Wednesday, 28 September 2011

Rivero's hypocrisy.....again

Here's Rivero's 'Thought for the Day' - written by himself: about how borders are just 'lines on a map'.

Yes, sure, great sentiment. Nothing new to international socialism, but there we go.

However, here's a selection of Rivero's previous comments relating to immigration - what happened to his sentiment expressed in 'Thought for the Day'?

And those are just the 'immigration' stories Rivero has commented under the section 'Immigration/NAU'. There are many other articles promoted there, all anti-immigration, just Rivero hasn't directly commented. The articles wouldn't be promoted at WRH if Rivero didn't agree.


And of course, over Israel/Palestine Rivero's call for ignoring borders is in sharp contrast to his real views:
MR: Another claim that Israel likes to make is that Palestine never really existed to start with.

Again, maps tell a different story.
Oh, now those lines on the maps are suddenly very important. Right.....


Tuesday, 27 September 2011

Killing of an American Nazi

Killing of an American Nazi

By his 10 yr old son

Look at those idiots?

The Nazi killed by his son had previously stood for election in California - receiving 30% of the vote, so they claim. wow.

The photo-journalist who spent 12 months with the NationalSocialistMovement before the murder was Julie Platner, her website is here.



Seems he ran in an election for the local water board (whatever that is)

October 19, 2010|By Tony Barboza, Los Angeles Times
Political newcomer Jeff Hall has run a discreet campaign trying to unseat an incumbent on an obscure Riverside County water board. He hasn't posted any signs, didn't show up to a candidates forum and lists no occupation on the November ballot.

But Hall is well-known as a white supremacist.

Hall's bid for a seat on the board of directors of the Western Municipal Water District has drawn outcry from community groups dismayed that a neo-Nazi who has held racist rallies at a day laborer center and a synagogue wants to administer their water — or at least gain publicity in the quest to do so.

Running the water board? Ah well.

Hypocrisy that's hard to beat

a joint military offensive with Iran against their common enemy: Kurdish rebels......

Oh, so that's fine then. Clearly, Kurds aren't Palestinian or Arab so they don't matter. Or more likely, they aren't being attacked by Jews so they don't matter.

Sheesh. Rivero is disgusting. Is it credible to imagine that if Palestine was populated by Kurds Rivero would care as little about them as he does today? It isn't violence Rivero opposes - it's who does it that matters: if it's American or Israeli violence, it's bad whereas Turkish and Iranian violence is fine, apparently. Despicable.

Monday, 26 September 2011

Rivero's Idiocy

Well, ok, but what about the constitution of the following Islamic states?

Pakistan: Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Almighty Allah alone, and the authority to be exercised by the people of Pakistan within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust....Islam shall be the State religion of Pakistan

Iran: The form of government of Iran is that of an Islamic Republic, endorsed by the people of Iran on the basis of their longstanding belief in the sovereignty of truth and Qur'anic justice

Saudi Arabia: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic state with Islam as its religion; God's Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet, God's prayers and peace be upon him, are its constitution…

Sudan: Those working for the state and those in public life should worship God in their daily lives, for Muslims this is through observing the Holy Quran and the ways of the Prophet, and all people shall preserve the principles of religion and reflect this in their planning, laws, policies, and official work or duties

Malaysia: Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation

Indonesia: …the national independence of Indonesia shall be formulated into a constitution of the sovereign Republic of Indonesia which is based on the belief in the One and Only God…

Iraq: Islam is the religion of the State

Egypt: Islam is the Religion of the State. Arabic is its official language, and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia).

Jordan: The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan is an Independent sovereign Arab State…Islam is the religion of the State and Arabic is its official language.

Tunisia: Tunisia is a free State, independent and sovereign; its religion is the Islam, its language is Arabic, and its form is the Republic

Morocco: An Islamic and fully sovereign state whose official language is Arabic, the Kingdom of Morocco constitutes a part of the Great Arab Maghreb

Kuwait: Kuwait is an Arab State, independent and fully sovereign....The religion of the State is Islam…

Afghanistan: The Republic of Afghanistan is an independent, unitary and indivisible and Islamic State, having sovereignty over the whole of its territory…

Yemen: Islam is the religion of the state and Arabic is its official language

Syria: The religion of the President of the Republic has to be Islam....Islamic jurisprudence is a main source of legislation

Bahrain: Bahrain is an Arab Islamic State, independent and fully sovereign and its people are part of the Arab nation

Libya: The Libyan people are part of the Arab nation. Islam is the religion of the State and Arabic is its official Language.

Oman: The Sultanate of Oman is an independent, Arab, Islamic, fully sovereign state with Muscat as its capital

Bangladesh: The state religion of the Republic is Islam


Saturday, 24 September 2011

My Friday Night

I made a couple of tunes. Need some work, but not bad for a few hours.

Wednesday, 21 September 2011

Tax Rises and Class War

If tax-rises on the wealthy are class-war then it must follow that not having tax-rises are class-war on the poor.

Can't have it both ways.

And funny how class is only recognised when taxes for the the wealthy are mentioned. No such thing as class, apparently.....until taxes on the wealthy are considered....then it's suddenly class-war.

