The Hill, July 24, 2013: Congress has launched an investigation of the helicopter crash that killed 30 Americans in Afghanistan, including members of the Navy’s elite SEAL Team 6 unit, The Hill has learned.
The victims’ families say the Pentagon hasn’t provided answers to their many questions about the deadly attack, which took place on Aug. 6, 2011, three months after Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan by Team 6 forces.
... Charlie Strange, whose son Michael was among those killed, said he asked President Obama two years ago at Dover Air Force Base to fully investigate. The death toll in the crash was the largest of any single incident for the U.S. military during the Afghanistan war.
Obama praised Michael’s service to Strange, who responded, “I don’t need to know about my son. I need to know what happened to my son.”
The president promised he would investigate, Strange said, but he never heard back from the White House. The Pentagon, meanwhile, has provided him and others with incomplete and contradictory information, he said.
Administration leaks that emerged after the bin Laden raid prompted members of Team 6 to worry about their safety.
For example, Michael Strange told his father he was working on a will before he returned to Afghanistan in the summer of 2011, his father said.
... a Department of Defense official disputed claims that there was an "ambush."
... Yet, Strange says insurgents were boasting on the Internet they had taken out Team 6 shortly after the helicopter crashed.
Shortly before the CH-47 Chinook helicopter took off on a rescue mission (operation Extortion 17), seven Afghan commandos who were on the passenger list were replaced by other Afghan military officials.
... In the transcript related to the Pentagon’s probe, a Defense official confirmed that all seven names of the Afghan soldiers were incorrect.
... Among the dead were 30 Americans, including 22 Navy SEALS, seven Afghan soldiers and one Afghan translator. Their bodies were later recovered, but the helicopter’s black box was not. Pentagon officials have said that it could not be recovered, citing a flash flood that happened soon after the assault.
All the bodies were cremated. The Pentagon has defended the cremation to the soldiers’ families, saying the bodies were badly burned.
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on National Security, however, said he has seen a photo of a deceased SEAL that was not [badly burned].
... During a ceremony at Bagram Air Base for the 38 killed, the deceased Afghan soldiers were loaded onto planes with the bodies of the U.S. forces. An imam spoke an Islamic prayer that included language on U.S. soldiers burning in hell.
Read entire report
See also:
US Navy SEALs: Two Helicopters
Pentagon Hides Files on Navy Seals Bin Laden Assassination Mission
Jesse Ventura: How Corrupt Republicans and Corrupt Democrats Ruined America
Navy SEAL Team 6 families Hold US Responsible for Sons' Deaths
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Justice for Trayvon: Obama's Campaign for Race Hatred
The Faculty Lounge: What Do Zimmerman’s Calls to Police Show About His View of Black Men?
Jon Rappoport: Why the Obama Administration Provokes Race Hatred Over Trayvon Martin
Judicial Watch: Justice Department Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests
AP: Justice for Trayvon Rallies Set For 100 Cities
WFB: Iran's Mullah's Join Obama in Stirring Race Hatred in America
LATimes: It's Working. Bash Mobs Rampage Through Southern California
If he would publicly debate Michelle Meyer, the author of this piece, we'd know for sure whether Obarmy is a stupid fuck or a lying cunt.CCC: The large violent underclass in Sanford, Florida
But we know the President of the United States is not stupid, therefore ...
Michelle Meyer, tries to finesse this point by suggesting that if Obama is peddling a totally warped account of the Trayvon Martin killing it is because he is looking at it from a different perspective than other people.
That's all very charitable but total bunk such as to be expected from an academic with security of tenure to think about. The truth is that the President of the United States does not provoke racial antagonism merely as the result of a weird personal perspective, which means folks should be asking themselves what the Nobel Piss Prize winner is aiming at.
The US is undergoing a wrenching transition from a land of opportunity to a country of widespread unemployment and underemployment, diminishing opportunity, declining incomes and much outright poverty.
Racial conflict will certainly help take the heat off a government whose globalist agenda serves the money power, not the people in whose name the government supposedly rules.
Meantime, the majority racial group in America, the Europeans who made America a great nation under constitutional rule, are to be displaced through mass immigration:
Today, largely because of immigration, there is no majority race in Hawaii or Houston or New York City. Within five years, there will be no majority race in our largest state, California. In a little more than 50 years, there will be no majority race in the United States. No other nation in history has gone through demographic change of this magnitude in so short a time … [These immigrants] are energizing our culture and broadening our vision of the world. They are renewing our most basic values and reminding us all of what it truly means to be American.Some Americans of European extraction aren't terrifically thrilled to see the country that their forebears built taken over by the Third World. So forcing a load of guilt down their throats is just the thing to keep them off-balance and demoralized.
Bill Clinton Commencement Address at Portland State University in Portland, Oregon June 13, 1998
A fifty year old white man was brutally beaten with a hammer by two black males. A witness saw the attack and called police. The victim’s injuries were severe and he was left with serious permanent damage. It was probably the intent of the suspects to kill him. The suspects are Julius Bender and Yahaziel Israel. When this horrific incident took place it only received a small blip in the news. The Orlando Sentinel censored the race of the victim even though it was in the police report. ...NYT: Obama: Why Blacks Feel Pain (Should Be Angry) About the Zimmerman Verdict
At the time of the attack, Trayvon Martin was local news in every market in the entire United States. Yet all this man got was a small censored blurb in the local daily. ....
... one of the suspects has a Hebrew name. His father is the local leader of a murderous anti-white religious cult. They call themselves the true Hebrews and believe they are preparing for a race war with white people. The group is called “Nation of Yahweh” and it is run by the notorious cult leader Yahweh Ben Yahweh. Members of the group have been convicted of crimes for their roles in fourteen murders and two attempted murders. Watchdogs believe that the cult is responsible for even more. The group’s leader served eleven years for his role in the murders. Yahaziel’s sister also has a Hebrew name, suggesting that his father raised them in the murderous cult. ...
Read more
Jon Rappoport: Why the Obama Administration Provokes Race Hatred Over Trayvon Martin
Judicial Watch: Justice Department Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests
AP: Justice for Trayvon Rallies Set For 100 Cities
WFB: Iran's Mullah's Join Obama in Stirring Race Hatred in America
LATimes: It's Working. Bash Mobs Rampage Through Southern California
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Former US President, Jimmy Carter: "America has no functioning democracy"
The following are edited excerpts from Google.Translate's English version of Der Speigel's report. The original article in German is available here.
On Tuesday, while attending a meeting of the "Atlantic Bridge," Former US President Jimmy Carter said, with reference to recent revelations about US National Security Agency spying on US citizens and allies alike, "America has no functioning democracy now."
Previously, the Democrat had been very critical of the practices of U.S. intelligence. "I think the invasion of privacy has gone too far," Carter told CNN. He also stated that the revelations of whistleblower Edward Snowden were "likely to be useful because they inform the public."
Carter has repeatedly warned that the United States has sharply declined in moral authority due to excessive restriction of civil rights.
Carter was the 39th President of the United States, holding office from 1977 to 1981. During his tenure, he tried to align U.S. foreign policy to better serve human rights. After his retirement from active politics he received the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize for his humanitarian work.
The President lamented the growing political divide in the United States, the excessive influence of money in U.S. election campaigns and the confusing American election rules.
Carter spoke of the triumphs of modern technology that had brought democratic progress to countries of the Arab Spring, but noted that these developments are endangered by the NSA spying scandal causing major U.S. Internet platforms such as Google and Facebook to lose credibility worldwide.
On Tuesday, while attending a meeting of the "Atlantic Bridge," Former US President Jimmy Carter said, with reference to recent revelations about US National Security Agency spying on US citizens and allies alike, "America has no functioning democracy now."
Previously, the Democrat had been very critical of the practices of U.S. intelligence. "I think the invasion of privacy has gone too far," Carter told CNN. He also stated that the revelations of whistleblower Edward Snowden were "likely to be useful because they inform the public."
Carter has repeatedly warned that the United States has sharply declined in moral authority due to excessive restriction of civil rights.
Carter was the 39th President of the United States, holding office from 1977 to 1981. During his tenure, he tried to align U.S. foreign policy to better serve human rights. After his retirement from active politics he received the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize for his humanitarian work.
The President lamented the growing political divide in the United States, the excessive influence of money in U.S. election campaigns and the confusing American election rules.
Carter spoke of the triumphs of modern technology that had brought democratic progress to countries of the Arab Spring, but noted that these developments are endangered by the NSA spying scandal causing major U.S. Internet platforms such as Google and Facebook to lose credibility worldwide.
Monday, July 15, 2013
Facebook: A Place to Advocate Politically Correct Riot and Murder
Examiner.com, July 3, 2013: On Wednesday, the Daily Caller's Michelle Fields wrote on her blog that while Facebook banned Fox News' Todd Starnes for a politically incorrect post, it has allowed the existence and growth of pages calling for the death of George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer on trial for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. At least one page called for rioting in the name of the young black man shot by Zimmerman last year.
A search of Facebook found two pages named "George Zimmerman must die." The only difference between the pages is the word "die," which is spelled "DIE" on one page.
The search also revealed a page called "Kill Zimmerman" and a closed group named "Kill george zimmerman bitch a*z." As of this writing, the group had 13 members.
Read More:
See also:
Thomas Sowell: Zimmerman Trial Jury Confirm That This Is Still America
NYT: >Obama Keeps Stirring Passions on Race
Jon Rappoport: Why the Obama Administration Continues to Provoke Race Hatred Over the Trayvon Martin Killing
CCC: RACEBOOK Deletes White History Month page with 75,000 followers
Judicial Watch: Documents Obtained by Judicial Watch Detail Role of Justice Department in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests
Yahoo News: Neice of Martin Luther King — Dr. King Would Not Have Worn a Hoodie, and George Zimmerman Is Not a Caucasian
Jon Rappoport: It’s all okay, Hillary feels families’ pain, we’re back on track
Daily Caller: Blacks benefit disproportionately from Florida's "Stand Your Ground" defense in homicide cases
NRO: The Checkered Past of George Zimmerman's Prosecutor
Fox News: Alan Dershowitz on Prosecutor Corey's irresponsible conduct in Zimmerman case
LA Times: Zimmerman verdict protestors, aka rioters, stomp cars, storm Walmart
Breitbart: US Department of Justice Launches Witch Hunt to Convict George Zimmerman of Racism
Eradica: While some riot, others only protest
Jon Rappoport: The George Zimmerman trial: life and death in the American psyop
Fred: Zimmerman, The Joy of Hopelessness
The Zimmerman affair warms the cockles of a curmudgeon´s heart. (I´m not sure what a cockle is, but I want mine to be at the right temperature.) Never have I seen such sprawling, cacophonous, indignant ignorance and frightful stupidity as that being exhibited by the American public. We are doomed. I am delighted. Curmudgeons love doom.
