on a large scale to finance wars. Our creditworthiness as a nation has long been to our advantage. This graph shows the history of public debt as a percentage of GDP using the traditional National Loans Fund measure. This statistic was discontinued by the Treasury in 2004 as it no longer accurately reflected the true liabilities of the modern state.

Now, after decades of relative peace and prosperity, our national debt is sky-rocketing once more. In 1997 Public Sector Net Debt stood at £352 billion. From there it took only 12 years to double, and the Government forecasts it will double again by 2014. Let's hope we don't need to finance a major defensive war any time soon.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
How the CIA Launched the «Financial Pearl Harbor» Attacks on Russia and Venezuela

http://www.strategic-culture.org/pview/2014/12/20/how-cia-launched-the-financial-pearl-harbor-attacks-russia-venezuela.html

Central Intelligence Agency director John Brennan's long familiarity with Saudi Arabia, owing to the time he spent there as the CIA station chief in Riyadh in the 1990s and his knowledge of Saudi oil operations, has paid off. Petroleum industry insiders claim that Brennan's agents inside Saudi Aramco convinced the firm's management and the Saudi Oil Ministry to begin fracking operations in order to stimulate production in Saudi Arabia's oldest oil fields. The Saudis, who are not known for their hands-on knowledge of their nation’s own oil industry, agreed to what became an oil pricing catastrophe which would not only affect Saudi Arabia but oil producing nations around the world from Russia and Venezuela to Nigeria and Indonesia.

By pumping high-pressure salt water into older wells, some at a depth of three to six thousand feet, an inordinate amount of pressure was built up. The CIA's oil industry implants knew what would occur when the fracking operations began. Due to the dangerously high water pressure, the Saudis were forced continuously pump oil until the pressure became equalized. That process is continuing. If the Saudis ceased pumping oil, they would permanently lose the wells to salt water contamination. In the current "pump it or lose it" situation, the Saudis are forced to pump at a rate that may take up to five years before they can slow down production rates to pre-glut levels.

The corporate media, including the Bloomberg and Dow Jones virtual business news monopolies, issued news reports claiming that the Saudis agreed to keep production high at the November meeting of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) in order to retain their market share amid increased U.S. oil production from fracking.

The net result of the CIA-inspired fracking operations, which the Saudis were warned not to pursue by petroleum engineers working for some foreign-based firms like Schlumberger, is that there will be an oil supply glut for the next 5 years. The glut will be followed by a reduction in Saudi oil production unless new oil fields are brought on line. There is now a major push by U.S. and Canadian oil companies to bring online the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the United States to offset the expected sharp rise in oil prices in four to five years. But with Canada suffering financially from the drop in oil revenues, the Keystone XL project is also on financially shaky ground.

The CIA operation to frack Middle Eastern oil fields was not only limited to Saudi Arabia. Oil industry sources have revealed that similar fracking caused over production problems in Kuwait and Iraq.

The CIA’s sabotage of Saudi and other oil fields is not a first for the agency. In 1982, a massive and devastating explosion of the Trans-Siberian Pipeline was said to have been the work of Trojan horse software implanted by a Canadian company on behalf of the CIA. Former U.S. Air Force Secretary Thomas Reed, who served in the Ronald Reagan White House, confirmed the CIA’s role in the industrial sabotage. The CIA cooperated with the Israeli Mossad in creating the Flame computer virus that crippled Iran’s nuclear enrichment equipment. Another CIA-Mossad virus, Stuxnet, had wreaked havoc on nuclear power plants around the world.

The CIA is believed to have played a part in the crash of the Russian-made Sukhoi Superjet 100 in May 2012 in Indonesia. A Russian military intelligence spokesman said that U.S. industrial sabotage in downing the flight, which killed 45 Indonesian and Russian nationals, was considered a likely cause. The crash came after the head of the Russian space agency, Roskosmos, said he believed that it was possible that the failure of the Phobos-Grunt mission to the moons of Mars may have been caused by American sabotage.

The CIA’s use of industrial sabotage against the Cuban sugar industry, the Chilean and Zambian copper industries, and the Haitian rice industry is legendary. Explosions at oil refineries in Iran, Argentina, Mexico, Ecuador, and Venezuela, pipeline explosions in Syria and Libya, and a Brazilian Petrobras marine oil rig collapse, have been attributed to CIA proxy terrorist groups.

The result of the sudden decline in oil prices has resulted in heavy damage to the economies of the CIA-targeted countries of Russia, Iran, and Venezuela. Brennan and his economic warfare operatives absolutely banked on the Saudi over-production to harm the economies of all three countries and the CIA has not been disappointed. The CIA figures that «regime change» would bring to power pro-U.S. governments in Russia, Venezuela, and Iran.

Already, from his base in Switzerland, exiled Russian tax evader billionaire Mikhail Khodorkovsky has called for President Vladimir Putin's violent overthrow and even his assassination. Meanwhile, the U.S. Congress took its cues from the CIA and voted to impose devastating economic sanctions on both Russia and Venezuela. President Barack Obama approved the congressional sanctions. Similar congressional legislation to increase sanctions on Iran is pending.

Russia has been harmed the most by the CIA's Saudi oil production scheme. The Russian ruble fell 56 percent in value against the U.S. dollar while Russian interest rates climbed to 17 percent. The price of shares of Russia's largest lending bank, Sberbank, fell 18 percent. Although the Russian economic collapse has resulted in financial ripples around the world, with Austrian and French banks losing their stock values and the value of the Polish zloty and Hungarian forint falling against the dollar, the Obama administration says that there will be no easing on economic sanctions imposed on Russia over Ukraine. Obama has also put the individual and institutional investments of American holders of Russian bonds in dire jeopardy.

The Pacific Investment Management Company's (PEBIX) Emerging Markets Bond Fund, which holds over $800 million in Russian bonds, has lost almost 8 percent in value in the past few weeks.

Meanwhile, basic staples in Venezuela, including cooking oil, rice, and corn flour, are becoming hard to obtain. On the Venezuelan black market, the U.S. dollar has jumped 1700 percent in value against the Venezuelan bolivar. The CIA is using the financial collapse to push for an undemocratic overthrow of the Venezuelan government and CIA operatives are providing cash payments to Venezuelan opposition politicians and provocateurs.

Iran, which has been under punitive Western economic sanctions for a number of years over its nuclear power program, is probably best able to weather the storm. Iran has built up a rather impressive domestic food production, telecommunications, and oil industry infrastructure to survive the sanctions. However, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani appears very aware of the Saudi role in the conspiracy to drive down oil prices. Recently, Rouhani said of the drop in oil prices, "The main reason for [it] is political conspiracy by certain countries against the interest of the region and the Islamic world and it is only in the interest of some other countries . . . Iran and people of the region will not forget such conspiracies.»

The economic hardships imposed on oil-producing Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, has resulted in an opportunity for the Islamic State to gain adherents in the country, especially among the young and unemployed population. The economy of China, which is hoping to begin pumping oil from lucrative marine reserves in the South China Sea, is feeling the strain of lower oil prices. Mexico, wracked with social instability, has also suffered from the CIA’s machinations. However, instability in Mexico has always been advantageous for the CIA, which continues to benefit from the illegal drug trade that keeps the agency’s slush fund accounts flush with cash.

Brennan's and the CIA's industrial sabotage of the Saudi industry will continue to have far-reaching effects on the world economy. Oil industry insiders fear that the CIA has unleashed something that may deal a devastating blow to the global economy from which it will be difficult to recover.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Seven Reasons Why the “Bad Guys” Keep Winning
By Washington's Blog
Global Research, December 23, 2014
Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/seven-reasons-why-the-bad-guys-keep-winning/5421355

How Come They Keeping Getting Away With It?

How come the bad guys keep getting away with it … even after getting caught again and again?

Reason Number 1: Falling for the Big Fib

People are wired to believe our leaders’ big statements, even if they are ridiculous:

As Adolph Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf:

    All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true in itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

Similarly, Hitler’s propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, wrote:

    That is of course rather painful for those involved. One should not as a rule reveal one’s secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.

Science has now helped to explain why the big lie is effective.

As I’ve previously pointed out in another context:

Psychologists and sociologists show us that people will rationalize what their leaders are doing, even when it makes no sense ….

Sociologists from four major research institutions investigated why so many Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, years after it became obvious that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

The researchers found, as described in an article in the journal Sociological Inquiry (and re-printed by Newsweek):

    Many Americans felt an urgent need to seek justification for a war already in progress

    Rather than search rationally for information that either confirms or disconfirms a particular belief, people actually seek out information that confirms what they already believe.

    “For the most part people completely ignore contrary information.”

    “The study demonstrates voters’ ability to develop elaborate rationalizations based on faulty information”

    People get deeply attached to their beliefs, and form emotional attachments that get wrapped up in their personal identity and sense of morality, irrespective of the facts of the matter.

    “We refer to this as ‘inferred justification, because for these voters, the sheer fact that we were engaged in war led to a post-hoc search for a justification for that war.

    “People were basically making up justifications for the fact that we were at war”

    “They wanted to believe in the link [between 9/11 and Iraq] because it helped them make sense of a current reality. So voters’ ability to develop elaborate rationalizations based on faulty information, whether we think that is good or bad for democratic practice, does at least demonstrate an impressive form of creativity.

An article yesterday in Alternet discussing the Sociological Inquiry article helps us to understand that the key to people’s active participation in searching for excuses for actions by the big boys is fear:

    Subjects were presented during one-on-one interviews with a newspaper clip of this Bush quote: “This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaeda.”The Sept. 11 Commission, too, found no such link, the subjects were told.

    “Well, I bet they say that the commission didn’t have any proof of it,” one subject responded, “but I guess we still can have our opinions and feel that way even though they say that.”

    Reasoned another: “Saddam, I can’t judge if he did what he’s being accused of, but if Bush thinks he did it, then he did it.”

    Others declined to engage the information at all. Most curious to the researchers were the respondents who reasoned that Saddam must have been connected to Sept. 11, because why else would the Bush Administration have gone to war in Iraq?

    The desire to believe this was more powerful, according to the researchers, than any active campaign to plant the idea.

    Such a campaign did exist in the run-up to the war…

    He won’t credit [politicians spouting misinformation] alone for the phenomenon, though.

    “That kind of puts the idea out there, but what people then do with the idea … ” he said. “Our argument is that people aren’t just empty vessels. You don’t just sort of open up their brains and dump false information in and they regurgitate it. They’re actually active processing cognitive agents”…

    The alternate explanation raises queasy questions for the rest of society.

    “I think we’d all like to believe that when people come across disconfirming evidence, what they tend to do is to update their opinions,” said Andrew Perrin, an associate professor at UNC and another author of the study…

    “The implications for how democracy works are quite profound, there’s no question in my mind about that,” Perrin said. “What it means is that we have to think about the emotional states in which citizens find themselves that then lead them to reason and deliberate in particular ways.”

    Evidence suggests people are more likely to pay attention to facts within certain emotional states and social situations. Some may never change their minds. For others, policy-makers could better identify those states, for example minimizing the fear that often clouds a person’s ability to assess facts …

The Alternet article links to a must-read interview with psychology professor Sheldon Solomon, who explains:

    A large body of evidence shows that momentarily [raising fear of death], typically by asking people to think about themselves dying, intensifies people’s strivings to protect and bolster aspects of their worldviews, and to bolster their self-esteem. The most common finding is that [fear of death] increases positive reactions to those who share cherished aspects of one’s cultural worldview, and negative reactions toward those who violate cherished cultural values or are merely different.

And what about torture? Even after the Senate Intelligence report said that torture didn’t do anything helpful – confirmed by America’s top interrogation experts and 1,700 years of history – the American public still believes the big lie.

And I would argue that the fact that the governments of the world have given trillions to the giant banks has invoked the same mental process – and susceptibility to propaganda -as the war in Iraq.

Specifically, many people assume that because the government has launched a war to prop up the giant banks, it must have a good reason for doing so.

Why else would trillions in taxpayer dollars be thrown at the giant banks? Why else would the government say that saving the big boys is vital?

And I would argue that the fear of another Great Depression (an economic death, if you will) is analogous to the fear of death triggered in many Americans by 9/11.