From 'The Economist' :
BARACK OBAMA'S proposal to raise tax rates on the rich has resulted in the usual ruckus. Republicans have declared class war. Mr Obama has replied: "This is not class warfare—it's math".
Remarkably the writer adds
Mr Obama claims to be on the side of the working and middle-classes, but I would submit that this sort of tax policy is in fact trivial. It's electoral public relations. The edges are precisely what this sort of thing is around. Our economy is riddled with a multitude of deeply-embedded structural flaws that allow the well-connected to enrich themselves at the expense of the rest of us, but nobody will do anything about it. There is a class war in this country, a war between the subsidy barons, the regulatory arbitrageurs, the patent monopolists and the rest of us. Mr Obama is a class warrior. The trouble is he's on the wrong side.
That may be so, but at least Obama is now exposing the Republicans' real interest and their commitment to class war (against the masses). It also puts the heat on The Tea Party and their ridiculous "No more taxes" line. Very smart, methinks.

From The Guardian:
With unemployment now at 9.1% and income inequality at record levels, the president is hoping to put pressure on Republicans who have staunchly rejected any tax increases and have called for deep cuts in government spending on the US's Medicare, Medicaid and social security programmes.
They add the usual statistics which the left has been banging on about for.....100s of years:
Last week the US census revealed that 46 million Americans – one in six – now live in poverty, the highest number ever.

• In 2010, the top 20% of Americans earned 49.4% of the nation's income. The top 1% account for 24% of all income.

• People who make money from investments pay far lower taxes than those who earn it from their wages.

• Last year Warren Buffett, who has a $50bn personal fortune, paid $6.9m in federal taxes – 17.4% of his taxable income. The other 20 people in his office paid between 33% and 41%.

Rivero Cunt -- Number 3655 in a long, long list

That's a very strange thing for Rivero to quote when Rivero insists the Holocaust never happened.

So what is he really saying? That several American companies dealt with IG Farben et al who were involved with Auschwitz.....which was afterall merely a factory which provided swimming pools for its 'staff' and which never did anything wrong at all, really? Yada yada.

Fuck off you cunt/.

And let's not forget some of Rivero's best chums and fellow travellers are Nazis. So what is he saying?

Wednesday, 14 September 2011

Larry jumps the shark - as they say

Larry aka RealTruthOnline has "jumped the shark" as they say.

For years, Larry (and all the other conspiracist twats) have been arguing that Al Qaida was really a false-front for American Imperialism. They said AQ was really the CIA, and everything it did was working to further American (elite) interests.

Now, however, Larry (along with many others - including Ron Paul) is arguing that Al Qaida and 911 shows that interventionist American foreign policy is a problem. They argue that "Get out of supporting Israel (and being the world's policeman) then there will be no Al Qaida attacks."

But if one is to believe that, and one accepts the conspiracy premises, it would mean the CIA and the "real power" behind America wants America to be non-interventionist. That's despite Larry and all the conspiracist crazies arguing that the supposed false-flag Al Qaida stuff is designed to get America TO intervene and that AQ exists merely to provide a justification for global intervention - the war on terror etc.

It doesn't make any sense. (Don't let that surprise you!)

Larry writes that Ron Paul said this (about interventionism) :
“As long as this country follows that idea, we’re going to be under a lot of danger. This whole idea that the whole Muslim world is responsible for this and they’re attacking us because we’re free and prosperous, that is just not true. Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda have been explicit, they have been explicit and they wrote and said that we attacked America because you had bases on our holy land in Saudi Arabia, you do not give Palestinians a fair treatment and you have been bombing…[crowd boos]…I didn’t say that, I’m trying to get you to understand what the motive was behind the bombing. At the same time, we had been bombing and killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis for 10 years. Would you be annoyed? If you’re not annoyed, there’s some problem.”
So Ron Paul is saying AQ attacked America because of its intervention in the Mid East, whatever. But people like Larry have been saying for 10 years that AQ is a false-front, and that their purpose (a la 911) is legitimising intervention in the Mid East etc.

You can't have it both ways.

If you are going to argue AQ is an extension of the CIA blah blah blah, and that it is designed to legitimise American intervention in the Middle East, legitimise American wars, legitimise Israeli wars for Israeli cannot then argue that AQ represents genuine Arab opinion and is caused by American interventionism.

If you are going to argue (as Ron Paul is doing) that the 911 attacks illustrate why the USA should not be involved abroad (especially the Mid East) - because it generates terrorism ---- you CANNOT then argue that AQ is a false-flag operation designed to enable American intervention in the Mid East etc.


Ron Paul is in deep shit over this. Or at least he should be.

All anyone has to do to finish Ron Paul is put it to him -

1) are AQ representing genuine muslim/MidEast issues with American interventionism/Imperialism - in which case we(USA) should withdraw if we want to avoid terrorism (the anti-interventionist line)


2) are AQ a false-flag, CIA-run organisation providing a justification for American intervention in MidEast etc (the usual conspiracist rendition of the situation)

It's quite amusing how much of RP's support rests upon both premises without ever seeing the dichotomy. A la Larry.

If one accepts the conspiracist angle, as so many Ron Paul supporters do, we can rewrite Ron Paul's speech like this:
The CIA (via their controlled asset, Al Qaida) are saying that ......"we attacked America because you had bases on holy land in Saudi Arabia, you do not give Palestinians a fair treatment and you have been bombing....and killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis for 10 years."
Does anybody believe that represents the real beliefs of those in the CIA? Does anybody think that is what the CIA is really about? Yet if the conspiracists are to be believed, and AQ is merely a CIA front, then that represents the real intent of the CIA - the real reason for the CIA running Al Qaida.

What complete (and self-evident) rubbish!!!

Ron Paul is playing it both ways. He is either taking the 911 Troofers for fools (why not?) or he is playing Joe Public as a fool. Either way, RP has dropped Troofers right in it.

