Monday, 30 November 2009

Rivero on Iran / "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"

I intended writing this a while back, but couldn't be bothered. Now I feel bothered enough to mention it.
As befitting Rivero's worldview, he is indulgent of Iran, seemingly based on the principle of support for one's enemies' enemy. Iran is Israel's enemy, thus Iran gets Rivero's support.

In early October '09 Rivero pushed a very positive view of Iran's position in negotiations over proposals Iran allow foreign rather than domestic uranium enrichment. Before the negotiations had concluded, Rivero was asserting Iran was going to agree to the proposals, and that such agreement would cast Israeli and American policy into disarray, as Iran's agreement was the last thing Israel and USA policy actually demanded, intent on war at any cost as they are, or so Rivero believes.

However, now we are further down the road, late November, and Iran still has refused to agree to the proposals. So, not only was Rivero wrong in fact - Iran did not (and still has not) signup to the proposals - but also the Rivero's entire scheme of Israel and USA being "hellbent on war no matter what" is undermined. But does Rivero even notice? No.

Surprisingly Rivero hasn't deleted some of his earlier comments, so we get a good chance to see how his position on Iran and the proposals has shifted, as the facts have changed. As the facts have changed, we can see Rivero yet holds to the same basic premise - but that premise - of (Jewish) aggression Iran is now justified by the new facts (even though the new facts contradict the old facts, which back in October Rivero had used to justify the same premise.) So, two seemingly contrary sets of facts - what Rivero thought would happen but didn't (Iran accepting the propsals) and what Rivero thought wouldn't happen but did (Iran refusing to accept the proposals) - are both rationalised by Rivero as justifying his wider premise of Jews conspiring in aggression against Iran.

Here's Rivero back October 24th:
As I predicted yesterday, Israel is trying to find some way to scuttle the Iran deal and proceed with the war.


Israel is cornered here. For that matter so is the United States. When this Iran deal goes through on Friday, the primary excuse for war with Iran evaporates.

....the Iran enrichment deal ends the possibility of a new war with which to distract from the old war.
And here's Rivero, more recently, writing after it became clear Iran still hadn't signed up to the proposals: Rivero, October 30th:
It isn't a deal until ALL sides agree to it.

The big lie here is the attempt to claim that Iran did agree to the original deal, which they did not, then to portray Iran as having broken the agreement which was never agreed to.
Ahem. On October 21st Rivero had written:
"Iran agrees 'in principle' to compromise on nuclear programme

Crisis over.

War is called off!

Now on to Israel's war crimes trials!!!!
Rivero seemed certain Iran would sign, he said Israel and USA warmongering was "cornered" by the prospect of Iran signing the proposals. But late November, and Iran still hasn't signed, and there's been a subsequent UN motion censuring Iran.

If "the Iran enrichment deal ends the possibility of a new war" as Rivero claimed, why didn't Iran go for it? If the deal had "ended the possibility of a new war", why did Iran refuse to sign, and doesn't that mean anything? The interpretation is just changed, so that the new facts can renew the attack on Jews.....err....Israel. Whoops.

WRH asks "James Von Brunn: Crazed killer or American hero?" (!)

The link Rivero provides leads to John Kaminski's homepage, not the story itself.

Unsurprisingly the essay promotes Von Brunn as an "American Hero" for his homicidal attack on the Washington Holocaust Museum. The essence of the argument is a reiteration of Von Brunn's own claims which are a miasma of anti-semitism and far-right conspiracy theories targeting the Federal Reserve, international Marxism and (of course) world Jewry as the principal causes of America's "woe".

The usual Rivero rubbish then........

But even for Rivero, promoting Von Brunn as "an American hero" is just a bit strong, isn't it? And whilst Rivero claims he isn't anti-semitic, he's 'just a critic of Israel' apparently, the fact remains he promotes the most extreme anti-semitism in the work of others - to the point of calling Von Brunn "an American hero".

Here's some of what the article Rivero is promoting actually says:
.....if you are acting on principle alone with no friends at your back, you often wind up being declared a “lone nut” by those who don’t have the courage to comprehend your ideas about justice, honesty, and who is doing what to whom, and you wind up alone and bleeding, your sharp tongue finally silenced, never to feel the warm hand of a friend again in this life.

In this world, such is the frequent consequence of acting on principle.

James Von Brunn had attacked.....the two central influences responsible for the rapid destruction of the American republic: the Federal Reserve and the Holocaust Museum.

....more knowledgeable [people] are more likely to include [Von Brunn] in a category that includes the famous patriot Patrick Henry, who said “Give me liberty, or give me death!”, or Eugene Debs, a presidential candidate who was put in jail during World War I for saying that war was bad.