This creates a regression towards old-fashioned thinking about such things as banks and the financial system, even though the giant banks actually do very little traditional banking these days.

In other words, the big lie appears to be as effective in financial as in military warfare.

Reason Number 2: The Urge to Defend Bad Systems

Psychiatrist Peter Zafirides, M.D sent us an excellent article explaining why good people defend bad systems:

    From the bust of the housing bubble and mortgage meltdown to Bernie Madoff and Jerry Sandusky, to political candidates and campaigns, it seems not a week goes by before another story of corruption and scandal breaks. And very predictably, the following questions always seem to follow:

    “How could they get away with this?”

    - or -

    “Why didn’t someone say or do anything about it?”

    In trying to answer these questions, we have to first understand a bit about both individual and group psychology. The answers may potentially surprise or frighten you, but it is through this understanding, that any real (and lasting) change can occur. Beyond these obvious questions lies another stark reality: good people tend to continue to defend bad systems.

    Why does this happen? What is going on here?

    Why do we stick up for a system or institution we live in—a government, company, or marriage—even when anyone else can see it is failing miserably? Why do we resist change even when the system is corrupt or unjust? A new article in Current Directions in Psychological Science, reveals the conditions under which we’re motivated to defend the status quo—a psychological process called “system justification.”

    The Power of the Status Quo

    In system justification theory, people are motivated to defend the status quo. There is a need to see it as being good, just and/or legitimate. People not only want to hold a favorable view of themselves and the groups they associate with, but they also hold favorable views of an entire, overarching social system. There is a lot at stake here on an individual psychological level that may not have anything to do with the particular candidate, or government or social issue.

    There are consequences for trying to buck the system. What will happen if you try to introduce a different type of political or economic system? You tend to be mocked, marginalized or completely ignored. People need to believe that the systems they believe in are legitimate. But this can cause bias and very dangerous blind spots when it comes to the issue of corruption in these systems.

    “Now this is not the same as acquiescence,” says Aaron C. Kay, a psychologist at Duke University, who co-authored the paper with University of Waterloo graduate student Justin Friesen. “It’s pro-active. When someone comes to justify the status quo, they also come to see it as what should be.”

    According to the research, four particular situations significantly increased the likelihood that system justification would occur:

    1. When a threat to the system occurred.

    2. When one is dependent on the system.

    3. When there is no potential escape from the system.

    4. When one has low personal control of their lives.

    Threat

    When we’re threatened we defend ourselves—and our systems. Before 9/11, for instance, President George W. Bush was sinking in the polls. But as soon as the planes hit the World Trade Center, the president’s approval ratings soared. So did support for Congress and the police. During Hurricane Katrina, America witnessed FEMA’s spectacular failure to rescue the hurricane’s victims. Yet many people blamed those victims for their fate rather than admitting the agency flunked and supporting ideas for fixing it. In times of crisis, say the authors, we want to believe the system works. This bias is real. The problem is, it may not even be consciously in our awareness.

    Dependency

    We also defend systems we rely on. In one experiment, students made to feel dependent on their university defended a school funding policy—but disapproved of the same policy if it came from the government, which they didn’t perceive as affecting them closely. However, if they felt dependent on the government, they liked the policy originating from it, but not from the school.

    Inescapability & Loss of Control

    When we feel we can’t escape a system, we adapt. That includes feeling okay about things we might otherwise consider undesirable. The authors note one study in which participants were told that men’s salaries in their country are 20% higher than women’s. Rather than implicate an unfair system, those who felt they couldn’t emigrate chalked up the wage gap to innate differences between the sexes. “You’d think that when people are stuck with a system, they’d want to change it more,” says Kay. But in fact, the more stuck they are, the more likely are they to explain away its shortcomings.

    Finally, a related phenomenon: The less control people feel over their own lives, the more they endorse systems and leaders that offer a sense of order.

    Change Is Possible!

    The research on system justification should not be overwhelming or demoralizing. If anything it can really help to enlighten those who are frustrated when people don’t rise up in what would seem their own best interests. The awareness of this psychological tendency in all of us is the first step in trying to minimize its impact. Awareness is critical if one hopes to meaningfully change systems.

    According to Dr. Kay, “If you want to understand how to get social change to happen, you need to understand the conditions that make people resist change and what makes them open to acknowledging that change might be a necessity.” This is true whether the change one desires is individual or societal.

    But do not despair! Whether on an individual or societal level, change absolutely happen. Awareness and knowledge is the first part of the process.

    Never give up the fight.

    Never doubt how truly powerful you are.

Reason Number 3: Assuming that the Super-Elite Are “Like Us”

The super-elites are not like us:

Vanderbilt researchers have found that the brains of psychopaths have a dopamine abnormality which creates a drive for rewards at any cost, and causes them to ignore risks.

As PhysOrg writes:

    Abnormalities in how the nucleus accumbens, highlighted here, processes dopamine have been found in individuals with psychopathic traits and may be linked to violent, criminal behavior. Credit: Gregory R.Samanez-Larkin and Joshua W. Buckholtz

    The brains of psychopaths appear to be wired to keep seeking a reward at any cost, new research from Vanderbilt University finds. The research uncovers the role of the brain’s reward system in psychopathy and opens a new area of study for understanding what drives these individuals.

    “This study underscores the importance of neurological research as it relates to behavior,” Dr. Francis S. Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, said. “The findings may help us find new ways to intervene before a personality trait becomes antisocial behavior.”

    The results were published March 14, 2010, in Nature Neuroscience.

    “Psychopaths are often thought of as cold-blooded criminals who take what they want without thinking about consequences,” Joshua Buckholtz, a graduate student in the Department of Psychology and lead author of the new study, said. “We found that a hyper-reactive dopamine reward system may be the foundation for some of the most problematic behaviors associated with psychopathy, such as violent crime, recidivism and substance abuse.”

    Previous research on psychopathy has focused on what these individuals lack—fear, empathy and interpersonal skills. The new research, however, examines what they have in abundance—impulsivity, heightened attraction to rewards and risk taking. Importantly, it is these latter traits that are most closely linked with the violent and criminal aspects of psychopathy.

    “There has been a long tradition of research on psychopathy that has focused on the lack of sensitivity to punishment and a lack of fear, but those traits are not particularly good predictors of violence or criminal behavior,” David Zald, associate professor of psychology and of psychiatry and co-author of the study, said. “Our data is suggesting that something might be happening on the other side of things. These individuals appear to have such a strong draw to reward—to the carrot—that it overwhelms the sense of risk or concern about the stick.”

    To examine the relationship between dopamine and psychopathy, the researchers used positron emission tomography, or PET, imaging of the brain to measure dopamine release, in concert with a functional magnetic imaging, or fMRI, probe of the brain’s reward system.

    “The really striking thing is with these two very different techniques we saw a very similar pattern—both were heightened in individuals with psychopathic traits,” Zald said.

    Study volunteers were given a personality test to determine their level of psychopathic traits. These traits exist on a spectrum, with violent criminals falling at the extreme end of the spectrum. However, a normally functioning person can also have the traits, which include manipulativeness, egocentricity, aggression and risk taking.

    In the first portion of the experiment, the researchers gave the volunteers a dose of amphetamine, or speed, and then scanned their brains using PET to view dopamine release in response to the stimulant. Substance abuse has been shown in the past to be associated with alterations in dopamine responses. Psychopathy is strongly associated with substance abuse.

    “Our hypothesis was that psychopathic traits are also linked to dysfunction in dopamine reward circuitry,” Buckholtz said. “Consistent with what we thought, we found people with high levels of psychopathic traits had almost four times the amount of dopamine released in response to amphetamine.”

    In the second portion of the experiment, the research subjects were told they would receive a monetary reward for completing a simple task. Their brains were scanned with fMRI while they were performing the task. The researchers found in those individuals with elevated psychopathic traits the dopamine reward area of the brain, the nucleus accumbens, was much more active while they were anticipating the monetary reward than in the other volunteers.

    “It may be that because of these exaggerated dopamine responses, once they focus on the chance to get a reward, psychopaths are unable to alter their attention until they get what they’re after,” Buckholtz said. Added Zald, “It’s not just that they don’t appreciate the potential threat, but that the anticipation or motivation for reward overwhelms those concerns.”

Has anyone tested the heads of the too big to fails for this dopamine abnormality?

What are the odds that they have it? And if they have it, what are the odds that they will voluntarily start acting responsibly, especially given the broken incentive system?

Experts also tell us that many politicians also share traits with serial killers. Specifically, the Los Angeles Times noted in 2009:

    Using his law enforcement experience and data drawn from the FBI’s behavioral analysis unit, Jim Kouri has collected a series of personality traits common to a couple of professions.

    Kouri, who’s a vice president of the National Assn. of Chiefs of Police, has assembled traits such as superficial charm, an exaggerated sense of self-worth, glibness, lying, lack of remorse and manipulation of others.

    These traits, Kouri points out in his analysis, are common to psychopathic serial killers.

    But — and here’s the part that may spark some controversy and defensive discussion — these traits are also common to American politicians. (Maybe you already suspected.)

    Yup. Violent homicide aside, our elected officials often show many of the exact same character traits as criminal nut-jobs, who run from police but not for office.

    Kouri notes that these criminals are psychologically capable of committing their dirty deeds free of any concern for social, moral or legal consequences and with absolutely no remorse.

    “This allows them to do what they want, whenever they want,” he wrote. “Ironically, these same traits exist in men and women who are drawn to high-profile and powerful positions in society including political officeholders.”

    ***

    “While many political leaders will deny the assessment regarding their similarities with serial killers and other career criminals, it is part of a psychopathic profile that may be used in assessing the behaviors of many officials and lawmakers at all levels of government.”

As Jim Quinn notes:

    When their bets came up craps, they had the gall to hold the American people hostage for trillions in bailouts. Their fellow psychopaths in Congress gladly forked over the money. Rather than mend their ways, these evil men have returned to their excessive risk taking and continue to pay themselves billions in compensation, while the American middle class is smothered to death under mountains of debt. These evil Wall Street geniuses have shown no remorse as seven million people have lost their jobs and millions more have lost their homes due to the greed and avarice displayed on an epic scale.

    Wall Street bankers exhibit the epitome of psychopathic behavior, showing lack of empathy and remorse, shallow emotions, egocentricity, and deceptiveness. Psychopaths are highly prone to antisocial behavior and abusive treatment of others. Though lacking empathy and emotional depth, they often manage to pass themselves off as average individuals by feigning emotions. These Wall Street bankers will never willingly accept responsibility for their actions. They continue to use their wealth and power to control the politicians in Washington DC and the misinformation propagated by the corporate media they control. They own and control the Federal Reserve and will print money until the whole system collapses in a spectacular implosion that destroys our financial system. They only care about their own wealth, influence and status. They have no shame.

Studies also show that the wealthy are less empathic than those with more modest wealth, and so:

    The idea of nobless oblige or trickle-down economics, certain versions of it, is bull,” Keltner added. “Our data say you cannot rely on the wealthy to give back. The ‘thousand points of light’—this rise of compassion in the wealthy to fix all the problems of society—is improbable, psychologically.”

    Those in the upper-class tend to hoard resources and be less generous than they could be.

Given that many in Congress and top government posts are multi-millionaires, the study might help explain why politicians seem only to work to make themselves wealthier and to help their wealthy buddies.

We will remain disempowered if we assume that the super-elites are “like us”. Unless we learn to spot “wolves in sheep’s clothing”, we will continue to fall prey to their scams.

This is not to say that all rich or powerful people are psychopaths. There are some great men and women who are affluent or who serve in Washington, D.C. But many do have psycopathic tendencies.

Reason Number 4: The Life-Or-Death Struggle to Defend Our Beliefs

Alternet points out:

    When your deepest convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, your beliefs get stronger.

    ***

    In 2006, Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler at The University of Michigan and Georgia State University created fake newspaper articles about polarizing political issues. The articles were written in a way which would confirm a widespread misconception about certain ideas in American politics. As soon as a person read a fake article, researchers then handed over a true article which corrected the first. For instance, one article suggested the United States found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The next said the U.S. never found them, which was the truth. Those opposed to the war or who had strong liberal leanings tended to disagree with the original article and accept the second. Those who supported the war and leaned more toward the conservative camp tended to agree with the first article and strongly disagree with the second. These reactions shouldn’t surprise you. What should give you pause though is how conservatives felt about the correction. After reading that there were no WMDs, they reported being even more certain than before there actually were WMDs and their original beliefs were correct.

