The Two Americas |
| J. Croft freedomguide.blogspot.com |
| Have you ever noticed that America is schizophrenic-of two minds, two ideals, two ideologies that contradict? How much American rhetoric doesn't match up with American actions? Notice how there are so many laws in what's sold to the world as the "land of the free?" Speaking of that slogan, it's ironic how many dictators we support as "allies", isn't it? We protect our freedoms by letting them be taken away. We secure our country by waging war against others, and leaving our borders unguarded, selling our ports to foreigners. We let "free trade" be promoted for the richest, while letting more and more taxes and regulation, and a inflationary imbalance choke and kill the dreams of all Americans as we're priced out of competitiveness with the rest of the world. We let the government "promote the General Welfare"-as is it's charge in the U.S. Constitution-by letting it clandestinely ship in drugs with one branch, as proven by Terry Reed and Michael Levine(1), and then waging a "war on drugs" that locks otherwise peaceful citizens for possession of some pot. Degrading them and warping them into more criminals by a prison system designed to spawn more crime, more fear, more pressure for more laws and more government authority, more power... which they turn around and DON'T use when honest disasters like Hurricane Katrina hit. We think we're free, yet we cower in the face of abusive authority that seeks more power and more people to label as "criminals so they can ticket and taser and shoot at and lock up. We think we're prosperous, yet we tremble in fear of losing our slave wage job and joining the ever-growing ranks of the damned known as the homeless. We engage in cowardly double-think to keep ourselves in line with "mainstream though"-as we lose our nation. How can we be so warped about ourselves and our nation? How can Americans embrace such diametrically opposite concepts simultaniously? Are we as a people scizophrenic? Is Freedom scizophrenic-no, that can't be it! It's something else, something far more insidious. There are two Americas. There's the America most of you reading this actually believed in-or still believe in. That America is the fabled "land of the free, home of the brave". That America was founded on the principles of Freedom, limited authority, a free hand to make your own destiny in this life with what talent and smarts you were able or willing to bring forth from yourself, on a legal, social and economic level playing field. That America was the place where your individual beliefs were respected, was where anyone from anywhere could come and start over with the same opportunities as a person born here from a family going back ten generations. That America was a land and people who had a limited, representative government that guarded them and their Freedom, and more importantly, was held in check by a document known as the Constitution, that enshrined an article called the Bill of Rights-which didn't deliniate individual rights so much as made boudaries beyond which the government could not trespass. Now reading that, think; do you live in this America? No. You, me-we all live in a different America. This America, in reality a kind of federal empire, drapes itself in the trappings of the America we were all taught was the way this nation was as a form of ideological disguise. We were lied to. This America, the fabled "land of the free, home of the brave", uses that quote as a slogan, a sugar coating on the many poison pills of lawyer-made laws, regulations, taxes, fines, agencies, and the corrupt ruling class that wields all that power for its own good. In this America, Freedom is a sugar coated lie to get us to accept the many political and social controls imposed upon us. This America's ideal of "freedom" is actually license-for example do you freely own and operate your automobile without government approval and permission? No? Then explain that chain of slavery known as your driver's license-you applied to a government agency for PERMISSION to drive, when nothing physically stops you from hopping into your car and driving safely anyway. Explain the vast bureaucracy that cloaks itself in "public safety" yet has the effect of taxing permission, taxing even harmless driving habits, even so far as taxing the condition of your vehicle in some areas-and I'm not talking busted headlights, I'm talking about having just a little rust-and you get fined!(Someone actually snapped and killed two cops over this-google "Carl Drega"... the state is becoming overbearing in it's arrogance and reach) You also don't have Freedom of Assembly; go to a church and it's a 501(c)3 incorporation under IRS rules that PERMIT it to operate without paying taxes in exchange for the church's keeping quiet on the real important issues of the day. Keep going on about personal sin and pumping the myths that the America we believe in is the America we live in, and you can rake in all the tithes you want. Rail about government abuses, and the IRS will bust a audit-like what happened to a "liberal" Californian church last year when they criticized the war. Plan a protest? State doesn't recognize your 1st Ammendment Rights: gotta get a PERMIT or you'll be labeled a riot, and have troops have a gay ol' time pepper spraying and caving your head in with their nightsticks. Want to get together in private and work toward peaceful, positive change? One paid snitch lying under oath is all it takes, and the government will come down on you under anti-terror laws, say you're "conspiring". Need to protect your person against the outlaw class the government's cultivated through free trade econmics and barely covert racism over the past half-century to terrify you into accepting more overt control and restrictions? Depending on where you live, who you know, you likely have to get a PERMIT...PERMISSION from the government to exercise your RIGHT. ...Depending on where you live, GETTING CAUGHT carrying a gun makes YOU a criminal too. And trust me, those government minions you come across in those types of jurisdictions are as small minded, as greedy, as ruthless and without a moral compass as the government manufactured street trash they deal with. A peacable "productive citizen" is nothing more than another bust, another conviction. Want more examples on how your Freedom's a nice myth meant to keep you pacified? No-too bad; your Fourth Ammendment Right to protection from "unreasonable" search and seizure has been reasoned out of effective usage by a federal government that reasons it can keep taking more of our rights so long as it's non government partners in the media and big business can keep us plied in cheap Chinese goods gotten by cheap enslaving credit. Yes-the very credit you put your ass into lifetime debt slavery for, congragulations on that brand new blow up playset your materially spoiled, emotionally neglected kids will use maybe three times. So enjoy your borrowed junk before the government "reasons" an excuse to raid your home and trash the place. ( Speaking of money-it's supposed to be silver and gold specie-coinage, and notes redeemable in precious metals. Since 1913 it's been "federal reserve notes"-issued by a nongovernment organization you think is the government's central bank. It's privately owned by the inbred elites that've run this country and they've made a 1913 dollar worth FIVE CENTS as of my writing this in 2006 by overprinting dollars-that's why everything keeps going up in price!) Same principle with the Fifth Ammendment-the one you hear those nasty criminals on the hundred TV cop shows the media puts out use to duck the righteous street cop's interrogation. Make it the province of scumbags and bullshit us with the state-lover's principle that "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about". DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY OTHERWISE INNOCENT PEOPLE THE GOVERNMENT GOES AFTER, RUINING THEIR LIVES?! What has your encounters with the police, agents and other bureaucrats been like? Danny Glover(Lethal Weapon) pull you over just to tell you to fix that taillight that just went out before some no life having prick with too much authority and a gun ruins your day and your meager budget with a court appearance and fines? Kim Delaney(NYPD Blue) ever conduct self-defense training courses, because the cops can't or won't come to your aid in time-like someone can't pull a trigger before you dial 911... like Mel Gibson's(Lethal Weapon, again) gonna come out of that phone speaker like Alladin out of a lamp, guns blazing? Stephanie March(Conviction)gets your case-y'know the one where a bureaucratic busybody's seizing your house because you're on land some eco-geek's called a "wetland"-and decides to prosecute the liar who proclaimed your dry, grassland backyard instead? Craig T. Nelson(The District)decide to stop police harrasment of people forced to live on the street-without real jobs they can live on, homes, drug detoxification, help them find a reason to go on, hope? Michael Chiklis(The Shield)operate a table at a gun show selling privately owned firearms under the table to a nation in desperate need of the means of self-protection enshrined in the Second Ammendent? More than likely, no. Most people in government, they learn to live with the yoke of federal tyranny they're mandated to enforce-it's their power. Many of them are of such small minds they to love the power trip, the open display of guns in a nation that's been programmed to surrender their own right to bear arms for self-protection. The worst of them commit their own crimes-theft, drug dealing, rape, murder; they are the ones most likely to be promoted. Promoted by criminals in three piece suits, known as career politicians. These criminals in three piece suits unfortunately operate not a Constitutionally limited government, but a hydra-headed monster of a government that masquerades itself as many federal, state and local institutions. This monster's tentacles never stop reaching for more power, more authority, more of YOUR MONEY AND LIFE'S WORK, seizing it and stealing it from YOU! In fact, this monstrous federal government's reach into our lives is so pervasive, so overwhelming, only the largest of corporations can operate in the country with any degree of latitude. At the pinnacles of power there is a small group of inbred elitists who regularly go back and forth from private life as CEO's and Directors in the corporate boardrooms to positions of power in government. They are greedy and corrupt beyond description, and have perpretrated literally every act of treason against us-and gotten away with it. You need a visual on this go to www.theyrule.net and you'll see this is fact! You want power, that so-called good life? You either have to be born in the right family, or know somebody-"it's not what you know it's who you know" as a insider once told me at a chance encounter at a bar. This piece of shit with too much money and power was about 35, dressed like a frat boy, and exuded a self assurance and confidence that told of a person who's always had their way. He breezily talked about him being in this bar in this suburb in this nowhere town because he had a swearing in ceremony the next morning-after that, all he had to do was produce a signature and it would be used as a license for some kind of niggling bureaucratic license. This walking, talking elitist filth told how his family "in politics since the the Revolution" went further, stating he'd next get a congressional seat in a few years. So I asked him about getting voted out of his "destined seat" by competitors, and he said it doesn't matter, he'd get it. "Well," I asked, "what if some Ross Perot type runs against you, with a billion dollars?" "Doesn't matter. We'd outspend him. ...It isn't what you know, it's who you know." And then the rat bastard tells me not to be "cynical", to "have faith in 'your' leaders". The entire political system's rigged like this folks. Get anywhere beyond a village council seat, and you gotta be accepted by "insiders" who own the game. For all practical purposes, in this country, if you don't go along with the way things are, you'll lose. And if you do win somewhow, because we have a federal, republic form of govenrment there are all kinds of checks to you doing any reform, all sorts of ways you can be corrupted and compromised... and if you still prove to be a danger, do a seance of JFK-ask him what the elites of this country do to reformers. Go to apfn.org. Go to infowars.com. Start reading up on how these "elites" really are-you'll find the truth is they're literally satanic, which explains their predatorial behavior. So, two Americas; one's a illusory piece of propaganda genius, and we're stuck in the one with no level playing field, no limited representative government, no guarantee of Rights. It's a insider's game and conditions have been ratcheted to squeeze out as much initiative, drive, intelligence and resources out of the American People as possible. The state-it doesn't serve We the People, it serves the Elite(2)-a pack of three piece suited hereditary criminals who have been exploiting Americans of all walks of life since the first footfall of Europeans on this continent. Africans and poor Europeans as slaves, indentured servants, wage workers in hazardous factories, soldiers to be shot to pieces in wars they set up. Those rare individuals that exhibited some talent and drive that allowed them to move upward were either regulated or taxed into oblivion, or exploited when they sold out. And what of this Constitution that's the supreme law of the land? What of our Rights? I'm afraid that too is a illusion, a "Hologram of Liberty" as Kenneth Royce put it as his title to his groundbreaking book. Order it from javelinpress.com or hit a gun show while you're still allowed... His premise, and our history has proven it correct is the Constitution was made in secret sessions by the very aristocratic ancestors of the pack of elitist inbreds running this country. The Constitution was engineered to have a veneer of limitied republican government while actually being a legal trojan horse of government power in service to the elites. The Bill of Rights was thrown in to appease enough people to BARELY get it passed, yet written to eventually get them nullified with technicalities and enroaching government power. We live in the "land of the free"? That slogan's a LIE! A great deception to appease us, keep us distracted, disinformed, asleep as the elites of this nation consolidated power-slowly, just enough to not wake up a armed, self-sufficient, intelligent Free People. Get them caught up with wasteful entertainments, sell them shoddy foreign slave labor made trinkets, wave that flag in their faces... ...And keeping that flag waving they've dismantled the American nation: *Made private entrepeneurship nearly impossible with megacorporate competion, regulations, a ever debasing currency. *Expand federal, state and local power to take away rights to private property, travel, freedom of speech, your right to arms, a real education, a level economic field. *Force everyone to resort to wage labor to keep up that materialistic "American Dream" that turns everyone into a corporate or state tool, then ship the jobs overseas thanks to taking down tariffs that leveled the playing field with nations with no regulations that used literally slave labor. Without jobs that sustained their lifestyles, mentally crippled by government schools and a elitist controlled media, Americans are sold on getting into lifetime debt slavery to keep up with the Joneses. This didn't crop up in the past 20 years either! No; the seeds of our destruction were laid two centuries ago when a people who fought a Revolution against the British Empire chose to let themselves be deceived into accepting a new Constitution that laid the groundwork for the theft of Freedom. Go to javelinpress.com and order "Hologram of Liberty", but basically the people who crafted the 1787 Constitution were lawyers and bankers agents. They stood by while the real Patriots fought and died, pulling strings on both sides because it was England's war to win-and they bungled the job so completely. History books talk of the many miracles of the American Revolution, but it was actually all to a plan; the Continental Army had it's few victories, and our Riflemen using guerilla warfare and marksmanship had the potential of winning if they played by their rules... but the generals chose set piece battles with the British Army and got asswhipped in straight up confrontations from New England to Georgia. See our enemies controlled the top ranks of both sides of that conflict; being monied interests they've ALWAYS controlled both sides surreptitiously in a grand game of problem-reaction-solution... the dialectic that's meant to artificially transform human societies-our attitudes and beliefs-through their induced inputs of money and violence. For example, slavery could've been abolished upon independence, but the writers of the 1787 Constitution kept it in-80 years of slowly building outrage, racism, the selfish interests of the minority of plantation owners who controlled Southern politics and you have the flammable social conditions that led the the Civil War. With the conclusion of that conflict, States Rights, a bulwark against tyranny was removed, the states humbled and the Federal Government became the dominent power in America. Blacks remained a hated underclass and were the scapegoats for the beginnings of unconstitutional gun control laws. Furthermore, as they were suckered by bankers and industrialist from fleeing the raw deal of southern farms to working the factories of the north, those same blueblooded bastards were plotting to eventually move those factories overseas for "free trade"-cheaper labor with less attitude. Those Blacks were trapped in the older part of the cities, and being promoted by the elites as a hated underclass; discriminated against, subject to harsher treatement by law enforcement, denied opportunities their part of the town eventually disintegrated, decaying into the ghettos we all know and loathe today... except for clueless young wiggers who foolishly think being broke and socioeconomically doomed is a cool thing. Everyone's been screwed over by the elite's dialectic. Everyone's been worked and molded into either good little worker drones, criminals to scare the little worker drones into going along with getting screwed, or cast aside, gulaged into prison or homelessness as a "example". Having lost their self-reliance Americans have lost their courage, and having lost their courage, they've cowered for the past century as the bankers and the blue bloods and the traitorous social engineers have had their fun with America; building a united global empire using American might abroad to bludgeon the world into surrendering... as they play a brilliant balancing act of consuming this country and it's people as they build their "world order". Today? As it stands as I write this, the job's about done. Everyone's a materialistic little debt slave-a nation of sheep herded to the slaughterhouse. When war breaks out with Iran and China, you can count that the final pretenses will be set aside, and America will become a fully militarized totalitarian state dedicated to total war. The Constitution-as rigged for the ruling class and flawed in it's protections as it is-will be scrapped and the full power and authority of the state will be felt by everyone. Armored vehicles and machine toting state thugs, finally unleashed under martial law on a unsuspecting, unprepared, asleep America. They'll make a big, terrifying show and then psyching out you adult sized children, give you an "out"; obey them at all times, spy on your fellow countrymen like you were living in East Germany(remember that country?), or perish. Food will be rationed-think you'll be able to dissent and still eat-or do you know how to tend a garden, get seed? Maybe you'll luck out and catch a bullet right there and then... or more probably, you'll be shipped to a "detention camp"; concentration camps have long been a dark side of American history people! The Japanese-Americans knew of them during WWII. The Native Americans know them as "reservations", Blacks have their "inner city ghettos". Is that what you want? Be freed of Freedom, free of being personably responsible? Are you THAT developmentally arrested that you want a mommy and daddy into your old age? You really want that America, the one our enemies have been building into our prison so long as you have your barbecue grill and NASCAR, and Christina Aguilera's new album? Or do you still yearn for the America we were promised, the "myth" as they put it behind our backs, that keeps us docile, compliant, asleep? Do you have the courage to be responsible for yourself-Freedom does require you be independent, self-reliant, resourceful, wise... not the things Ameicans are conditioned for by the elites "popular culture" and educational institution-plus there are all those laws... still yearning to be Free? You willing to take the certain confrontation with the government to secure your Freedom-you willing to say NO to bowing before them for permission and license to practice what is your Right? Do you have what it takes to make the America we believe in-that's currently a illusion used by the enemy to pacify us-into reality? Will you stand, even alone if you must, even pursued relentlessly by the enemy's jack booted thugs for even peaceful noncompliance? Would you even have the guts to give a Freedom Fighter even a morsel of food you were gonna consume-getting fatter and fatter on your couch, as American Idol rots a few more of what brain you have left? Are there ANY Americans left that value their Freedom over their borrowed comforts? That would rather live in truth than enslave themselves to lies for some false promise of "safety"? As I write this I wonder if we ever had that America we were promised... and I pause... ...I have to say we have had that America in the past. We've had that America when escaped slaves and indentured servants of all races moved beyond colonial authorities into the Appalachians and the Great Plains, risking their lives to have a place of their own, a place they could be Free. To keep their Freedom those brave, shining examples of Humanity picked up the rifle, learned the fine art of rifle marksmanship and fought for their freedom from both the British Crown and our own nation's native born inbred elitists. We've had that America when Abolitionists helped escaped slaves make it out of the South, risking everything they have in disobedience to a corrupted government flush with plantation and factory owner bribes. We've had that America when millions of women rose up, risked arrest and imprisonment and ruin to gain their Right to vote. We've had that America when millions of Blacks rose up, and shook off the overt racism of Jim Crow. We've had that America with the brave defenders of the Alamo-Americans and Mexicans wanting Freedom from a corrupt Mexico. We've had that America with the brave citizens of Athens, Tennessee in 1946, who witnessed the horrors of World War Two and found they could not accept the homegrown tyranny of a pack of corrupt traitors-using the weapons from a local armory their taxes paid for these Patriots routed them after a attempt at vote fraud. We've had that America when in 1998 at a "town hall meeting"(remember those?) in Columbus, Ohio, Madeline Albright and a couple other elitist tools were foolish enough to have a question and answer session with average Americans-trying to sell a Iraqi invasion! Left and Right, Veterans and Peace Activists got their heads together on the spot and like Real Americans made those warmongerers regret even trying to sell that war... they had to wait about four years after they blew up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon to scare us into World War III.