Tuesday, January 29, 2008


I have read with interest the comments circulating on this site and elsewhere on the internet. These comments and articles seem to be in one of two camps, with a sprinkling with a foot on each side. So, I decided to define the terms;

Optimism; a doctrine that this world is the best possible world; 2. An inclination to put the most favorable construction upon actions and events or to anticipate the best possible outcome.

Pessimism; An inclination to emphasize adverse aspects, conditions, and possibilities or to expect the worst possible outcome. 2. The doctrine that reality is essentially evil and that evil overbalances happiness in life.

This is from Webster’s ninth new college dictionary, 1989 which overall I think has better word usage definitions than any of the new stuff I have seen.

Adding to that, the observation of Robert Heinlein that says; that optimists have more fun but pessimist are more often right.

I fall into the group that is pessimistic. I guess life experiences and observations lead me to that position. In my lifetime, I have seen very little reason to be optimistic, especially on a macro scale. On an individual level, well, a very few times, yes.

But, what I tend to force attention to is on a macro scale, national, international, and even local happenings. In these arenas I see not much to be optimistic about. But, that is just me talking. Whatever anticipation that I experience called hope and what might turn out from it is often dashed into pieces in a reality check.

I have written often about ‘working within the system’ and what a waste of time I view that activity. My reasons are voluminous and often stated unequivocally. The principal reason for that statement is that we are not, at any level, dealing with people that either respect us or anything remotely identified as adherence to law and decency. At the national level, we are opposed by people that change the laws and definition of decency on a whim. If the populace gets to close to real change from the business as usual, they change how or under what circumstances they will even listen to us, much less institute changes that may be to their disadvantage. What changes am I referring to? The elite attitude of entitlement; the elite propensity to greed and accumulation of wealth; the elite’s constant demand for more power over us. Whatever respect they have for the populations of countries can be encapsulated in what we can do for them, not what they can do for us. I suppose that I misuse the term respect in this case. In actuality it is simply manipulation of us for their ends.

All of the above statements do not preclude my view that we shouldn’t keep trying, not so much as to affect any real outcomes that we desire, but from the notion that we should continually press for what we believe is right. For, if we do not do that, then we are complicit in the very actions that we despise. If this government does what I think it is going to do, then the pressing for what we believe is right is going to get really expensive. In which case, we all have to decide where we draw the line in the sand.

Do I have no hope at all? It depends on what we are referring to. If I would point out that hoping that we can change the mind of those in power, to do what is right, I have none. If I have hope that something good can come of the collapse of this empire, and hopefully, civilization as a whole, yes I do.

The point that I wish to press home is that those with the power, the elite, do not and never have had concern about whatever we want. Only if it serves their agenda do they deign to listen to us. We get a few chicken bones thrown our way and they proclaim their concern for us. An actual voice in how we are governed has long since passed, and I don’t mean in just the last 8 years. From our very beginning and inception, there has been a constant erosion of the principles of a popular government. We aren’t alone in this. Just take a look at what our government does (and other governments also) when a popular movement in a country is contrary to their agenda and goals.

I am going to state again; they could give a rat’s ass about our concerns and desires. And, by us, I am referring to the majority of citizens in any country that have no power, low economic status and with a completely different values system from the elites.

I hope this explains adequately why I look at myself as a pessimist.

Now, let’s examine optimism.

This will take on a multitude of forms, same as pessimism. I presume you know of someone who is a pacifist, and argues strongly for their position. This is, in my view, an optimists position, that the inherent good in each of us can be brought out by absolute non violence. In reading history, I have to come to the conclusion, it doesn’t work. And be careful in using the Gandhi example. Do a bit more research on that period in India. While he was a catalyst, he was not a prime mover. And by the way, take in a few statistics in your study about how many of the population were killed by the British in its being forced economically to give up control of the area. If being a pacifist means willing to die unnecessarily for an ideal and not opposing violence being perpetrated on you, you have lost me. Another argument proposed is that violence never accomplishes anything but more violence. Well, it sure appears to me that after 5000 years of recorded history, that statement just doesn’t hold water. It accomplishes a lot. You might not agree with the end result, but it sure gets the results wanted.

The major problem is that in a civilized society such as ours, violence is the sole realm of the top of the pyramid. Any violence from the bottom up we are educated (indoctrinated) to believe either unnecessary or has an evilness attached to it. But from the top, violence is often meted out with no repercussion. Take the police use of tasars these days. Way too much of the time is savage, often with lethal results, and most times, unnecessary. If you fight back, the penalties are severe. I really do expect to see much more of this kind of behavior on the part of law enforcement. In its extreme form, it is called a police state.