    They repeated the experiment with other wedge issues like stem cell research and tax reform, and once again, they found corrections tended to increase the strength of the participants’ misconceptions if those corrections contradicted their ideologies. People on opposing sides of the political spectrum read the same articles and then the same corrections, and when new evidence was interpreted as threatening to their beliefs, they doubled down. The corrections backfired.

    Once something is added to your collection of beliefs, you protect it from harm. You do it instinctively and unconsciously when confronted with attitude-inconsistent information. Just as confirmation bias shields you when you actively seek information, the backfire effect defends you when the information seeks you, when it blindsides you. Coming or going, you stick to your beliefs instead of questioning them. When someone tries to correct you, tries to dilute your misconceptions, it backfires and strengthens them instead. Over time, the backfire effect helps make you less skeptical of those things which allow you to continue seeing your beliefs and attitudes as true and proper.

    ***

    Psychologists call stories like these narrative scripts, stories that tell you what you want to hear, stories which confirm your beliefs and give you permission to continue feeling as you already do.

    ***

    As the psychologist Thomas Gilovich said, “”When examining evidence relevant to a given belief, people are inclined to see what they expect to see, and conclude what they expect to conclude…for desired conclusions, we ask ourselves, ‘Can I believe this?,’ but for unpalatable conclusions we ask, ‘Must I believe this?’”

    ***

    What should be evident from the studies on the backfire effect is you can never win an argument online. When you start to pull out facts and figures, hyperlinks and quotes, you are actually making the opponent feel as though they are even more sure of their position than before you started the debate. As they match your fervor, the same thing happens in your skull. The backfire effect pushes both of you deeper into your original beliefs.

    ***

    The backfire effect is constantly shaping your beliefs and memory, keeping you consistently leaning one way or the other through a process psychologists call biased assimilation. Decades of research into a variety of cognitive biases shows you tend to see the world through thick, horn-rimmed glasses forged of belief and smudged with attitudes and ideologies.

    ***

    Flash forward to 2011, and you have Fox News and MSNBC battling for cable journalism territory, both promising a viewpoint which will never challenge the beliefs of a certain portion of the audience. Biased assimilation guaranteed.

    ***

    The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there be a greater number and weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet these it either neglects and despises, or else-by some distinction sets aside and rejects, in order that by this great and pernicious predetermination the authority of its former conclusion may remain inviolate

    - Francis Bacon

It is very difficult for anyone to really listen to evidence which contradicts our beliefs. But unless we learn how to grit our teeth and do so, we will forever be victims to the divide-and-conquer game which ensures that we have politicians who will ignore our demands, we will be so wedded to one investment strategy that we will forever lose money on our investments, and we will generally be weak and disempowered people.

Reason Number 5: Forgetting that We Don’t Live in Tribes

Our brains are wired for tribal relationships:

Biologists and sociologists tell us that our brains evolved in small groups or tribes.

As one example of how profoundly the small-group environment affected our brains, Daily Galaxy points out:

    Research shows that one of the most powerful ways to stimulate more buying is celebrity endorsement. Neurologists at Erasmus University in Rotterdam report that our ability to weigh desirability and value doesn’t function normally if an item is endorsed by a well-known face. This lights up the brain’s dorsal claudate nucleus, which is involved in trust and learning. Areas linked to longer-term memory storage also fire up. Our minds overidentify with celebrities because we evolved in small tribes. If you knew someone, then they knew you. If you didn’t attack each other, you were probably pals.

    Our minds still work this way, giving us the idea that the celebs we keep seeing are our acquaintances. And we want to be like them, because we’ve evolved to hate being out of the in-crowd. Brain scans show that social rejection activates brain areas that generate physical pain, probably because in prehistory tribal exclusion was tantamount to a death sentence. And scans by the National Institute of Mental Health show that when we feel socially inferior, two brain regions become more active: the insula and the ventral striatum. The insula is involved with the gut-sinking sensation you get when you feel that small. The ventral striatum is linked to motivation and reward.

    In small groups, we knew everyone extremely well. No one could really fool us about what type of person they were, because we had grown up interacting with them for our whole lives.

    If a tribe member dressed up and pretended he was from another tribe, we would see it in a heart-beat. It would be like seeing your father in a costume: you would recognize him pretty quickly, wouldn’t you.

    As the celebrity example shows, our brains can easily be fooled by people in our large modern society when we incorrectly ascribe to them the role of being someone we should trust.

    As the celebrity example shows, our brains can easily be fooled by people in our large modern society when we incorrectly ascribe to them the role of being someone we should trust.

    The opposite is true as well. The parts of our brain that are hard-wired to quickly recognize “outside enemies” can be fooled in our huge modern society, when it is really people we know dressed up like the “other team”.

    ***

    Our brains assume that we can tell truth from fiction, because they evolved in very small groups where we knew everyone extremely well, and usually could see for ourselves what was true.

    On the other side of the coin, a tribal leader who talked a good game but constantly stole from and abused his group would immediately be kicked out or killed. No matter how nicely he talked, the members of the tribe would immediately see what he was doing.

    But in a country of hundreds of millions of people, where the political class is shielded from the rest of the country, people don’t really know what our leaders are doing with most of the time. We only see them for a couple of minutes when they are giving speeches, or appearing in photo ops, or being interviewed. It is therefore much easier for a wolf in sheep’s clothing to succeed than in a small group setting.

    Indeed, sociopaths would have been discovered very quickly in a small group. But in huge societies like our’s, they can rise to positions of power and influence.

    As with the celebrity endorsement example, our brains are running programs which were developed for an environment (a small group) we no longer live in, and so lead us astray.

    Like the blind spot in our rear view mirror, we have to learn to compensate and adapt for our imperfections, or we may get clobbered.

    Grow Up

    The good news is that we can evolve.

    While our brains have many built-in hardwired ways of thinking and processing information, they are also amazingly “plastic“. We can learn and evolve and overcome our hardwiring – or at least compensate for our blind spots.

    We are not condemned to being led astray by [banksters and power-hungry sociopaths].

    We can choose to grow up as a species and reclaim our power to decide our own future.

Reason Number 6: Pretending We Know

People who don’t know much about a subject tend to over-estimate their understanding. Ironically, experts in any subject tend to underestimate their abilities (because the more you know, the more you realize that you don’t know.)

Moreover, people who don’ t much about a subject are more hesitant to learn about it than people who know something about it.

(This may be learning a sport or a musical instrument. When you get decent at it, it becomes fun … and learning how to improve is pleasurable. On the other hand, if you make nails-on-chalkboard noises while learning how to play electric guitar or fall a lot while you’re learning how to ski, it isn’t as fun … and it is tempting to give up and avoid it if your friends try to “drag you along”. The same dynamic might apply to learning as well.)

If we realize that we are resisting learning new information – either because we assume we already know it all, or because we want to avoid the embarrassment of being a beginner – we will remain stuck where we are, and we will never grow wiser or more powerful. If your mind is already “full”, you can’t fill it any more. Indeed, one of the secrets of really smart people is to adopt a “beginner mind”, so that they are open to learning new information.

Reason Number 7: Apathy

The CIA notes that, public apathy allows government officials to ignore their citizens. While it is easy to slip into apathy, we will as a people be ignored by our politicians unless we remain involved.

Reason Number 8: The CIA and Other Government Agencies Control Media, Movies, TV and Video Games

Famed Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein says the CIA has already bought and paid for many successful journalists.

A CIA operative allegedly told Washington Post editor Philip Graham … in a conversation about the willingness of journalists to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories:

    You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month.

The Church Committee found that the CIA submitted stories to the American press:

The New York Times discusses in a matter-of-fact way the use of mainstream writers by the CIA to spread messages.

The government is paying off reporters to spread disinformation.

A 4-part BBC documentary called the “Century of the Self” shows that an American – Freud’s nephew, Edward Bernays – created the modern field of manipulation of public perceptions, and the U.S. government has extensively used his techniques.

The Independent discusses allegations of American propaganda.

One of the premier writers on journalism says the U.S. has used widespread propaganda.

Indeed, an expert on propaganda testified under oath during trial that the CIA employs THOUSANDS of reporters and OWNS its own media organizations (the expert has an impressive background).

Of course, the Web has become a huge media force, and the Pentagon and other government agencieshave their hand in that as well. Indeed, documents released by Snowden show that spies manipulate polls, website popularity and pageview counts, censor videos they don’t like and amplify messages they do.

The CIA and other government agencies also put enormous energy into pushing propaganda throughmovies, tv and video games.

We intentionally listed propaganda last, because we only fall for propaganda to the extent we fail to learn the first 7 lessons … i.e. to wake up and think for ourselves.

As Michael Rivero notes:

    "Most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all."

Moral cowards … or people too lazy to learn how their own minds – and those of the bad guys – work.
Copyright © 2014 Global Research

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naked_Ape

The Naked Ape, which was serialized in the Daily Mirror newspaper and has been translated into 23 languages, depicts human behavior as largely evolved to meet the challenges of prehistoric life as a hunter-gatherer (see nature versus nurture). The book was so named because out of 193 species of monkeys and apes only humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) are not covered in hair. Desmond Morris, the author, who formerly was the Curator of mammals at London Zoo, said his book was intended to popularise and demystify science.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The Washington Morons Have Managed To Create A Chinese-Russian Alliance

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/12/22/washington-morons-managed-create-chinese-russian-alliance/

Tass News Agency

“If the Russian side needs it, we shall offer all possible support.” — Chinese Foreign Minister

BEIJING, December 22, TASS. China believes Russia will be able to overcome the current economic problems, and is ready to offer whatever assistance if needed, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in an interview with Hong Kong’s Fenghuang television channel on Sunday.

“We believe that Russia has opportunities and knowledge to overcome the current problems in the economy. The Chinese-Russian relations of strategic partnership are at a high level, we are always supporting and helping our friend. If the Russian side needs it, we shall offer all possible support we may have,” the foreign minister said.
http://itar-tass.com/en/economy/768328


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
John Pilger: 'Real Possibility of Nuclear War' - Ukraine Crisis Could Start World War 3

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40537.htm

John Pilger, film-maker and award winning journalist, talks to Going Underground host Afshin Rattansi about the headline events of the year, from CIA torture to the Ukraine crisis. He says the whole tenure of the BBC coverage of the Torture report was ‘does torture work?’ Modern British history is full of torture, and the British were ‘masters’ at it. When the OSS become the CIA, it split into 2 sections – one an intelligence gathering section, the other a covert operations arm for the presidency, the central part of which was torture. He warns that the culture of apologising for the state, to minimise its responsibility, has ‘burrowed’ into the minds of correspondents, citing the defence correspondent on Newsnight failing to mention the role of Britain when appraising why the Middle East was a mess. He also says that parliamentary inquiries like the Nolan inquiry and the Chilcot inquiry are stopped before they can get anywhere, describing it as a ‘series of whitewashes.’ He talks of a ‘consensus’ to cover up, citing the arms to Iraq inquiry, where the only person that the judge commended was a Foreign Office official who described the Foreign Office as a ‘culture of lying.’ He says that the number of high-ups in the British establishment who committed serious offences ‘numbered in the dozens,’ and the only difference between the US and UK in torture is ‘in terms of scale.’ The real issue in democracies is ‘dissent being constrained’ physically on the streets. He believes it is ‘dangerous’ to protest in the way people did in 2003, whether you are an establishment figure, a journalist, or just a man on the street.

He says the Sydney siege, whilst horrific, still has to be deconstructed to find what’s missing from it. He points out that the Australian PM declared it a ‘terrorist act’ within minutes of it starting, when it turned out to be a lone wolf, and asks why someone with his history was on the loose. He argues that looking at the list of demands, they were all negotiable, and asks why force was used, and says ‘it seems very likely that the people in there were killed by the police and not by the terrorist.’