James Von Brunn spent his entire life searching for the truth as he saw it, and as he learned it. Very early on he spotted the Jewish financial hammerlock that appeared, to him, to be turning the world into a pornographic quagmire. He spent much of the rest of his life trying to convince anyone who would listen of the dangers we all were not seeing, and how our lives were being degraded and destroyed by this network of financial vampires.

.....Here was a great opportunity for the lockstep Jewish media to really go off about a white supremacist Jew hater shooting up a Holocaust Museum. I mean, is the movie version already in production, or what?

Only one answer fits. Von Brunn was too hot to handle. He was so on point that there was no debating him. He had the goods, and Jewish media didn’t want people to hear that. That’s why they’ve made all these laws prohibiting hate speech, so no one may question the Jewish lies that are imposed on us as their utterly deleterious fabricated rendition of reality.

[Von Brunn wrote:]....Through manipulation, bribery, slander, assassination, and control of the mass media, JEWS contrived to pit nation against nation, race against race, financing all sides in the resultant wars; then at exorbitant interest rates financing reconstruction of the devastated countries. Rothschild's modus operandi has kept Western Civilization in a continuous state of war and eternally in debt.

“In 1981 America's future seemed dismal indeed. It seemed to me that IF the FED could be brought to center stage and exposed, the entire Illuminati structure would collapse. Enraged citizens would hang the International Bankers. America would resume its role as a bastion of Western Culture.”

....JEWRY was politically invisible to the West, and its war against the West was always subterranean, cunning and deceptive. JEWISH strategy was to infiltrate the institutions of Western Culture and destroy them. JEWRY'S primary weapon was money manipulation and USURY.”

“JEWS have no religious scruples regarding money where goyim are concerned. They now have the means to carry out their war of annihilation of the West. They would not surface as a fighting unit and openly attack their hated enemy. They remained invisible. Their strategy was to organize the entire JEWISH People into a Fifth Column whose purpose is to penetrate the West and destroy everything.

No doubt a conspiracy exists to create One World Marxist Government at the sacrifice of America's sovereignty. Just as certain, One World ideologists of all stripes are financed by the International Banking Cabal, in which the Federal Reserve System (FED) plays a major role.
So, there we have it: Rivero is touting an acknowledged "white supremacist jew hater" as "an American hero".

Rivero is clearly engaged in the same sort of subterfuge and LIES that BigDan'sBigBlog and many others exhibit - to claim they themselves are not anti-semitic even as they promote authors and works which really are, obviously, anti-semitic. Rivero and the others are facing both ways. How can one sustain denials of anti-semitism whilst promoting Von Brunn as an American hero? Especially when the reasons claimed for Von brunn's heroism are his preparedness to act homicidally against "the world jewish conspiracy"! Von brunn isn't a supposed hero because of violence against Israel or Zionism - but against "the world jewish conspiracy". 'Jew' is the disinction used - nothing else.

Here's Rivero claiming he doesn't hate jews:
I am not "anti-Jewish"....... The truth is that I don't hate the Jewish people.
Rivero doesn't "hate jews" yet promotes claims that "a white supremacist jew-hater" is "an American hero" for attempting homicide justified on the grounds he was acting against "the world jewish conspiracy".

In this bizarro world of Rivero and Kaminski, what exactly would constitute anti-semitism if Von Brunn's views and actions don't?

And how come Von Brunn found his political home amongst the white supremacist far-right.......and is touted as a hero by Rivero and Kaminski for his homicidal attack on the Holocaust Museum.......yet Rivero can still himself avoid the labels of being anti-semitic, far-right and an ultra/white nationalist? How come Von Brunn was familiar and known to Eustace Mullins, Willis Carto's Liberty Lobby, Stromfront, VNN, etc etc - all far-right people and places which Rivero also promotes and whose anti-semitic conspiracy theories Rivero shares - and yet Rivero can still claim Von Brunn is an "american hero" whilst claiming he himself isn't any of the things Von Brunn stood for? How come?

I mean, what exactly is it that makes Von Brunn "an American hero" for Rivero and Kaminski if not the homicidal attack on what they believe is "the jewish world conspiracy"? And what is the notion of "a jewish/marxist world conspiracy" if not anti-semitic, racist, Hitlerite hogwash? How can Rivero etc call Von Brunn a hero and share his worldview yet still expect to somehow escape the charge of anti-semitism? He must think his readers are idiots........(they are?)

Laughably Rivero claims: will not find anything inside my site that talks about Jewish anything.