(3) We've had that America with every worker intitiated strike, with every government employee who tries their level best to contain their employer's destructive reach and appetites, blow the whistle when the corruption is wafting in their face, when the thugs that government likes to have get set to ruin innocent lives. We have that America, in the hearts of those who cherish Freedom. It's not enough to have our America in our hearts however, we must make our America a reality in our land if we are to save ourselves from the techno-feudal police state that threatens to stunt and enslave humanity for all time. We must ACT and take back authority from those who conspire with that America-the enemy of all men that oppresses and taxes at home and wages war abroad, that has promoted every evil under the sun while clothed in the image of the America we Free People love and cherish. We MUST have Our America if we're to survive! How? First off it's up to you. You have to want it enough to sacrifice-whatever sacrifces it takes to be Free, that's the commitment you and yours has to make, or you won't even begin. If you do, it will amaze you what one person can do. Know your limits, as the state's more than equipped enough to handle individuals. A small group, the state's equipped to handle... ...Spawn many individuals, many groups-all independent yet all working toward a common goal and the state will be as a hapless cattle in a field full of fire ants. But start with you. You've got to flush your head gear of the propaganda and conditioning that's damned you, cleanse your body and mind of the poisons that are killing you. Mentally and physically prepare for your struggle, because this the Devil's world and we were put here to Liberate it. Find your destiny. What you're good at. Believe in yourself and your cause. Don't look for examples, BE the example, survive, and that will be success enough for others to join you. First off-getting your head straight: while you still have unfettered internet access visit these sites, and LEARN: www.rwva.org-learn how to use a rifle, because the Armed Citizen is the foundation of a Free America. www.gold-eagle.com, www.silver-investor.com, www.thedailyreckoning.com-learn how messed up our economic policies have been, and then protect what's left of your assets by buying silver. www.javelinpress.com-Boston T. Party is a Libertarian author I like to refer to. His Hologram of Liberty should be required reading as to the corrupt origins of this nation. Also there are links to his Free State Wyoming project-a effort to peacefully take over a Wyoming county and build a real-life working model of a Free Community. I also write about this at my freedomguide.blogspot.com, in a article titled "Message to Mr. and Mrs. America." www.infowars.com, www.prisonplanet.com-Alex Jones has late breaking news, and has himself infiltrated elitist gatherings and taken video of the pagan ceremonies they perform. No, these people are NOT church going lovers of Jesus! www.hermes-press.com-important source of info on the true state of America and aspects of it's darker origins. www.theclairefiles.com-Claire Wolfe is another Libertarian, and her message board's a great place to meet other freedom-minded folks. www.rense.com-THE motherlode of alternate information on the internet. A cyber Grand Central Station of Truth. Take a few weeks, go through the archives, read all you can-if this site doesn't wake you I don't know what will.(Warning: UFO's are among the wilder topics tackled here.) Also check out www.rumormillnews.com, www.batr.org, www.arcticbeacon.com. indymedia.org-More leftist, and I think the Left lets themselves be ruled by their gatekeepers too much, but these people are expressing themselves and their struggles and doing a good job. Network with them, learn, teach, get together on the big issues because only united under the cause of Freedom will we stand a chance. freedomguide.blogspot.com-I write extensively on the above subjects and I encourage you to read through my essays. I don't write for soundbytes though. Get some education, then DO: *Cleanse yourself. Stop eating corporate made, government approved processed foods-they're killing you! Eat organically, in fact go on a vegan no meat/dairy diet for a couple months coupled with abstaining from the TV and actually working out. I've done it myself and you'll be amazed at the difference. Stop drinking tap water and using fluoridated toothpastes, they poison your body and dull your mind, making you more suggestible and weak minded. *Store up food, herbal medicine, candles, fuel, batteries for when the elite get done using Americans as the economic engine of their global plantation and crash this country. *Pray to God directly. Our Father the Creator will hear all who find a quiet time, a quiet place, and quiet their minds. Our Father's voice is a quiet humble voice and not knowing how to commune with Him(thanks to all the deceptive religions meant to spiritually enslave us)... it will take time and practice and perseverance but Our Father WILL help you, believe me! *Get a anonymous server. After you educate yourself take the essays and articles that have influence you the most and copy and paste them everywhere. Go to sports sites, fan sites, message boards of all types and post like crazy. Get the message out! *Find out when the next gun show is. Then start shopping for a military pattern semiautomatic rifle in .308, a supply of magazines, and a case of 7.62x51NATO. DON'T GO TO DEALERS-YOU'LL HAVE TO REGISTER YOUR WEAPON WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! Look for people walking around or a table with a private seller even numbered prices. Get a FAL or a M1a/M14, or even a HK-91. Stay away from the AR-10's, they malfunction and parts are hard to come by. Get spare parts too. The effort will cost about $2,000. You can do it-sell that extra SUV, or have a yard sale-whatever it takes. If not, then find a bolt action war surplus in .308-a mauser or Indian enfield, otherwise you'll have to spring for several cases of obsolete ammo. *TRAIN! Get some targets and the Guide from Fred's(rwva.org) and go shooting. Shoot until you can hit a 1 inch target rapid fire at 25 meters-you'll be good out to 500 meters after you figure out how big a man looks out that far, and you'll be a threat to tyranny. Get some airsoft guns and practice close in tactics. Camp for a week at a time; wean yourself of the cushy mainstream lifestyle that's enslaved you mind and body to the system. Being self sufficient and independent is the only antidote to the cultural and social poisons we've been pumped with our entire lives, and the key to being self sufficient is self sufficiency protecting yourself. *Get activated politically! Find a cause that gets under your skin and get involved! Work with others, with their causes, be a good example of yours as yous selflessly help others and you might gain a recruit. *Get out of debt. Stop being a slave to consumerism. Pay off the car, the house, the credit cards. Sell that house if you have to but stop being a slave to your job and to the elite bankers who enslave you with the childish materialism they've conditioned you with with their media your entire life! Find a new place to live, even renting, in the country where you will survive a staged economic collapse or a nuclear 9/11. *This will be tough... try to talk to someone not like you. For example, if you're a relatively successful(by wage earner standards)blue or white collar guy, start a conversation with that gangbanger looking dude as you both watch the ball game at the bar. Urban folks are oppressed and are more likely to be aware. Or if you are a rural type, the next time you have to help one of those yuppie types who can't figure out how to change their own tire, take the opportunity to wake them up. If you're a good Cop next time you pull someone over you should make some blunt comments on how their vegging in front of their big screen TV's allows crooked politicians and traitorous social engineers to pass the laws he or she enforces. Part of the enemy strategy is to keep us divided along race and class lines-we are all countrymen who have sat and watched helplessly as Our America has been waved in our faces to keep us decieved, as it has been slowly killed. *When you actually get people listening and motivated work together start preparing for the worst. America's consumer economy is run by a thin margin; that is, if the trucks stopped rolling in two weeks FAMINE would hit this country. So build up food stocks. Group by ammo by the case at gun shows. Train together. Better yet, get involved in local politics. Take over a local government and start dismantling the federal beast! I go into detail about this in my essay, "Message to Mr. and Mrs. America" at freedomguide.blogspot.com God's put us as Americans in this time for a reason. America's being used for global domination in a process designed to destroy it in the process-because the enemy used ideals dangerous to them in creating this nation. Our Father WILL win this war against the enemy and their scheduled apocalypse, but He will have a much easier time of it if YOU will join him in Liberating this world. Besides, you're going to die sooner or later and face Him; what are you going to face Him as, a made in China flag waving couch potato "patriot"? (1)Terry Reed, Compromised: Bush, Clinton and the CIA-this is the suppressed truth about our last three Presidents; how they commited acts of treason with their drug running. A dangerous book if you like keeping your illusions about this country's ruling class. A companion volume, more dealing with the South American side of the drug game is The Big White Lie by Michael Levine. (2)You know that all our Presidents are related?! It's true; Burke's Peerage traces the ancestry of all the men who became President-they're all related to Charlemange. What are the odds this is coincidence? Folks on the internet talk of a "new world order"? These "royals" trace themselves back to the Roman Empire-some try to hustle us to believe they're descended from Jesus Christ! "New World Order"?! (3)9/11 was staged. There's no way modern high strength steel skyscrapers will collapse demolition style neatly into their own property, not tipping over, after relatively lightweight aluminum and composite jetliners crash into it, and burn out their kerosene fuel-which can't begin to melt heavy construction steel! And a collapse certainly wouldn't produce all the volcanic style outgassing of vaporized concrete and steel and send steel beams weighing thousands of pounds shooting out sideways like someone detonated a really powerful bomb... not by aluminum jetliners crashing into buildings designed to withstand such a event, not by jet fuel that burnt out a hour beforehand. And where the fuck was the U.S. Air Force for two hours as four jumbo jets were lumbering across American airspace off course, with their transponders shut down? Trillions spent on air defense during the Cold War and we can't track nor intercept jetliners with our state-of-the-art mach 2+ interceptors?! Who staged this monstrous fraud? Neoconservatives in their "Project for a New American Century" called upon a "new Pearl Harbor" attack to scare the American People into transforming the U.S.A. into a empire. It's worked. |
Sunday, March 19, 2006
FUCK BUSH AND HIS ELITE
Saturday, March 18, 2006
Maten a Bush, antes de que sea tarde
Terrorism and the Three Sillies
This weekend's edition of Signs of the Times carries several important pieces that I would like to bring to everyone's attention and then I am going to present a fable that I read as a child that will shed some light on our present situation.