With Russia, he says he has never known the truth ‘so inverted’ over any one issue. He believes we are in the midst of a cold war more dangerous than the one he grew up with, comparing the raw propaganda of the prior to what we’re seeing now, with a ‘real possibility’ of a nuclear war. He compares it to Iraq, because both involved ‘fiction,’ the idea that Russia is attacking the West. He says oil prices were driven down by agreement between the US and Saudis, to wreck the Russian economy. He says it was NATO and the US that took over Ukraine, to the point that Joe Biden’s son is on the board of Ukraine’s biggest private gas provider. At a meeting in Yalta in September 2013, the ‘takeover of Ukraine was planned’ by prominent politicians and multinationals. There was a ‘coup stage-managed by the Obama administration,’ and blame shifted to Russia, who acted purely defensively. He says there is a ‘real prospect of war’ with a nuclear power and strong conventional military, and Putin has now started ‘talking red lines’ himself. He describes ‘extraordinary propaganda’ promoting tension and demonising Russia, which ‘may end up being self-fulfilling.’

John is crowdfunding his new documentary, ‘The Coming War between America and China’, about the perceived threat to the US from China. You can find out more and contribute at https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/john-pilger-the-coming-war-documentary


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2064
The 'New World Order' crowd who control America
and its PLAN for World Domination fear that both
Russia and China will develop the power and the
integrity to successfully oppose the sought after
Government by Tyranny.

The dual-national-citizen NeoCons who devise the
various 'regime-changes' are by their nature paranoid.
The power structure in the U.S. has effectively
become the 'iron fist' of the revived Roman Empire
(aka The Empire of Chaos.)

The Neo-Cons care nothing about the loss of life or
'collateral damage' as they go about their 'business.'
The modern concept of warfare which they've
implemented in fact maximizes terror and brutality
as it spills unprecedented innocent blood.

They are very careful not to sacrifice their 'own kind'
as they make war. 


---------------------------
The animal mind ALWAYS reacts to what it does not understand. This is what sets dogs barking. If you are going to tell the truth, you are going to have to be okay with barking dogs, because they will harry your passage until you pass through town.
Les Visible - 27 February 2020
   
Group: Guest
The 'New World Order' crowd who control America
and its PLAN for World Domination fear that both
Russia and China will develop the power and the
integrity to successfully oppose the sought after
Government by Tyranny.

I wouldn't be so sure the NWO crowd doesn't also control Russia and China.
They have been playing an excellent game of incrementalism so far and it
is working perfectly.  They couldn't have scripted a better plan for complete
and total domination.  These guys are shrewd.  They know what they want
and are on target to get it.

Just saying, be very careful where you put your support, because neither
side is your friend.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2064
That is of course a very real possibility Matt.

At the present moment, however, The Empire
of Chaos (The West) is conducting itself as the
Iron Fist to forcefully bring nations into submission
to its PLAN.

The actions of Russia and China, on the other hand,
are moderate by comparison and offer an alternative
which permits nations to retain sovereignty and to
seek even handed relations with other nations in
accordance with already established international
law.

A set of laws which The West disregards with impunity.

The next several months, even perhaps years, should
help to clarify matters.

The Lies of the West may catch up and cause blowback.

It certainly is true that the NWO crowd has its hands in
everything.  Fortunately, the crowd has factions and
certain elements seem much more reasonable and
conscientious than others.

The faction which is in control of the West (The Empire
of Chaos) prefers to accomplish its business with little
regard for human life; creating brutal terrorist groups
to 'persuade' those who may resist with the spilling of
much blood.


---------------------------
The animal mind ALWAYS reacts to what it does not understand. This is what sets dogs barking. If you are going to tell the truth, you are going to have to be okay with barking dogs, because they will harry your passage until you pass through town.
Les Visible - 27 February 2020
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Al-Qaeda calls for ‘targeting of Western commercial airliners’

https://www.intellihub.com/al-qaeda-calls-targeting-western-commercial-airliners/

YEMEN (INTELLIHUB.COM) — The new issue of Inspire, an online Al-Qaeda affiliate, pictures the undercarriage of a commercial airliner’s fuselage being blown apart, suggesting that Jihad extremists target commercial airliners in the Western world to appease Allah.

Could this Al-Qaeda-backed publication, propaganda, intertwine with the missing airliners from both Indonesia and Malaysia?

ISIS Missiles, and the case for retiring the A-10

http://xbradtc.com/2014/10/27/isis-missiles-and-the-case-for-retiring-the-a-10/

The New York Times has a short but informative piece on ISIS gaining and using Man Portable Air Defense Systems (MANPADS) in Syria. The MANPADS has been around since the 1960s, with the first generation US Redeye and Soviet SA-7 Grail setting the basic template for those that follow.  For the most part, non-state actors have often had access to the SA-7 and similar missiles. But with the exception of the US supplying the far more capable FIM-92 Stinger to the Mujihadeen in Afghanistan in the late 1980s, few such non-state groups have had access to modern, more capable missiles. For a time, the Stinger was head and shoulders above any other MANPAD system in capability. Judicious use of tactics, and profligate use of countermeasures such as flares minimized the risks MANPADS posed to modern combat aircraft and helicopters. But the times, they are a-changin’. Several late model Russian and Chinese MANPAD systems are quite capable and increasingly in the hands of groups such as ISIS and the Free Syrian Army. With US airstrikes taking place in both Iraq and Syria against ISIS positions, the chances of our airmen facing these advanced MANPADS cannot be dismissed.

Threat to Aircraft: ISIS Downs Mi-35 Chopper Using MANPADS


http://sofrep.com/37370/isis-downs-mi-35-chopper-using-manpads/

According to recent reporting from IHS Janes and the Long War Journal, images released via Twitter by the Islamic State show a militant firing the advanced FN-6 MANPADS (man-portable air defense system) at an Iraqi helicopter conducting operations in the vicinity of the embattled Baiji Refinery in early October. The refinery, one of Iraq’s largest and most productive prior to its closure due to ongoing violence around June, was reportedly producing roughly 170,000 barrels per day.

The FN-6, a third-generation system developed by the Chinese and the most advanced of their arsenal on the international market, was allegedly supplied by Qatar to various Syrian insurgent groups as early as last year.  IHS Janes reports that the weapons were supplied to select factions by the Qataris, “despite warnings that they could proliferate to more extreme groups like [ISIS].”

FN-6

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN-6

The complete FN-6 missile system weighs 16 kg. The missile is 1.495 m in length, and has a diameter of 0.072 m. The weight of the missile is unknown. It uses a single stage solid rocket motor, and can obtain a maximum speed of 360 m/s when flying head-on, and 300 m/s when tail chasing. The missile's operating range is from 500 m to 6 km, and its operating altitude is from 150 m to 3.5 km.

Planes over London!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GRMxMEghW4

The title says it all. Filmed under the approach path to London Heathrow Airport Runway 27L and 27R Hounslow West, Hounslow Central, Osterly., October 2012!

RAF Waddington plane spotters get Typhoon shock

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-Dg0LxgJH4

Open Border's policy enhances free movement of terrorists and weapon systems into strategic positions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poLhMH5v5fc


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2630
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsRm8M-qOjQ&feature=youtu.be

Interesting to say the least

regards

Mike 8)


---------------------------
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

As a general rule, the most successful person in life is the person that has the best information.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The Outlook for the New Year. The Insanity of Nuclear War against Russia

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Global Research, December 30, 2014
PaulCraigRoberts.org

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-outlook-for-the-new-year-the-insanity-of-nuclear-war-against-russia/5422006

Dear Readers:  The conflict that Washington has initiated between the West and Russia/China is reckless and irresponsible.  Nuclear war could be the outcome.  Indeed, Washington has been preparing for nuclear war since the George W. Bush regime.

Washington has revised US war doctrine in order to initiate conflict with a first strike nuclear attack.

Washington has discarded the ABM treaty in order to build and deploy anti-ballistic missiles that are intended to prevent a retaliatory strike against the US.  Washington is engaged in a buildup of military forces on Russia’s borders, and Washington is demonizing Russia’s government with false charges. 

As the Bush/Obama regimes dismantled the safeguards put in place in order to minimize the risk of nuclear war, no protests came from the American public or the media.  Washington’s European vassal states have also been silent. 

Washington’s drive for hegemony has brought nuclear insanity to the world.

Moscow and Beijing understand that they are Washington’s targets.  As Larchmonter explains, Russia and China are conjoining their economic and military capabilities in order to protect against Washington’s attack.  Read what Larchmonter reports.  Open the URL in my column below and run your cursor over the bottom of the page and click “page fit.” Choose 50% and readable text will fill your screen.

Washington’s demonization of Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, and Assad were preludes to military attacks on Iraq, Libya, and Syria.  In view of these precedents, it is reasonable to regard Washington’s demonization of Vladimir Putin as a prelude to military action.

Russia is not Iraq, Libya, or Syria.  Russian war doctrine states that Russia can use nuclear weapons in response to a nuclear or conventional attack on Russia.  For the world to sit silent while Washington’s arrogance provokes armageddon telegraphs total political failure.  Where are the voices in behalf of humanity?


The Outlook for the New Year

Washington has shaped 2015 to be a year of conflict.  The conflict could be intense.

Washington is the cause of the conflict, which has been brewing for some time. Russia was too weak to do anything about it when the Clinton regime pushed NATO to Russia’s borders and illegally attacked Yugoslavia, breaking the country into small easily controlled pieces.  Russia was also too weak to do anything about it when the George W. Bush regime withdrew from the ABM treaty and undertook to locate anti-ballistic missile bases on Russia’s borders.  Washington lied to Moscow that the purpose of the ABM bases is to protect Europe from non-existent Iranian nuclear ICBMs.  However, Moscow understood that the purpose of the ABM bases was to degrade Russia’s nuclear deterrent, thereby enhancing Washington’s ability to coerce Russia into agreements that compromise Russian sovereignty.

By summer 2008 Russian power had returned.  On Washington’s orders, the US and Israeli trained and equipped Georgian army attacked the breakaway republic of South Ossetia during the early hours of August 8, killing Russian peacekeepers and civilian population. Units of the Russian military instantly responded and within a few hours the American trained and equipped Georgian army was routed and defeated.  Georgia was in Russia’s hands again, where the province had resided during the 19th and 20th centuries.

Putin should have hung Mikheil Saakashvili, the American puppet installed as president of Georgia by the Washington-instigated “Rose Revolution”, and reincorporated Georgia into the Russian Federation.  Instead, in a strategic error, Russia withdrew its forces, leaving Washington’s puppet regime in place to cause future trouble for Russia.

Washington is pushing hard to incorporate Georgia into NATO, thus adding more US military bases on Russia’s border.  However, at the time, Moscow thought Europe to be more independent of Washington than it is and relied on good relations with Europe to keep American bases out of Georgia.

Today the Russian government no longer has any illusion that Europe is capable of an independent foreign policy. Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated publicly that Russia has learned that diplomacy with Europe is pointless, because European politicians represent Washington’s interest, not Europe’s.  Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently acknowledged that Europe’s Captive Nation status has made it clear to Russia that Russian goodwill gestures are unable to produce diplomatic results.

With Moscow’s delusion shattered that diplomacy with the West can produce peaceful solutions, reality has set in, reinforced by  the demonization of Vladimir Putin by Washington and its vassal states. Hillary Clinton called Putin the new Hitler.  While Washington incorporates former constituent parts of the Russian and Soviet empires into its own empire and bombs seven countries, Washington claims that Putin is militarily aggressive and intends to reconstitute the Soviet empire.  Washington arms the neo-nazi regime Obama established in Ukraine, while erroneously claiming that Putin has invaded and annexed Ukrainian provinces.  All of these blatant lies are echoed repeatedly by the Western presstitutes. Not even Hitler had such a compliant media as Washington has.

Every diplomatic effort by Russia has  been blocked by Washington and has come to naught.  So now Russia has been forced by reality to update its military doctrine. The new doctrine approved on December 26 states that the US and NATO  comprise a major military threat to the existence of Russia as a sovereign independent country.

The Russian document cites Washington’s war doctrine of pre-emptive nuclear attack, deployment of anti-ballistic missiles, buildup of NATO forces, and intent to deploy weapons in space as clear indications that Washington is preparing to attack Russia.