Not that they will notice. Larry didn't.

Larry writes:
It turns out that Ron Paul is correct. In a 1998 interview conducted by ABC’s John Miller, Bin Laden said these words:

“The call to wage war against America was made because America has spear-headed the crusade against the Islamic nation, sending tens of thousands of its troops to the land of the two Holy Mosques over and above its meddling in its affairs and its politics, and its support of the oppressive, corrupt and tyrannical regime that is in control. These are the reasons behind the singling out of America as a target."
So, you see, if AQ is a CIA-run front organisation, then what the CIA and "the real power behind America" wants is.....a cessation of the war against Islam, cessation of meddling in the affairs of Islam, an end to support for oppressive, corrupt and tyrannical regimes. etc. haha. It's scarcely credible is it? Ron Paul is either trying to deceive the American public, or he's just crapped over the whole idea of AQ as a false-front, CIA entity. Troofers please take note? You can't have it both ways.

Tuesday, 13 September 2011

911 and a frenzy of conspiracy to commemorate the big 10

So, the 10th anniversary of the 911 attacks has been commemorated. As far as 911Troof is concerned that means a frenzy of reiterating the same old crap they've been churning out every day, month and year since it happened. Nice. Respect, huh?

I've been going through WhatReallyHappened's list of bullshit, and responding in my usual sceptical way and my comments have been deleted at an unprecedented rate.

It's quite funny to post scepticism at all these places only to have it deleted (and rubbished as the work of Mossad, of course. When do my cheques arrive for all this work, Mossad? Everyone says I'm due a payment.....and I could do with it thanks very much.)

Usually I'd document the instances of censorship, but really, what's the point? I'm tired of doing it, especially as it achieves nothing. This isn't an argument about evidence, though that's what Troofers like to claim it is. Material evidence doesn't impact upon faith - and that's what 911 Troof is really about - faith. The censorship undertaken by Troof is a material fact, aside from the facts of the matter regarding 911 itself, and that's why I have always tried to document it. But I'm tired of the whole thing. I'm still nevertheless fascinated by it. It's a socio-political phenomena, which transcends 911 conspiracy eg Hofstader's "Paranoid Style". I find it fascinating, especially as it informs my view of the rise of Nazism which previously I could never comprehend. Nazism was conspiracism, and its appeals are echoed throughout conspiracism, including 911 Troof. So, as stupid as it is, it is important, only not for the reasons Troofers and all the other kooks imagine.

I suspect this will probably be the last year that 911 Troof has any real significance as a popular meme. It's going to increasingly become part of the mythology of conspiracism, rather than an active political force by itself. Good riddance. Maybe we can move on to some real issues now?

The problem is, when Troof moves onto other issues (if it does) then it's going to be anti-semitism - the mother-lode of conspiracism. But at least with 911 forever increasingly passing into history, fascism's opportunity to exploit it will also be receding at the same pace.

Monday, 12 September 2011

WRH - Turkey - Drones - All cool

That passes without comment at WRH. So, Turkey wanting predator-drones stationed in Turkey to aid its war against Kurdish insurgency is.....fine. Need I point out the hypocrisy?

While we're at it, American-sponsored Turkish military equipment put to use against Israel is fine too, right? It's "criminal" when Israel is involved but perfectly fine when it's Turkey?

What's the explanation, if not anti-semitism?

Everywhere is war.....

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — Turkey's prime minister said Monday that Israel's raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla last year was "cause for war" but added that his country showed "patience" and refrained from taking any action.

Erdogan made the comments before departing for a visit to Egypt later on Monday, where he will seek to boost his government's already high standing in the Arab world — a position he has achieved in part by challenging Israel on the world stage.

Erdogan, intent on broadening Turkey's influence in the Middle East and the Arab world, will also visit Tunisia and Libya, two other countries where popular uprisings have ousted autocratic leaders.

Erdogan told Al-Jazeera television in a recent interview that the Israeli raid, which killed eight Turks and a Turkish American on board a Turkish ship trying to break Israel's naval blockade of Gaza, occurred in international waters and was "unlawful."

His comments were carried by Turkey's state-run Anatolia news agency late Sunday.

"It is a cause for war, but we decided to act in line with Turkey's grandeur and showed patience," Erdogan said.

An Israeli government spokesman was not immediately available for comment, but Israel insists its naval commandos acted in self-defense after being attacked by some of the activists.

Israel has expressed regret for the loss of lives aboard the flotilla and said Tuesday it was time for the two countries to restore their former close ties.

A U.N. report into the raid, released earlier this month, said Israel's naval blockade was legitimate but accused Israel of using "excessive and unreasonable" force in the raid.

Turkey has been angered over Israel's refusal to apologize for the raid.
In response, Turkey this month suspended its military ties with Israel, expelled top Israeli diplomats, pledged to campaign in support of the Palestinians' statehood bid and vowed to send the Turkish navy to escort Gaza-bound aid ships in the future.

On Monday, a Turkish newspaper, Sabah, said three navy ships have begun preparations ahead of their deployment in the east Mediterranean to escort ships that would carry aid to the Gaza Strip in the international waters of the Mediterranean. Turkey's military would not comment, and Turkey's Foreign Ministry said it had no information on any possible deployment. Sabah did not say when the ships would set sail.

Israel insists there is no need for aid to Gaza since it eased restrictions on imports through land crossings, labeling the flotillas political provocations.