Another of the signs of optimism is contained in the ‘can do’ attitude of our society. There is no problem that can’t be fixed and other ramifications of this position. It refuses to acknowledge that there are problems that are not fixable, but I say it must be taken out of the equation entirely. For instance, climate change. There are those that insist we can change what is happening, and some say that what is going on with our climate change is a deliberate manipulation by the PTB. From the standpoint that we have man made climate change, I fear it is a problem that is not fixable. If it is a deliberate manipulation of conditions by advanced technology, the only thing that will stop it is a complete dissolution of civilization and technology. And maybe it will come to that, and, of course it will cause a whole bunch of new problems.

I guess overall, I would have a tough time finding reasons to be optimistic about much of anything going on in the macro world. On a personal basis, I have a limited amount of optimism about how we are preparing for what I see coming at us. Time should certainly sort it all out, it is whether I will be around to see the results.


Tuesday, January 22, 2008


By Murph

I guess I just am going to have to put out a request for someone to set me straight here. I’m really confused about some things and feel very frustrated about it.

Freeacre and I watched a documentary on the Afghanistan and Iraq war going on, it’s history and what led up to the invasions, “No End In Sight”. I felt that the information provided was factual and without propaganda value particularly.

I am left with the general question; what the hell is going on? Actually I have had this question for some time. It appears that there are 4 possible answers. If there are more, please set me straight.

  1. This group of people running our government are incompetent as hell and the people above them with a master plan are incompetent also.

  1. The stated aims of this government are not the same as the real aims.

  1. All that has been going on for the last 16 years is actually a master plan by someone or some group, including the complete cluster fuck that is Afghanistan and Iraq, the complete destruction of the American economy, the militarizing of the country and world domination.

  1. Absolutely no one or no group is any longer in control of anything.

If number 1 is correct, folks, they can’t get anything right. Everything they do is contrary to stated goals and any common sense by anyone with an IQ over a fence post. If this country decided to revolt, they couldn’t put down a Boy Scout troop determined to take action. If 2 million dissidents were fielded, they would be bumfucked. Let’s see here, hmmm, striking the keys of my handy dandy Japanese hand calculator with 165 functions that is now 15 years old, I notice that would be .6% or so of our population. Holy cow. Now there is a figure I can take home. Let’s see now, we have approximately 160,000 troops in Iraq, out of 1.5 million total worldwide, and Iraq had a population of 23,000,000 before we started to kill everyone we could get in our sights or just by bombing. Add to that the Blackwater contractors of about 50,000 carrying machine guns and what seem to be 13,000 troops from the coalition that Georgie put together. That means we had at the beginning, one soldier for every 103 citizens of the country. A country that from a technological perspective is somewhere between 1650 and 1920 in technological development. What the Hell? We have in this country a total police force of approximately 1.5 million. If we brought home every soldier from Iraq, including all Blackwater mafia troops, and put them all on insurrection suppression in the U.S., and taking for granted that every soldier, Blackwater thug and police officer did their job, that means we would have a total of 1.7 mil troops or one soldier for every 175 citizens covering a land territory approximately 20 times the size of Iraq. If we did what Ron Paul wants to do, bring all the troops home, every one of them, we would end up with about 3.5 million troops and police and Blackwater thugs. That’s one trooper for every 100 citizens now, and they have to cover 20 times the land area of Iraq. Hmmm. I hope you all see what I am getting at.

Number 2 is just as likely as number 1 and 3 I think. What we were told at election time and during the administrations smoke blown up our collective asses at news conferences has nothing to do with what is going on. Now let’s take a look at the possible agendas.

  1. They seem to be determined to crash our economy
  2. They seem determined to make everyone else in the world hate our guts
  3. They seem to be determined to utterly destroy our land base
  4. They seem determined to make us all subservient, or as an extension, kill most of us off.
  5. They seem determined to rule the world.

I imagine you can add more to the list, but that is enough of my own paranoia.

Number 3 is an extension of number 2, just different power players making the decision.

I sure would hope number 4 is the correct answer. If no one is in control, we have a chance of fighting back, or at least side stepping the worst coming down.

So ok people, step right up and let me know the truth of the matter. End my confusion so I can go back to a normal life.

Now, let’s take a brief look at the primaries. At this point, with what information I garner from the popular media and the internet, it sure appears to me that this is a truly rigged election, and everyone but Ron Paul and Kuchenick are playing it. At least in this area, on the popular media, mostly TV, there is no mention of the two men no matter how he does in the polls or the primary process. On the TV, I hear virtually no discussion of what any of the candidates advocate and or stand for. The pundits and talking heads are on the national news gossiping about them, giving no real information about anything. The consequence of these omissions is that we are not having any real elections at all this time around. While I admit that I border on indifference on this election, simply for the above reasons, it sure appears to me that it simply makes no difference who, of the front runners, from either party get the nominations. Those that just might make a difference are opposed by the elite, at all levels of society, and they aren’t going to have a chance. On top of that, it also appears that the vote counting is very seriously flawed and is not a reflection of the popular vote.