Saturday, 14 November 2009

Some info for Rivero - Dresden's Nazism

"Every year on February 13th and 14th, Germans commemorate the bombing of Dresden by the allied forces in 1945.

Usually there is an official memorial at the ‘Heidefriedhof’, a cemetery in the outskirts of Dresden. This year on February 13th , Dresden’s mayor Helga Orosz and Saxony’s prime minister Stanislaw Tillich spoke to the 200 mourners and laid a wreath in commemoration of the dead. Like in the years before, this event was also attended by several neo-Nazis, for example by members of the NPD, the main far right party, and of the neo-Nazi organisation HDJ.

In the evening of Friday February 13th, around 2500 people gathered around the ‘Frauenkirche’ (‘church of our lady’) – which was burned out during the bombing and collapsed – to remember the people who died during the bombing. Around the same time, around 1100 neo-Nazis marched through the city with torches.

Usually there is a major neo-Nazi demonstration to commemorate the bombing. This year on February 14th , about 6000 neo-Nazis – the highest number so far – from all over Europe came to march in Dresden. They listened to Wagner, symbolically laid down a wreath and carried placards saying: “allied bombing holocaust” and “historical truth brings intellectual freedom”. In their speeches they pointed out how the Allies “demolished an innocent city” and killed “hundreds of thousands of civilians”. In 2004 a commission of historians made clear that about 25000 people died during the bombings – far fewer than the number claimed by Nazi propaganda at the time and today’s neo-Nazis. It seemed necessary to highlight yet again how the city and its people were not that ‘innocent’: many of Dresden’s residents worked in war industries and the city was a communication and transportation hub.

A broad alliance of democratic institutions and individuals – among them the confederation of German trade unions and members of the Social Democratic, Green and Left Party- called ‘Geh Denken’ (‘Go think’) that engages against right-wing extremism in Dresden organised a counter-demonstration, which was attended by 7500 people. ‘Geh Denken’ opposes the ‘exploitation’ of the remembrance event by neo-Nazis, the “distortion of history” and wants to send a “democratic signal” against right-wing extremism."


But Rivero suggests nazi / anti-semitic graffiti at a synagogue in Dresden on the anniversary of Kristallnacht is "a hoax".

Monday, 9 November 2009

"HOAX!" says Rivero (about swaztikas daubed at Dresden synagogue on eve of Kristallnacht anniversary)

An article in the Jerusalem Post reports:
Police in the eastern German city of Dresden said a synagogue in the city has been defaced with swastikas and other far-right symbols.

Dresden police said the symbols were painted on an outer wall of the downtown Neue Synagoge.

There were no immediate suspects but state police are investigating.

The vandalism comes just ahead of the 71st anniversary Monday of the 1938 Nazi Kristallnacht - Night of Broken Glass - pogrom.
Rivero's response? It's a hoax!
Mike Rivero: How do we know this is another hoax? Aside from the prior long history of hoaxes...

On that logic, for Rivero, it's a hoax. Amazing. What a schmuck.

It's a hoax because.....there's been "a long history of other hoaxes"? Has there? More importantly, Kristallnacht was no hoax.....nor is the long history of anti-semitism, in Nazi Germany or elsewhere - though Kristallnacht holds a special place in the history of pogroms. There's no reason whatsoever to expect it to be "a hoax". (One perpetrated by joooos? Seriously?)

Rivero continues, somewhat obliquely and childishly, claiming
When you were a kid, playing Cowboys and Indians, or Cops and Robbers, did you WANT to be the Indian or the Robber? No, normal human instinct is to play at being the winners.

Well, big news flash here, the Nazis LOST and destroyed their country in the process. Nobody wants to be them. The so-called "American Nazis" are no more genuine than the "American Al Qaeda".

The Nazis are long gone, a relic of the last century. The recent survey taken of British school children shows that Hitler and the Nazis are not high in the public's awareness. Nobody but Israeli propagandists even think of them any more. Nobody wastes time with Swastikas any more but Israel's propagandists.
Is Rivero a first-class prick, or what? Does Rivero know Dresden very well? Does he know the situation vis a vis neo-nazism there?

And nobody wants to be Nazis? What about your friends, Herr Rivero?? They seem pretty keen. They do, after all, "waste their time" - and ours - with their Swaztika. As do you, Mr Rivero. Like when you sent your audience to a Swedish Neo-Nazi website, under the pretence that it was a Swedish rally for freespeech. It was in fact a Neo_nazi march in support of the holocaust denial of fascist-associated Ernst Zundel. "Swedes" hardly works to describe "SWEDISH NEO-NAZIS".

One of the comments left for Rivero's entry says:
If you planned to paint the synagogue anyway, what's a little primer in the shape of a nazi cross going to hurt?
Hilarious, no?