The first article is by Paul Craig Roberts: Is Another 9/11 in the Works? Paul points out that what is happening in global politics - i.e. Bush planning another war in the midst of losing the first one - is totally insane. Yet, as anyone can see, the rhetoric leading up to bombing Iraq was identical to the mad propagandistic ravings that pass for political discourse concerning Iran today. "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." The immediate past tells us that Bush and the Neocons very definitely intend to make war on Iran. And yet, that is so insane that most of us can't grok it. The US Army is stretched to the breaking point, the economy is floating on illusion, the American people are a heartbeat away from unimaginable financial disaster, and yet Bush and the Warmongers are planning another hideously expensive war... or so it seems. Roberts states the case succinctly:
So, since Bush doesn't have the manpower or the moneypower (or even the cojones) to wage a proper war (I'm being sarcastic here since no war is ever "proper"), what's he gonna do?First of all, Bush lacks the troops to do the job. If the US military cannot successfully occupy Iraq, there is no way that the US can occupy Iran, a country approximately three times the size in area and population.
Second, Iran can respond to a conventional air attack with missiles targeted on American ships and bases, and on oil facilities located throughout the Middle East.
Third, Iran has human assets, including the Shia majority population in Iraq, that it can activate to cause chaos throughout the Middle East.
Fourth, polls of US troops in Iraq indicate that a vast majority do not believe in their mission and wish to be withdrawn. Unlike the yellow ribbon folks at home, the troops are unlikely to be enthusiastic about being trapped in an Iranian quagmire in addition to the Iraqi quagmire.
Fifth, Bush’s polls are down to 34 percent, with a majority of Americans believing that Bush’s invasion of Iraq was a mistake.
If you were being whipped in one fight, would you start a second fight with a bigger and stronger person?
That’s what Bush is doing.
The obvious answer is: Nukem!
Yup. It seems pretty clear that this is the answer that will suit. And Bush and gang have plenty of resources already on hand to do the job without making another blip in the current economic crisis; and just maybe, as a sideline, they can end up nuking Iraq too and "kill two birds with one stone". I mean, if you are going to start nuking, no reason to hold back, right? Solve all your problems with the same solution!
But there is a problem here: nuking Iran without provocation will absolutely enrage the whole rest of the world that is already feeling a lot of hostility toward the U.S. because there were no WMDs in Iraq not to mention the growing belief all over the planet that Bush and Co were complicit in the 911 attacks.
So, what to do? How to get justification to nuke Iran?
The answer is simple: "Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." The history indicates that Bush and Co are certainly quite capable of engaging in False Flag operations against their own country in order to justify their actions (things they wanted to do and planned to do in advance). As noted above, 911 is most likely just such a scenario even if I think that the Bush Gang were only complicit and did not carry out the entire conspiracy on their own. In that sense, I think that a lot of commentators are correct: the U.S. couldn't have pulled that off alone. But I digress.
Justifying the nuking of another country is going to take a bit more than a 911 type attack; you know, "like attracts like." That means that what we (at Signs of the Times) have been saying for some time is becoming more and more likely to transpire: a nuclear attack on the US devised and carried out as a False Flag operation designed to lay blame on Iran. Roberts presents this idea in the following way:
I'm afraid that I don't exactly agree with this version. I don't think that minimizing American deaths will be an objective. On the contrary, I think that maximizing American deaths will be deliberately sought so as to maximize the fear and hysteria. That means a nuke attack on American soil - not on a ship - and probably highly populated soil at that.Readers, whose thinking runs ahead of that of most of us, tell me that another 9/11 event will prepare the ground for a nuclear attack on Iran. Some readers say that Bush, or Israel as in Israel’s highly provocative attack on the Jericho jail and kidnapping of prisoners with American complicity, will provoke a second attack on the US. Others say that Bush or the neoconservatives working with some “black ops” group will orchestrate the attack.
One of the more extraordinary suggestions is that a low yield, perhaps tactical, nuclear weapon will be exploded some distance out from a US port. Death and destruction will be minimized, but fear and hysteria will be maximized. Americans will be told that the ship bearing the weapon was discovered and intercepted just in time, thanks to Bush’s illegal spying program, and that Iran is to blame. A more powerful wave of fear and outrage will again bind the American people to Bush, and the US media will not report the rest of the world’s doubts of the explanation.
Reads like a Michael Crichton plot, doesn’t it?
Fantasy? Let’s hope so.
Moving on to the next item that caught my eye from the weekend edition of Signs: Robert C. Koehler writes a piece entitled Trust Us. In this article he tells the story of Ion Sancho, the election supervisor of Leon County, Fla., my home state. Koehler writes:
I've been talking about this since the last election. When I saw what happened then, when the Signs Team had collected certain data, it was clear that fraudulent elections were already a fact of life in the U.S. Certainly, the 2000 election was the last fair election that was ever held in this country and that one was "given" to George Bush by trickery, bribery, coercion, blackmail, and having certain elements in place at the right place and time according to a devious plan. Once Bush had been declared president, he and his minions were then able to suppress any process that might have undone the "appointment." What's more, there were then able to set into motion the plan that ensured that whoever they want gets into office whereever and whenever they choose: manipulatable electronic voting.The problem is, there's an anti-democratic force rampaging across the country that wants ... privately conducted, secrecy-shrouded elections. The state of Florida even has a bizarre law outlawing manual recounts of election results. This removes all chance of public scrutiny from the process.
I humbly submit that this is nuts, and that if we don't scream out at the top of our lungs we're going to lose our democracy. What we're witnessing, I fear - and what isolated watchdogs like Sancho are warning us about, but cannot prevent all by themselves - is democracy's transition to expensive charade.
So folks, its already a done deal. It's all over but the crying. There is NO chance whatsoever of anyone getting rid of the "Powers That Be" in the U.S. by way of the exercise of the vote. Anybody who suggests anything different to you is just living in denial or deliberately blowing smoke.
The third item on the Weekend Signs Page that I want to talk about is J. Crofts The Two Americas. He writes:
It's sad, but all too true. This leads us to John Kaminski's piece Who made this plan? where he writes:There are two Americas.
There's the America most of you reading this actually believed in-or still believe in. That America is the fabled "land of the free, home of the brave".
That America was founded on the principles of Freedom, limited authority, a free hand to make your own destiny in this life with what talent and smarts you were able or willing to bring forth from yourself, on a legal, social and economic level playing field. That America was the place where your individual beliefs were respected, was where anyone from anywhere could come and start over with the same opportunities as a person born here from a family going back ten generations.
That America was a land and people who had a limited, representative government that guarded them and their Freedom, and more importantly, was held in check by a document known as the Constitution, that enshrined an article called the Bill of Rights-which didn't deliniate individual rights so much as made boudaries beyond which the government could not trespass.
Now reading that, think; do you live in this America?
No. You, me-we all live in a different America.
This America, in reality a kind of federal empire, drapes itself in the trappings of the America we were all taught was the way this nation was as a form of ideological disguise. We were lied to. This America, the fabled "land of the free, home of the brave", uses that quote as a slogan, a sugar coating on the many poison pills of lawyer-made laws, regulations, taxes, fines, agencies, and the corrupt ruling class that wields all that power for its own good.
In this America, Freedom is a sugar coated lie to get us to accept the many political and social controls imposed upon us. ...Promoted by criminals in three piece suits, known as career politicians.
These criminals in three piece suits unfortunately operate not a Constitutionally limited government, but a hydra-headed monster of a government that masquerades itself as many federal, state and local institutions. This monster's tentacles never stop reaching for more power, more authority, more of YOUR MONEY AND LIFE'S WORK, seizing it and stealing it from YOU! In fact, this monstrous federal government's reach into our lives is so pervasive, so overwhelming, only the largest of corporations can operate in the country with any degree of latitude.
At the pinnacles of power there is a small group of inbred elitists who regularly go back and forth from private life as CEO's and Directors in the corporate boardrooms to positions of power in government. They are greedy and corrupt beyond description, and have perpretrated literally every act of treason against us-and gotten away with it. ...So, two Americas; one's a illusory piece of propaganda genius, and we're stuck in the one with no level playing field, no limited representative government, no guarantee of Rights. It's a insider's game and conditions have been ratcheted to squeeze out as much initiative, drive, intelligence and resources out of the American People as possible.
Americans aren't the good guys anymore. Hollow TV pitchmen still insist our boys are dying for their country, but more and more people know that those lives are being wasted on corporate profits, deliberately squandered for somebody's twisted big score scheme.This brings us to the last news item that catches my attention: Nazis of the Nineties. (Notice that this article was written in 1998!) This is the piece that puts it all together when it tells us:And you know who's making the money. The very pervs who are orchestrating all these wars. Repeat after me: Carlyle Group.
Maybe the most frightening thing is that so many Americans are going along with the scam. And the more I find out about American history - from George Washington butchering French traders in their sleep on Christmas Eve - maybe they always have.
How many thousands of supposedly responsible Americans are keeping their mouths shut about what really happened on 9/11, or how they knew always the reason for the Iraq war was one big lie? ...