We are not yet in a position in this country to vote for a person who advocates a really big revolution against business as usual. So, if there is any push toward that, the elites will quench it post haste. Kuchenick and Paul are on the receiving end of this and the citizens be damned. Hillery and Obama certainly aren't going change much, despite the tidbits they throw out. Neither of them have even hinted that we need to end the world domination plans and dissemble the empire building.

Again, it is all about money. If a political player wants to get anything but gossip out there, they have to pay for it, and the American public seems more interested in voting on gossip issues rather than real policy. Any real effort to have a popular representative government looks long gone to me.

We are being royally screwed blue, every morning. Every morning when we get up, the elite are asking if it was good for us too. Any answer that indicates less than satisfaction is ignored or put down. This is not a good tactic at all. Somewhere down the line, there will be revolt. We are so toasted.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

The Stockholm Syndrome?

Do Sections of American Society, To Some Extent, Exhibit Symptoms?

From our friend in Belgium.

Most articles dealing with the Stockholm Syndrome usually start off with a brief description of what it is, so I will follow the usual path. Stockholm Syndrome is the name given to the identification some hostages have with their captors. Often the captors become regarded as benevolent and even admirable. This usually takes a few days to set in. After denying the hostages their liberty and threatening them with death, the captors then begin to offer small liberties and luxuries in exchange for obedience. For example, a person who does not misbehave can be given better food than the other hostages, or allowed more comfortable shelter. By extending a carrot in exchange for servility, the captor begins to be seen as the bringer of freedom to the hostage, and looked up to as a child may look upon a parent.

It was a letter to Joe Bageant which first captured my imagination, from a 70’s hippy lady Karen, who never stopped living the dream. She and her husband live on a small homestead in up state New York and over the years, have lost hope in a better world which has turned their back on them. Now they have become more isolationist, avoiding contact with those they see as having a disregard and lack of respect for their fellow humans whilst also exhibiting a personal lack of responsibility. It was their observation that society is suffering from the Stockholm Syndrome which I wanted to explore further.

It must be said from the outset that Stockholm Syndrome is a trend not a universal. Unlike the female hostages in the original Stockholm bank, one of whom became engaged to her captor and the other who began a defense appeal fund, in a later bank hostage situation two women lured their captor in front of a window so that police marksmen could get a clear shot at him. When he was only wounded the two women picked him up and held him against the window so the police could get a second shot in.

What is known about the groupings and conditions in which Stockholm Syndrome is likely to occur? The social groups in which it is more prevalent are:

Abused Children

Battered/Abused Women

Prisoners of War

Cult Members

Incest Victims

Criminal Hostage Situations

Concentration Camp Prisoners

Controlling/Intimidating Relationships

In the final analysis this type of emotional bonding is a victim’s strategy for survival and apart from the specific list above it can be found in any other situation in which one person or group exerts draconian authority and control over another.

There are several behavioral traits which can be attributed to the occurrence of Stockholm Syndrome. Some or all of the following may be present.

Positive feelings by the victim toward the abuser/controller

Negative feelings by the victim toward family, friends, or authorities trying to rescue/support them or win their release

Support of the abuser’s reasons and behaviors

Positive feelings by the abuser toward the victim

Supportive behaviors by the victim, at times helping the abuser

Inability to engage in behaviors that may assist in their release or detachment

Additionally, it has been found that four situations or conditions are present that serve as a foundation for the development of Stockholm Syndrome.

The presence of a perceived threat to one’s physical or psychological survival and the belief that the abuser would carry out the threat.

The presence of a perceived small kindness from the abuser to the victim

Isolation from perspectives other than those of the abuser

The perceived inability to escape the situation

So, what does the Stockholm Syndrome have to do with the State? First, the relationship between a State and its citizens is virtually identical to that of a hijacker and his hostages. A State can deny its citizens basic rights and freedoms, and uses force to keep them under its thumb, just as a captor does with his victim. If you are good and live by the State's laws, then you can enjoy whatever freedom it allows you to have without interference (note that what this amounts to is the State saying it will not take anymore of your freedom than it already has — for now anyway). This is analogous to a captor setting down the rules by which the hostages must live by while under his purview, and if they are good then "no one gets hurt." Good behavior is rewarded, and as the hostages continue to have their needs provided by their captors, much as a State provides certain services to its citizens, they are seen less as the criminals they are and more like benevolent caretakers.