Has there ever been such focused inattention as the case has produced? Nothing of importance is noticed, and everything lacking it is. The crucial fact to come out of the whole adventure—crucial, and therefore utterly overlooked--was that Rachel Jeantel, a prosecution witness and black girl aged nineteen years, can´t read. The grim implication of this fact is confirmed by the illiteracy of tweets from blacks regarding the case. “Ima kill dat dumass cracker be racis.” Here we see as neatly displayed as if in a jewelry box why so many young blacks will go nowhere in the remaining fifty years of their lives. They can´t read, or barely can. In a fading techno-industrial civilization—I use the latter word frivolously—this consigns them to a life on charity. Is this not of more note than who started what?
No. The educational disaster that will leave Rachel and millions of her confreres in meaningless lives on welfare pales in importance compared to the question: Did Trayvon Martin and Zimmerman have the proper racial attitudes? This is what exercises the vast endocrine boobitry howling with empty-headed rage and self-righteousness.
Of course racism was involved in the shooting. The prosecution established this beyond doubt. Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a “creepy-ass cracker,” “cracker” being a highly pejorative term for low-class whites living in decaying trailers in the pine barrens and Everglades of Florida. So Trayvon, a racist, didn´t like white people. So what? Most blacks don´t.
A measure of the limitless hypocrisy that pervades, that almost constitutes American political life is that Travon´s clear racial hostility—“creepy-ass cracker”—is ignored. Only whites can exhibit racial antagonism. Yet perhaps twice a week on the Drudge Report one encounters cell-phone video of young blacks seriously beating whites because they are white. Here you have to understand that racial attacks are not racial. The local police chief invariably says that race wasn´t involved, when in fact nothing else was, and the papers will speak of “teens.”
Read more:
Jew Among You: My advice to George Zimmerman
Steve Sailer: Obama: A jury has spoken"
And from the New York Post:
"Hey, everybody, let's riot:"
CNN: Juror: 'No doubt' that Zimmerman feared for his life
A search of Facebook found two pages named "George Zimmerman must die." The only difference between the pages is the word "die," which is spelled "DIE" on one page.
The search also revealed a page called "Kill Zimmerman" and a closed group named "Kill george zimmerman bitch a*z." As of this writing, the group had 13 members.
Read More:
See also:
Thomas Sowell: Zimmerman Trial Jury Confirm That This Is Still America
NYT: >Obama Keeps Stirring Passions on Race
Jon Rappoport: Why the Obama Administration Continues to Provoke Race Hatred Over the Trayvon Martin Killing
CCC: RACEBOOK Deletes White History Month page with 75,000 followers
Judicial Watch: Documents Obtained by Judicial Watch Detail Role of Justice Department in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests
Yahoo News: Neice of Martin Luther King — Dr. King Would Not Have Worn a Hoodie, and George Zimmerman Is Not a Caucasian
Jon Rappoport: It’s all okay, Hillary feels families’ pain, we’re back on track
Daily Caller: Blacks benefit disproportionately from Florida's "Stand Your Ground" defense in homicide cases
NRO: The Checkered Past of George Zimmerman's Prosecutor
Fox News: Alan Dershowitz on Prosecutor Corey's irresponsible conduct in Zimmerman case
LA Times: Zimmerman verdict protestors, aka rioters, stomp cars, storm Walmart
Breitbart: US Department of Justice Launches Witch Hunt to Convict George Zimmerman of Racism
What a cunt that cunt Eric Holder is. And Hilary Clinton too. But we already knew that the Clintons are self-hating anti-white racists: "In a little more than 50 years, there will be no majority race in the United States" — Bill Clinton, June 1998 commencement address at Portland State. The graduates, so it is reported, cheered.Limbaugh: Jeantel testimony suggests Trayvon Martin was a gay-basher
Eradica: While some riot, others only protest
Jon Rappoport: The George Zimmerman trial: life and death in the American psyop
Fred: Zimmerman, The Joy of Hopelessness
The Zimmerman affair warms the cockles of a curmudgeon´s heart. (I´m not sure what a cockle is, but I want mine to be at the right temperature.) Never have I seen such sprawling, cacophonous, indignant ignorance and frightful stupidity as that being exhibited by the American public. We are doomed. I am delighted. Curmudgeons love doom.
Has there ever been such focused inattention as the case has produced? Nothing of importance is noticed, and everything lacking it is. The crucial fact to come out of the whole adventure—crucial, and therefore utterly overlooked--was that Rachel Jeantel, a prosecution witness and black girl aged nineteen years, can´t read. The grim implication of this fact is confirmed by the illiteracy of tweets from blacks regarding the case. “Ima kill dat dumass cracker be racis.” Here we see as neatly displayed as if in a jewelry box why so many young blacks will go nowhere in the remaining fifty years of their lives. They can´t read, or barely can. In a fading techno-industrial civilization—I use the latter word frivolously—this consigns them to a life on charity. Is this not of more note than who started what?
No. The educational disaster that will leave Rachel and millions of her confreres in meaningless lives on welfare pales in importance compared to the question: Did Trayvon Martin and Zimmerman have the proper racial attitudes? This is what exercises the vast endocrine boobitry howling with empty-headed rage and self-righteousness.
Of course racism was involved in the shooting. The prosecution established this beyond doubt. Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a “creepy-ass cracker,” “cracker” being a highly pejorative term for low-class whites living in decaying trailers in the pine barrens and Everglades of Florida. So Trayvon, a racist, didn´t like white people. So what? Most blacks don´t.
A measure of the limitless hypocrisy that pervades, that almost constitutes American political life is that Travon´s clear racial hostility—“creepy-ass cracker”—is ignored. Only whites can exhibit racial antagonism. Yet perhaps twice a week on the Drudge Report one encounters cell-phone video of young blacks seriously beating whites because they are white. Here you have to understand that racial attacks are not racial. The local police chief invariably says that race wasn´t involved, when in fact nothing else was, and the papers will speak of “teens.”
Read more:
Jew Among You: My advice to George Zimmerman
Steve Sailer: Obama: A jury has spoken"
And from the New York Post:
"Hey, everybody, let's riot:"
CNN: Juror: 'No doubt' that Zimmerman feared for his life
Econ 101 is killing America
By Robert Atkinson and Robert Lind
Salon, July 8, 2013: In the Middle Ages, people looked to the Church for certainty. In today’s complex, market-based economies, they look to the field of economics, at least for answers to questions concerning the economy. And unlike some disciplines, which acknowledge that there’s a huge gap between the scholarly knowledge and policy advice, economists have been anything but shy about asserting their authority.
As we can see from the current dismal state of economic affairs, economies are incredibly complex systems, and policymakers who are forced to act in the face of this uncertainty and complexity want guidance. And over the last half century, neoclassical economists have not only been more than happy to offer it, but largely been able to marginalize any other disciplines or approaches, giving them a virtual monopoly on economic policy advice.
But there are two big problems with this. First, despite economists’ calming assurances, we still know little about how economies actually work and the effect of policies. If we did, then economists should have sounded the alarm bells to head off the financial collapse and Great Recession. But even more problematic, even though most economists know better, they present to the public, the media and politicians a simplified, vulgar version of neoclassical economics — what can be called Econ 101 — that leads policymakers astray. Economists fear that if they really expose policymakers to all the contradictions, uncertainties and complications of “Advanced Econ,” the latter will go off track — embracing protectionism, heavy-handed “industrial policy” or even socialism. In fact, the myths of Econ 101 already lead policymakers dangerously off track, with tragic results for the economy and everyday Americans.
Myth 1: Economics is a science
The way economists maintain stature in public policy circles is to present their discipline as a science, akin to physics. In Econ 101, there is no uncertainty, only the obvious truths embedded in supply and demand curves. As noted economist Lionel Robbins wrote, “Economics is the science which studies human behavior as a relationship between given ends and scarce means, which have alternative uses.” If economics is actually a science, then policymakers can feel more comfortable following the advice of economists. But if economics is really a science – which implies only one answer to a particular question — why do 40 percent of surveyed economists agree that raising the minimum wage would make it harder for people to get jobs while 40 percent disagree? It’s because as Larry Lindsey, former head of President Bush’s National Economic Council, admitted, “the continuing argument [among economists] is a product of philosophical disagreements about human nature and the role of government and cannot be fully resolved by economists no matter how sound their data.”
Read more:
Salon, July 8, 2013: In the Middle Ages, people looked to the Church for certainty. In today’s complex, market-based economies, they look to the field of economics, at least for answers to questions concerning the economy. And unlike some disciplines, which acknowledge that there’s a huge gap between the scholarly knowledge and policy advice, economists have been anything but shy about asserting their authority.
As we can see from the current dismal state of economic affairs, economies are incredibly complex systems, and policymakers who are forced to act in the face of this uncertainty and complexity want guidance. And over the last half century, neoclassical economists have not only been more than happy to offer it, but largely been able to marginalize any other disciplines or approaches, giving them a virtual monopoly on economic policy advice.
But there are two big problems with this. First, despite economists’ calming assurances, we still know little about how economies actually work and the effect of policies. If we did, then economists should have sounded the alarm bells to head off the financial collapse and Great Recession. But even more problematic, even though most economists know better, they present to the public, the media and politicians a simplified, vulgar version of neoclassical economics — what can be called Econ 101 — that leads policymakers astray. Economists fear that if they really expose policymakers to all the contradictions, uncertainties and complications of “Advanced Econ,” the latter will go off track — embracing protectionism, heavy-handed “industrial policy” or even socialism. In fact, the myths of Econ 101 already lead policymakers dangerously off track, with tragic results for the economy and everyday Americans.