People want to talk about politics, candidates? I see a one-party system in the United States dominated by nongentile bankers aligned with the forces of Europe's old money, which likely in and of itself is nongentile as well, since the major controlling mechanism of human society - the Rothschild controlled banks, whose emblem is the prototype of the flag of Israel - have dominated the world financial scene since long before they pilfered from American citizens the right to control their own money way back in 1913.
But today's news is worse.
Scheduled start of World War Three was due March 20, when they tried to start up the Iranian bourse (European term for "stock exchange") trading oil in euros in Tehran.
Doesn't it give you a warm feeling when you know the sclerotic, twitching finger of Dick Cheney is fiddling with the nuclear button? Here's a man who has never been stopped, and he can produce the spilled blood to prove it.
Who knows what the latest twist will be in this stranger-then-coincidence confrontation with Iran over another pack of lies? The U.S. picks wars with whomever it wants, and because its citizenry is so drugged-out by bad schools, medicine and food, they roar their drunken approval of these atrocities. ...
How many Americans have gone down the rabbithole morally in recent years? Yes, America has always been a cesspool of rape and plunder largely covered over by those who write the history books. There may never have been a time in history when the populace got the straight scoop from the powers that be.
It seemed, though, in the last half of the 20th century in which I spent the better part of my life, that I grew up with a degree of confidence in a system that could produce people like Edward R. Murrow and Joe McCarthy, a world that could conduct a civilized debate and arrive at a logical solution.
Perhaps I was naive. Once upon a time, I loved my country. Now I am very afraid of it.
In his book "The Road to Serfdom," Friedrich Hayek warned Americans in 1944 that despite their military war against Nazis, they were travelling the philosophical and economic road to that the Nazis were travelling. The Americans ignored that warning. Now along the Americans we are left with the consequences that are coming home to roost in the nineties: a government of omnipotent size and power using its power to kill innocent, peaceful citizens at home and abroad. Today, the number of its victims is in the millions. But at the end of this road lie the deadly bombing and concentration camps for the multitudes. ...Again, let me mention that the above article was written in 1998 and already some of its predictions have been validated. This is the article that made me think of the folk tale of my childhood. When I read the following:The name of the new game to be played in the last year of the twentieth century is "catastrophic terrorism" and it has been made frightening, not because it conceivably could really happen but because of what people who choose to dwell on the possibility, however remote, want to do about it. The anti-biological and anti-weapons of mass destruction American propaganda and actions are already duplicating Hitler's prior to World War-II tactics.
Any further terrorism from now onwards would be justified in the name of combating "catastrophic terrorism," which is defined as going far beyond what the US Secretary of Defence William Cohen calls "the conventional type of terrorism." That is the work of "cowards," he says, who "rejoice in the agony of their victims." They then "retreat to villages where they hide behind the skirts of women and the laughter of children and dare you to strike back - and strike back we will."
"We have to depend upon intervention" he declared on December 8, 1998 and the same views have been expressed by Ashton Carter, John Deusch and Philip Zelikow, two former high-level Defence Department Officials, and a former staff member of National Security Council, in the Foreign Affairs magazine. This propaganda would justify the US armed attack in any part of the world as "prevention" of the sensed danger. Afghanistan and Sudan were probably the first victims of an undeclared Nazi agenda for dominating the world.
The word "Nazi" might offend some Americans but a thorough research can pale Nazi atrocities by comparison with what the US has done and is doing in the name of national interest. CIA, with the help of CNN, BBC and ABC etc., is waging a major propaganda war against the Muslim world in particular, with the help of capitalist media elite and some powerful politicians. Their lies were once totally disregarded by most people, but today, the majority of the people seem to believe the anti "rogue states" propaganda.
We still have too many people, who do not believe that the present American attempts are leading to a US world order and total domination of those nations, which are considered anti-American. They, like the unbelievers in 1939, will not take the time to research the American intentions and wrong doings. If they did, they would see that these warnings are indeed accurate and timely. What the world fails or refuses to recognise is that the concentration camps were simply the logical extension of the Nazi agenda and mind-set. It doesn't matter if there were six million killed - or six hundred - or six - or even one.
The evil is the belief that the US government should have the power to sacrifice even one individual for the good of the American "nation" and "interest." Once this basic philosophical premise and political power are conceded, innocent people, beginning with few and inevitable ending in multitudes, will be killed, because "the good of the nation" always ends up requiring it. The UN and rest of the world seem to have conceded this authority to the US so that it freely exercise its Nazi practices. ...
And like the German people of the 1930s, Americans either refuse to see it happening, or they rationalise what is happening so that they do not have to deal with it. ...
On international level, we observe that Hitler's words have been put to practice in the form of CNN and BBC. According to Hitler, "the task of propaganda lies not in a scientific training of the individual, but rather in directing the masses towards certain facts, events, necessities, etc., the purpose being to move their importance into the masses' field of vision." We can see this at CNN and BBC, as they also stick to a few main points and repeat them over and over. ...
Hitler believed that propaganda had to be very simple, so the average person, with very short attention span, could understand it. The thesis is: "If any terrorism conceivably could happen, we must assume that it will, and do something about it now, before it is too late." This is itself the very essence of psychological terrorism that the world community is constantly ignoring. ...
Policy of the Nazis of the nineties is now being established in such a manner that any nation capable of posing a threat to US interests at any time in the future is a legitimate target for American attacks. It is the intention of the Nazis in Washington to so bring the nations into such despair that they will gladly give themselves over to the new despotism. They are prepared to give up their hopes and dreams, their religions and economies for the brief promise of rest from the turmoils placed before them. ...
The Nazi regime of the thirties set out to gain control by focusing on three main areas: regulatory, persuasive and intimidatory. Regulation is being done through different UN resolution and their selective enforcement; persuasion is being done through electronic and print media and intimidation through missile strikes from the pirate ships. Resolutions passed by the Security Council in the early nineties have been the catalyst to the transformation of US to a nazified, and the world as a whole to be its centralised state.
In late thirties, the history was transformed to emphasise the superiority of German civilisation, with German heroes coming to the forefront. German failures were either left out of the unit or blamed on the Jews. The same is happening in the late nineties with the American heroes giving details of their ruthless bombings on the CNN with pride in militarism. Like Nazis, the US administration wants to create a static world society whereby nations act unquestionably, and do little thinking for themselves. ...
CNN has become the most effective brainwashing tool, showing no victims of the 400 cruise missiles they way they show Israeli victims of a single Hizbollah rocket. None of us try to wait and reach to the root causes of the issue before making a pro-American mind after seeing these images.
They say "might is right" but this saying cannot be proven in actual history. "Might" just falls harder when it is "not right." The US actions may not have surpassed the Nazi atrocities. But that's today.
Hitler believed that propaganda had to be very simple, so the average person, with very short attention span, could understand it. The thesis is: "If any terrorism conceivably could happen, we must assume that it will, and do something about it now, before it is too late." This is itself the very essence of psychological terrorism that the world community is constantly ignoring. ...Put together with this:
"We have to depend upon intervention" he declared on December 8, 1998 and the same views have been expressed by Ashton Carter, John Deutsch and Philip Zelikow, two former high-level Defence Department Officials, and a former staff member of National Security Council, in the Foreign Affairs magazine. This propaganda would justify the US armed attack in any part of the world as "prevention" of the sensed danger. Afghanistan and Sudan were probably the first victims of an undeclared Nazi agenda for dominating the world.
If any terrorism conceivably could happen, we must assume that it will, and do something about it now, before it is too late. This propaganda would justify the US armed attack in any part of the world as "prevention" of the sensed danger.
This leads us to the story of the Three Sillies by Joseph Jacobs:
Once upon a time there was a farmer and his wife who had one daughter, and she was courted by a gentleman. Every evening he used to come and see her, and stop to supper at the farmhouse, and the daughter used to be sent down into the cellar to draw the beer for supper. So one evening she had gone down to draw the beer, and she happened to look up at the ceiling while she was drawing, and she saw a mallet stuck in one of the beams. It must have been there a long, long time, but somehow or other she had never noticed it before, and she began a- thinking. And she thought it was very dangerous to have that mallet there, for she said to herself: “Suppose him and me was to be married, and we was to have a son, and he was to grow up to be a man, and come down into the cellar to draw the beer, like as I’m doing now, and the mallet was to fall on his head and kill him, what a dreadful thing it would be!” And she put down the candle and the jug, and sat herself down and began a-crying.
Well, they began to wonder upstairs how it was that she was so long drawing the beer, and her mother went down to see after her, and she found her sitting on the settle crying, and the beer running over the floor. “Why, whatever is the matter?” said her mother. “Oh, mother!" says she, “look at that horrid mallet! Suppose we was to be married, and was to have a son, and he was to grow up, and was to come down to the cellar to draw the beer, and the mallet was to fall on his head and kill him, what a dreadful thing it would be!” “Dear, dear! what a dreadful thing it would be!” said the mother, and she sat her down aside of the daughter and started a-crying too. Then after a bit the father began to wonder that they didn’t come back, and he went down into the cellar to look after them himself, and there they two sat a- crying, and the beer running all over the floor. “Whatever is the matter?” says he. “Why,” says the mother, “look at that horrid mallet. Just suppose, if our daughter and her sweetheart was to be married, and was to have a son, and he was to grow up, and was to come down into the cellar to draw the beer, and the mallet was to fall on his head and kill him, what a dreadful thing it would be!” “Dear, dear, dear! so it would!” said the father, and he sat himself down aside of the other two, and started a-crying.