Also, the rationalizations hostages give are similar to the arguments for the necessity of State action. Without the State, we are told, there would be no good or service and so the State is actually providing a positive benefit to society through its existence. Similarly, hostages say that those who held them against their will went out of their way to please and provide for them, and thus are not the evil people others see them as. As the State supposedly institutes law and order, and thus brings stability and protects life, hostages can see their overseers as giving and protecting their lives as well, simply because they do not take it from them. Can you identify any of this with the current situation in the USA?

Apart from the relationship between a state and its citizens, are there any examples where a citizenry seeks appeasement from perceived threats other than directly from their own state? The one which has the greatest risk to world stability is the relationship between the ordinary people of Israel and their Arab world outside their door. Not withstanding the ‘My dad can thump your dad’ posturing of the leadership, sixty years of living on the edge of their nerves has left its toll on the population, particularly the Ashkenazim business class. They have looked inward on their situation and like an abused child have concluded that they must in someway be responsible for their lot since bad things happen to bad people. Most want a permanent settlement of the situation which acknowledges their right to exist but they are trapped by a feeling that by lowering their defenses they could make way for a Trojan horse. Whilst throughout history this strategy for survival has worked well for European Jews with Christian overlords, this hierarchy held no personal threat to the Jews existence. Mizrakhim Jews from the Eastern (Arab lands) Diaspora, see a jahad as a quick route to paradise, so have no such reservations. The present situation with Jews now in their own land, experiencing a permanent internal and external, seemingly insoluble conflict is vastly different, particularly since some Muslim elements do not respond well to groveling; a fact that can only lead to an increase of pressure in the boiler.

By direct contrast, the inhabitants of the Israeli prison camp known as Gaza show no such Quisling characteristics. They have Hamas representing them and like the women hostages who held the gangster to the window, they are not going to dissemble. Hamas are gentle and benevolent towards their own but fierce and resolute towards those who would do harm. If they are afraid they do not show it.

The guiding principle which served President Nixon throughout his Terms in office was “People react to fear not to love”. Keep people afraid and you can control them. The message has not been lost on those who followed. And what was good for a president is good also for the advertising industry that taps into our mental insecurities and supplies us with symbolic substitutes. If this fear which is now paralyzing us, suddenly turns to panic then the tables may suddenly be turned on those who now have control.

What are the things we should be afraid of? Many are afraid of social rejection, to be outside the ‘in crowd’, to be out of step with their respected peers, to be smiled at slightly disapprovingly and kept outside their inner circle. Perhaps we should also fear Satan; the Pied Piper; bird flu; chemtrails; WMD, the militarization of space, Earth’s collision with a dark Sun, terrorists and anyone who hates our freedoms enough to want to take them away. The three most common fears this administration uses against its own people are:

1) Fear of a foreign threat (Communists, Terrorists, etc.).

2) Fear of a domestic threat (Minorities, Crime, Poverty, Drugs, etc.).

3) Fear of some sort of decay in moral values (sometimes referred to as 'family values’), which are to be used if the first two don’t do the trick.

I saw a two or three minute You Tube spliced video of Bush in different suit and ties and on different podiums just saying the words “Terror; Terrorist or Terrorism”. It reminded me of a soap powder commercial, if the word is repeated over and over, it forms a bridgehead in the mind and nothing will make it go away. We have fear by proxy and it is our protector who is promulgating this fear within us. Here are two quotations from President Bush which will serve as examples.

“There will be no going back to the era before September 11, 2001 – to false comfort in a dangerous world”.

“Our security will require all Americans to be forward looking, to be resolute; to be ready for preemptive action”.

The response to this fear is to remove the freedoms of which our adversaries are so envious, for our own protection, of course.

Here are some of the ways we are now being protected:

By intercepting and scanning for trigger words, any piece of electronic communication entering, leaving or being passed internally through the USA.

Ripping up the Geneva Convention and allowing US representatives to torture any others it feels so inclined to do, without any reason, so long it is not done on Mainland USA soil.

Repealing the Posse Comitatus Act, and thus allowing the military onto the streets, in place of the police, for the purpose of controlling US citizens.

Disallowing any persons right to ‘habeas corpus’ so that they can be held in custody indefinitely without ever being charged or brought to trial.

The building and staffing of in excess of 800 detention centers each capable of holding tens or hundreds of thousands of inmates.

More stringent passport control so that US citizens can no longer enter Canada or Mexico without these documents, even though Mexicans with truck loads of furniture can freely enter the USA.

The Department of Homeland Security’s operation End Game whereby all US citizens must be within borders by 2015 and all non US citizens outside.

It would appear these are the freedoms that the terrorists hate you having.

But no, these are the measures the US Government is taking on your behalf, to protect you from their evil. Like the handle from the book and film ‘Breakheart Pass’ stated “No one is who you think they are and nothing is what it seems”.