UPDATE: Rivero reported on the desecration of a grave (in Iran) of an Iranian protestor, shot dead in anti-government rallies in June 2009. Rivero's present support of Iran leads him to claim:
"If you can't identify and name the perps, you have absolutely no idea of who desecrated this grave, period, end of discussion."
For Rivero, some desecrations are different to others, obviously.

Saturday, 7 November 2009

Rivero and Fort Hood

Rivero's coverage is interesting.

Most recently he's linked to an Associated Press article. The AP article does not say what Rivero quotes.....what he quotes is ttaken from the comments.....which reproduce his own conspiracy view of the Fort Hood shootings.
Yesterday fellow soldiers tried to surprize the two consciencious objectors but the privates were prepared and killed 12 soldiers who tried to force their way into the privates' barracks at Fort Hood.
The link is given as:

and once clicked it says - "(Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)"

But the quote Rivero gave is from the comments, and the quote is totally at odds with what the AP article actually says. So what's the point of it? Just manipulation to make it seem AP said what Rivero does about Fort Hood shootings? Or is it just a way to repeat his conspiracy.....try to create a sense that it's a "popular" and reasonable view? Hmm.

I've been following Rivero's pronouncements on this story. Rivero feels the story is "a setup". Here's his explanation:
here is what I think happened.

I think that a GROUP of soldiers rebelled against further deployment. This is why we had early reports of multiple shooters, numbering up to 5.

But 5 soldiers shooting their officers signals mutiny in the ranks. It recalls the "fragging" of Vietnam days. It looks really bad to the citizenry. It could even spread to other soldiers and other bases where the military are stretched to the breaking point.

So, the DC boys look around and say, "Oh, we have this dead Muslim guy; we'll just blame it on him!" And presto-chango, five shooters pissed off with the wars becomes one conveniently dead [Jordanian - crossed out] Palestinian Muslim with possible links to Al Qaeda.

Only turns out Major Hasan isn't dead. Which creates a whole new problem the instant he gets off that ventilator at the hospital.

November 5th Rivero claimed:
This is a staged incident.

Rivero links to a Prisonplanet article, headlined:
Everything About Nidal Malik Hasan Screams “Patsy”

Interestingly, Rivero links to an article which argues against allowing this incident to be viewed in "a racist" way.
Nov 06 09:05
Fort Hood Shootings: Don't Let Racism Hide Truth


Back in May, an Army Sgt. stationed in Iraq and suffering from PTSD shot and killed five of his fellow soldiers. That man's name - John Russell - was Anglo Saxon. Nobody speculated on the role of his religion in the killing.
URUKnet. Hmmmm. But hold on? Religion is not a "race" what "racism" is there in religion? And what about all of Rivero's references to jews, the jewish, zionism, zionists?

Here is Rivero publishing an article the object of which is to suggest avoiding racism in dealing with the shooter at Fort Hood. a muslim asian? american....

Funny, considering Rivero's stance on jews etc. Usually for Rivero it's apparently the jewish religion responsible for jews' (always dreadful) behaviour......just as their race is responsible...just as zionism is responsible....all of it, whatever the occasion demands of his implacable opposition (prejudice).

A stark example of a gross double-standard.

Rivero says something else odd, too:
Remember the Gleiwitz Deception? The German Government killed a polish prisoner and left the body to be found to point the finger of blame at Poland.

Given how often the US government copies the Nazi playbook, I wonder if this Major is the sacrificial lamb to point the finger of blame at Muslims.
The Germans did not kill "A" prisoner at Gleiwitz. One would hardly have been convincing, would it? Plus there were 21 other operations involved in the deception. One prisoner killed? Come on Rivero? Get it right?
WRH/Mike Rivero: I repeat this reeks of being a setup.
Everything is a staged incident, according to Rivero. And it's all the fault of jews, of course.

Thursday, 5 November 2009

Something Socrates Likes, But Doesn't Know Yet (?)

Nikki Sudden and the Jacobites

Big Store

Where The Rivers End

Son of a French Nobleman

Who refuses to like that? I think it's brilliant. I'm guessing you like it, Socrates.....but maybe I'm wrong : I've never even been to Idaho....or Massachewsits.

Feel free to recommend stuff btw.

Something Welsh

This band are pretty much the band I wanted to be. They spent nearly 10 years on alternative circuit, but then had a Nirvana-like breakthrough, ironically enough, after one of their core members disappeared/committed suicide. I much prefer what is considered their more commercial stuff - it's much better produced, and the songs are much better. Like this one. (Watch it fullscreen!)