Now the gentleman got tired of stopping up in the kitchen by himself, and at last he went down into the cellar too, to see what they were after; and there they three sat a-crying side by side, and the beer running all over the floor. And he ran straight and turned the tap. Then he said: “Whatever are you three doing, sitting there crying, and letting the beer run all over the floor?”
“Oh!” says the father, “look at that horrid mallet! Suppose you and our daughter was to be married, and was to have a son, and he was to grow up, and was to come down into the cellar to draw the beer, and the mallet was to fall on his head and kill him!” And then they all started a-crying worse than before. But the gentleman burst out a- laughing, and reached up and pulled out the mallet, and then he said: "I’ve travelled many miles, and I never met three such big sillies as you three before; and now I shall start out on my travels again, and when I can find three bigger sillies than you three, then I’ll come back and marry your daughter.” So he wished them good-bye, and started off on his travels, and left them all crying because the girl had lost her sweetheart.
Well, he set out, and he travelled a long way, and at last he came to a woman’s cottage that had some grass growing on the roof. And the woman was trying to get her cow to go up a ladder to the grass, and the poor thing durst not go. So the gentleman asked the woman what she was doing. “Why, lookye,” she said, “look at all that beautiful grass. I’m going to get the cow on to the roof to eat it. She’ll be quite safe, for I shall tie a string round her neck, and pass it down the chimney, and tie it to my wrist as I go about the house, so she can’t fall off without my knowing it.” “Oh, you poor silly!” said the gentleman, “you should cut the grass and throw it down to the cow!" But the woman thought it was easier to get the cow up the ladder than to get the grass down, so she pushed her and coaxed her and got her up, and tied a string round her neck, and passed it down the chimney, and fastened it to her own wrist. And the gentleman went on his way, but he hadn’t gone far when the cow tumbled off the roof, and hung by the string tied round her neck, and it strangled her. And the weight of the cow tied to her wrist pulled the woman up the chimney, and she stuck fast half-way and was smothered in the soot.
Well, that was one big silly.
And the gentleman went on and on, and he went to an inn to stop the night, and they were so full at the inn that they had to put him in a double-bedded room, and another traveller was to sleep in the other bed. The other man was a very pleasant fellow, and they got very friendly together; but in the morning, when they were both getting up, the gentleman was surprised to see the other hang his trousers on the knobs of the chest of drawers and run across the room and try to jump into them, and he tried over and over again, and couldn’t manage it; and the gentleman wondered whatever he was doing it for. At last he stopped and wiped his face with his handkerchief. “Oh dear,” he says, "I do think trousers are the most awkwardest kind of clothes that ever were. I can’t think who could have invented such things. It takes me the best part of an hour to get into mine every morning, and I get so hot! How do you manage yours?” So the gentleman burst out a-laughing, and showed him how to put them on; and he was very much obliged to him, and said he never should have thought of doing it that way.
So that was another big silly.
Then the gentleman went on his travels again; and he came to a village, and outside the village there was a pond, and round the pond was a crowd of people. And they had got rakes, and brooms, and pitchforks, reaching into the pond; and the gentleman asked what was the matter. “Why,” they say, “matter enough! Moon’s tumbled into the pond, and we can’t rake her out anyhow!” So the gentleman burst out a- laughing, and told them to look up into the sky, and that it was only the shadow in the water. But they wouldn’t listen to him, and abused him shamefully, and he got away as quick as he could.
So there was a whole lot of sillies bigger than them three sillies at home. So the gentleman turned back home again and married the farmer’s daughter, and if they didn’t live happy for ever after, that’s nothing to do with you or me.
It's a pretty funny story, yes? Most of the silliness of human beings is as generally innocuous as the examples in this story. Of course, the dingbat trying to get the cow on the roof killed her cow and died herself in the exercise of her silliness, so that warns us that our ignorance and simple-mindedness can be fatal. But in general, silliness isn't fatal. It is only fatal when this tendency of human beings is used by those who do not have the best interests of the masses at heart.
Can you imagine what the farmer and his family would have done if the gentleman caller, instead of pointing out that their imaginations were the cause of their distress and that the answer was simple: remove the object that was triggering their imaginations to run wild, had rather decided to play on their fears for his own agenda? What if he wanted to take the land of an enemy? He could have told the farmer and family that this neighbor had planted the mallet in the ceiling to cause exactly the tragedy that the farmer's daughter feared. They would have then taken up their pitchforks and firebrands and gone at once to the home of the declared evildoer, killed him and taken his possessions.
If any terrorism conceivably could happen, we must assume that it will, and do something about it now, before it is too late. This propaganda would justify the US armed attack in any part of the world as "prevention" of the sensed danger.That is exactly how the American people are being controlled. They have been "hystericized" and this process has been ongoing for the past 50 years or more - since the Nazi scientists were brought back to America from Germany and put to work to help the US achieve global dominance, to become the Seat of the New World Order. As Abid Ullah Jan wrote on 5 Jan 1998:
In his book "The Road to Serfdom," Friedrich Hayek warned Americans in 1944 that despite their military war against Nazis, they were travelling the philosophical and economic road to that the Nazis were travelling. The Americans ignored that warning. Now along the Americans we are left with the consequences that are coming home to roost in the nineties: a government of omnipotent size and power using its power to kill innocent, peaceful citizens at home and abroad. Today, the number of its victims is in the millions. But at the end of this road lie the deadly bombing and concentration camps for the multitudes. ...It's here, it's now. The only thing that will save us now is a global cataclysm from the "outside." And that will exact its own heavy toll. But maybe that is what is really meant by the "Second Coming?"
Food for thought.
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
LG gets so Emotional for LCDs
Parece que ya estamos casí alla, en ese lugar en el que jugar en un LCD sera tan fluido como en un CRT.
Tambien parece que estos tios de Lg que estan hasta en la sopa estan hacienmdo productos que por lo menos por fuera cumplen.Es emocionante, hasta hace unos mese Viewsonic con su VX924 era el rey indiscutible y había pocas opciones pues el response time era en promedio de 8 ms.
LG gets so Emotional for LCDs
Sunday, March 12, 2006
Saturday, March 11, 2006
L
Empire and the Regime of Unilateral Translation
It has always seemed rather symptomatic of a critical, yet largely untheorized, problem in the new praxis of the multitudes that the intellectual project bearing that name, the journal Multitudes, should be undertaken in a single, national-and formerly imperial-language. Certainly, the interesting role of French in relation to global English as both a codification of the division of labor within the putative unity of the West-particularly in relation to the crucial redemptive role ascribed to the aesthetic in the wake of the collapse of the ethical-and the relative autonomy of French vis-à-vis English combined with the intimate proximity between the two (allowing for much faster translation flows between the two languages) must be taken into account in judging the practical effects of this means of communication for the multitudes. From this point of departure, it might be possible to construct a genealogy of the role of the French language as it constitutes something approaching a theoretically-critical meta-language of ostensibly global proportions.
In their collective opus, Empire, Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri (hereafter abbreviated H&N) recognize that one of the important problems of today’s political struggles are their inability to articulate beyond immediate local concern (except by immediately jumping to a global plane). "There is," they write, "no common language of struggles that could ’translate’ the particular language of each into a cosmopolitan language...This points toward an important political task : to construct a new common language...Perhaps this needs to be a new type of communication that functions not on the basis of resemblances but on the basis of differences." [1] As true as this may be, not all difference is the same, and we would have to be very careful in our analysis to specify precisely how this difference occurs. H&N seem to be aware of what is at stake in this problem when they remind us that, even as communication needs to be rethought on the basis of difference, "control over linguistic sense and meaning and the networks of communication becomes an ever more central issue for political struggle." [2]
Accepting the premise advanced by Empire that networks of language constitute a crucial site for the multitudes in the struggle against global Empire, this brief essay explores how the problems of address within the text call forth, or pre-figure, a certain mode of address by critical intellectuals from the non-West. In this sense, both "Empire" and its critics-in this case, the reception of the text by intellectuals in Taiwan-form a fascinating instance of "co-figuration" that demands the attention of those who find in the notion of the multitude a conceptual mobility adequate to the exposure of non-subjective sovereignty and the diagonal lines of flight from capital.
The relation between Taiwan and the conceptual framework deployed by H&N in Empire is hardly fortuitous. To a large extent, H&N’s theorization of the historical development of sovereignty provides a cogent way to understand Taiwan’s long term, anomalous situation and its position within the U.S.-centered global Empire. [3] The redefinition accomplished by H&N of internationalism, dispensing with the limiting framework of political subjectivities based on the normativity of the nation-state without falling into the samson-esque pathos of anarchism or the compensatory catharsis of a so-called "global soul," is surely one of the enduring contributions of their work. Unfortunately, the critical import of this global, non-(inter)national perspective is often undermined, in Empire, by the absence of a thorough critique of American nationalism. I will not dwell on the reasons why H&N underestimate the importance of this critique, as it is completely conceivable-and indeed imperative-to articulate the growing dialectic between Empire and nationalism within the framework already deployed by Empire. Needless to say, nationalism has never been fundamentally opposed to imperialism, and it is surely within this history that the amalgam of US Imperial Nationalism ought to be understood.