Myth 1: Economics is a science
The way economists maintain stature in public policy circles is to present their discipline as a science, akin to physics. In Econ 101, there is no uncertainty, only the obvious truths embedded in supply and demand curves. As noted economist Lionel Robbins wrote, “Economics is the science which studies human behavior as a relationship between given ends and scarce means, which have alternative uses.” If economics is actually a science, then policymakers can feel more comfortable following the advice of economists. But if economics is really a science – which implies only one answer to a particular question — why do 40 percent of surveyed economists agree that raising the minimum wage would make it harder for people to get jobs while 40 percent disagree? It’s because as Larry Lindsey, former head of President Bush’s National Economic Council, admitted, “the continuing argument [among economists] is a product of philosophical disagreements about human nature and the role of government and cannot be fully resolved by economists no matter how sound their data.”
Read more:
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Some Links
Daily Mail: Blair fixer picked the judge for the David Kelly Inquiry just three hours after the weapons inspector's suicide — Before body had been identified
Guardian: David Kelly's Prediction: If Iraq invated "I'll be found dead in the woods"
CTV: Stephen Harper's appoints bodyguard as ambassador to Jordan
Jon Rappoport: Matrix: who is Edward Snowden?
Patrick Buchanan: Zimmerman: A Trial That Should Never Have Been Held
Aangirfan: Mysterious Killings, Agents of Empire
Guardian: Edward Snowdon Invokes Nuremberg in Self-Justification
NYT: Sudden Improvements in Egypt Suggest a Campaign to Undermine Morsi
iSteve: NYT prepares surprised readers for Zimmerman acquittal
Boston Globe: Tsarnaev pleads not guilty of Boston Marathon Charges
Daily Mail: Death of the West — US Birthrate Hits All-Time Low
McClatchy: Obama takes the next step on the road to tyranny — Civil servants ordered to spy on one another
Pan African News Wire: Hundreds of British Soldiers to Deploy to Libya
Guardian: David Kelly's Prediction: If Iraq invated "I'll be found dead in the woods"
CTV: Stephen Harper's appoints bodyguard as ambassador to Jordan
Jon Rappoport: Matrix: who is Edward Snowden?
Patrick Buchanan: Zimmerman: A Trial That Should Never Have Been Held
Aangirfan: Mysterious Killings, Agents of Empire
Guardian: Edward Snowdon Invokes Nuremberg in Self-Justification
I ... had the capability without any warrant to search for, seize, and read your communications. Anyone’s communications at any time. That is the power to change people’s fates.Juan Williams: 'Crackers,' a 'teenage mammy' -- the sorry truth about race and Zimmerman trial
It is also a serious violation of the law. The 4th and 5th Amendments to the Constitution of my country, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and numerous statutes and treaties forbid such systems of massive, pervasive surveillance. While the US Constitution marks these programs as illegal, my government argues that secret court rulings, which the world is not permitted to see, somehow legitimize an illegal affair. These rulings simply corrupt the most basic notion of justice – that it must be seen to be done. The immoral cannot be made moral through the use of secret law.
I believe in the principle declared at Nuremberg in 1945: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore individual citizens have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring.
NYT: Sudden Improvements in Egypt Suggest a Campaign to Undermine Morsi
iSteve: NYT prepares surprised readers for Zimmerman acquittal
Boston Globe: Tsarnaev pleads not guilty of Boston Marathon Charges
Daily Mail: Death of the West — US Birthrate Hits All-Time Low
McClatchy: Obama takes the next step on the road to tyranny — Civil servants ordered to spy on one another
And those failing to spy on their co-workers will be liquidated, um, no, not yet. But they will be charged with a crime.Guardian: Global Corruption: Survey reveals one in four people paid a bribe in past year
How Soviet-like.
Ain't globalization great.YouTube: Tommy Robinson of the English Defense League on Islam, a Religion of Peace — Not
A revealing look at how the BBC, aka British Buggers Corporation, Buggering British Children, etc., etc., handles an opponent of national cultural genocide.Aangirfan: The American Money Power; The Hypocrisy of Obama; The US Controlling Both Sides in Egypt
Quite remarkable is not only that the BBC can find people to debate serious issues publicly in such a childish way, but that the corporation encourages the vicious name calling directed at someone who dares defy the cannons of political correctness.
Pan African News Wire: Hundreds of British Soldiers to Deploy to Libya
The Economic Nonsense of a Globalist Mouthpiece
In one of his more coherent diatribes against my post about the causes of Western economic stagnation, Ron H. quoted me as follows:
But in a globalizing world economy where technology is transforming the processes of production, distribution and exchange at an ever accelerating pace, there is no obvious connection between production and income. Far from it. When production is off-shored from high-wage, and highly regulated economies to low-wage economies with minimal workplace health and safety standards, income in the country doing the off-shoring declines, even as the profits of the corporations doing the off-shoring increase.
Technology has the same perverse influence on the economy. If the baker and candlestick maker each employs new technology that enables them to reduce the number of their employees, their profits will increase, while consumption declines as their former employees subsist on welfare or die of starvation. Unless, that is, the baker and candlestick maker invest their additional profits in manufacturing, say, washing machines, thereby re-employing the labor the just shed.
But there's nothing automatic about such adjustments. Moreover, the baker and the candlestick maker are in no way compelled to invest in their own country the profits they reap from idling their former employees. Under the current globalization regime, they would most likely invest their spare capital in a factory overseas to exploit cheap foreign labor, importing the product at a price that forces the local competition into bankruptcy and idles more of their own compatriots. And once the demand for labor falls beyond a certain point, capital is in a position to drive wages to the starvation level. This is what we now see in the West. It is the long-delayed verification of a central tenet of Marxist economic analysis.
Workers are now in a position to be shafted. Union power to control the price of labor has been destroyed. The freedom of democratically elected governments to establish national economic policies that protect the interests of their own people has been signed away with institution of the World Trade Organization. Stagnation and decline in consumption and therefore in overall economic output are the necessary consequences. As workers incomes decline output of the economy must decline with it compensated only by increased spending by the managerial and capitalist classes, which although grotesquely extravagant, cannot keep pace with the impoverishment of the masses.
But in Ron H's libertarian Happy Land, the American economy is is a perfectly tuned self-regulating mechanism that automatically maximizes output, thereby assuring all but lazy bums a fine wage. Thus, in Economic Happy Land, welfare or any other governmental intervention in the economy for the greater good is a moral crime against rich people.
In fact, the state of the economy is the result of the independent decisions of millions of individuals and corporations, plus a few monopolistic or oligopolistic entities and the biggest actor of all, the government. To assume that the actions of these participants, each serving their own interest, will automatically lead to the perfectly happy economic outcome where everyone prepared to do an honest day's work will be assured an honest day's pay is utter foolishness promoted by billionaire libertarian mouthpieces such as Ron H only because it serves their masters' interest.
That no one actually believes in the Happy Land free market economic model is evident from the fact that every economic actor, so far as they are able, seeks to promote government regulation of the economy in their own interest.
Giant corporations in the West naturally oppose restrictions on their freedom to move capital, goods and people wherever production is cheapest, prices of end products are highest, wages are lowest, environmental law and workplace health and safety regulations are laxest, and taxes payable are lowest. But at the same time, these "libertarian" corporations insist on the strictest governmental enforcement of their "intellectual property rights" and all of the privileges negotiated on their behalf under international trade agreements. Workers in the West, insofar as their interests are represented in government, which is now rarely, naturally seek precisely those restrictions that capital wishes to eliminate; particularly those that restrict the export of jobs and the capital and technology that goes with those jobs.
The real political issue concerning the economy is not, therefore, to intervene or not to intervene, but whether to intervene in the interests of the money power or of the people. In the West today, the tide of economic influence runs strongly against the people.
What does it take for an economy to grow? More production, obviously.He then adds:
And what does it take to increase production? More demand, obviously.
And what does it take to increase demand? More income, obviously.
And what does it take to increase income? More production, obviously.By which he presumably meant, a causal loop, from which it can be inferred that all is for the best in the best of all possible economic worlds, such that production generates income that creates demand for even more production until the whole "circle" is spinning at the speed of light.
Oops! This looks like a circle.
But in a globalizing world economy where technology is transforming the processes of production, distribution and exchange at an ever accelerating pace, there is no obvious connection between production and income. Far from it. When production is off-shored from high-wage, and highly regulated economies to low-wage economies with minimal workplace health and safety standards, income in the country doing the off-shoring declines, even as the profits of the corporations doing the off-shoring increase.
Technology has the same perverse influence on the economy. If the baker and candlestick maker each employs new technology that enables them to reduce the number of their employees, their profits will increase, while consumption declines as their former employees subsist on welfare or die of starvation. Unless, that is, the baker and candlestick maker invest their additional profits in manufacturing, say, washing machines, thereby re-employing the labor the just shed.
But there's nothing automatic about such adjustments. Moreover, the baker and the candlestick maker are in no way compelled to invest in their own country the profits they reap from idling their former employees. Under the current globalization regime, they would most likely invest their spare capital in a factory overseas to exploit cheap foreign labor, importing the product at a price that forces the local competition into bankruptcy and idles more of their own compatriots. And once the demand for labor falls beyond a certain point, capital is in a position to drive wages to the starvation level. This is what we now see in the West. It is the long-delayed verification of a central tenet of Marxist economic analysis.
Workers are now in a position to be shafted. Union power to control the price of labor has been destroyed. The freedom of democratically elected governments to establish national economic policies that protect the interests of their own people has been signed away with institution of the World Trade Organization. Stagnation and decline in consumption and therefore in overall economic output are the necessary consequences. As workers incomes decline output of the economy must decline with it compensated only by increased spending by the managerial and capitalist classes, which although grotesquely extravagant, cannot keep pace with the impoverishment of the masses.
But in Ron H's libertarian Happy Land, the American economy is is a perfectly tuned self-regulating mechanism that automatically maximizes output, thereby assuring all but lazy bums a fine wage. Thus, in Economic Happy Land, welfare or any other governmental intervention in the economy for the greater good is a moral crime against rich people.