Erdogan's visit to Egypt coincides with increasingly troubled ties between Cairo and Israel following an attack on the Israeli embassy there. Israel fears that it is being left increasingly isolated by the Arab Spring, which is changing the power dynamics in the region, alongside tense relations former ally Turkey.

Erdogan "will try to impress (the Arab) public opinion by giving messages clearly emphasizing Turkey's rift with Israel," said Mustafa Turkes of the Middle East Technical University's International Relations Department.

Of course, Rivero and other anti-semites cheer this. Along with Al Qaida, HAMAS, Nazism and every other opponent of Israel. What a motley crue.

People need wake up, before it's too late.

FBI documents on "5 dancing Israelis"

Someone has used FOIA to obtain the FBI documents for their investigation into the infamous "5 dancing Israelis" of 911, often supposed by conspiracists to be direct evidence of Israeli responsibility, an 'inside job', whatever.

The documents are available via a blogpost, here. The website is called, Zionism Stinks. At least they proclaim their bias, eh?

Read the entire document as I did (500 pages of forms) and one is left with the near-certainty that there's absolutely nothing to this story. Absolutely nothing.

The real story is how such a paucity of cause has led to 10 years of suspicion, and direct claims of Israeli-state involvement. Ridiculous.

I can only see the whole thing as an illustration of prejudice. How else to explain 10 years of claims about (Jewish/Israeli) conspiracy? The documents simply do not provide any justification for it.

People like Rivero use people like Ryan Dawson to make outrageous claims, all to serve an anti-semitic and conspiracist agenda. People like Ryan Dawson bleat that they aren't anti-semitic, yet they embrace and promote people such as Mike Rivero, and sources and audiences such as

The fact is, the far-right seek to discredit and undermine confidence in the democratic-liberal state, whilst simultaneously blaming Jews for it. They make use of whomever and whatever they can.

This "dancing Israeli" rubbish is just one vector for the process.

Of course "Israeli" doesn't quite strictly mean "Jew", but it's close enough for the anti-semite. That's the value of people like Ryan Dawson to Rivero - Dawson doesn't have to say "JEW", Rivero can say it, and each of their audiences understands what is meant anyway. Who doesn't? To illustrate:

Dawson writes explicitly that "911 was the Mossad." Attempting to innoculate himself from charges of anti-semitism, he adds: "Understand that Israel is not Jewish people OK please get that through your warped heads."

(Why does he think every reader's head is warped?)

So, 'Israel is not Jewish people'? Ok. But then what race and religion is he referring to here when he expounds on the real perps:
[Mossad]is not an Israeli intelligence agency per say it is a terrorist agency for the military industrial complex which feeds off of the hatred of the bigots and useful idiots concentrated in Israel. The US and Israel are not really different countries in a way. The US and Israeli agencies and their Neocon governments work for their own interests and those interests are guided by a racist, political ideology mixed up with a fascist version of a religion and Straussian philosophy.
Sorry, but the carefully avoided word there is "JEW" - in both the religious and ethnic senses. If they are guided by racism, then what race is meant if not Jew? And likewise the 'fascist religion' - what does that mean if not Judaism? It's disingenuous of Dawson to claim he doesn't target Jews or Judaism - he clearly does - but in a convoluted fashion.

This is how "dancing Israelis" becomes anti-semitism.

I noted previously how Dawson had turned the "dancing Israeli" story from myth and conjecture into solid fact. He claims:
"individuals were caught on 911 with explosives.....and worked for an intelligence agency of a foreign country that benefited from 911.....and lied about Anthrax, the war and everything that followed it..."
Mossad and Israel....which according to Dawson supposedly run America for their own interests - ie of the Jewish race and the Jewish religion.

The utility of this to the anti-semitic far-right is obvious and seems the most likely reason for Rivero's patronage and promotion of Dawson.

But check the actual FBI documents and there is absolutely no reason to imagine the 'dancing' Israelis were Mossad agents. They're a bunch of punks, at least one of which was found in possession of a hash bong-pipe (illegal). They were working for a boss who purposefully employed illegals so as to underpay them and to avoid payroll taxes - and whom one employee described to the FBI as "a crook". Another interviewee described one of the supposed perps as "a clown" and incapable of involvement in 911. Moreover, none of the photos the 'dancers' took showed the WTC before the first plane had hit. They, along with the rest of NewYork, only took an interest in the WTC after the first plane had hit and the building began burning/smoking.

The FBI (seemingly perfectly appropriately) concluded there was no reason whatsoever to imagine these people were involved and so handed jurisdiction to the INS (because of visa expiry issues) before their subsequent deportation. There seems to be absolutely nothing in any of it re 911, Mossad, inside-job, explosives, truck-bombs.......NOTHING.

Yet in the hands of 'the Real 911 Troof movement" - such as Dawson and Rivero - this non-story becomes the foundation of a vast anti-semitic tale of unchecked Israeli and Mossad subversion of America explaining everything from the Anthrax attacks to the banking crisis, the Iraq war and most everything else.

Even as Dawson claims he doesn't target Jews or Judaism, he clearly does. Moreover, his work (outrageous unsupported cconspiracism) is promoted by anti-semites such as Rivero, with Dawson's full consent and support. Dawson even stated he was 'happy to get the traffic' when David Duke promoted him.

When the ADL (accurately) criticise such people for using their outrageous unfounded claims to promote anti-semitic conspiracism, Dawson & Rivero et al just add the ADL to the conspiracy, and flat-out deny the charges (which they nevertheless feel a need to misrepresent rather than properly address).