By feeding a constant war footage and collusion from a compliant media who serves us a diet of toxic news we are taught by rote and repetition to be afraid. And what do people do when they are afraid? As Marilyn Manson so astutely observed, they consume and by consuming they make big business even bigger. Whether it is the teenage girl who is led to believe the boys won’t like her if she doesn’t use this brand of spotty cream or the politician who tells us that if the terrorists break through the line in Iraq, they will come to the West and take away the few freedoms we still have left, thereby keeping Big Arms nicely ticking over.

Does this make us bond closer with the Muslims? I suspect not. Does it make us bond closer to our protectors who are pushing the fear agenda at us? Probably for a significant number it does. Even though Bush has the worst popularity ratings of any previous president, there are still a third of the population who think he is doing a great job. Many will be died in the wool Republicans who follow their party, right or wrong but I suspect not all are from this camp and some are looking for personal appeasement from those who are holding them in fear. These are the ones who are exhibiting the Stockholm Syndrome.

Society is a complex business and although the Stockholm Syndrome is likely to exist in significant numbers, it is not the whole story. A more probable likelihood is given by Derrick Jensen in his book “A Language Older than Words”. He describes an unhappy childhood at the expense of a mentally disturbed father who would routinely beat and rape his wife; himself (Derrick) and his brothers and sisters. What was the boy’s reaction when his father stood up and dragged his brother across the dinner table? He was just a child, not able to go ‘mano a mano’ with his father. Just like soldiers going over the trench top and seeing comrades fall as they charge the no mans land, they were thankful it wasn’t them. Likewise the small boy on the dinner table was thankful it was not him. He kept his head down and carried on eating. But just like the soldier on the battlefield who sees his comrades fall, it does not mean he is excused his turn.

The Stockholm Syndrome appears to be a real effect on society however a probable greater effect on the dumbing down of the people is the hope that keeping your head down and hiding in the crowd will be enough for you to be passed over. Deep down, most Americans know that their turn will eventually come and the possibility increases with each passing day. As King Solomon noted in his famous song “All the world is vexation and vanity”.

What response should be offered to this inevitability? Should we form some sort of alternative breakaway self sustained grouping and leave the present ways behind? Should this group defend itself, if and when its time comes and maybe suffer the fate of so many other indigenous peoples at the hands of the Europeans? Should it rage against the passing of the light? Should it collectively put its head through an open window and shout “I’m as mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore”, or should it adopt a more pragmatic approach and calmly wait its turn?


Karen’s letter to Joe Bageant


Definition and relation of SS to the State


Conditions necessary for appearance of SS


The Jewish Connection


Fear and Consumption (1)


Fear and Consumption (2)


Derrick Jensen – A Language Older than Words (Intro reader)


Bush Ratings


Quotation “Rage against the passing of the Light”


Quotation “I’m as mad as hell”

From the film “Network” spoken by character Howard Beale

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

Something is Happening Here, but we don't know what it is...

by Freeacre

Did Hillary have an “Oprah moment” which tugged at the heartstrings of the women in New Hampshire so they changed their minds at the last minute and voted for her instead of Obama? Or, was there some sort of computer manipulation going on that switched the count in her favor? Ron Paul supporters are saying that their votes were not even counted at all in precincts that reported zero votes for Paul. Oh, Christ, here we go again. We’ll never know, will we?

One thing I am certain of is that the electoral process is compromised as long as those paperless machines are used. Voters should boycott them. They are unacceptable. Want more information? Google “voter fraud in New Hampshire.”

Update on our policy of no shopping at a grocery store for a month to see how the preparedness plans hold up: good so far. Only exception has been to get a gallon of milk so murph can still drink a glass with his cookies at night. In a true emergency he’d have to suck it up (or maybe that should be “not suck it up). We pulled a bunch of elephant garlic and some potatoes from the quasi-root cellar made from the buried garbage can, and I made some garlic potato soup from a head of roasted garlic, onions, potatoes, canned chicken, chicken base flavoring, and evaporated milk. It was quite good, if I say so myself. Depending on your taste, you can season it with salt and pepper, thyme, or some herbs de provincial, or any combination thereof. I’m still experimenting.

….OK, have we put the surveillance team to sleep yet? One can only hope. I doubt it, however, because of the Promus software the intelligence agencies are supposed to be using now that automatically scans millions of messages at once for suspect conversations, and automatically transfers people to lists of assorted dissidents. So much for free speech – now an antiquated concept in this “post 9/11” horror show.

Part of me would like to respond at length to Rockpicker’s question from the last post about what space based death ray machinery I was referring to from the last campfire conversation. I mean, here we are, at the beginning of a year that we pretty well know is going to be a ball buster. We have a pause between the next primary where it will be my pleasure to watch Romney bite the big one as the people of Michigan reject “The Uber Suit Man” despite the fact that they liked his dad a bunch. That is my expectation, unless they really have been taken over by the pods.