In fact, the state of the economy is the result of the independent decisions of millions of individuals and corporations, plus a few monopolistic or oligopolistic entities and the biggest actor of all, the government. To assume that the actions of these participants, each serving their own interest, will automatically lead to the perfectly happy economic outcome where everyone prepared to do an honest day's work will be assured an honest day's pay is utter foolishness promoted by billionaire libertarian mouthpieces such as Ron H only because it serves their masters' interest.
That no one actually believes in the Happy Land free market economic model is evident from the fact that every economic actor, so far as they are able, seeks to promote government regulation of the economy in their own interest.
Giant corporations in the West naturally oppose restrictions on their freedom to move capital, goods and people wherever production is cheapest, prices of end products are highest, wages are lowest, environmental law and workplace health and safety regulations are laxest, and taxes payable are lowest. But at the same time, these "libertarian" corporations insist on the strictest governmental enforcement of their "intellectual property rights" and all of the privileges negotiated on their behalf under international trade agreements. Workers in the West, insofar as their interests are represented in government, which is now rarely, naturally seek precisely those restrictions that capital wishes to eliminate; particularly those that restrict the export of jobs and the capital and technology that goes with those jobs.
The real political issue concerning the economy is not, therefore, to intervene or not to intervene, but whether to intervene in the interests of the money power or of the people. In the West today, the tide of economic influence runs strongly against the people.
Monday, July 8, 2013
Baby Math for a Globalist Groupie: Or, the Average 2011 Earnings of the Lowest Paid 54% of American Wage Earners Really Was Less Than $12,500
Commenting on another post, Ron H says not only am I unable to add up, but that I am a deceptive and dishonest person, which is to say, a liar.
Here I'll deal with both charges.
Here's Ron H on my math:
...the Social Security wage statistics table, doesn't support your claim that 54% of Americans have average earnings of $12,500. Perhaps you meant to write $27,500.So who's right?
Here is the Social Security Wage Statistics table for 2011 that I cited in my blogpost of July 4.
Let's take it bit by bit, so hopefully everyone may grasp it.
From the first line of the table we see that the twenty-three and a half million lowest paid American wage earners (23,548,858 to be precise) earned $47.5 billion in 2011, or an average of just over two thousand dollars each ($2,019.42, to give it to the penny) .
From the next line of the table we see that the next lowest paid thirteen point eight million Americans earned $102.5 billion in 2011 for an average of $7,400.95 each.
And so on, until we reach a cumulative total of 53.90% of American wage-earners, comprising 81,623,250 individuals, with total earnings in 2011 of one trillion, fifteen billion and some change, or an average per person of $12,400 plus or minus some rounding error. (To get the total income for the lowest-paid 53.9% of wage-earners, you have to add the "Aggregate amount" under the heading "Net compensation" in the first five lines of the table.)
So if anyone is able to reach Ron H's average $27,500 in 2011 as the mean wage for the lowest paid 54% of American wager-earners, I hope they will let me know how.
And Who's the Liar
Now, for the lie, perpetrated by trickery.
"I see" says Ron H that,
you fixed the link in your response to me so that it didn't point directly to the wage statistics table but to a newly created blog post misdated July 4th, so you could dismiss my previous statement about your source.First, I "fixed" nothing. In response to comments by Ron H on the mean earnings of the lowest paid 54% of American wage-earners I provided a link to my blog post of July 4 — The Wealth of a Hyper-Power.
The allegation that I "misdated" that post is false. Until today, when I did a Google search for how to change a Blogger date stamp (learning in the process how to drop an egg without breaking it), I had no idea that a Blogger date stamp could be changed. But in any case, every date stamp on this blog is the date stamp provided automatically by Blogger and which, so far as I am aware, indicates the actual date on which a post first appeared.
For Ron H, however, there is no question that I lied: "Your dishonesty" he says, "is offensive."
Now that I have categorically denied any deception, it will be interesting to see if Ron H withdraws his remarks and apologizes, as I have requested, for his insulting and false insinuation. Needless to say, until he does, any future remarks he may post here will be deleted automatically, which is to say, as soon as I see them.
Pentagon Hides Files on Navy Seals Bin Laden Assassination Mission
MyWay, July 8, 2013: The nation's top special operations commander ordered military files about the Navy SEAL raid on Osama bin Laden's hideout to be purged from Defense Department computers and sent to the CIA, where they could be more easily shielded from ever being made public.
The secret move, described briefly in a draft report by the Pentagon's inspector general, set off no alarms within the Obama administration even though it appears to have sidestepped federal rules and perhaps also the Freedom of Information Act.
An acknowledgement by Adm. William McRaven of his actions was quietly removed from the final version of an inspector general's report published weeks ago. A spokesman for the admiral declined to comment. The CIA, noting that the bin Laden mission was overseen by then-CIA Director Leon Panetta before he became defense secretary, said that the SEALs were effectively assigned to work temporarily for the CIA, which has presidential authority to conduct covert operations.
"Documents related to the raid were handled in a manner consistent with the fact that the operation was conducted under the direction of the CIA director," agency spokesman Preston Golson said in an emailed statement. "Records of a CIA operation such as the (bin Laden) raid, which were created during the conduct of the operation by persons acting under the authority of the CIA Director, are CIA records."
Golson said it is "absolutely false" that records were moved to the CIA to avoid the legal requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.
The records transfer was part of an effort by McRaven to protect the names of the personnel involved in the raid, according to the inspector general's draft report.
But secretly moving the records allowed the Pentagon to tell The Associated Press that it couldn't find any documents inside the Defense Department that AP had requested more than two years ago, and could represent a new strategy for the U.S. government to shield even its most sensitive activities from public scrutiny.
"Welcome to the shell game in place of open government," said Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archive, a private research institute at George Washington University. "Guess which shell the records are under. If you guess the right shell, we might show them to you. It's ridiculous."
Read More
See also:
CanSpeccy: US Navy SEALs: Two Helicopters
CanSpeccy: Navy SEAL Team 6 families Hold US Responsible for Sons' Deaths
The secret move, described briefly in a draft report by the Pentagon's inspector general, set off no alarms within the Obama administration even though it appears to have sidestepped federal rules and perhaps also the Freedom of Information Act.
An acknowledgement by Adm. William McRaven of his actions was quietly removed from the final version of an inspector general's report published weeks ago. A spokesman for the admiral declined to comment. The CIA, noting that the bin Laden mission was overseen by then-CIA Director Leon Panetta before he became defense secretary, said that the SEALs were effectively assigned to work temporarily for the CIA, which has presidential authority to conduct covert operations.
"Documents related to the raid were handled in a manner consistent with the fact that the operation was conducted under the direction of the CIA director," agency spokesman Preston Golson said in an emailed statement. "Records of a CIA operation such as the (bin Laden) raid, which were created during the conduct of the operation by persons acting under the authority of the CIA Director, are CIA records."
Golson said it is "absolutely false" that records were moved to the CIA to avoid the legal requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.
The records transfer was part of an effort by McRaven to protect the names of the personnel involved in the raid, according to the inspector general's draft report.
But secretly moving the records allowed the Pentagon to tell The Associated Press that it couldn't find any documents inside the Defense Department that AP had requested more than two years ago, and could represent a new strategy for the U.S. government to shield even its most sensitive activities from public scrutiny.
"Welcome to the shell game in place of open government," said Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archive, a private research institute at George Washington University. "Guess which shell the records are under. If you guess the right shell, we might show them to you. It's ridiculous."
Read More
See also:
CanSpeccy: US Navy SEALs: Two Helicopters
CanSpeccy: Navy SEAL Team 6 families Hold US Responsible for Sons' Deaths
Thursday, July 4, 2013
The Wealth of a Hyper-Power
Fifty-three percent of American wage-earners, or just under 82 million people, earn less than $30,000 per year. The average earnings of those 82 million Americans is $12,500 per year.
If those of the 54th to the 99th percentile by income are defined as the American middle class, the average earnings of middle class Americans is $50,241.
The top one percent of American wage-earners get just over one quarter as much in aggregate as the middle 45%, and slightly less even than the poorest 54%, but individually, they're doing OK, each earning, on average, $1,865,065 per year.
At the tippy top, the highest paid earners, all 93 of them, earned an average of $79,783,529.22 in 2011, which however, must be only a very small fraction of their total income which will have been mainly derived from investments.
International comparisons indicate that income per capita is still higher in America than almost every other country and is only exceeded by that of oil (Qatar, Brunei, Norway), banking (Switzerland, Luxembourg) or city (HongKong, Singapore) states.
By inequality of income distribution, the United States ranks high on the GINI index, alongside, El Salvador, and Peru, Ruanda and Cameroon, Russia and the UK. At the other end of the spectrum are wealthy countries such as Slovenia and Germany, Australia and Switzerland, suggesting that income inequality is not an overriding causal factor in the determination of national wealth.
If those of the 54th to the 99th percentile by income are defined as the American middle class, the average earnings of middle class Americans is $50,241.
The top one percent of American wage-earners get just over one quarter as much in aggregate as the middle 45%, and slightly less even than the poorest 54%, but individually, they're doing OK, each earning, on average, $1,865,065 per year.
At the tippy top, the highest paid earners, all 93 of them, earned an average of $79,783,529.22 in 2011, which however, must be only a very small fraction of their total income which will have been mainly derived from investments.
International comparisons indicate that income per capita is still higher in America than almost every other country and is only exceeded by that of oil (Qatar, Brunei, Norway), banking (Switzerland, Luxembourg) or city (HongKong, Singapore) states.
By inequality of income distribution, the United States ranks high on the GINI index, alongside, El Salvador, and Peru, Ruanda and Cameroon, Russia and the UK. At the other end of the spectrum are wealthy countries such as Slovenia and Germany, Australia and Switzerland, suggesting that income inequality is not an overriding causal factor in the determination of national wealth.
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
The Oppression of Emma West: the Politically Correct End Game Plays Out
By Robert Henderson
In November 2011 Emma West was arrested and subsequently charged for a racially aggravated public order offence. The charges concerned her public denunciation of the effects of mass immigration whilst on a tram in Croydon, a suburb of London.
After playing her for nearly twenty months, the politically correct British establishment have finally landed their fish: Miss West has not only been found guilty but mentally ill. She has been given a two year community order for two years and been bound over to keep the peace. The community order is likely to concentrate on probation supervision and “treatment” for her “offending” behaviour. In addition she has been given a mental health treatment order for assaulting a constable dealing with the case.