911 conspiracy is the biggest lot of rot I have ever come across. It is no surprise that in 10 years 'the movement' has produced nothing of substance and has gained no traction, crackpots notwithstanding. What a waste of 10 years.

Sunday, 11 September 2011

ADL criticise Ryan Dawson

The ADL have criticised 911 Troof conspiracism, including Ryan Dawson, AKA Rys2Sense.

Dawson responded in an open letter thus:
It seems to me that the ADL wants to quickly paint questioning 911 as akin to racism in order to prevent investigation.
Dawson says this even though in his own most recent video he himself criticises the presence of Joooo obsessed Troofers in his 'movement' - including people promoting William Pierce's National Alliance and "jew this, jew that".

So Dawson's own video vindicates the general point of the ADL's criticism of 911 Troof.

But anyway, WhatReallyHappened linked to a website carrying the ADL's criticism of 911 Truth and Ryan Dawson. The website is called 'theinfounderground', the specific page is here.

Ryan Dawson's letter appears in a thread introduced as "ADL goes after Ryan Dawson and Mike Delany".

Folowwing the letter, there are some revealing responses. The first:
Fuck the ADL
We support our 2 friends

Word for Word truth from our 2 friends
Friends? Third response:
Yeah... I guess our buddies Mike D. and Ryan D. are "capturing" the younger generation to a degree...their Anti-Jew Scam videos on 9/11 must have hit a "magic" number... ADL Scam J'Tards always fear the next generation is going give them the boot!
Buddies? Their Anti-Jew Scam videos on 911?

This is right after Dawson's letter in which he is claiming his 'movement' is not anti-semitic, and that the ADL uses criticism of anti-semitism as a means to protect Israel!

Well, Dawson is either ignorant of his precious 'movement' or he is being dishonest about its (anti-semitic) character.

A later entry in the thread links another page elsewhere but which was also directly linked to from WhatReallyHappened. At this page the first lines read:
"Being labeled an "anti-Semite" is an honor these days. All it means is someone who is against the Jewish criminal gang that dominates the global power structure."
The old anti-semite as hero malarkey.

This was linked to from a site of which Ryan Dawson is a member - Dawson and the webmaster Mike Rivero seem pretty chummy, they've long been promoting each other, now they're calling themselves "the real truth movement" yada yada.

But Dawson isn't an anti-semite.....and his movement isn't either. So he says.

Well, what about linking direct to these clearly anti-semitic places and them treating Ryan Dawson as a friend and buddy? These people are yanking the chain on anti-semitism.......yet they consider Ryan 'anti-racist' Dawson a friend!


According to Dawson, himself and Rivero are 'the real Truth movement'.

Whilst Dawson is opining about how 911 Troof is not anti-semitic we have his ally Rivero linking to all sorts of crud and proving that it most certainly is anti-semitic.

And these people - Rivero and Dawson - are supposedly "allies"?

Hardly makes sense, does it?

Seems they say the same things, except Dawson denies anti-semitism whilst Rivero promotes it.

Rys2Sense - a slowly evolving consciousness?

Rys2Sense aka Ryan Dawson webmaster of has a new video. For once there's a novelty - at least a few minutes of genuine interest.

Somewhere in the middle of this video Ryan Dawson seems finally to be properly recognising some of the problems with Troofiness, anti-semitism and the far-right.

Nevertheless he immediately switches back to claiming Israel did 911, and Zionism this, and Zionism that, rah rah rah. But for a few moments he seems to be actually beginning to distinguish racism, anti-semitism and the presence of the far-right within what he calls "the movement" (911 Troof Movement). He even mentions people saying "jew this, jew that". (What about Zionist this, Zionist that? Doh!)

It will be interesting to see what sort of response he gets. I suspect he seriously underestimates the influence of fascism on 911 Troof and his audience. One example - he claims himself, Sibel Edmonds and Rivero are 'the real truth movement'.

It's quite astonishing for him to say such a thing considering his video and the criticism of racism in "the movement". Likewise when one sees him responding in the comments thread over at WhatReallyHappened, surrounded by obvious and blatant anti-semitism conjured for the purpose of Rivero.

What are the comments of a supposed 'anti-racist' like Ryan Dawson doing amongst the anti-semitism of WhatReallyHappened? Why does Dawson think Rivero attracts such people? Can't he see it? Can't he see how absurd it looks to be found amongst that crowd - saying what they do - at the same time he's criticising racism within 'the movement' in his video?

But not only has Ryan Dawson been amongst such people for years he even claims Rivero/WRH is "the real 911 Truth Movement".

Oh, so it must be just bad luck that Rivero attracts the audience he does. And it's just blind chance that Ryan Dawson is to be found amomgst them, sharing much of the same audience. It's got nothing to do with people actually digging the Jew-bashing.......? It's got nothing to do with the fact their content attracts the far-right, racists and anti-semites? Sure.

In the video Dawson relates some tale about getting a little too mixed-up with people into William Pierce. To his credit he disowns them. However, Dawson doesn't seem to quite understand the issue - how is it he is getting too close to such people in the first place? They're your audience Ryan......that's Rivero's audience, his friends and colleagues, his fellow-travellers. It isn't LUCK.

I mean, does he understand Rivero or even his own audience? Doesn't he read what Rivero writes? Doesn't he read the comments from his fellow WRH members? Doesn't he see the comments at YouTube and at his website when he posts stupid Holocaust denial videos? Does he not pick-up the far-right agenda and memes running throughout his own website forum?