Washington is also conducting economic and political warfare against Russia, attempting to destabilize the economy with economic sanctions and attacks on the ruble. The Russian document acknowledges that Russia faces Western threats of regime change achieved through “actions aimed at violent change of the Russian constitutional order, destabilization of the political and social environment, and disorganization of the functioning of governmental bodies, crucial civilian and military facilities and informational infrastructure of Russia.” Foreign financed NGOs and foreign owned Russian media are tools in Washington’s hands for destabilizing Russia.

Washington’s reckless aggressive policy against Russia has resurrected the nuclear arms race.  Russia is developing two new ICBM systems and in 2016 will deploy a weapons system designed to negate the US anti-ballistic missile system. In short, the evil warmongers that rule in Washington have set the world on the path to nuclear armageddon.

The Russian and Chinese governments both understand that their existence is threatened by Washington’s hegemonic ambitions.  Larchmonter reports that in order to defeat Washington’s plans to marginalize both countries, the Russian and Chinese governments have decided to unify their economies into one and to conjoin their military commands.  Henceforth, Russia and China move together on the economic and military fronts.  http://www.mediafire.com/view/08rzue8ffism94t/China-Russia_Double_Helix.docx

The unity of the Bear and the Dragon reduces the crazed neoconservatives’ dream of “an American century” to dangerous nonsense.  As Larchmonter puts it, “The US and NATO would need Michael the Archangel to defeat China-Russia, and from all signs Michael the Archangel is aligned with the Bear and its Orthodox culture. There is no weapon, no strategy, no tactic conceivable in the near future to damage either of these rising economies now that they are ‘base pairs.’”

Larchmonter sees hope in the new geopolitics created by the conjoining of Russia and China.  I don’t dispute this, but if the arrogant neoconservatives realize that their hegemonic policy has created a foe over which Washington cannot prevail, they will push for a pre-emptive nuclear strike before the Russian-Chinese unified command is fully operational. To forestall a sneak attack, Russia and China should operate on full nuclear alert.

The US economy–indeed the entire Western orientated economy from Japan to Europe–is a house of cards. Since the economic downturn began seven years ago, the entirety of Western economic policy has been diverted to the support of a few over-sized banks, sovereign debt, and the US dollar.  Consequently, the economies themselves and the ability of populations to cope have deteriorated.

The financial markets are based on manipulation, not on fundamentals. The manipulation is untenable. With debt exploding, negative real interest rates make no sense. With real consumer incomes, real consumer credit, and real retail sales stagnant or falling, the stock market is a bubble.  With Russia, China, and other countries moving away from the use of the dollar to settle international accounts, with Russia developing an alternative to the SWIFT financial network, the BRICS developing alternatives to the IMF and World Bank, and with other parts of the world developing their own credit card and Internet systems, the US dollar, along with the Japanese and European currencies that are being printed in order to support the dollar’s exchange value, could experience a dramatic drop in exchange value, which would make the import-dependent Western world dysfunctional.

In my opinion, it took the Russians and Chinese too long to comprehend the evil that has control in Washington.  Therefore, both countries risk nuclear attack prior to the full operational capability of their conjoined defense.  As the Western economy is a house of cards, Russia and China could collapse the Western economy before the neoconservatives can drive the world to war. As Washington’s aggression against both countries is crystal clear, Russia and China have every right to the following defensive measures.

As the US and EU are conducting economic warfare against Russia, Russia could claim that by wrecking the Russian economy the West has deprived Russia of the ability to repay loans to the European banks. If this does not bring down the thinly capitalized EU banks, Russia can announce that as NATO countries are now officially recognized by Russian war doctrine as an enemy of the Russian state, Russia can no longer support NATO’s aggression against Russia by selling natural gas to NATO members.  If the shutdown of much of European industry, rapidly rising rates of unemployment, and bank failures do not result in the dissolution of NATO and thus the end of the threat, the Chinese can act.

The Chinese hold a very large amount of dollar-denominated financial assets.  Just as the Federal Reserve’s agents, the bullion banks, dump massive shorts onto the bullion futures markets during periods of little activity in order to drive down the bullion price, China can dump the equivalent in US Treasuries of years of Quantitative Easing in a few minutes.  If the Federal Reserve quickly creates dollars with which to purchase the enormous quantity of Treasuries so that the financial house of cards does not implode, the Chinese can then dump the dollars that they are paid for the bonds in the currency market.  Whereas the Federal Reserve can print dollars with which to purchase the Treasuries, the Fed cannot print foreign currencies with which to buy the dollars.

The dollar would collapse, and with it the power of the Hegemon.  The war would be over without a shot or missile fired.

In my view, Russia and China owe it to the world to prevent the nuclear war intended by the neoconservatives simply by replying in kind to Washington’s economic warfare.  Russia and China hold all the cards.  Not Washington.

Russia and China should give no warning.  They should just act.  Indeed, instead of step by step, Russia and China could simultaneously use the counter-measures.  With four US banks holding derivatives totaling many times world GDP, the financial explosion would be the equivalent to a nuclear one.  The US and Europe would be finished, and the world would be saved.

Larchmonter possibly is correct. 2015 could be a very good year, but pre-emptive economic moves by Moscow and Beijing could be required.  Putin’s current plan seems to be to turn away from the West, ignore the provocations, and mesh Russia’s strategic and economic interests with those of Asia.  This is a humane and reasonable course of action, but it leaves the West untroubled and undistracted by its economic vulnerabilities.  An untroubled West remains a grave danger not only to Russia and China but also to Americans and the entire world.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Leon Panetta Says Brace For 30 Year War With ISIS

10/08/2014

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-08/leon-panetta-says-brace-30-year-war-isis

    "I vividly recall how, in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s killing, Obama partisans triumphantly declared that this would finally usher in the winding down of the War on Terror. On one superficial level, that view was understandable: it made sense if one assumes that the U.S. has been waging this war for its stated reasons and that it hopes to vanquish The Enemy and end the war.

    But that is not, and never was, the purpose of the War on Terror. It was designed from the start to be endless.”

    - Glenn Greenwald, in his latest piece for the Intercept


Leon Panetta is pretty much the epitome of a status quo insider. Someone, who due to his influence and mainstream veneer of respectability, is capable of inflicting an almost inconceivable amount of damage to freedom and prosperity in America. In fact, you could say that Mr. Panetta is as responsible as almost anyone else for the banana republic laughing stock that this nation has been transformed into over the past several decades. Why? Because he served in top positions for several of America’s Presidents over that time.

He started out working for Richard Nixon, before switching parties and serving nine terms as a Democratic Congressman from California. He then served the Clinton Administration, including as Chief of Staff. Most recently, he was head of the Department of Defense and the CIA under Obama. This is an extremely political animal.

His ties run deepest with the Clintons, and while he criticizes Obama heavily in his new book, he excitedly proclaims that Hilary Clinton would be “great president,” and that “one thing about the Clintons is, they want to get it done.”

I’m sure they do, but get what done exactly. In the case of of Bill Clinton, it was dismantling Glass Steagall, and fully turning over the entire U.S. economy and public policy to financial oligarchs.

Think I am exaggerating? In a recent USA Today interview, we can clearly see exactly what “getting it done” would mean during a Hilary Clinton Presidency: Endless War.

USA Today reports that:

   “I think we’re looking at kind of a 30-year war,” he says, one that will have to extend beyond Islamic State to include emerging threats in Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and elsewhere.

    In the book’s final chapter, however, he writes that Obama’s “most conspicuous weakness” is “a frustrating reticence to engage his opponents and rally support for his cause.” Too often, he “relies on the logic of a law professor rather than the passion of a leader.” On occasion, he “avoids the battle, complains, and misses opportunities.”

Yeah, well Hitler was a pretty passionate leader.

Key Democrats, Led by Hillary Clinton, Leave No doubt that Endless War is Official U.S. Doctrine

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/07/key-democrats-led-hillary-clinton-leave-doubt-endless-war-u-s-doctrine/

Long before Americans were introduced to the new 9/11 era super-villains called ISIS and Khorasan, senior Obama officials were openly and explicitly stating that America’s “war on terror,” already 12 years old, would last at least another decade. At first, they injected these decrees only anonymously; in late 2012, The Washington Post - disclosing the administration’s secret creation of a “disposition matrix” to decide who should be killed, imprisoned without charges, or otherwise “disposed” of - reported these remarkable facts:

    "Among senior Obama administration officials, there is a broad consensus that such operations are likely to be extended at least another decade. Given the way al-Qaida continues to metastasize, some officials said no clear end is in sight. . . . That timeline suggests that the United States has reached only the midpoint of what was once known as the global war on terrorism.”

In May, 2013, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing on whether it should revise the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF). A committee member asked a senior Pentagon official, Assistant Secretary Michael Sheehan, how long the war on terror would last; his reply: “At least 10 to 20 years.” At least. A Pentagon spokesperson confirmed afterward “that Sheehan meant the conflict is likely to last 10 to 20 more years from today — atop the 12 years that the conflict has already lasted.” As Spencer Ackerman put it: “Welcome to America’s Thirty Years War,” one which – by the Obama administration’s own reasoning – has “no geographic limit.”

Listening to all this, Maine’s independent Sen. Angus King said: “This is the most astounding and most astoundingly disturbing hearing that I’ve been to since I’ve been here. You guys have essentially rewritten the Constitution today.” Former Bush DOJ lawyer Jack Goldsmith – himself an ardent advocate of broad presidential powers – was at the hearing and noted that nobody even knows against whom this endless war is being waged: “Amazingly, there is a very large question even in the Armed Services Committee about who the United States is at war against and where, and how those determinations are made.”

All of that received remarkably little attention given its obvious significance. But any doubts about whether Endless War – literally – is official American doctrine should be permanently erased by this week’s comments from two leading Democrats, both former top national security officials in the Obama administration, one of whom is likely to be the next American president.

Leon Panetta, the long-time Democratic Party operative who served as Obama’s Defense Secretary and CIA Director, said this week of Obama’s new bombing campaign: “I think we’re looking at kind of a 30-year war.” Only in America are new 30-year wars spoken of so casually, the way other countries speak of weather changes. He added that the war “will have to extend beyond Islamic State to include emerging threats in Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and elsewhere.” And elsewhere: not just a new decades-long war with no temporal limits, but no geographic ones either. He criticized Obama – who has bombed 7 predominantly Muslim countries plus the Muslim minority in the Phillipines (almost double the number of countries Bush bombed) – for being insufficiently militaristic, despite the fact that Obama officials themselves have already instructed the public to think of The New War “in terms of years.”

Then we have Hillary Clinton (whom Panetta gushed would make a “great” president). At an event in Ottawa yesterday, she proclaimed that the fight against these “militants” will “be a long-term struggle” that should entail an “information war” as “well as an air war.” The new war, she said, is “essential” and the U.S. shies away from fighting it “at our peril.” Like Panetta (and most establishment Republicans), Clinton made clear in her book that virtually all of her disagreements with Obama’s foreign policy were the by-product of her view of Obama as insufficiently hawkish, militaristic and confrontational.

At this point, it is literally inconceivable to imagine the U.S. not at war. It would be shocking if that happened in our lifetime. U.S. officials are now all but openly saying this. “Endless War” is not dramatic rhetorical license but a precise description of America’s foreign policy.

It’s not hard to see why. A state of endless war justifies ever-increasing state power and secrecy and a further erosion of rights. It also entails a massive transfer of public wealth to the “homeland security” and weapons industry (which the US media deceptively calls the “defense sector”).

Just yesterday, Bloomberg reported: “Led by Lockheed Martin Group (LTM), the biggest U.S. defense companies are trading at record prices as shareholders reap rewards from escalating military conflicts around the world.” Particularly exciting is that “investors see rising sales for makers of missiles, drones and other weapons as the U.S. hits Islamic State fighters in Syria and Iraq”; moreover, “the U.S. also is the biggest foreign military supplier to Israel, which waged a 50-day offensive against the Hamas Islamic movement in the Gaza Strip.” ISIS is using U.S.-made ammunition and weapons, which means U.S. weapons companies get to supply all sides of The New Endless War; can you blame investors for being so giddy?

I vividly recall how, in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s killing, Obama partisans triumphantly declared that this would finally usher in the winding down of the War on Terror. On one superficial level, that view was understandable: it made sense if one assumes that the U.S. has been waging this war for its stated reasons and that it hopes to vanquish The Enemy and end the war.