We have time to talk amongst ourselves, let our imaginations go wild, put on the tin foil hats for while. But I gotta admit that I don’t like the look of the possible consequences of pissing off the government boyz. So, I’m just going to share some selections of some reports that are available to read on other sites and let you connect the dots yourselves any way you want to.

Let me begin by saying that I have no military knowledge or experience of any sort. I can’t even throw a baseball, let alone a hand grenade. I’d probably set myself on fire if I tried to throw a Molotov cocktail. But what I am reading seems alarming to me.

From subtopia.blogspot.com there is this long piece entitled “Cites in the Crosshairs” that seems to say that there has been a qualitative shift in the ways that cities are perceived. (Sort of like when the business schools began teaching that any money that could be made is counted as a loss when it is not made, has led to a ramped up ruthless greed that leaves no room for mercy.) Cities are perceived as targets as people are driven off the land and into or surrounding cities. The large barrios of the poor are relegated to the areas close to the garbage dumps. These areas are considered breeding grounds for ”insurgents”. Software has been developed that can target these areas for general evaporation, in spite of pleas from the Christian Children’s Fund for money to send little Maria and her baby brother some shoes. Apparently we are not all on the same page…. But, that’s a dot.

The regular neighborhoods, as in Baghdad, have proven to be very dangerous to soldiers attempting to pacify the residents as they go door to door due to asymmetric warfare tactics like IED’s. So, from the article, “A major response amongst U.S. military – “Programs with telling titles such as “Combat Zones That See” and “Visibuilding” promise to re-establish the dream of omniscient, distanciated and machinic vision for U.S. forces in cities, allowing them to once again withdraw physically from the killing power of their machines. Many dreams of robotized and automated high-tech warfare, permanently projecting perfect power into global south cities, are emerging here. The objective being to try and delegate the decision to kill to computer software embedded within networked weapons and sensors which permanently loiter within or above urban space automatically dispatching those deemed ‘enemy.’” OK, that’s a dot.

Featured on LATOC today, there is an article from the guerrilla news network. It is a piece that Michael Ruppert wrote in 2006, “The Military is Planning for The End of the Grid.” From a report to congress by the Dept. of Defense in May, 2006: “As Peak Oil & Gas drive energy prices through the roof, the military sees an opportunity to effectively monopolize grid energy when they need to by taking advantage of a deregulating energy industry preparing to sell energy to the highest bidder. Such a scenario will benefit the military above all else because no one could possibly outbid them.

With America’s commercial manufacturing sector packing up shop and relocating primarily in Mexico and China to cut costs, military installations and private-sector military-industrial-complex manufacturers in America are sure to have the deepest pockets to pay for grid energy with little competition as hydrocarbon supplies start to dwindle. People will be priced off the grid.”

The military and the elites have plans for those big alternative energy programs, like huge wind turbine fields, as well. They are building them close to their own homes and military bases. From Ruppert again, “Those who blindly advocate for big renewable energy infrastructure know not what they do. When big wind and solar farms supported by environmentalists come on line they are placed on the Pentagon’s map, and when that energy is eventually needed for one of their installations or industrial producers they will simply take it through a well-orchestrated alliance with gigantic private energy firms. This is yet another reason why the only sustainable energy motto for this century is think small, think local. All the big stuff is already on the Pentagon’s radar and will ultimately be exploited to their benefit, not yours.” That’s a dot.

So, by golly! What did I read on cryptogon a couple of days ago? “New Power Meters in California Can Ration or Cut Off Electricity by Remote Control.” The San Francisco Chronicle reports “… customers would get an electricity meter that can be switched on or off remotely, without a visit from one of PG & E’s customer service trucks. During a power emergency, the devices also could ration electricity to a home rather than blacking it out entirely….They can also be programmed with software that, in the future, could allow them to control home appliances, turning off air conditioners and washing machines or changing their power needs as needed.” There’s another dot.

Gee. Do you think that the military might anticipate some resistance to these and other invasive tactics? No problem! We have, after all, all this weaponry we have been using in Afghanistan and Iraq that we can always turn against domestic “terrorists” who may want to set their own thermostats. And, there’s lots of money in it as well!

Lets see…also from cryptogon, “Micro UAV Surveillance at Antiwar Protests.”

“I heard someone say, ‘Oh my God, look at those,’ the college senior from New York recalled. I look up and I’m like, ‘What the hell is that? They looked kind of like dragonflies or little helicopters. But, I mean, those are not insects.”

No, those are not insects. Those are surveillance drones that will eventually be able to identify you from centralized data bases while they chase you down the street and call in for cluster bombs, microwave pain rays - or worse.