Perhaps he's beginning to notice. I sense something a little changed in his consciousness and I can only imagine it will develop, especially now he's mentioning the problem. What will his audience say? How will his beloved Troof Movement respond? It can surely only confirm what appears to be his emerging, more conscious thoughts.

Here's the vid, dated Sept 10th, 2011:

It's worth comparing his position on the video with the article and comments he responded to at WRH on the same day. [Go to bottom of entry for Dawson and others' comments.] Example:
We know WHO did 9/11.

9/11 was jews.
9/11 was Israel.
9/11 was zionists.

How many rats have to carry the plague, before you start exterminating rats?

Anti-semitic? You betcha. If you're not anti-semitic, my question to you is; WHY NOT?
Ryan Dawson hasn't quite got his eyes open yet, has he? He's got a way to go.

I wonder how much of an audience he will have left if he continues pursuing these themes and developing his consciousness so. Interesting to watch what will happen.


Lots of things to complain about in the video. Taking just one - he says "individuals were caught on 911 with explosives.....and worked for an intelligence agency of a foreign country that benefited from 911.....and lied about Anthrax, the war and everything that followed it..."



But who was found with explosives? And did they work for Mossad, or some such? It isn't as simple as Ryan Dawson believes. Not at all.

Does he seriously think an operation to demolish the twin towers was setup just that morning? They only just finished rigging the demolition early that day hence they were driving around NYC in a van of explosives on 911.....? Seriously?

Anyway, here's an excellent page debunking this story.

Troofers and haters quote the original news sources from 911, but never the corrections which followed a few minutes later. The corrections added that contrary to earlier reports the trucks DID NOT contain explosives. Apart from that, there's nothing else to the story.

Dawson not only claims rumours from the day as fact (truck-bomb attack against Washington Bridge), he mixes up the story with another about "the 5 dancing Israelis". The 5 dancing Israelis suddenly become the truck-bombers......and as they simply must work for MOSSAD then for Dawson the whole story of 911, Anthrax and 'the wars' explains itself. Zionism!!! Dun Dun Dun!!! Surprised, right?

That's how these Troofers roll.......


Oh, and I can't comment directly on RyanDawson's YouTube video because I am still banned - he refuses to allow me to post. Troof.

The New Anti-semitism - WRH 2011 style

WRH's Rivero gives his whole game away early on:
So now comes the ADL once more screaming "Anti-Semitism" at anyone questioning the official story of 9-11, even if the question in particular does not involve Israel!
The simple fact is that anti-semitism need have nothing to do with Israel. The cynical anti-semite's favourite defence is to claim there's a real distinction between anti-semitism and anti-Zionism. Now Rivero's complaining the ADL mentions anti-semitism without anyone referencing Israel. Well, indeed, Mr Rivero - it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with it: anti-semitism exists aside from Israel.

That one sentence seriously undermines Rivero's entire spiel. But he uses it as his foundation. Rivero wants to attack Jews and the ADL (as defenders of Jews, presumably). He wants to pin the blame for 911 on Jews. It's done in a very particular way - it's propaganda. Screw me trying to analyse it...just look at it out of context a little. Here's Rivero's version of anti-semitism, as seen by the ADL:
Researcher: "Why did BBC report the collapse of World Trade Tower 7 twenty six minutes before it happened?"

But there's clearly nothing anti-semitic about simply mentioning that story by the BBC and nobody would ever complain there was.
Researcher: "How did the Secret Service know that President Bush was safe where he sat reading about pet goats?"

But there's clearly nothing anti-semitic about saying that and nobody would ever complain there was.
Researcher: "How could the hijacked planes fly over 8 United States Air Force bases without having a single warplane come up to intercept them?"

But there's clearly nothing anti-semitic about saying that and nobody would ever complain there was.
Researcher: "Who ordered the fighters from Andrews Air Force Base 180 miles out into the Atlantic making it impossible for them to intercept the aircraft headed for the Pentagon?"

But there's clearly nothing anti-semitic about saying that and nobody would ever complain there was.

I know this is getting boring already, but blame Rivero/WRH.
Researcher: "What order did Dick Cheney let stand, according to Norman Mineta?"

But there's clearly nothing anti-semitic about saying that.........
Researcher: "Why do load-bearing beams in the ruins of the World Trade Towers show clear signs of demolition charges?"

But there's clearly nothing anti-semitic about saying that.........
Researcher: "How can the wreckage from Flight 93 be spread out over 8 miles of countryside when the official story says the plane augered into the ground during a fight between the passengers and the hijackers?"


Researcher: "Why are the names of the accused hijackers not on the actual passenger manifests of the flights as issued by the airlines?"


Researcher: "Why do we hear explosions the moment building 7 starts to collapse?"

There's simply nothing explicitly anti-semitic about anything the "researcher" says. What is of anti-semitic nature is the inclusion of the spurious ADL responses, a purposeful misrepresentation of the position of anyone who protests the racism of anti-semitism.

This is the neuro-linguistic-programming method applied to anti-semitism? Rivero concludes:
You see what I mean. The ADL is acting like they have something to hide.
Only the ADL never complained about those things, rather that those saying such things are anti-semites who blame 911 (and everything else) on Jews.

The comments added by WRH readers are fascinating, if gruesome:
if you want to get technical about it, if you say the truth about history itself, you're bound to be anti-zioturd (which they conveniently morphed into a race which happens to be the race of their arch enemies, the palestineans and the syrians, i.e. the semites).

09/10/2011 - 15:28
one more time !
You see what I mean. The ADL is acting like they have something to hide.