They're a very political band, left-wing, and somehow very Welsh (Almost exact contemporaries of mine.) They took a lot of stick over their support for Cuba, a song about Baby Elian, a tour that started (finished?) in Havana, etc. A pile of great tunes, which, somehow, I feel really reflect me, and the Wales I grew/grow up in. Their music makes me feel we have a lot of shared experience. For a while here in the UK they were massive - somehow I feel very proud of them. It's definitely not to everyone's taste though......and, as ever, I like their more commercial, well-produced stuff.

"The world is full of refugees,
just like you and just like me......."

Uncommon sentiment, sadly. But they made it an anthem of sorts.

Documentary - Schopenhauer on Love

I'm getting into Schopenhauer. I've never read any before, but I'm finding it really speaks to me. Video is a documentary on him - makes it very accessible.

I'll add the others in the series, as I enjoyed the Schopenhauer one so much......this next one is "Socrates - On Self-Confidence" :)

Epicurus on Happiness

Seneca on Anger

Montaigne on Self-Esteem

Nietzsche on Hardship

Tuesday, 3 November 2009

The Specials

Too Much Too Young


(Written about Coventry, apparently - somewhere I had lived a few years prior to this record's release, and its rise to No1. The video was actually filmed in London not Coventry, though it does give a great sense of the mood in BRitain heading into the pits of Thatcherite early 80s.

"It could be your job next!" --- that was a local landmark. It was stark-white graffiti, written on the last surviving wall of a demolished local steel plant.

It's strange how the demolition people left that wall there, even though the rest of the factory and plant had long ago been reduced to rubble. The mainline local train used to run past the last wall, with its solemn gaffiti warning. Nobody could escape reading "Thatcher was here......It could be your job next......" But still they left it there.

That train ride in the early 80s - Thatcher's Wales - was a trip through a "rust belt". Everything falling to pieces......rusting.....silent.... Grass growing across a dozen rusting train tracks.......and always that wall, with it's white-paint warning "IT COULD BE YOUR JOB NEXT"

A Message to You Rudy

I forgot this one:

I walk along this same old lonely street
Still trying to find, find a reason
Policeman comes and smacks me in the teeth
I don't complain, it's not my function

Nothing ever change, oh no
Nothing ever change

They're just living in a life without meaning
I walk and walk, do nothing
They're just playing in a life without thinking
They talk and talk, say nothing
I'm just living in a life without feeling
I walk and walk, I'm dreaming
I'm just living in a life without feeling
I talk and talk, say nothing
I'm just living in a life without meaning
I walk and walk, do nothing

Uptown Top Ranking - what is that?

Monday, 2 November 2009


1 in 5 mammal species on 'red list'

Many other species also endangered, while up to 70% of plants could be wiped out, say conservationists

Cash squeeze threatens
free nursery places

there are now warnings that not only will the state-run nurseries lose out but state funding could end up subsidising the profits of some privately run nurseries.

Bank sell-off may cost further £40bn

Alistair Darling will need to pour up to £40bn of taxpayers' money into the banking system if he is to fulfil a pledge to carve out three new banking players on the high street in the next four years.


1 in 5 mammals at threat whilst we are arguing over our own nurseries. 75% of plant life under threat?

"Free" nursery places? There's no such thing. Just like there's no "free" defence industry.

And wasn't it the argument in favour of private banks, and markets and all that, that they generated wealth? And yet substantial fractions of the anuual GDP is being borrowed to bail out the supposed engine of finance-capitalism. Along with financing the unemployment that goes along with all this, public debt is skyrocketing. The issue, then, is, who is going to pay for all this? That's the choice - and it's a class issue.

In the UK the Tories have already targeted welfare claimants. The poorest are going to be made to pay. Again. Because they were the ones whom gained the most out of the last 20 years' bubbles, right? And they're the ones responsible for macro-economic policy, right? They're the ones the Bank of England considers when it sets interest rates, right? So, of course they should be the ones to pay. They already have so much to give, anyway, right?

"Tax them til the pips squeak" doesn't even get there. The whole thing doesn't make sense. Children starve to death across much of the world. Others are fat and wealthy beyond measure. There is no lack of work to do, yet people are "unemployed". Doesn't make sense. "Efficiency gains" are generally bad news.....a real indictment of capitalism. (Though capitalism's barbarism does doubtless force a certain efficiency - like slavery would.)

Stalin and Hitler's workcamps seem to prove that despotism is less successful than even the least enlightened sort of libreral capitalism. Starving, dehumanised people simply cannot work very hard.

If certain conditions prevail, one could perhaps imagine the outcome. That's a fundamental part of science?

blah blah woof woof