The Taiwanese edition of Empire is prefaced by not one but five essays varying in length from two to approximately twenty pages. The battery of authors solicited to preface the work for readers with access to Chinese on the Taiwanese market is evidently designed to create the representation of a national intelligentsia. [4] The unusually large number of prefatory introductions by local intellectuals immediately suggests the complex politics of knowledge that accompany the economy, indeed war, of translation (often unilateral) between central and peripheral nationalized languages such as English and Chinese. Needless to say, the complement to this economy of translation (and silence) across the boundary between center and periphery (or again, between West and non-West) is an assumption of the translated text’s heterogeneous opacity in contrast to the homogeneous clarity of "original" communication in the national language. Hence, each of the prefaces takes upon itself the task of "introduction," devoting more or less time to the process of distillation of Empire’s main arguments. By the time the chronologically-inclined reader has gone through four of these introductions and prepares, once again, to begin yet another, this time by Kuan-hsing Chen, it is virtually impossible not to recall that Chen, years ago in the preface to a Chinese translation of an English-language work on cultural imperialism, qualified the prefatory operation in terms of "disinfection and sterilization."
There is at this postcolonial conjuncture little to be gained from questioning the latent premise of social pathology and normalization inscribed into such metaphors. Rather, it is more fruitful to read the tirelessly "introductory" quality of this battery of prefaces as the performance of an incantatory repetition done, somewhat as Starhawk has taught, in order to cast the circle. Significantly, the casting of a powerful, tautegorical circle is not performed in order to allow unprecedented mutation and multiplication of the fecund discourses deployed by Empire, but rather to protect the power of the older tautology, nationalism, that runs a continuous cycle between market, territory, blood, and language. The position of the intellectual as privileged guardian of the secret of this circle is well known. Indeed, the question of the empowerment figures prominently in two of the text’s most strident critics, Chen and Wang.
The primary problem that really captures our attention in this limited space here is rather how the prefaces work within the construction of a homolingual mode of address that binds readers and authors in a pact of homogeneous translation. The first, and certainly most obvious, clue to understanding this construction concerns the deployment of the authorial voice, particularly the use of the first person pronoun, including fascinating shifts between singular and plural that we cannot discuss in detail here. Each of the authors, except one whose "we" is implicitly left to an "orthodox" leftism of class analysis, poses the question of how "we" should read Empire. It is not difficult to show that the referent behind the ubiquitous use of "we" is assumed to be the particular, limited community circumscribed by the proper name "Taiwan."
Language, of course, inevitably becomes a central concern for the prefatory authors. Kuan-hsing Chen refers, without further explanation, to the difference between an "English-language world" and a "Chinese linguistic context." In reference to the theoretical dispositive of the text and the historical narrative concerning the development of immanentism as a motor of political liberation, Chen observes : "As far as those people living in Chinese-language areas are concerned, although we can comprehend this history intellectually, we are not very capable of experientially incorporating the corporeal and affective content of secularization and its historical transformation... Since we cannot incorporate the historical experience of Euro-American secularization, it is impossible to understand the specificity of Euro-American modernity." [5] Chen makes a similar argument, based on collective historical experience, about why Europeans cannot understand how the moral constantly impinges upon the public in the United States. Undoubtedly, there is a certain truth in these kinds of highly precipitate formulations. Baudrillard essentially makes the same argument concerning the impossibility of understanding across the Atlantic. What is alarming about these kinds of formulations is not the tendency towards cultural essentialism, which is precisely what gives them their imaginary force, but rather the implicit relation between experience and textuality that guarantees the meaning of certain enunciations will be more transparent for members of the same community. A classic strategy of enunciative desti-nation, in which the object of address is known in advance and pre-figures the meaning of address.
Undoubtedly, the most thoughtful engagement with the text comes from Kuan-hsing Chen, whose reading is attentive not only to the histories of colonialism, imperialism and the Cold War that have impeded or deformed the emergence of local as well as truly international struggles of liberation, but which also recognizes the truly innovative aspects in the text’s identification of a new, non-anthropological figure for bioplitical struggle. However, Chen’s overall evaluation of the text is negative. One of the most serious charges that Chen lays against the authors of Empire concerns their inability to articulate a serious critique of US nationalism. In the aftermath of September 11, Chen concludes that this crucial absence reveals critical flaws in the political disposition of the text as a whole, flaws which become most apparent in the "fiercely hollowed-out" account of the constitution of the multitudes.
In the penultimate section of Chen’s preface, devoted to a discussion of the multitudes, Chen resumes the essential novelty of the concept, both in relation to the advent of immaterial production and in relation to the essentially non-liberative concept of a people. Significantly, Chen mentions that, "in a Chinese linguistic field, it is difficult to find a precise translation for the term," [6] preferring to leave the term in English, untranslated. He does explain, however, that the term is equivalent to the term "subaltern," essentially referring to groups that are "weak" (ruo) in a sense relative to the momentum and mobility (shi) of the dominant. Note that the Chinese translators of H&N’s work simply rely on the conventional Sinic term qunzhong that has long served as a conventional equivalent for the "mass." Certainly, Chen’s refusal to translate the term as "qunzhong-mass" must be seen in light of his recognition of the difference the term "multitudes" marks in relation to the previous political trio of mass, class, and people. We must stress, however, that our concern here is not to determine whether or not Chen has properly understood "the Concept," but rather to grasp the field of relations in which bodies become knowledgeable. From this perspective, the fact that Chen leaves the term untranslated is not simply orthogonal, it is also actively anti-diagonal, for it effectively interdicts the emergence of a new term, and hence a new articulatory subjectivity, from emerging in Chinese.
For Chen, the constitution of the field of meaning and the dispersal of bodies within it is unquestionably conditioned by historical experience. Of course, Chen has already posited an immanent connection between historical understanding and the present constitution of community-particularly in its linguistico-cultural specificity. Although we must reject the conceptual premises of this argument, it still must be treated in terms of its corporeal opacity. In order to grasp the relations at work here, it is necessary to refer to Chen at length :
"Even if we construe Empire as a diaolgue within leftist thought, we still must see : if historical experience has proved that the unfolding of capitalism and the movements of the working class in different regions throughout the world possess different attributes, the erasure of different historical layers would result not only in a loss of explanatory power, but also a loss of the possibility of discovering both real points of articulation and the principles of the new articulations : by the same token, the Euro-American historical locus that constitutes Empire cannot be separated from the multitude [this term is always in English in the original]. The multitude is immanent to Euro-America/postmodernity. If one cannot grasp the specific attributes of the multitude in different regions, the linkages of the multitude as it becomes an anti-imperial subject could only operate in a serpentine-like fashion. This fiercely hollowed-out tendency leaves a reading of the overall theoretical account finally washed out. The fact that the book ends with a discussion of militants in the movements shows that the authors clearly see that the anti-imperial revolutionary movements must pass through linkage, articulation, and organization, and it is precisely here that we return to the problem of historicity : the articulatory subject of the movement does not exist in a vacuum and can no longer accept unified commands issued by the anti-imperial headquarters. If trans-regional linkage is to become possible, the discovery of a common enemy is but a point of departure, the democratic form is but a mediation. If the work of organization is to unleash the desire for liberation, it cannot be de-linked from the knowledges of specific local histories and cultures. This is what I call the necessity of an uninterrupted dialectic between the new internationalism and localism. To the extent that the positions of globalism, its enunciative position, manifest a posture of anti-Empire, it is difficult to empower [in English in the original] the subject of resistance immanent to history." [7]
Considerations of length force us to condense and economize. Clearly, the unsurpassable horizon of historical experience is understood by Chen in a conventional, hermeneutic fashion : community and language are the suppositories of sedimentary accumulation over time. However, since Chen’s whole notion of political meaning is completely relative, based on a calculus of relative positionality and momentum, it is pointless to construe these remarks as simple cultural essentialism. In fact, Chen’s position is quite the opposite, emphasizing absolute motility in the present. The true import of Chen’s position, combining the essentialism of common historical experience with the non-essentialism of radically relative positionality, is rather to be found in the constitution of an unequal linguistic barrier that distinguishes the supposed unities of Chinese and English. The problem of how the communication of the multitudes will create linkages across the debris of subjectivities bound to the violence of national language created in the wake of capital’s deterritorializing advance throughout the supposedly "open" space made by the creation of a line dividing the lawful comity of nations-the West, from the lawlessness of the Rest, is irreducible to the historico-theoretical account of sovereignty and immanence in Empire and its various translation-mutations. From this point of view, we see that Chen’s inability to translate the term "multitude" is primarily performative, and in this sense, not the indication of a negative lack, but rather a positive refusal. Readers of H&N will certainly recognize in this refusal the operation of a political action whose meaning extends to, or really circumambulates, the central problem of transformation in Empire/Empire.