09/10/2011 - 12:26
I was personally attacked in
I was personally attacked in the ADL hit piece the Jpost and Haaretz

09/02/2011 - 09:12
I am soooooooooooooooooooooo
Mike Rivero
I am soooooooooooooooooooooo jealous.

Michael Rivero
What Really Happened

09/02/2011 - 11:06
We'll never be allowed the truth about HOW they did 9/11...
But we know WHO did 9/11.

9/11 was jews.
9/11 was Israel.
9/11 was zionists.

How many rats have to carry the plague, before you start exterminating rats?

Anti-semitic? You betcha. If you're not anti-semitic, my question to you is; WHY NOT?

Even dogs are smart enough to be able to make the determination between being stumbled over and being kicked.

09/02/2011 - 09:03
Notice Rys2Sense responds in the comments? Rys2Sense is Dawson ..... Ryan Dawson

Dawson's the 'anti-racist' whom opposes Jewish self-determination even as he helps rehabilitate Nazism.

Click the links on the right somewhere.

How can Rys2Sense/Dawson seriously posture that he's anti-racist and anti-fascist when he's so involved with people speaking like that? Dumb.

How can Rivero posture that he isn't anti-semitic? Why does he bother? Oh....that's not hard to answer is it?

And so many of these people are blabbing about a spectre of fascism. Now that really is Orwellian.

Saturday, 10 September 2011

Turkey Threatens to Provoke War with Israel

Turkey has offered to escort all ships transporting aid and arms to any nation on earth. Oh, my's just those sailing for Gaza. This is a provocation, and if they go through with it, a prelude to war. Turkey would be better off securing aid for the PKK, but somehow that's not so urgent, apparently. But seeing as the Turks think aid so important one might expect they'd gladly accept a 'freedom flotilla' sailing with supplies for the PKK, right? Sure. It's just food....honest.

A little context about our 'humanitarian' hero, Turkey:

--According to human rights organisations since the beginning of the uprising 4,000 villages have been destroyed, in which between 380,000 and 1,000,000 Kurdish villagers have been forcibly evacuated from their homes. Some 5,000 Turks and 35,000 Kurds, including 18,000 civilians have been killed, 17,000 Kurds have disappeared and 119,000 Kurds have been imprisoned by Turkish authorities. According to the Humanitarian Law Project, 2,400 Kurdish villages were destroyed and 18,000 Kurds were executed, by the Turkish government. Other estimates have put the number of destroyed Kurdish villages at over 4,000. In total up to 3,000,000 people (mainly Kurds) have been displaced by the conflict, an estimated 1,000,000 of which are still internally displaced as of 2009.

More recently, from August 2011:

A sharp escalation in fighting between Turkey and the Kurdish separatist PKK over the past three weeks has bucked the trend of recent years that saw Turkey inching towards a peaceful solution to three decades of conflict with its restive Kurdish minority.

Fighter jets began bombing PKK positions in northern Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region on Wednesday, following a PKK ambush that killed eight Turkish soldiers. The Turkish military has lost some 40 soldiers this month to PKK attacks, and pro-government newspapers have begun entertaining a 'Sri Lankan model' - a massive military blitz akin to the one that destroyed Sri Lanka's Tamil Tiger insurgency at a cost of hundreds of lives, aimed at destroying the PKK in the Kurdish southeast and the northern Iraqi mountains.

Set sail oh flotilla of peace and plenty! No? Oh, ok then.....Kurds aren't fighting Jews, so what do they matter?

Wiki has a figure of 14,500 casualties (1948-2009) for the Israel/Palestine conflict - spanning 60 years, an average of approx 250 per year.

Whereas the Turkish/Kurdish conflict casualties are usually given in the region of 40,000. That's in less than 30 years, giving an average casualty rate of 1300 - 5 times higher than I/P.

But no-one cares about the Kurds and Turkey.....only Israel and Palestine.

We can raise the same issue for Sri Lanka and the Tamils - a far worse conflict than I/P but one which received very little coverage.

The United Nations released an estimate on the number of people killed in Sri Lanka's 27 year civil war: 80,000 to 100,000 people were killed in the war between the government and Tamil Tiger rebels. That's approx 3000 casualties per year - twelve times more than the I/P conflict.

Any concerns for Palestine and Palestinians which fail to address Kurdish or Tamil issues similarly are open to accusations of heavy bias against Jews. Else what's so special about Palestine? Making Palestine so important denigrates Tamil and Kurdish suffering, their separatist movements and their respective conflicts.

Any UN votes about Turkey coming up? Or Sri Lanka? No. Thought not. No Jews involved, so nobody cares.


Turkey 'to escort Gaza aid ships' amid row with Israel

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said his country will in future escort aid ships travelling to the Gaza Strip.

Speaking to Al Jazeera, Mr Erdogan also said Turkey had taken steps to prevent Israel unilaterally exploiting natural resources in the eastern Mediterranean.

He spoke amid a growing row over Israel's refusal to apologise for a deadly raid on an aid ship last year.

Turkey has already cut military ties and expelled Israel's ambassador.
It has also said it will challenge Israel's blockade of Gaza at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Relations between Turkey and Israel have worsened since Israeli forces boarded the Mavi Marmara aid ship in May last year as it was heading for Gaza. Nine Turkish activists were killed during the raid.

Israel has refused to apologise and said its troops acted in self-defence.
In his comments to Al-Jazeera, Mr Erdogan said Turkish warships were "authorised to protect our ships that carry humanitarian aid to Gaza".