This is the best of all outcomes for the British elite, because not only have they avoided a contested trial, but her words of resentment at what had happened to her country are now officially deemed to be the result of mental illness amplified by taking two and a half times the recommended dose of the antidepressant Citalopram. In addition, she had drunk one large glass of wine. More on the antidepressant later.
In addition to these pc goodies, Miss West has been persuaded to make a Maoist style admission of fault, including the truly mind-boggling statement by her barrister David Martin-Sperry that the support she had been offered by the likes of the BNP and NF had "deeply distressed his client and, coupled with the pressure of the trial, led her to try and take her own life on three separate occasions.” Really, Mr Martin-Sperry? The support of people who share her views on immigration drove her to attempted suicide?
As for citalopram, the common side effects of this do not include aggression. Indeed, the common effects on mental state are more likely to be either sedative (the drug may create drowsiness) or anxiety. Other common effects are problems with concentration and memory. Aggression can be associated with the drug but it is very uncommon (1 in 1,000 takers experience such an effect according to the NHS guidance).
The video of part of the Croydon tram event does not show Miss West either being mentally confused or exhibiting an uncontrolled aggression. In fact, bearing in mind she had her six year-old son with her and was surrounded by many racial and ethnic minority people, she demonstrated a distinct command of herself. To ascribe her complaints, as her barrister did, to the effects of the drug plus the wine producing “unusual ideas”, is dubious in the extreme because her demeanour did not suggest she was in the grip of a drug-induced frenzy. Moreover, what is “unusual” about being appalled by the effects of mass immigration? The drug “explanation” of course fits in with the politically correct idea that no one could have such views if they were of normal mind.
The Killer Fact
The killer fact in the case is this, the authorities did not bring her to trial while she was offering a plea of NOT GUILTY. The not guilty plea was maintained for a very long time (19 Months) until June this year (19 months) when doubtless ground down by the delay and the constant threat of having her son taken from her, she changed her plea to GUILTY. That removed the embarrassment or worse of having a contested trial on the subject that the British elite fear most: honest talking about immigration and its consequences.
Consider what the supposedly liberal, ostentatiously caring powers-that-be were prepared to do to a seriously ill woman to avoid a contested trial. Her psychiatric history is lengthy and severe (she had been receiving treatment for depression since she was 18) and includes suicide attempt. She also suffered the rarity of being “sectioned” (taken into residential psychiatric care against her will) for treatment not long before her episode on the tram.
Despite this medical background, she was refused bail when first arrested and was originally remanded for more than a month (she was released after eight days following protests) in the highest security woman’s prison in England HMP Bronzefield. Contemptibly, the authorities tried to claim her custody was for her own safety despite the fact that Miss West had not claimed she felt under threat. She then went through the torment of having her case scheduled no less than seven times before changing her plea to guilty, while all the time living with the threat of having her son taken away. Indeed, she is still living with that because the social services may decide she is unfit because she has exhibited in their eyes “racist tendencies.” Furthermore, according to her barrister “There have been threats to burn her house, she has been physically assaulted and beaten to the ground outside her home” It would be interesting to know if her assailant is being prosecuted.
Her Barrister did his best to get the case thrown out:
Read more
See Also:
CanSpeccy: Are you a far-right-wing extremist, racist, anti-Semite against genocide?
CanSpeccy: The British National Party: A Conspiracy Against Democracy?
Express: Mass immigration IS destroying Britain
Migration Watch: Was Mass Immigration a Conspiracy
Steve Sailer: Zuckerberg's latest Cheap Labor Lobby ad
After playing her for nearly twenty months, the politically correct British establishment have finally landed their fish: Miss West has not only been found guilty but mentally ill. She has been given a two year community order for two years and been bound over to keep the peace. The community order is likely to concentrate on probation supervision and “treatment” for her “offending” behaviour. In addition she has been given a mental health treatment order for assaulting a constable dealing with the case.
This is the best of all outcomes for the British elite, because not only have they avoided a contested trial, but her words of resentment at what had happened to her country are now officially deemed to be the result of mental illness amplified by taking two and a half times the recommended dose of the antidepressant Citalopram. In addition, she had drunk one large glass of wine. More on the antidepressant later.
In addition to these pc goodies, Miss West has been persuaded to make a Maoist style admission of fault, including the truly mind-boggling statement by her barrister David Martin-Sperry that the support she had been offered by the likes of the BNP and NF had "deeply distressed his client and, coupled with the pressure of the trial, led her to try and take her own life on three separate occasions.” Really, Mr Martin-Sperry? The support of people who share her views on immigration drove her to attempted suicide?
As for citalopram, the common side effects of this do not include aggression. Indeed, the common effects on mental state are more likely to be either sedative (the drug may create drowsiness) or anxiety. Other common effects are problems with concentration and memory. Aggression can be associated with the drug but it is very uncommon (1 in 1,000 takers experience such an effect according to the NHS guidance).
The video of part of the Croydon tram event does not show Miss West either being mentally confused or exhibiting an uncontrolled aggression. In fact, bearing in mind she had her six year-old son with her and was surrounded by many racial and ethnic minority people, she demonstrated a distinct command of herself. To ascribe her complaints, as her barrister did, to the effects of the drug plus the wine producing “unusual ideas”, is dubious in the extreme because her demeanour did not suggest she was in the grip of a drug-induced frenzy. Moreover, what is “unusual” about being appalled by the effects of mass immigration? The drug “explanation” of course fits in with the politically correct idea that no one could have such views if they were of normal mind.
The Killer Fact
The killer fact in the case is this, the authorities did not bring her to trial while she was offering a plea of NOT GUILTY. The not guilty plea was maintained for a very long time (19 Months) until June this year (19 months) when doubtless ground down by the delay and the constant threat of having her son taken from her, she changed her plea to GUILTY. That removed the embarrassment or worse of having a contested trial on the subject that the British elite fear most: honest talking about immigration and its consequences.
Consider what the supposedly liberal, ostentatiously caring powers-that-be were prepared to do to a seriously ill woman to avoid a contested trial. Her psychiatric history is lengthy and severe (she had been receiving treatment for depression since she was 18) and includes suicide attempt. She also suffered the rarity of being “sectioned” (taken into residential psychiatric care against her will) for treatment not long before her episode on the tram.
Despite this medical background, she was refused bail when first arrested and was originally remanded for more than a month (she was released after eight days following protests) in the highest security woman’s prison in England HMP Bronzefield. Contemptibly, the authorities tried to claim her custody was for her own safety despite the fact that Miss West had not claimed she felt under threat. She then went through the torment of having her case scheduled no less than seven times before changing her plea to guilty, while all the time living with the threat of having her son taken away. Indeed, she is still living with that because the social services may decide she is unfit because she has exhibited in their eyes “racist tendencies.” Furthermore, according to her barrister “There have been threats to burn her house, she has been physically assaulted and beaten to the ground outside her home” It would be interesting to know if her assailant is being prosecuted.
Her Barrister did his best to get the case thrown out:
Read more
See Also:
 |
| The Conspirators: (Source). |
CanSpeccy: The British National Party: A Conspiracy Against Democracy?
Express: Mass immigration IS destroying Britain
Migration Watch: Was Mass Immigration a Conspiracy
Steve Sailer: Zuckerberg's latest Cheap Labor Lobby ad
Friday, June 28, 2013
Some links
Zero Hedge: Is there any Middle Eastern country that we haven’t screwed up yet?
PressTV: Brzezinski: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, their western allies orchestrated Syria crisis
Michell Chossudovsky: America’s Plan to Annex and Invade Canada
Center for Disease Control: Crime Victims With Guns Less Likely to Suffer Injury or Death
David Stockman: The US Fed Has Painted Itself Into a Corner
Aangirfan: CIA-linked Syrian rebels decapitate Christian bishop
Wired: WikiLeaks Volunteer Was a Paid Informant for the FBI
So whether or not Wikileaks was intended all along as a trap for whistle blowers, that is what it became and presumably still is.
John Kaminski: Assange, Manning and Snowden: Shaping us into Robots
The Daily Paul: Booz Allen Hamilton: What You Don't Know About Snowden's Former Employer
Jon Rappoport: Ed Snowden, NSA, and fairy tales a child could see through
Wayne Madsen: The Story of Obama: All in the Company
Kieth Ablow: Was the Unabomber right: the horrors of technology combined with government?
Harvard University Press: Hitler's Willing Hollywood Collaborators
PressTV: Brzezinski: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, their western allies orchestrated Syria crisis
Michell Chossudovsky: America’s Plan to Annex and Invade Canada
Center for Disease Control: Crime Victims With Guns Less Likely to Suffer Injury or Death
David Stockman: The US Fed Has Painted Itself Into a Corner
Aangirfan: CIA-linked Syrian rebels decapitate Christian bishop
Wired: WikiLeaks Volunteer Was a Paid Informant for the FBI
So whether or not Wikileaks was intended all along as a trap for whistle blowers, that is what it became and presumably still is.
John Kaminski: Assange, Manning and Snowden: Shaping us into Robots
The Daily Paul: Booz Allen Hamilton: What You Don't Know About Snowden's Former Employer
Jon Rappoport: Ed Snowden, NSA, and fairy tales a child could see through
Wayne Madsen: The Story of Obama: All in the Company
Kieth Ablow: Was the Unabomber right: the horrors of technology combined with government?
Harvard University Press: Hitler's Willing Hollywood Collaborators
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Ending the Hegemony of Liberal Economic Ideas and Western Economic Stagnation
The other day, I ridiculed Niall Ferguson's new book, the Great Degeneration, which claimed to be about the "causes of our stationary state," i.e., Western economic stagnation, in which he devoted a total of seven lines to the actual cause of the current Western economic standstill, before launching into four chapters of hand waving about institutional degeneration, a cause for concern perhaps, but laughable as an explanation of why China and many other Third World countries boom while unemployment and social unrest swell throughout the West. Here, then, I put Ferguson straight as to the West's relative economic decline.