Huh? Google “Star Wars in Iraq” and watch the video. Doctors and witnesses of directed energy and high intensity micro-wave weapons that can cut the heads off people sitting in cars without disturbing the rest of the body. Weapons that can shrink an adult body to 2-3 feet long while it burns it to a crisp. You can read the details on rense.com. It’s a report entitled, “Horrifying US Secret Weapon Unleashed in Baghdad.” From the report, “Then to his amazement the tank suddenly let loose a blinding stream of what seemed like fire and lightning, engulfing a large passenger bus and three automobiles. Within seconds the bus had become semi-molten, sagging “like a wet rag” as he put it. He said the bus rapidly melted under this withering blast, shrinking until it was a twisted blob about the dimensions of a VW bug. As if that were not bizarre enough, an al-Ghazali explicitly describes seeing numerous human bodies shriveled to the size of newborn babies. By the time local street fighting ended that day, he estimates between 500 and 600 soldiers and civilians had been cooked alive as a result of the mysterious tank-mounted device.” The army just ordered 31 more of these weapons for use in Iraq. But, what happens in Iraq doesn’t necessarily stay in Iraq. That’s another dot.

Those lasers and pain machines could probably make short work of herding thousands of people right into the boxcars that can take them to the 230 domestic internment camps now completed here in the USA. (Google those.)

Now go back to the rense site and go to the middle column. Down aways is a box with the headline “Stunning Discovery.” It has several parts. This is the wing-nut fringe area. Take a look at the mystery space stations or mini-death stars or whatever they are that this guy has been able to capture pictures and video of. I would suspect that maybe they are just space debris. But if that’s all it is, why is the military harassing him with helicopters over his home and taking pictures? What the hell is this? A hacker in England is currently threatened with prosecution (or rendition) for having hacked into the pentagon and read information regarding technical space personnel that are not astronauts.

So, Boy, Howdy! That could be some serious crowd control! Or some sort of mind f__k that unites the world against an event that makes 9/11 look like a picnic at grandma’s house. You connect the dots. I really don’t know what the heck is going on.

Thursday, January 3, 2008

Election Season Begins… break out the popcorn


So, the nice white people of Iowa who are happily bringing us higher food prices now that they are all getting rich converting corn to ethanol, are going to the voting booths today. Well, er, not exactly. The Republicans are going to talk amongst themselves in caucuses that could be held in homes or schools or firehouses or whatever and discuss the candidates. Then, they will write the name of their favorite on a piece of paper. The papers will be counted, and the winner will win. That means that the one who gets the most votes will be the candidate who the delegates to the Republican National Convention from Iowa will be expected to vote for, at least on the first round. It’s a fairly straightforward procedure.

However, on the Democratic side, the people will gather. Groups will form in clusters – Kucinich supporters, Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Dodd, and so on. If there is a candidate with less than 15% support, those people’s choice will not be counted. They will have to merge with some other bunch, or go home. Anti-war candidates like Kucinich, Gravel, and Dodd will be dropped like a hot rock. That’s why Kucinich is telling his folks in Iowa to merge with Obama supporters if he is hosed right off the bat.

Speeches will be made, caucus goers will be exhorted by neighbors and friends (and perhaps bosses or wives of bosses, pastors, etc.) to vote for their candidate. Then, they will have to physically stand with the group they want to vote for. So much for secret ballots. Everybody knows who you vote for. This pretty much leaves out those who don’t want to offend the boss or the neighbors by voting for someone less popular. No wonder a lot of people choose not to be a part of this cockamamie system and won’t attend the democratic caucuses. Anyway, the votes are counted by a raising of hands, I guess, and the winner is declared. Now the delegates to the Democratic convention are supposed to vote for that candidate.

What about the support for the other candidates? Or other parties? I think it just evaporated, at least as far as the media is concerned and the money machinery that backs it. Given the fact that a paper ballot could easily be sent to every registered voter and they could send it in to the state, is this fair? In fact, do we even need the stranglehold of the two political parties?

I think not.

Oh, yeah. And, just to add to the high weirdness, the Democratic votes will be tallied by the Israelis. What?? Yes, apparently an Israeli Defense company located in Orlando, Florida will tally the votes by this process:

1. Final body counts from each precinct are sent to a central state Democratic Party headquarters. These numbers are never revealed, either to the press or public ... or, one assumes, the Secretary of State. Remember, the Iowa caucuses are not government-run elections, but party-run.

2. A formula is applied to the results in each precinct that yields a number of delegates assigned to each candidate. It is weighted via a formula based on precinct turnout (Democratic) for the previous two general elections. Confused enough yet?

3. The results reported--i.e., the percentages--are percentages of delegates that each candidate has received, based on the body count adjusted by the formula.