The problem, however, is that this central problem itself can only be perceived as such from the other side of the unilateral regime of translation between Chinese and central, imperial languages (primarily English, but certainly including, in a manner that remains to be specified, French and Italian, for instance). The relation between English and the languages of Taiwan (mandarin, Taiwanese, Hakka, aboriginal, etc...) is a relation of unilateral translation. Of course, languages are ’freely’ translated into each other, although it hardly requires a statistical analysis to know that the overwhelming direction of translation is structured by a market that promotes flows of data from Chinese into English and flows of comprehensive technology from English into Chinese. The sense of these flows produce very different kinds of subjectivities. The subjectivities produced in English remain virtually autonomous of what is said in Chinese, while English becomes not just a means of social production, but also the only means of social recognition for Chinese in global Empire. Hence the matrix of difference and control needs to be transformed. Just as H&N say, this means "Knowledge has to become linguistic action and philosophy has to become a real reappropriation of knowledge." [8] This reappropriation, however, cannot simply be thought along the lines of difference without considering how bodies become knowledgeable in asymmetrical ways under the regime of unilateral translation. Readers of Empire will of course remember that H&N carefully reject theories of biopower that are purely intellectual (taking aim primarily at Italian and French writings from the 1990s) because they overlook the corporeal aspects of social production. In response to these overly intellectualized accounts of biopolitics that focus "almost exclusively on the horizon of language and communication" [9] and hence ignore somatic affect, H&N elaborate the crucial aspects of immaterial labor, particularly the production and manipulation of affects, that will lead to a powerful recognition of the new figure of the collective biopolitical body. In a disciplinary process of language-learning, which necessarily comprises a moment of translation, we could see a subjective technology that defeats the distinction between body and intellect, per se.
It should be clear now that the crucial absence in Empire of a critique of US imperial nationalism is intrinsically related to the biopolitics of language, particularly the regime of translation instituted by global English. What we might simply call the "technologically-assisted amplification of English voice"-provided we understand the word "technology" primarily in terms of subjective formation in the displacement of the political-is one of the most important lacunas for the multitudes in H&N’s work, all the more salient given the fact that H&N’s biopolitical dispositive ought to have led them beyond this lacuna in the first place. Minimally, this would mean that one has to change the notion of address implicitly codified into disciplinary divisions of knowledge within the Human Sciences. The fact that H&N’s work appears in English is not, to borrow their terms, "superstructural, external to production." Since the end of the Second World War, English serves as the model of complete translatability. [10] However, disciplines that specialize in theoretical production about global issues-we know these disciplines occur in French as well as in English (and here we express some reserve as to the division of labor between the two)-this global theory, then, does not take responsibility, in the Derridean sense of being response-able, for the way this kind of intervention is disseminated into other languages. Ultimately the unilateral privilege enjoyed by English (with its French reserve, or preserve, of radical theory) can only be maintained by institutional discipline that overlooks the need both to engage in the dialogic process of translation, refraction, and retranslation and to not confuse this dialogic process with the construction of a world.
Is it necessary, as H&N think, to create a new "common language" based on the singularity of translation as a mode of social production ? If the answer is undoubtedly yes, does this mean that we can dismiss the need also to resituate the site of unilaterality away from theories of difference, and, perhaps even singularity ? Otherwise, how can we ever distinguish between "common language" and doctrine ? This project minimally means that English cannot be relied upon as a site of commonality and the exteriority of, or exceptionalism granted to, the position of the translator must be reworked. Unless we disrupt the poles of relative positionality visible only when Empire is translated from the central language into the peripheral one (and then subsequently "retranslated," as we do now, back into the circuits of the central language network), two related results are predictable : on the one hand, Chen’s position will only find expression in the spirals of third world identity politics and/or Chinese linguistico-cultural nationalism ; on the other hand, H&N’s global framework will only communicate, in the unilateral regime of translation, the bio-affective form of a directive from the self-styled Party Central of the Imperial Avant-Garde.
[1] Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge : Harvard University, 2000), 57.
[2] Empire, 404.
[3] Cf. Jon Solomon, "Taiwan Incorporated : a survey of biopolitics in the sovereign police’s Pacific Theater of Operations," in Traces : a multilingual series of cultural theory, Vol. 3. (forthcoming, 2003).
[4] Pressed for space, I can only list these authors in a note : Wan-ch’ang Hsiao, a politician who formerly held the post of premier ; Hsing-ch’ing Wang, a senior journalist and leading liberal critic ; Hui-lin Wu, an economist from a government think tank ; Yi-chung Ch’en, a defender of "orthodox" leftism from the Academia Sinica (a state-sponsored research center) ; and Kuan-hsing Chen, a university professor who is also a leading thinker and promoter of academic Cultural Studies, social movements, and pan-asian internationalism.
[5] Empire, 30.
[6] Empire, 36.
[7] Diguo, 39-40.
[8] Empire, 404.
[9] Empire, 29.
[10] Cf. "The Technique of the Modern Political Myths," the penultimate chapter of Ernst Cassirer’s posthumous English work, The Myth of the State (1946), in which the history of rationality against myth that forms the construction of the political in the West is finally grounded in the untranslatability of mythically-oriented Nazi Deutsch and the implicit, full transparency of rational English.
Farrakhan revels in the spotlight of Million Men March
Farrakhan revels in the spotlight of Million Men March
October 16, 1995
Web posted at: 7:45 p.m. EDT
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Nation of Islam leader Minister Louis Farrakhan spoke for over two hours at Monday's Million Man March, telling hundreds of thousands on the Mall in Washington that white supremacy is the root of the country's suffering ( 199K AIFF sound or 199K WAV sound).
"That makes you sick," Farrakhan said, "and you produce a sick society and a sick world."
The response to his call for a day of atonement and reconciliation for black men strengthened his position as a leader in the African American community, Farrakhan said, "like it or not." 
The U.S. Park Service estimated that 400,000 heard Farrakhan and other speakers in the all-day rally.
And while Farrakhan may have been the inspiration for Monday's Million Man March, he wasn't necessarily the reason huge numbers of people showed up. In interviews with CNN, several African-American participants said they hoped the rally would generate self-reliance and black unity. "We're not here to overthrow anyone," said John West, an educator from Chicago. (111K AIFF sound or 111K WAV sound).
The crowd was entertained by pulsing African drums (88K JPEG photo) and music before it heard uplifting speeches from a platform set up just below the congressional terrace where U.S. presidents deliver their inaugural addresses. (1M QuickTime movie)
Speaking in Texas, President Clinton praised the inspirational goals of the rally but he rejected "one man's message of malice and division" -- a reference to Farrakhan, whom he did not mention by name. Farrakhan has angered Jews, Catholics, gays, feminists and others with his comments over the years. He has called Judaism a "gutter religion" and recently defended his use of the term "bloodsuckers" to describe Jews, Asians and others who open businesses in minority communities and take the profits elsewhere.
"Many of our young people are in prison or dropping out of school," West said. "I would like to send a message to them that there is hope and there are people who care about them. If we all pull together as a community and as a race, I think we can lick some of these problems."
"We who are at the bottom of the pile need to climb out and not wait to be lifted out," said one Farrakhan aide, Abdul Allah Muhammad. "In the process of doing that, we must ask for God's help and be worthy of God's help. That's why this is called a day of atonement." (more from Muhammad on Farrakhan's message to African-Americans - 94K AIFF sound or 94K WAV sound)
"I'm here for atonement," said Stephen Jones, an assistant school principal from Chicago. "I'm here to unify the black community, to be role models for our students to let them know there is hope in America. We are here to inspire all people of our country to get an education." (179K AIFF sound or 179K WAV sound)."
"It's not about Farrakhan," said Philip Branker of St. Paul, Minnesota. "(It's about) black men uniting for a cause." There's "a need to unite," he said, because "there hasn't been a strong (black unity) movement for some time now."
That's also why Jerry Parries of Cleveland drove to Washington with friends. "What motivated me was the African-American brothers getting together, doing something for their community and supporting one another," he said. "It's an economic thing. ... It's not about Louis Farrakhan." (more from Parries (119K AIFF sound or 119K WAV sound)
Many federal employees arranged to take Monday off. Several government agencies and local school districts reported a high absentee rate.
Milion Men march ,1995
Clinton: Racial rift 'tearing at heart of America'
President voices concerns in black and white
October 16, 1995
Web posted at: 2:15 p.m. EDT
AUSTIN, Texas (CNN) -- While thousands of African-American men marched on Washington, President Clinton issued his own challenge to both white and black Americans.
Clinton said differing reactions to the Simpson verdict had served to highlight far deeper divisions, rifts that are "tearing at the heart of America." But they had also helped provide a window for communication and reconciliation.
"Today we face a choice," he said. "One way leads to further separation and bitterness and more lost futures. The other way, the path of courage and wisdom, leads to unity, reconciliation, and a rich opportunity for all to make the most of the lives God has given them."
"White racism may be black people's burden, but it is white people's problem," charged the president. In a reference to former Los Angeles Police Department detective Mark Fuhrman, he said, "The taped voice of one policeman should fill you with outrage. So I say to you: clean your house of racism." (250K AIFF sound or 250K WAV sound)
While acknowledging the roots of black pain and anger, the president also gave voice to white concerns. "Blacks must understand the roots of white fear," Clinton insisted. "It isn't racist for a white parent to hold his child close in a high crime neighborhood."
And he urged the black community to take responsibility for its problems, and for people of color, too, to cleanse their minds of ugly racism: "Again, I say, clean your house."
Clinton hailed the men participating in Monday's Million Man March, but offered thinly veiled criticism of the events' organizer, Louis Farrakhan, known for anti-Semitic remarks.
"One million men are right to be standing up for personal responsibility," he said. "But one million men do not make right one man's message of malice and division."
In a powerful speech that sometimes resembled a parental lecture, Clinton ended with a call for a united America.
"Whether we like it or not," he said, "we are one nation, one family, indivisible. For us, divorce or separation are not options."