First, though, Ferguson's only reference to the actual causes of Western decline:
The bit about liberals preferring to see Western economic stagnation as the result of poor education and low taxes, is, in fact, irrelevant. Liberals are globalists, who naturally, therefore, seek explanations for the destructive consequences of their policies that exculpate them from blame while at the same time promoting policies that line their pockets. High taxes and more government spending on welfare, healthcare, and education mean more jobs for the educated middle class that fill the ranks of the bureaucracy in jobs so well paid that government towns such as Washington, DC, Ottawa, Ont., and Brussels, the EU capital, are now among the wealthiest jurisdictions in the West.
But let's consider in terms of basic economics why Western economies have stagnated or begun to shrink:
What does it take for an economy to grow? More production, obviously.
And what does it take to increase production? More demand, obviously.
And what does it take to increase demand? More income, obviously.
Yes, in the short run, debt comes into it. If folks go deeper into debt, they can consume more, which is one reason why central banks have fought the current depression by keeping interest rates at something close to zero.
But in the long-run debt has to be repaid, so increasing debt or discouraging debt deleverage is no solution to Western economic decline.
So the answer to the question of how to end Western economic stagnation is simple. It is to increase incomes.
Less simple, is the question of how?
A stupid liberal idea to increase incomes is to do it by government fiat: which is to say by imposing minimum wage laws. All Western governments have done this in the face of the obvious fact that a minimum wage law either denies work to those whose labor is worth less than the minimum wage or it compels them to work in the unregulated underground economy, where they receive neither the minimum wage nor the protection of workplace health and safety standards.
Another stupid liberal idea is to pay people, millions and tens of millions of them, not to work. These are people receiving unemployment pay, sick pay, maternity pay, disability benefits and welfare. In addition, are millions of elderly people who, choosing to retire earlier than necessary, receive non-contributory retirement or old age pensions or other benefits.
Because all these sources of income, which we will refer to collectively as welfare, tend to make not working more attractive than working, they increase the number of people who could work and gain income for themselves who opt instead to live at the expense of the taxpayer, with the result that total spendable income of society as a whole is reduced.
A third stupid liberal idea is to keep people of average and even less than average intelligence in school for decades, which constitutes another form of welfare, inasmuch as the taxpayer funds the educational infrastructure and much of the running cost. Furthermore, by keeping young people out of the workforce where they would gain work experience that would enhance their earnings potential, it lowers their life-time earnings.
So what to do?
First, abolish the minimum wage.
Second, abolish welfare.
Third, introduce a tax-department-administered income supplement for those who are employed but who earn less than what used to be the minimum wage.
Two things will result.
First, every worker unable to get a job at minimum wage will now find work at a lower wage, which will, nevertheless, net them an income equal to something like the now abolished minimum wage.
Second, employers in the West will now be on something closer to a level playing field, in terms of wages, with companies in Asia and Africa, where manufacturing wages are on average less than 5% of those in the West.
What will it cost? Less, almost certainly, than the welfare programs to be abolished, which have huge overhead costs, but with the following benefits.
It will eliminate the social costs of unemployment, including much crime, drug abuse, loss of work skills, mental illness, and social unrest.
It will lead to the creation of thousands, tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of small businesses, as the creation of a cheap labor resource once again makes it possible for people in the West to make shoes and shirts, computers and car parts for one another, rather than importing them from the sweatshops of the Third World.
And it will release tens and hundreds of thousands of able and educated people now unproductively employed in the welfare bureaucracy into the market economy where many will demonstrate the entrepreneurial talent to create businesses employing those who were formerly unemployed and unproductive wards of the state.
The net result will be an increase in GDP and an increase in income with which the addition to GDP can be consumed.
But liberals are determined that you will never understand this, for the increasingly demoralized peoples of the West are targeted for extinction as racial, cultural and religious communities, to be replaced by a mongrelized globalized workforce without attachment to, or even knowledge of, the Western tradition of freedom and civil rights.
See also:
CanSpeccy: End Welfare Now
CanSpeccy: When a Pair of Hands Is No Longer Worth a Living Wage
CanSpeccy: How to End the Depression Now
Daily Mail: US Birthrate Hits All-Time Low
First, though, Ferguson's only reference to the actual causes of Western decline:
In the United States, the wider debate is about globalization, technological change, education and fiscal policy. Conservatives tend to emphasize the first and second as inexorable drivers of change, destroying low-skilled jobs by "offshoring" or automating them. Liberals prefer to see widening inequality as the result of insufficient investment in public education, combined with Republican reductions in taxation that have favored the wealthy.Amazing, really, that anyone could claim to have the explanation of Western economic decline without further reference the destruction of jobs by offshoring and automation.
The bit about liberals preferring to see Western economic stagnation as the result of poor education and low taxes, is, in fact, irrelevant. Liberals are globalists, who naturally, therefore, seek explanations for the destructive consequences of their policies that exculpate them from blame while at the same time promoting policies that line their pockets. High taxes and more government spending on welfare, healthcare, and education mean more jobs for the educated middle class that fill the ranks of the bureaucracy in jobs so well paid that government towns such as Washington, DC, Ottawa, Ont., and Brussels, the EU capital, are now among the wealthiest jurisdictions in the West.
But let's consider in terms of basic economics why Western economies have stagnated or begun to shrink:
What does it take for an economy to grow? More production, obviously.
And what does it take to increase production? More demand, obviously.
And what does it take to increase demand? More income, obviously.
Yes, in the short run, debt comes into it. If folks go deeper into debt, they can consume more, which is one reason why central banks have fought the current depression by keeping interest rates at something close to zero.
But in the long-run debt has to be repaid, so increasing debt or discouraging debt deleverage is no solution to Western economic decline.
So the answer to the question of how to end Western economic stagnation is simple. It is to increase incomes.
Less simple, is the question of how?
A stupid liberal idea to increase incomes is to do it by government fiat: which is to say by imposing minimum wage laws. All Western governments have done this in the face of the obvious fact that a minimum wage law either denies work to those whose labor is worth less than the minimum wage or it compels them to work in the unregulated underground economy, where they receive neither the minimum wage nor the protection of workplace health and safety standards.
Another stupid liberal idea is to pay people, millions and tens of millions of them, not to work. These are people receiving unemployment pay, sick pay, maternity pay, disability benefits and welfare. In addition, are millions of elderly people who, choosing to retire earlier than necessary, receive non-contributory retirement or old age pensions or other benefits.
Because all these sources of income, which we will refer to collectively as welfare, tend to make not working more attractive than working, they increase the number of people who could work and gain income for themselves who opt instead to live at the expense of the taxpayer, with the result that total spendable income of society as a whole is reduced.
A third stupid liberal idea is to keep people of average and even less than average intelligence in school for decades, which constitutes another form of welfare, inasmuch as the taxpayer funds the educational infrastructure and much of the running cost. Furthermore, by keeping young people out of the workforce where they would gain work experience that would enhance their earnings potential, it lowers their life-time earnings.
So what to do?
First, abolish the minimum wage.
Second, abolish welfare.
Third, introduce a tax-department-administered income supplement for those who are employed but who earn less than what used to be the minimum wage.
Two things will result.
First, every worker unable to get a job at minimum wage will now find work at a lower wage, which will, nevertheless, net them an income equal to something like the now abolished minimum wage.
Second, employers in the West will now be on something closer to a level playing field, in terms of wages, with companies in Asia and Africa, where manufacturing wages are on average less than 5% of those in the West.
What will it cost? Less, almost certainly, than the welfare programs to be abolished, which have huge overhead costs, but with the following benefits.
It will eliminate the social costs of unemployment, including much crime, drug abuse, loss of work skills, mental illness, and social unrest.
It will lead to the creation of thousands, tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of small businesses, as the creation of a cheap labor resource once again makes it possible for people in the West to make shoes and shirts, computers and car parts for one another, rather than importing them from the sweatshops of the Third World.
And it will release tens and hundreds of thousands of able and educated people now unproductively employed in the welfare bureaucracy into the market economy where many will demonstrate the entrepreneurial talent to create businesses employing those who were formerly unemployed and unproductive wards of the state.
The net result will be an increase in GDP and an increase in income with which the addition to GDP can be consumed.
But liberals are determined that you will never understand this, for the increasingly demoralized peoples of the West are targeted for extinction as racial, cultural and religious communities, to be replaced by a mongrelized globalized workforce without attachment to, or even knowledge of, the Western tradition of freedom and civil rights.
See also:
CanSpeccy: End Welfare Now
CanSpeccy: When a Pair of Hands Is No Longer Worth a Living Wage
CanSpeccy: How to End the Depression Now
Daily Mail: US Birthrate Hits All-Time Low
Monday, June 24, 2013
Alexandr Dugin: How the West, having destroyed its own tradition, seeks the destruction and enslavement of all other societies
Alexandr Dugin on Potential Allies in the Global Revolution
... I consider the “White nationalists” allies when they refuse modernity, the global oligarchy and liberal-capitalism, in other words everything that is killing all ethnic cultures and traditions. The modern political order is essentially globalist and based entirely on the primacy of individual identity in opposition to community. It is the worst order that has ever existed and it should be totally destroyed. When “White nationalists” reaffirm Tradition and the ancient culture of the European peoples, they are right. But when they attack immigrants, Muslims or the nationalists of other countries based on historical conflicts; or when they defend the United States, Atlanticism, liberalism or modernity; or when they consider the White race (the one which produced modernity in its essential features) as being the highest and other races as inferior, I disagree with them completely.
More than this, I can’t defend Whites when they are in opposition to non-Whites because, being White and Indo-European myself, I recognize the differences of other ethnic groups as being a natural thing, and do not believe in any hierarchy among peoples, because there is not and cannot be any common, universal measure by which to measure and compare the various forms of ethnic societies or their value systems. I am proud to be Russian exactly as Americans, Africans, Arabs or Chinese are proud to be what they are. It is our right and our dignity to affirm our identity, not in opposition to each other but such as it is: without resentment against others or feelings of self-pity.
...Soon the world will descend into chaos. The financial system is going to collapse. Disorder, ethnic and social conflicts will be breaking out everywhere. Europe is doomed. Asia is in tumult. The oceans of immigrants everywhere will overthrow the existing order. The present system will be broken and disbanded.