This seems like a very opaque process, with two uncomfortable contingencies: (1) a candidate could win the "popular" vote (i.e., the body count) but fail to come out on top in delegates, which is what is reported; (2) the assignment of final numbers is not transparent--in fact, it is done totally in secret--so we could have questions as to what goes on in the closed rooms. Maybe each precinct can confirm or deny the eventual result. But it's hard not to feel that hanky panky could possibly go on at the state party level, if so desired.

“Isn’t that special,” as the Church Lady would observe. Hummm….

But, in case you think the process is only egregiously manipulated by the Democrats, you could look into what the Republicans and the media are doing to squelch Ron Paul.

There is a virtual blackout of coverage of Ron Paul’s run, despite the fact that he keeps winning straw poll after straw poll, and he’s raised more money than anyone from individual citizens through grass-roots efforts over the internet. If he manages to muster a decent amount of votes in the caucuses, it really will be a “revolutionary” event. His appeal is to the independent voters, the ones who usually don’t vote at all, and those who are serious about ending the war and the military empire that the republicans as well as the democrats have created. Both he and Kucinich are their party’s worst nightmares.

Ron Paul wants to get rid of the Patriot Act, bring the troops home from not only Iraq, but all the 130 military bases we have all over the world and dismantle the empire. This is because he actually supports the constitution of the United States of America which all those congress people have sworn to defend. Horrors! He wants to get rid of the departments like Education that has systematically dumbed down the schools of the nation and others that the framers did not envision, and transfer a lot of the power of the central government to the states, where there would be more hands-on involvement by the local citizenry. He wants to end the Federal Reserve and the income tax which basically goes to pay the interest we are charged on the money created by the Federal Reserve!! He would fund the social security program from money saved from the bloated military, the bogus “War on Drugs” and the demonic “intelligence” services renditioning prisoners and provoking everyone to hate us (except the globalists).

I have reservations about several of his views, but they are minor in comparison to the support I give to the rest. Also, the real power of his program is in the grassroots supporters. His official staff is hopelessly inept in terms of the slick, professional marketing teams the other candidates use. I think that he is enough of an advocate for a weak executive branch that there is a lot of wiggle-room on his policies that could be dealt with later. He is also aware of resource depletion and will fight the creation of the North American Union. That’s plenty to chew on.

Kucinich is big on peace, but lax on individual liberty. Once in office, the first thing he’d do is end the war. The second thing, I fear, would be to disarm this country’s citizens so they have no self-defense against the forces of fascism. Maybe that’s just a fear of mine that is unfounded. He is innovative, though, and seems to genuinely be motivated with a concern for the people, not the financiers. He also is aware of resource depletion and the environment, and does not seem to be in the pocket of Big Business. I don’t know for sure, as I have not kept up with his campaign much. One thing I do know is that he’s about as popular with the Democratic establishment as a tick at a dog show and they will do just about anything to get rid of him. I have more hope for Edwards.

Anyway, this nominating process will prove to be about as satisfying and hard to ignore as picking a scab, until the official candidates are chosen and the real race begins. By that time, serious shit will have come down that can no longer be avoided – like the perfect storm (sorry to use such a by now hackneyed phrase) of inflation (outrageous food prices), energy crunch (gasoline at $4 per gallon), serious climate change related problems (hurricanes and floods), the real estate melt-down (foreclosures), and the wars (endless) – all of which will be at the forefront of the voters minds, as they lose their jobs as well as their homes and their neighborhoods start to look like Baghdad. Candidates won’t be able to babble about “change” vs. “experience” and ignore the suffering all around them. Well, maybe the Republicans will just continue to focus on the Apocalypse and the “family” (a rich white banking family, with no gay kids.)

If people don’t hit the streets this summer and demand that their liberties be restored, protest against the loss of privacy, the threat of military cyber weaponry poised against them, the domination of the corporations and advertising invading their lives, the lock-down of the media’s hold on information, the complicity of the Food and Drug Administration with Big Pharma, and the corporatization of the government as a whole, then I think it will be too late. The long range tazers, the robotic listening devises, the micro-wave ray guns, the detention camps, and all the horrifying new weapons and rules that have been created to force us into submission will be in place to insure that the vision of the neo-cons is established. You might want to counsel your children to learn Chinese.

We will be sharing the conditions of the Third World people and the animals on the Most Endangered Species List that we have been complicit in exploiting and exterminating, and we will begin to know the truth of the slogan, “What comes around, goes around.”

Far be it from me to advise who to vote for or whether to vote at all. Carolyn Baker suggests that voting only lends itself to the illusion that voting matters. Perhaps voting for a third party, like Cynthia McKinney running for president from the Green Party has merit. At least, it would demonstrate dissatisfaction with the two party death grip. As an anarchist, I truly believe that one should look within and do what is in keeping with the truth inside. Collectively, all those truths taken together will probably be the wisest way to go.