But that is not, and never was, the purpose of the War on Terror. It was designed from the start to be endless. Both Bush and Obama officials have explicitly said that the war will last at least a generation. The nature of the “war,” and the theories that have accompanied it, is that it has no discernible enemy and no identifiable limits. More significantly, this “war” fuels itself, provides its own inexhaustible purpose, as it is precisely the policies justified in the name of Stopping Terrorism that actually ensure its spread (note how Panetta said the new U.S. war would have to include Libya, presumably to fight against those empowered by the last U.S. war there just 3 years ago).

This war – in all its ever-changing permutations – thus enables an endless supply of power and profit to flow to those political and economic factions that control the government regardless of election outcomes. And that’s all independent of the vicarious sense of joy, purpose and fulfillment which the sociopathic Washington class derives from waging risk-free wars, as Adam Smith so perfectly described in Wealth of Nations 235 years ago:

    "In great empires the people who live in the capital, and in the provinces remote from the scene of action, feel, many of them, scarce any inconveniency from the war; but enjoy, at their ease, the amusement of reading in the newspapers the exploits of their own fleets and armies. To them this amusement compensates the small difference between the taxes which they pay on account of the war, and those which they had been accustomed to pay in time of peace. They are commonly dissatisfied with the return of peace, which puts an end to their amusement, and to a thousand visionary hopes of conquest and national glory from a longer continuance of the war."

The last thing the Washington political class and the economic elites who control it want is for this war to end. Anyone who doubts that should just look at the express statements from these leading Democrats, who wasted no time at all seizing on the latest Bad Guys to justify literally decades more of this profiteering and war-making.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
"The last thing the Washington political class and the economic elites who control it want is for this war to end."

Correct. Trials for war crimes, acts of aggression and crimes against peace come after the war ends!

The "War on Terror" has been designed to be perpetual with an ever shifting enemy that can never be defeated. Where the enemy does not exist, it is created.

The rapid roll out of the police state since 9/11 is designed to control and terrify the population into submission, it's true purpose masked by the False Flag terrorism that was the pretext used to justify it.

The endless propaganda pumped out by the MSM is designed to control your mind, what you think, and how you react.

When the BRICS have finally had enough of Western aggression they will pull the trigger on the financial bomb, the economies of the West will collapse overnight.

What happens then is anybody's guess..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_United_States_foreign_regime_change_actions


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
False Flagging the World towards War. The CIA Weaponizes Hollywood

http://www.globalresearch.ca/false-flagging-the-world-towards-war/5421649

“The dangerous patriot: The one who drifts into chauvinism and exhibits blind enthusiasm for military actions. He is a defender of militarism and its ideals of war and glory. Chauvinism is a proud and bellicose form of patriotism, …which identifies numerous enemies who can only be dealt with through military power and which equates the national honor with military victory.” - James A. Donovan (1916-1970), American lawyer and Commander in the United States Navy Reserve

“Where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control.” - Lord Acton (1834-1902) (John E. Dalberg), English Catholic historian, politician, and writer

“If you want war, nourish a doctrine. Doctrines are the most frightful tyrants to which men ever are subject… ” - William Graham Sumner (1840-1910), American academic

“The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. … It is our true [foreign] policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.” - George Washington (1732-1799), First President of the United States, (1789-1797), Farewell Address, 1796


These days, militaristic Neoconservatives, or Neocons, have near complete control of the American government under the façade of whoever is president at the time. They direct U.S. policies at the State Department, at the Pentagon, at the U.S. Treasury and at the Fed central bank. They are thus in position to influence and frame American foreign policy, military policy, economic and financial policies and monetary policy.

This was not the case before the Ronald Reagan administration (1981-1989) when the latter adopted a neocon-inspired “muscular foreign policy” based on military intervention abroad, perpetual war, arbitrary regime changes, and imperial worldwide governance in any matters deemed to be in American interests and of that of its close allies. Even though they fared less well under the George H. Bush administration (1989-1993), when they were considered the “crazies in the basement”, they resumed their ascendance within the American government under the Bill Clinton administration (1993-2001) with the U.S.-led Kosovo war and with the irresponsible dismantling of the Glass-Steagall Act, thus paving the way for the 2008 worldwide financial crisis.

The Neocons’ greatest success, however, came with the George W. Bush and Dick Cheney administration (2001-2009) when they persuaded the latter to launch the (illegal) 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, a war still with us and expanding today, twelve years later. They also drafted the so-called “Bush Doctrine” of (illegal) preemptive wars and of forced political regime changes in other countries.

This was an ideology that the Neocons had long advanced, both when Paul Wolfowitz was Deputy Secretary of Defense for policy in the George H. Bush administration (1989-1993), even though the latter publicly repudiated it, and in various essays published by a neocon think-tank dubbed “The Project for the New American Century (PNAC)” and founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan.

After the fall of the Soviet empire in 1991, the warmongering Neocons argued that there should not be any “Peace dividend” for American taxpayers but rather that the United States should seize the opportunity to become the sole world military superpower and should therefore increase and not decrease its military spending. The intention was to establish a military New American Empire for the 21st Century, along the lines of the British Empire in the 19th Century.

Indeed, after the events of 9/11 and the arrival of George W. Bush in the White House in 2001, Paul Wolfowitz, as U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense under Donald Rumsfeld, was in a better position to push for increased U.S. military spending and for the adoption of a new aggressive U.S. foreign policy. What was most troubling is the fact that the PNAC produced a paper in 2000, titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”, (of which Paul Wolfowitz was a signatory), which enigmatically noted that only a “new Pearl Harbor” would make Americans accept the military and defense policy transformations that the neocon group was proposing. Then, in September 2001, the “new Pearl Harbor” coincidentally and conveniently morphed into the 9/11 attacks.

The war against Afghanistan, where the 9/11 terrorists had trained (and who came from Saudi Arabia and a few other countries), and the war against Iraq, a country not even remotely connected with the events of 9/11, followed.

At the beginning of 2015, Neocons occupy key positions within the Barack Obama administration and it should be no surprise that U.S. foreign policy is hardly any different than it was under the George W. Bush administration. They are constantly pushing for provocations, confrontations, conflicts and wars. In fact, the year 2015 could be the year when many of the fires they have lit could turn into conflagrations.

Let us look at a few of them.

1. The danger of another major financial and economic crisis


On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed an already watered down version of the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to reign in financial corruption that brought about the 2008 financial crisis. The new law was supposed to re-establish part of the provisions of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act gutted out by the Clinton administration in 1999, in order to prevent megabanks and insurance companies from using government-insured deposits to build for themselves a pyramid of risky bets on the derivatives market (credit default swaps, commodity swaps, collateralized-debt obligations and other risky derivative financial products, etc.).

But guess what! Only four years later, on December 16, 2014, lobbyists and lawyers working full time for the megabanks persuaded President Obama to sign a massive $1.1 trillion omnibus bill disguised as a Budget Bill and which contains a provision to remove a rule known as the ‘swaps push-out’ rule, the latter requiring insured banks to establish uninsured subsidiaries to conduct their speculative derivatives trading activities.

As a consequence, American megabanks are now back in business speculating with government-insured deposits. When the entire financial house of cards will blow out again is unknown, but you can be sure that it will, especially if a serious political or economic shock hits the economy.

I would call that ‘financial brinkmanship’ and I would call Obama’s caving in to the megabanks ‘political cowardice’. And who do you think will pay in various ways for the economic mess when it occurs? Certainly not the megabanks that transformed their insolvent asset-backed securities into newly printed cold cash after the 2008 financial crisis, but ordinary people.

The U.S. economy and many other economies are still reeling from the 2008 financial crisis brought about by corrupted politicians and bankers with their lax or nonexistent regulations and excessive speculation schemes. Such economies are vulnerable and sensitive to unforeseen financial shocks because debt-to-income ratios are still high in many countries, including in the U.S. where the indebtedness ratio reached a peak of 177 percent just before the 2008-09 economic recession and still now stands at a lofty 152 percent. (Historically, the debt-to-income ratio has remained well below 90 percent.) A sudden rise in interest rates could therefore wreak havoc with many economies.

For one, the European Union (EU), the largest world economy, is teetering on the brink of recession, suffering from various government-imposed austerity programs, from an overvalued euro currency (for those countries in the euro zone) and from the economic blowback of its conflicts with Russia over including Ukraine into NATO. Europe is indeed in the midst of a lost decade of high unemployment, low economic growth and deteriorating social conditions. And, there is no light at the end of the tunnel.

China’s economy, the third largest world economy, is also slowing down fast, with excess manufacturing capacity while its exports are suffering from a 25 percent appreciation of the Chinese renminbi since 2004 and from weak world demand. Moreover, its financial sector is also vulnerable to the fact that China’s debt level is now at a lofty 176 percent of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The Chinese economy is also going through structural changes as the Chinese government pursues policies to reduce the country’s reliance on foreign markets and to shift from an export-oriented model to more domestic sources of growth.

As for the U.S. economy, it is still weak and unable to generate enough new jobs, despite a rebound during the last few months, while the labor force participation rate has declined from 66.5 percent before the 2008-09 recession to 62.7 percent today. The fact that millions of Americans have part-time jobs and would like to have full-time jobs, and that real wages of those who work are stagnant or falling are also indicators that things have not come back to normal.

Since there is no fiscal policy and no industrial policy originating from the U.S. government, the Fed central bank has been obliged to step in with the most aggressive monetary policy in its history. Indeed, the Fed has quadrupled its bank lending to $4.5 trillion since 2008 and it has pursued a policy of risky zero-rate and low-rate policies.

As a consequence, the Fed has created a gigantic financial asset bubble. The unwinding of such monetary prodigiousness won’t be an easy task. What’s more, the U.S. government will be paralyzed by a political gridlock over the coming two years, a republican-controlled Congress being pitted against a lame-duck Democratic president, thus making it difficult for the U.S. government to respond adequately to a new financial crisis.

Another ominous sign is the collapse of the velocity of money in the U.S., just as during the late 1920s, right before the start of the Great Depression, and it is now at a nearly 20 year low. That both the American political and financial sectors are unhealthy should be worrisome for the coming years.

2. The real danger of a nuclear war with the rekindling of the old Cold War with Russia

Brinkmanship in financial matters is one thing; brinkmanship with nuclear war is another. Sadly, the neocon-inspired U.S. government is today involved in both.

Indeed, for many years now, the U.S. government has been engaged in an aggressive geopolitical warfare against Russia, first in pursuing a policy of geopolitical and military encirclement of Russia by expanding NATO to its borders with the integration of Ukraine, and second, by implementing a policy of economic warfare against Russia in order to undermine its economy and, eventually, to provoke a regime change in that country. It’s a game of “dare you?”

Some of the more lunatic Neocons openly call for a new World War III, presumably with Russia a country against which they seem to have personal animosities. These are some of the lunatics President Barack Obama listens to.

Oil as a geopolitical tool

The 50 percent drop of oil price in 2014 may be part of a wider U.S.-led economic warfare plan to destabilize the Russian economy and provoke an Oil Slump, knowing full well that 50 percent of Russian state revenue comes from its export sales of oil and gas. Above all, policy-makers in Washington D.C. want to break the Gazprom-E.U. supply dependency to weaken Russia and keep control over the E.U. via American allies such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Such an artificial drop in oil price appears to be a complement to the already known decisions to saddle Russia with stiff American-led economic and financial sanctions designed by the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, (an outfit created in 2004 after intensive lobbying by AIPAC) and other attempts by the U.S. government to reduce Europe’s reliance on Russian oil and gas.

Since September, Saudi Arabia, a country with excess oil capacity and low-cost production, (and in a position to manipulate the international price for oil), has suddenly and dramatically decided to sell crude oil at deeply discounted prices and to maintain its oil production at high levels in face of a declining world oil demand.

This is a reversal of what Saudi Arabia and the OPEC countries did in the fall of 1973 when they suddenly quadrupled the price for oil and provoked a global economic recession.

This is, however, a strategy similar to what Saudi Arabia adopted in 1986 when it flooded the world with cheap Saudi oil, thus collapsing the international price of oil to below $10 a barrel, after an agreement with the U.S. government. The objective then was to undermine the economies of the Soviet Union and its then Iraq ally, even though other economies such as the Canadian economy suffered greatly from such a gambit.