After this transitional period, direct global dictatorship will be implemented. We should be prepared and start to organize the global resistance right now – the planetary network of traditionalists, Conservative Revolutionaries, Heideggerians, the partisans of the Fourth Political Theory and multipolarity, and non-conformists of all sorts – a kind of Sacred Front beyond Right and Left, and consisting of different, older political and ideological taxonomies. All three of the political theories have been phased out of modernity, and also out of conventional and assumed history. We, and also our enemies, are entering absolutely new ground.
Every traditionalist should ask himself (or herself) the following questions:
... The Fourth Political Theory struggles for the cause of all peoples, but it is not made for the people. It is a call to the intellectual elite of every human society, and rejects hegemony in all senses (philosophical, social, and political). This time, the people cannot help us. This time, we must help the people.
Opposing us is nothing more than an intellectual elite, but it is a hegemonic one. All its material power is nothing but an illusion and a phantasm: its texts, discourse and words are what really counts. Its force lays in its thought. And it is on the level of thought that we have to fight and, finally, win. Everything material that opposes us is actually nothing but pure privation. Only thought really exists.
It is easy to manipulate the masses, much easier than to persuade the few. Quantity is the enemy of quality – the more so, the worse. The capitalist elite thinks differently. That error will be fatal. For them. And we are going to prove it.
We need an open, undogmatic Front that is beyond Right and Left.
We have prepared for the coming moment of opportunity for too long. But now, finally, it is not so far in the future.
We will change the course of history.
Source and comments
Friday, June 21, 2013
The Clintons and Other Self-Hating White Liberals, No. 47
Chelsea Clinton Laments: My Great Grandmother Did Not Have Access to Planned Parenthood
Which raises the question: are the Clintons really, really stupid, or are they for the extinction of the European peoples in America.
Apparently, it is the latter.
As Bill Clinton stated in his commencement address at Portland State University in Portland, Oregon June 13, 1998:
For more on the self-hating liberal mindset, see Robert Henderson's, The Liberal Lies We Live By, a review of John Marsh's book, The Liberal Delusion.
Which raises the question: are the Clintons really, really stupid, or are they for the extinction of the European peoples in America.
Apparently, it is the latter.
As Bill Clinton stated in his commencement address at Portland State University in Portland, Oregon June 13, 1998:
Today, largely because of immigration, there is no majority race in Hawaii or Houston or New York City. Within five years, there will be no majority race in our largest state, California. In a little more than 50 years, there will be no majority race in the United States. No other nation in history has gone through demographic change of this magnitude in so short a time … [These immigrants] are energizing our culture and broadening our vision of the world. They are renewing our most basic values and reminding us all of what it truly means to be American.Evidently Chelsea's thinking is that if, a few generations ago, the white race had been strangled at birth or slaughtered in the womb, there would be no white race problem today. No Clinton's either, which would have been a plus.
For more on the self-hating liberal mindset, see Robert Henderson's, The Liberal Lies We Live By, a review of John Marsh's book, The Liberal Delusion.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Niall Ferguson: The Decline of the West Explained – Not
In his latest book, pot boiler, extended magazine article in hard covers for 28 bucks, whatever, Niall Ferguson sets out to explain why the nations of the West, so long dominant in scientific and technical skills, wealth and power, are now stagnating economically as China and much of the rest of the Third World rise in power and prosperity at an unprecedented rate.
The trouble, thinks Feguson, is the problem that Adam Smith identified as the cause of China's economic stagnation in the 18th century: it is, he argues, our institutions. Our institutions of democracy, capitalism, the rule of law, and civil society, he says, have degenerated, resulting in the the concentration of wealth, the emergence of monopolies, a decline in educational standards and other ills that have resulted in a loss of Western competitiveness.
In form, Ferguson's book is reminiscent of those vaguely interesting and generally incoherent lectures to which so many have been exposed during undergraduate education: a few interesting facts and ideas with many loose ends, leaving unlimited scope for further debate and literary output.
But as an account of the stagnation and relative decline of the West, Ferguson's effort is almost entirely futile other than as an exercise in misdirection, distraction and cover-up.
If the institutions of democracy in the West are degenerating, those of the extraordinarily dynamic China are essentially non-existent. If the rule of law in America is increasingly the "rule of lawyers," in China it is a concept barely even understood. If free and fair competition in Western economies has diminished as capital has been concentrated in fewer hands, China' state capitalism is the complete antithesis of the free and fair market that underlay Adam Smith's invisible hand. As for the the institutions of civil society, the West is still incomparably free compared with China where even association for the purpose of religious worship is prohibited.
So while Western institutions are in decline, China's are absolute crap. Yet still China's economy booms as the West stagnates. Clearly, then, there's more to Western economic decline than the inadequacy of some vaguely defined sets of institutions.
To discover what has stultified the West, it is necessary to consider what drives economic expansion, and the answer to that is quite simple: increased investment and production. But you cannot have increased investment and production unless there are markets for the increased output, and there will only be markets for the increased output if the new production is competitively priced. But how can new output in the West be competitively priced when the legally mandated minimum wage in America and Europe is between ten and twenty or more times the rate paid factory workers in the Third World?
This is the simple, obvious brute fact that explains Western economic stagnation, to which Niall Ferguson, like any other tenured professor at a top US or UK university, must carefully avoid drawing attention.
The consequences of the fact of Western wage uncompetitiveness with the Third World are as obvious as this one basic fact itself.
Once the Uraguay Round of the Gatt (which led to the creation of the World Trade Organization) was signed by the Western states in 1994, the Western economies were on the skids.
It took a while, naturally, to export Western capital and technology, accumulated through the sweat of generations, to the Third World.
It took a while, naturally, to construct the factories, build the research centers, train the engineers, biotechnologists, the computer scientists, and the millions of production line workers in China, India, Bangladesh and a hundred other countries before the Third World was in a position to take the jobs of tens of millions of Western workers.
But the system's in place now and the jobs have been bleeding away rapidly during the last ten years, the loss masked in part by housing bubbles that stimulated the construction industry, which is among the few that cannot be off-shored wholesale.
But now the real estate bubbles have burst or are bursting and the shrinking Western economies are plagued by deflation, falling incomes, rapidly rising welfare costs and unemployment, and ominous rumblings of social discontent. Add to the mix mass immigration of culturally disparate elements, which displaces from the workforce the least competent members of the indigenous population, and you have a recipe for both economic decline and revolution.
Hyperventilating about the degeneration of our social, legal and political institutions or getting everyone to join the Lions Club won't solve the problem created by the treason of our elites, who have sold out the working people of America and Europe for the benefit of the money power, which has gained enormous profits through the success of globalized corporations such as IBM, Apple, Microsoft, and many others.
The only remaining question of real interest is whether the money power will get away with the genocide of the Western nations in its bid for a system of global financial feudalism. And an answer to that question, we can be sure, will not be made available by Niall Ferguson or any other member of the academic elite until such time as the question has become entirely academic.
The trouble, thinks Feguson, is the problem that Adam Smith identified as the cause of China's economic stagnation in the 18th century: it is, he argues, our institutions. Our institutions of democracy, capitalism, the rule of law, and civil society, he says, have degenerated, resulting in the the concentration of wealth, the emergence of monopolies, a decline in educational standards and other ills that have resulted in a loss of Western competitiveness.
In form, Ferguson's book is reminiscent of those vaguely interesting and generally incoherent lectures to which so many have been exposed during undergraduate education: a few interesting facts and ideas with many loose ends, leaving unlimited scope for further debate and literary output.
But as an account of the stagnation and relative decline of the West, Ferguson's effort is almost entirely futile other than as an exercise in misdirection, distraction and cover-up.
If the institutions of democracy in the West are degenerating, those of the extraordinarily dynamic China are essentially non-existent. If the rule of law in America is increasingly the "rule of lawyers," in China it is a concept barely even understood. If free and fair competition in Western economies has diminished as capital has been concentrated in fewer hands, China' state capitalism is the complete antithesis of the free and fair market that underlay Adam Smith's invisible hand. As for the the institutions of civil society, the West is still incomparably free compared with China where even association for the purpose of religious worship is prohibited.
So while Western institutions are in decline, China's are absolute crap. Yet still China's economy booms as the West stagnates. Clearly, then, there's more to Western economic decline than the inadequacy of some vaguely defined sets of institutions.
To discover what has stultified the West, it is necessary to consider what drives economic expansion, and the answer to that is quite simple: increased investment and production. But you cannot have increased investment and production unless there are markets for the increased output, and there will only be markets for the increased output if the new production is competitively priced. But how can new output in the West be competitively priced when the legally mandated minimum wage in America and Europe is between ten and twenty or more times the rate paid factory workers in the Third World?
This is the simple, obvious brute fact that explains Western economic stagnation, to which Niall Ferguson, like any other tenured professor at a top US or UK university, must carefully avoid drawing attention.
The consequences of the fact of Western wage uncompetitiveness with the Third World are as obvious as this one basic fact itself.
Once the Uraguay Round of the Gatt (which led to the creation of the World Trade Organization) was signed by the Western states in 1994, the Western economies were on the skids.
It took a while, naturally, to export Western capital and technology, accumulated through the sweat of generations, to the Third World.
 |
| Collapsed Bangladesh factory where Loblaws of Canada
(62% owned by billionaire George Weston) outsourced manufacture of its Joe Fresh line of apparel. More than one thousand workers died in the collapse, but as George Weston remarked, they need the work. Garment workers in Canada presumably do not need the work, or if they do, would be much more expensive to hire. |
But the system's in place now and the jobs have been bleeding away rapidly during the last ten years, the loss masked in part by housing bubbles that stimulated the construction industry, which is among the few that cannot be off-shored wholesale.
But now the real estate bubbles have burst or are bursting and the shrinking Western economies are plagued by deflation, falling incomes, rapidly rising welfare costs and unemployment, and ominous rumblings of social discontent. Add to the mix mass immigration of culturally disparate elements, which displaces from the workforce the least competent members of the indigenous population, and you have a recipe for both economic decline and revolution.
Hyperventilating about the degeneration of our social, legal and political institutions or getting everyone to join the Lions Club won't solve the problem created by the treason of our elites, who have sold out the working people of America and Europe for the benefit of the money power, which has gained enormous profits through the success of globalized corporations such as IBM, Apple, Microsoft, and many others.