This time, there seems to be a convergence of interests between the U.S. government and the Saudi kingdom. From a U.S. government’s point of view, the main objective is to hurt the Russian and Iranian energy sectors and damage the finances of President Vladimir Putin’s Russian government, while securing Saudi Arabia’s assistance in fighting the Islamist State (IS) in Iraq and in Syria.

From a Saudi point of view, a world oil price war meets its regional and global objectives in three ways. First, it is well known that the Saudi government wants to dominate oil and gas production in the entire Middle East region and is in opposition to Iran and Syria for securing the rich European market. Second, the Saudi government would also like to pressure Russia to end its support for the Syrian al-Assad government. Third, Saudi Arabia also wishes to regain market shares that it lost to more costly oil from shale oil and oil sands. By lowering oil prices, Saudi Arabia hopes to reduce or even put such competing oil production out of business by making their production less profitable.

However, such a move is bound to severely damage oil production from oil shale in North Dakota in the USA and oil-producing states like Texas may fall into recession, even though the overall U.S. economy will benefit from cheaper oil. Oil production from tar sands in Alberta, Canada will also badly suffer and this means a drop in the Canadian dollar, and possibly a Canadian recession. The shale and tar sands oil industries will be the main innocent victims of the overall geopolitical policy pursued by the U.S. government and its Middle East allies.

Indeed, since the kingdom of Saudi Arabia is an American client state, it is most unlikely that such a move to flood oil markets and precipitate a stiff drop in oil price was decided without a tacit, if not an overt, approval by the U.S. government. In fact, there is wide speculation that when U.S. secretary of state John Kerry met with King Abdullah in September 2014, they allegedly struck an overall deal to that effect.

Ukraine as a geopolitical pawn

As to the destabilization of Russia’s neighboring Ukraine, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland has pretty much confirmed that the U.S. government was deeply involved in overthrowing the legitimate elected Ukrainian government last February, with the avowed objective of installing a U.S.puppet government in that country. This makes a mockery of democracy and only demonstrates how deeply the U.S. government is involved abroad in power politics and in aggressive interference in the domestic affairs of other countries.

Neoconservative Victoria Nuland, appointed Assistant Secretary of State by President Barack Obama, has publicly confirmed that the U.S. government has “invested” $5 billion to destabilize Ukraine and create a conflict between the latter country and Russia. It is hard not to conclude that the Ukrainian crisis is a made-in-Washington crisis. Her famous and insulting remark about Europe [“f*** the E.U.”] is another clear indication that the U.S. government wished to provoke a crisis with Russian not to help Europeans but to serve its own narrow imperial objectives, whatever the costs to the Russian people and to Europeans.

What is most disturbing is the irresponsibility with which the U.S. House of Representatives passed Resolution 758, on December 4, 2014, that is tantamount for all practical purposes to a declaration of war against Russia, based on false premises, distorted facts and false accusations. With that kind of irresponsible leadership, the world is presently in very bad hands.

The truth is that if Soviet missiles in Cuba, 90 miles from U.S. territory, were unacceptable to the U.S. government in 1962, American missiles in Ukraine, on the Russian borders, are unacceptable to the Russian government in 2015. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. For whoever knows history, that should not be too difficult to understand.

Conclusion


If world affairs take a turn for the worse in 2015, the world should know where to point the finger at the culprits. Some people think that world events occur by pure chance and there is no planning behind them. They are wrong. Dead wrong. Bad government policies, misdeeds, false flag operations or simple miscalculations are often at the heart of many geopolitical crises, be they financial, economic or military. Sometimes, it just happens that the “crazies in the basement” are in charge.

It is becoming clearer and clearer, even for the uninformed and the misinformed among us, that the resurgence of the Cold War confrontation with Russia has been engineered in Washington D.C. and that Russia has not been the aggressor, (as the official propaganda wants us to believe), but has rather reacted to a whole series of U.S.-led provocations.

Why have there been so many destabilizing interventions by the U.S. government around the world and who profit the most from this man-made instability? This is a good question that ordinary Americans should ask themselves.

Domestically, should the U.S. economy continue to be run by bankers? Internationally, should the U.S. government pursue its policy of deliberately attempting to drive the Russian government into a corner and takes measures to destroy the Russian economy? These are acts of war. Are ordinary Americans in agreement with such policies? Who will profit the most and who will lose the most if there were to be a nuclear war with Russia? Since Europeans would be at the forefront of such a conflict, this is a question that has also to be answered in Europe.

What the world desperately needs now is a law-governed international environment, not a jingoistic and chauvinistic world empire that looks only after its narrow self-interests.

More fundamentally maybe, we should reject the false ideology of clash between nations. It is a grave and dangerous fallacy that can only lead the world to disaster.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
George Carlin ~ The American Dream

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The Privatization of War: Private Mercenaries and the “War on Terror” in American Foreign Policy

http://www.globalresearch.ca/distancing-acts-private-mercenaries-and-the-war-on-terror-in-american-foreign-policy/5421943

“I do this job for the opportunity to kill the enemies of my country and also to get that boat I always wanted. . . . [W]hen engaged I will lay waste to everything around me.” – Contractor slogan.

“It’s the perfect war… everybody is making money.” – US intelligence officer in Afghanistan.


His bulging left bicep featuring a tattoo of a Panther and his right one of the Grim Reaper, Wolf Weiss was a heavy metal guitarist from Los Angeles with fifteen years’ military experience who embodied the new type of warrior for the 21st century. Styled “the Heavy Metal Mercenary” by Rolling Stone Magazine, Weiss was hired by a private contractor, Crescent Security, to drive truck convoys in Iraq and admitted to killing several Iraqis in four separate firefights. His team, the Wolverines, was known for provocative displays of force, going by the motto: “strike down thine enemies and vanquish all evil by the right hand of god, strength and honor to all who live by the code of the warrior.” In November 2004, en route to Baghdad international airport, Weiss’s vehicle was ambushed by U.S. soldiers who mistook him for an insurgent. He was shot in the head and killed. He had told Rolling Stone that “war was one of the few things in the world I can do really well…..A lot of people are calling us private armies – and that’s basically what we are. This is not a security company. This is a paramilitary force.”1


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Group: Guest
... Weiss’s vehicle was ambushed by U.S. soldiers who mistook him for an insurgent. He was shot in the head and killed.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

I do wonder how many U.S. soldiers Weiss mistakingly engaged as insurgents.


The end (of 2014) is growing near.  Any chance of an Everyman Standing Order 04?
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
A timely recounting of the Weimar disaster that aided Hitler's rise to power

The Weimar story is a lesson from history - what can happen when a nation follows the wrong economic doctrine, says Charles Moore.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/7921664/A-timely-recounting-of-the-Weimar-disaster-that-aided-Hitlers-rise-to-power.html

This book, first published in 1975, has just been republished as a warning. It was spotted by Warren Buffett and printed on the internet. Now an enterprising publisher has rushed it out. Concerned citizens have sent copies to central bankers to remind them of what was once, and could be again.

In fact, though, its report of the German hyperinflation is so extreme that it has the perverse effect of making the modern reader feel almost cosy. If the cost-of-living index in Germany stood at one in 1914, it was 15 million in September 1923, 3,657 million in October and, on November 12 1923, 218,000 million. In the 10 days to November 13, government expenditure exceeded revenue by 1,000 times. If you found a case full of banknotes, the sensible thing was to steal the case and leave the money.

Farmers withheld food in order to get higher prices for it, or refused to be paid in what was known as "Jew-confetti". Desperate townspeople went marauding through villages. The value of pensions and savings was utterly wiped out. Some people were murdered; others starved. Even Gordon Brown never got close to this achievement. The Western world today has not suffered total defeat in total war, is not facing strong revolutionary movements from Right and Left, and is not paying crippling reparations (though government debt almost amounts to the same thing). Things aren't that bad, we comfort ourselves.

But the Weimar story does contain plenty of relevant lessons. One is the power of the wrong economic doctrine. In Germany at that time, economic experts simply had no idea of the quantity theory of money. Havenstein, the president of the Reichsbank, believed that the incredible inflation of the mark had nothing to do with the fact that he was printing ever more notes. In fact, he turned his job into that of a demented printer, churning out notes which, as Adam Fergusson well puts it, were "far too many yet far too few". His disastrous sway is a cautionary tale for those of us who tend to believe that the independence of the central bank from government is invariably a good thing. Some claim that Alan Greenspan was the modern Havenstein, doing everything he could to ignore basic financial truth and keep asset prices rising.

In Weimar Germany, incomprehension trickled down from the top. When something terrible is happening, and people cannot understand why, their natural reaction is panic. Once inflation really got going, people could see that it was useless to keep money, so they went out on insane spending sprees, buying, for example, pianos which they couldn't play. By the same token the other way round, people's irrationality can have a good effect. Havenstein died in November 1923, and his successor, Schacht, presided over a new medium of exchange called the Rentenmark, guaranteed by mortgages on agricultural property and bonds on German industry. Although they could easily have decided otherwise, people chose to believe what they were told, that a trillion marks equalled a gold mark and a gold mark equalled a Rentenmark. The currency stabilised.

This book also shows the incremental power of a bad phenomenon. Once inflation gets going, many acquire an interest in its continuance. The word "crisis" means the moment when a problem comes to a head, but the trouble with inflation is that it is a way of postponing (and therefore ultimately worsening) that crisis. As Lord D'Abernon, the astute British ambassador to Germany at the time, put it, "Inflation is like a drug in more ways than one. It is fatal in the end, but it gets its votaries over many difficult moments." Today, a similar addiction is shown by those, including our recently defeated government, who try to put off tackling the deficit lest tough action produce slump. When the world has gone mad, making things worse can seem like making them better.

Just now, experts are debating whether the greatest risk to the world is deflation or inflation – 1930s depression or Weimar explosion. I am not qualified to judge, although it seems worth pointing out that it could be first one and then the other. But what is fascinating about the history of economic collapse is that it brings one back to the basis of civilisation. Government and civil society itself depend for their existence on an infinitely complicated web of trust. Money is a prime expression of this. If money cannot be trusted, nor can any but the most primitive exchanges between human beings. You cannot plan, build, save, borrow, bequeath. Your values, both material and moral, radically deteriorate. In extreme cases, only your next meal matters.

Adam Fergusson shows that Germany's material collapse was also a moral one. All authority failed. "My dear lady," said a bank official to a woman inquiring anxiously about her War Loan, "where is the state which guaranteed those securities for you? It is dead." Once it died, people tended to hate and fear anyone who might conceivably be doing better than they: "Germany's capital", Fergusson writes, "had been redistributed in the most cruel way, no longer spread reasonably evenly among millions, but largely in coagulated blobs among the new plutocracy".

At such a point, angry citizens identify those coagulated blobs (usually inaccurately and unfairly) and attack them.
Political leaders who stir the hatred seem plausible. It is actually possible to build a new state on the basis of such hatred. After reading this, I understood better than before why anti-Semitism was so important to Hitler: it seemed to explain things.
 
Charles Moore.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The Destruction Of The Middle Class Is Nearing The Final Stages

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-23/destruction-middle-class-nearing-final-stages

The events of the past few months seem astounding when taken in all at once. The plan to destroy the U.S. dollar and the American middle class is moving at an ever increasing speed.

At the recent G20 meeting the nations agreed that bank deposits would no longer be considered money. These bank deposits become the property of the banking institution and as such can be used any way the bank wants. This means that any money you deposit in a bank now is no longer yours but makes you an investor in the bank and subject to lose that money if a banking crisis takes down the bank.

The spending bill just passed by congress makes the American taxpayer responsible for any derivatives loses that banks may suffer. These derivative holders now have first priority when any funds are paid out and depositors are relegated to last place. FDIC insurance will have to pay out these funds but it has no where near enough money to pay the more than 300 trillion in losses that will be suffered in a banking crisis. That means any depositor has little hope of getting anything back. In order for depositors to get anything back massive money printing would have to take place making any payout amount to only pennies on the dollar.