The only remaining question of real interest is whether the money power will get away with the genocide of the Western nations in its bid for a system of global financial feudalism. And an answer to that question, we can be sure, will not be made available by Niall Ferguson or any other member of the academic elite until such time as the question has become entirely academic.
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Canada and Nato in Syria: Backing the Al Qaeda Cannibals Versus Assad's Thugs
Having lost major wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, plus embarking on various futile murderous forays into Pakistan, Yemen and sundry other places in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia, the US has now, it appears, decided to launch a war against the legitimate government, however unpleasant, of Syria on what appear to be the entirely spurious basis that Assad's "Thug" regime is killing its own people with toxic gas.
In fact, according to some sources, it is the al Qaeda cannibals backed by the humanity-loving West, who are using poisonous gases in Syria under the direction of US advisers in Jordan and Turkey.
According to George Bush "Fool me once, shame on ......... you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." But not so, apparently, with the American people. The same bollocks works well every time the war lobby sets out to kill another few hundred thousand people in the name of democracy and humanity at a cost of trillions to the taxpayer.
In fact, according to some sources, it is the al Qaeda cannibals backed by the humanity-loving West, who are using poisonous gases in Syria under the direction of US advisers in Jordan and Turkey.
According to George Bush "Fool me once, shame on ......... you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." But not so, apparently, with the American people. The same bollocks works well every time the war lobby sets out to kill another few hundred thousand people in the name of democracy and humanity at a cost of trillions to the taxpayer.
The Real Threat to British Elites
By Steve Sailer
Taki's Mag, June 5, 2013: Recent incidents of Muslims behaving badly—such as the butchering of British soldier Lee Rigby by two Islamic-convert African immigrants, the riots in Stockholm, and the never-ending revelations about numerous Pakistani pimps “grooming” very young white English girls for being gang-banged by their relatives—has European elites terrified…of European commoners.
For example, last week the European Parliament secretly voted to retroactively strip French nationalist Marine Le Pen, who won 17.9% of the national vote in the first round of the 2012 presidential election, of parliamentary immunity for comments made during her successful campaign for a law against prostration in the streets of France, opening her to prosecution for “hate speech.”
Similarly, the frequently feckless English police responded to the carnage in Woolwich by arresting social-media users.
British leaders repeatedly swept the Muslim statutory gang-rapist phenomenon under the rug for over a decade. Way back in 2001, Nick Griffin of the British National Party began to point out that Pakistani pimps in Britain were targeting white girls under 16.
It’s most useful to think of this practice not so much as pedophilia—a bizarre fetish—but as economically rational whoremastering. Pakistani pimps focus on recruiting very young postpubescent English girls because they are so naïve.
In contrast, women-respecting Swedes seldom make talented pimps.
In the many Pakistani grooming cases in England, Ali G types would convince silly little white girls that they were their boyfriends, provide them with drugs, then browbeat them into proving their love by having sex at a party with all the pimps’ Uncle Jamaals.
The genius of the system is that the pimps don’t pay the girls, not even their room and board. After each party, they dump them back at their moms’ council flats.
Is this rape?
Of course. These girls are adolescents, far too young to give consent to being gang-banged.
Is it racial?
Feminist Susan Brownmiller’s 1975 bestseller Against Our Will famously argued that “rape is a crime not of lust, but power.” That’s obviously missing much of the point. And yet conquest and rape seem to go together.
It might seem insane that this kind of Bronze Age predatory pattern would work so well in a sophisticated country such as England, but that’s exactly why it worked: Noticing patterns is now derided as “stereotyping.”
Moreover, the highest priority in Europe is to never provide any fodder for right-wing organizations. Thus, a decade ago when a Channel 4 documentary crew working on a snoozer about social workers in Bradford stumbled upon this widespread practice, the police insisted that Channel 4 postpone the documentary because it might help the BNP in upcoming elections. The network complied.
Read more
Taki's Mag, June 5, 2013: Recent incidents of Muslims behaving badly—such as the butchering of British soldier Lee Rigby by two Islamic-convert African immigrants, the riots in Stockholm, and the never-ending revelations about numerous Pakistani pimps “grooming” very young white English girls for being gang-banged by their relatives—has European elites terrified…of European commoners.
For example, last week the European Parliament secretly voted to retroactively strip French nationalist Marine Le Pen, who won 17.9% of the national vote in the first round of the 2012 presidential election, of parliamentary immunity for comments made during her successful campaign for a law against prostration in the streets of France, opening her to prosecution for “hate speech.”
Similarly, the frequently feckless English police responded to the carnage in Woolwich by arresting social-media users.
British leaders repeatedly swept the Muslim statutory gang-rapist phenomenon under the rug for over a decade. Way back in 2001, Nick Griffin of the British National Party began to point out that Pakistani pimps in Britain were targeting white girls under 16.
It’s most useful to think of this practice not so much as pedophilia—a bizarre fetish—but as economically rational whoremastering. Pakistani pimps focus on recruiting very young postpubescent English girls because they are so naïve.
“It’s European men—with their talent for self-organization—who frighten Europe’s ruling class.”
As we’ve seen in recent years, Muslim male-chauvinist cultures that
treat females like dirt tend to nurture males who have a knack for
living off women’s earnings. Thus, Albanian pimps have come to dominate the European sex-slave trade. And the various Chechen layabouts
who have been in the news in America since the Boston bombing have
displayed a remarkable gift for getting attractive women to throw their
lives away on them.In contrast, women-respecting Swedes seldom make talented pimps.
In the many Pakistani grooming cases in England, Ali G types would convince silly little white girls that they were their boyfriends, provide them with drugs, then browbeat them into proving their love by having sex at a party with all the pimps’ Uncle Jamaals.
The genius of the system is that the pimps don’t pay the girls, not even their room and board. After each party, they dump them back at their moms’ council flats.
Is this rape?
Of course. These girls are adolescents, far too young to give consent to being gang-banged.
Is it racial?
Feminist Susan Brownmiller’s 1975 bestseller Against Our Will famously argued that “rape is a crime not of lust, but power.” That’s obviously missing much of the point. And yet conquest and rape seem to go together.
It might seem insane that this kind of Bronze Age predatory pattern would work so well in a sophisticated country such as England, but that’s exactly why it worked: Noticing patterns is now derided as “stereotyping.”
Moreover, the highest priority in Europe is to never provide any fodder for right-wing organizations. Thus, a decade ago when a Channel 4 documentary crew working on a snoozer about social workers in Bradford stumbled upon this widespread practice, the police insisted that Channel 4 postpone the documentary because it might help the BNP in upcoming elections. The network complied.
Read more
Monday, June 17, 2013
Canada Returns to the NeoCon Fold. Seeks Ouster of Thug Syrian Regime by US-Backed Cannibals
The Star, June 16, 2013:
DUBLIN, IRELAND—On the eve of a summit of world leaders, Prime Minister Stephen Harper castigated Russian President Vladimir Putin for supporting “the thugs of the Assad regime” in Syria and said there’s no reason to hope other G8 leaders can convince Putin to help depose the Syrian strongman.
Harper, who wants an end to the dictatorship of President Bashar Assad to halt the bloody civil war in the Middle Eastern nation, went so far as to suggest Putin doesn’t deserve to sit at the table with leaders of some of the most advanced industrial democracies.
“I don’t think we should fool ourselves,” Harper said, using what may be his toughest language ever on the international stage. “This is the G7 plus one. Let’s be blunt, that’s what this is: the G7 plus one.”
Read more
Meantime, Zbigniew Brzezinski slams US policy on Syria
Washington Examiner, June 14, 2013: The president's abrupt decision to arm Syrian rebels is a huge mistake, one driven by emotion and propaganda not they kind of strategic White House plan that has marked past successful interventions in civil wars, according to former Carter-era national security chief Zbigniew Brzezinski.
In a broad attack on President Obama's vague interventionist policy, the highly-respected international affairs analyst warned that by jumping in to Syria's civil war with no plan is likely to lead to another costly and extended military action that could eventually draw U.S. forces into a clash with Syria's top ally Iran.
"I think our posture is baffling, there no strategic design, we're using slogans," slammed Brzezinski on MSNBC's Morning Joe Friday. "It's a tragedy and it's a mess in the making," he said. "I do not see what the United States right now is trying to accomplish."
Read more
And Boris Johnson, Rival to UK PM, David Camerloon, Declares: Don't Arm Syrian Maniacs
Thanks to Aangirfan for the last two links and the following:
Zbiniew Brzezinski eviscerates Obama's foolish decision to fuel Syrian civil war:
See also:
21st Century Wire: On A False Premise: US looks to G8 Summit to build ‘consensus’ over Syria
Canada Defects from the NeoCon War Coalition
Harper, who wants an end to the dictatorship of President Bashar Assad to halt the bloody civil war in the Middle Eastern nation, went so far as to suggest Putin doesn’t deserve to sit at the table with leaders of some of the most advanced industrial democracies.
“I don’t think we should fool ourselves,” Harper said, using what may be his toughest language ever on the international stage. “This is the G7 plus one. Let’s be blunt, that’s what this is: the G7 plus one.”
Read more
Meantime, Zbigniew Brzezinski slams US policy on Syria
Washington Examiner, June 14, 2013: The president's abrupt decision to arm Syrian rebels is a huge mistake, one driven by emotion and propaganda not they kind of strategic White House plan that has marked past successful interventions in civil wars, according to former Carter-era national security chief Zbigniew Brzezinski.
In a broad attack on President Obama's vague interventionist policy, the highly-respected international affairs analyst warned that by jumping in to Syria's civil war with no plan is likely to lead to another costly and extended military action that could eventually draw U.S. forces into a clash with Syria's top ally Iran.
"I think our posture is baffling, there no strategic design, we're using slogans," slammed Brzezinski on MSNBC's Morning Joe Friday. "It's a tragedy and it's a mess in the making," he said. "I do not see what the United States right now is trying to accomplish."
Read more
And Boris Johnson, Rival to UK PM, David Camerloon, Declares: Don't Arm Syrian Maniacs
Thanks to Aangirfan for the last two links and the following:
Zbiniew Brzezinski eviscerates Obama's foolish decision to fuel Syrian civil war:
See also:
21st Century Wire: On A False Premise: US looks to G8 Summit to build ‘consensus’ over Syria
Canada Defects from the NeoCon War Coalition
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)