And if you don’t think there is any danger of a banking crisis in America you may want to keep in mind that the Treasury Dept. has recently ordered $200k worth of 72 hr emergency kits for dispersion to every major bank in America. These are known by many as bug-out-bags and are used to support individuals when disaster strikes and they have to care for themselves for the first few days of crisis.

New legislation now gives pension plans the ability to cut benefits to pensioners in the future making the future welfare of these people uncertain. They say it is necessary to prevent these funds from going bankrupt. It will “apply to multi-employer pensions, where a group of businesses in the same industry join forces with unions to provide pension coverage for employees. The plans cover some 10 million U.S. workers,” You may be happy to know this will not affect congressional pensions, as long as they are funded by the taxpayers.

The sanctions being placed on Russia are beginning to destabilize the world in many ways. The sudden drop in oil prices will send ripples through many foreign nations and cause an already tense situation to become highly flammable. It seems this is what is wanted to provoke a new world war and hide the complicity of bankers and politicians in the coming destruction of the economy.

For the past few years those elite with knowledge of the coming monetary destruction have been putting their fiat dollars into any hard assets they can find. The recent record prices paid at auction for collectables is just one more indication that those in the know are moving into hard assets as fast as they can to preserve their wealth.

This diversification includes precious metals and land as well. I believe when there are no more metals or suitable properties available for purchase, these entities in control of this game will pull the plug and let everything collapse. Those holding fiat paper, electrons or other paper promises will be devastated as those assets evaporate into thin air.

You may feel some security knowing you have a good job but among the deposits that disappear will be billions in commercial accounts that belong to businesses. When these businesses lose this money, many will likely close destroying many jobs in the process. This will send ripples through the transportation, production and distribution system when it happens. In an economy made up of 70% consumer spending, this will be fast and devastating to those with few resources to fall back on when it happens.

There are three lessons that many people will learn in the coming months. If you do not have it already you may not be able to get it. If you do not have it physically in your hands you do not own it. If you cannot protect it you will not have it for long.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Capitalism in crisis, a warning from history: Eighty years ago, a banking collapse devastated Europe, triggering war. Today, faith in the free markets is faltering again

Dominic Sandbrook, 6 August 2011

Exactly 80 years ago, international capitalism stood on the verge of meltdown.

The collapse of the banking system in the summer of 1931 sent shockwaves through Europe, bringing governments to their knees and thousands out onto the streets.

In the United States, an increasingly careworn president and his congressional critics fought a bitter battle over government spending and tax rises.

And in Britain, with the Labour government broken by the economic crisis, a Conservative-dominated coalition imposed the deepest spending cuts in a generation, slashing benefits in an attempt to restore confidence in the nation’s finances.

With the banks refusing to lend, and millions of people thrown out of work, capitalism itself seemed utterly discredited.

In other countries, many turned to the far Right, swelling the ranks of the Nazis and their allies.

In Britain, a generation of intellectuals turned their backs on capitalism, placing their faith in the utopian idealism of Soviet Communism and closing their eyes to the horrors of Stalin’s barbaric regime.

For decades afterwards this extraordinary historical moment — when capitalism itself appeared to have failed — was forgotten, and looked like the stuff of ancient history.

But in the summer of 2011, with the eurozone in chaos, the British economy stagnant and the U.S. crippled by debt, with social mobility at a standstill and millions of ordinary families squeezed until they can barely breathe, it feels disturbingly familiar.

In the past two days alone, stock markets have been in free-fall across the capitalist world. With investors manifestly losing confidence in Spain and Italy, two of Europe’s biggest economies, a second devastating world recession cannot be ruled out.

Although the share-price plunge does not yet come close to the infamous Wall Street Crash of 1929, this week’s market mayhem is a chilling reminder of the sheer fragility of the capitalist system.

If the worst happens, if Spain and Italy go down and the euro crumbles, then the world economy really will be in trouble.

Only 20 years ago, the capitalist West was congratulating itself on victory in the Cold War. The Berlin Wall had come down, the Soviet Empire had broken up, and American intellectuals were even proclaiming the ‘end of history’.

Marxism was dead and capitalism triumphant, or so we were told. Having lifted millions in the West out of poverty, having showered them with goods and opportunities, the free-market system could do no wrong.

Today, the picture is very different. For although the Left has never recovered from the fall of the Soviet Union, capitalism has rarely seemed in a more desperate condition.

And with bankers still pocketing gigantic bonuses and Europe swept by a wave of austerity, even the Right are beginning to wonder whether the system is intolerably loaded in favour of rich metropolitan elites.

Only last week, for example, the Tory MP Douglas Carswell suggested that ‘the free market all too often turns out not to be a free market at all, but a corporatist racket for the few’.

Modern Conservatives, he said, should be ‘as suspicious of Big Business and Corporatism as we have been of Big Government’.

On the surface, this may sound shocking. Yet when you dig a little deeper, it is not hard to see why so many people have lost faith in the free market.

The entire premise of the capitalist system, after all, is that in a free market, hard work will produce its own reward. For capitalists, the important thing is equality of opportunity. If you put in the effort, then you can be whatever you want to be, regardless of your background.

So when Margaret Thatcher, one of capitalism’s most passionate champions, ran for the Tory leadership in 1975, she defined her values as ‘the encouragement of variety and individual choice, the provision of fair incentives and rewards for skill and hard work, and a belief in the wide distribution of individual private property’.

And when she walked into Downing Street four years later, she promised to ensure that ‘hard work pays’.

But you do not have to be a card-carrying Left-winger to see why millions of people — not just in Britain but across the world — feel completely cheated.

When most of us contemplate the results of the bankers’ greed, for example, talk of ‘fair incentives and rewards’ seems a sick joke.

In every corner of Europe, ordinary families, through absolutely no fault of their own, are paying an intolerable price for the outrageous avarice of the financial elite.

Recent figures show that City bonuses came to a staggering £14 billion last year, with one executive, Barclays boss Bob Diamond, pocketing an incredible £6.5 million — and that’s on top of his £8 million-plus annual pay package.

Yet at the same time, banks are refusing to lend to ordinary families and small businesses.

Indeed, last month the banks actually took in as deposits  £3 billion more than they lent, which goes a long way to explaining why growth is virtually non-existent.

‘No wonder economic growth is barely visible to the naked eye,’ remarked the Coalition’s former Treasury spokesman, Lord Oakeshott, ‘when the banks keep sucking billions out of the economy.’

These are, incidentally, the same banks, such as RBS and HBOS, that British taxpayers had to save from the consequences of their own reckless gluttony.

Three years ago, the Government spent £500 billion to bail out the collapsing banking system. And now, while the bankers toast themselves with vintage champagne, the rest of us are picking up the bills.

But the bankers’ greed is only one symptom of a wider malaise. The stark truth is that millions of ordinary families feel the system gives them no chance of success.

The facts are simply unanswerable. A child born in 1971 has less chance of moving up the social ladder than one born in 1951.

On top of that, the gap between rich and poor has grown steadily since the 1970s, with some of the biggest increases coming during the 13-year New Labour regime.

Half a century ago, during the Fifties and Sixties, grammar schools, job opportunities in manufacturing and the death of deference meant that working-class children felt they had a decent chance of getting on.

And in their different ways, state-school educated prime ministers such as Harold Wilson, Ted Heath, Jim Callaghan, Margaret Thatcher and John Major gave the impression that anybody could make it, regardless of their background.

Even in 1931, during the last great crisis of capitalism, Britain was run by a prime minister, Ramsay MacDonald, who was the illegitimate son of a Scottish labourer and a poor housemaid. At a time when it would have been easy to imagine that power belonged exclusively to the rich, MacDonald was a shining example of social mobility.

Nobody could possibly look at our leaders and draw the same conclusion today.

From Cameron, Clegg and Osborne — respectively the son of a millionaire stockbroker, a banker and the heir to a baronetcy — to Ed Miliband and Ed Balls, one the son of a North London intellectual, the other the privately educated son of a professor, British politics has become the plaything of a tiny self-regarding elite, totally out of touch with ordinary families.

Looking at our political class, you begin to suspect that modern capitalism is loaded in favour of those who already enjoy wealth and power. It has become a closed system, impossible to penetrate unless you are incredibly lucky.

Other facts tell a similar story.

As the Tory minister David Willetts showed in a provocative book last year, Britain’s youngsters are being cut adrift. Thanks partly to ferocious competition from Eastern European immigrants, workers in their 20s today earn far less than their parents did at the same age.

And with house prices having soared and banks refusing to lend, they find it impossible to get onto the property ladder.

As a result, the old Conservative dream of a ‘property-owning democracy’ is increasingly reserved for the silver-haired.

Most experts recognise that home-ownership is one of the keys to a stable, prosperous, hard-working society — yet since 1997, home ownership among people in their 20s has steadily fallen.

Of course there was a time when education offered a leg-up: but those days are becoming a fading memory. Thanks to the unforgivable abolition of the grammar schools, the gap between private and state education has become a chasm.

In a country that claims to value competition, it is nothing less than a disgrace that just four expensive private schools — Eton, Westminster, St Paul’s, St Paul’s Girls — send as many students to Oxford and Cambridge as 2,000 state schools put together.

Meanwhile, the Government’s education reforms mean that working-class children face the prospect of paying back £9,000 a year in tuition fees if they choose to go to university.

And this, of course, comes at a time when fat-cat vice chancellors, already rewarded with grace-and-favour residences and boundless expense accounts, are being paid an average of more than £220,000 each.

On holiday in Tuscany — something well beyond most British families — perhaps David Cameron should spend an afternoon with his great predecessor Benjamin Disraeli’s book, Sybil.

In this work, first published in 1845, the greatest Tory statesman of the Victorian era warned that Britain had become ‘two nations … who are as ignorant of each other’s habits, thoughts, and feelings as if they were dwellers in different zones, or inhabitants of different planets; who are formed by a different breeding, are fed by a different food, are ordered by different manners, and are not governed by the same laws: the rich and the poor’.

Disraeli was no socialist. But as an outsider himself, born into a Jewish family, he recognised that capitalism could only take root in ordinary people’s hearts and minds if it gave them a stake of their own.

At bottom, capitalism is as much a moral enterprise as it is an economic one. If those lucky enough to become successful ignore the virtues of thrift, self-discipline and sobriety, as well as the moral imperative to look after the weak, then capitalism degenerates into cronyism and self-interest.

At its best, the free market is a tremendous liberating force. During the Fifties and Sixties, it gave millions of people opportunities their parents could barely have imagined: happy childhoods, good schools, well-paid jobs and contented retirements.

But when capitalism fails, as in the 1930s, then it allows extremism to thrive.

During that unhappy decade, some were bewitched by the false promise of Stalinist Russia; others flocked to the blood-drenched banners of the Far Right.

Eighty years on, capitalism has once again lost its way. With millions betrayed by their under-performing schools, locked out of the job market, forgotten by the banks and abandoned by their politicians, Britain is in danger of becoming two nations again.

Modern capitalism is not beyond redemption. But it badly needs to rediscover its moral dimension, lost amid the scramble to protect the privileges of a narrow metropolitan elite.

It is time that our politicians cracked down on non-domiciled billionaires, and time they made sure the rich elite paid their fair share of our national tax bill.

And if David Cameron really wants to rekindle the British people’s faith in the capitalist system, then he should go further. He should force the banks to lend more money to individuals and small businesses, getting our economy moving again.

He should restore a culture of competition and excellence to our state schools, giving working-class children a genuine sense that they can climb the ladder. And he should make it a priority to encourage real jobs in real businesses, reinvigorating a manufacturing sector that has been abandoned for far too long.

The stakes could not be higher. Unless capitalism opens its arms to the common man, then an entire generation will conclude that it is no more than a fig leaf for the super-rich.

That would be a tragedy. For despite all capitalism’s weakness — despite the flaws, inequalities and hypocrisies that are an inevitable part of any human endeavour — it remains the only way to promote real and lasting opportunity.

Other systems have been tried, and they have collapsed in bloodstained ruins. Only capitalism — the free exchange of goods, skills, services and ideas — has proved itself true to the instincts of human nature.

Today, we can only hope that capitalism’s champions learn the lessons of history.

For if they fail, then the results could be too dreadful to contemplate.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 [43] 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 ... 100
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2020-09-19, 17:30:19