"From now on, we will not let these ships to be attacked by Israel, as what happened with the Freedom Flotilla," he said, referring to the Mavi Marmara incident.
The BBC's Jonathan Head in Istanbul says Turkey's decision to increase its naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean - and not just to deter Israeli operations against Gaza activists - is a serious one.

Turkey is protesting against the exploration of gas reserves by the government of Cyprus, because it does not recognise the area as Cypriot territorial waters.
Israel has recognised them, and hopes to source future natural gas supplies there.
This could spark a conflict that mixes the current Turkish-Israeli friction with the 50-year-old dispute over Cyprus, our correspondent says.

"You know that Israel has begun to declare that it has the right to act in exclusive economic areas in the Mediterranean," said Mr Erdogan.

"You will see that it will not be the owner of this right, because Turkey, as a guarantor of the Turkish republic of north Cyprus, has taken steps in the area, and it will be decisive and holding fast to the right to monitor international waters in the east Mediterranean."

In response to Mr Erdogan's comments, Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor was quoted by Reuters news agency as saying: "This is a statement well-worth not commenting on."

Monday, 5 September 2011

Look familiar?

Game over?

These videos were in response to the Troofy argument that runs thus:
Then why do controlled demolition people take the time to rig a building if all they had to do was blow up a top portion and have it come hurling through the bottom portion of it?
The videos show that it's perfectly possible, indeed, they closely resemble the WTC collapses imo.

It's simply a physical fact a certain level of mass would smash even a reinforced WTC tower (or anything else) straight down to the ground, at a tiny fraction less then freefall.....given sufficient mass/momentum.

Sunday, 4 September 2011

Beacon Hill School - 'the Russell School'

"Do not train a child to learn by force or harshness; but direct them to it by what amuses their minds, so that you may be better able to discover with accuracy the peculiar bent of the genius of each."

I found what seems a good paper on Beacon Hill School, founded and ran by Dora (and Bertrand) Russell. The author is 'Deborah S. Gorham, Distinguished Research Professor', so likely it's pretty sound.

I've only read the first few pages so far, but it seems very good. I post it for anyone interested.....all those millions clamouring for more on Beacon Hill.....

Link to full paper here

Indirect Link

The Introduction

This essay examines Beacon Hill School, founded in 1927 by Bertrand and Dora Russell. I consider the roles of the school’s two founders and the significance of the school as an educational and social experiment, situating its history in the context of the development of progressive education and of modernist ideas about marriage and childrearing in the first half of the twentieth century. Although Bertrand Russell played a crucial role in founding Beacon Hill, it was primarily Dora Russell’s project, and it was exclusively hers from 1932 until the school ceased to exist in 1943.

For more than a century, progressive ideas about children, childFrearing and education have gone in and out of favour. In the 60s a “free school” movement flourished in North America and in Britain, and in Britain progressive ideas had a significant effect on the State school system.

Today, in contrast, progressive ideas are largely out of favour as school authorities and parents focus on achievement and worry about “attention deficit disorder” when little boys and girls cannot sit quietly in seats once again arranged in uniform rows.

Interest in progressive education was at its zenith in the early twentieth century. It flourished in Britain in the inter-war period, which saw the founding of the New Education Fellowship and the establishment of several well-known progressive schools, including A. S. Neill’s Summerhill and the Elmhirsts’ Dartington Hall. Beacon Hill School, the subject of this paper, founded in  by the eminent philosopher Bertrand Russell and his second wife Dora Black Russell, was one of the best
known of the inter-war British progressive schools.

In this paper I examine the role of the school’s two founders and the significance of Beacon Hill School as an educational and social experiment. I explore progressive and libertarian ideas about children and education, and I focus on a number of overlapping social and moral questions that were of importance to the Russells and others. These include modernist views about marriage and monogamy, sexuality, parenthood and feminism.

Beacon Hill opened in September 1927 full of promise. Its first location was Telegraph House on the South Downs, Sussex, near Petersfield, Hampshire. The Russells’ daughter Katharine Tait recalls the “200 acres of woods and valleys, with deer and rabbits and stoats and weasels and huge yew trees we could jump into from higher trees and absolutely magnificent beech trees for climbing … [t]he real freedom to learn, to roam, to experiment—it was incomparable.”

.....[T]he school was a success even during its last few years, when financial pressures and the exigencies of wartime forced Dora Russell to move Beacon Hill to its fifth and final home, Carn Voel, her own relatively modest family house near the village of Porthcurno, a few miles from Land’s End. One former pupil recently reminisced about his experiences at Beacon Hill in the 1940s:

One of my fondest memories is of the Natural History lessons with Dora, based on the study of that great tome ‘The Science of Life’ (by H. G. Wells, Julian Huxley & G. P. Wells). Dora encouraged us to question, to follow our curiosity … into all sorts of highways & byeways of phenomena of life; to speculate; to wonder … I remember sheer fascination and a sense of the infinity of the field of knowledge that was waiting to be explored.

David Correa-Hunt wrote those words more than 60 years after he and his sister Susan had been day pupils at Beacon Hill, and they stand as a tribute to Dora Russell’s success as an educator.

Tories - remove benefits from offenders

It makes sense on some some level - why should law-abiding taxpayers support people who are resorting to fraud and other crimes? But it's ridiculous and simply exacerbates the problem. I don't see how the British government can remove financial support from's supposed to be the minimum the law says one needs to live. And if you're going to take it away from people who are already causing problems......and make them destitute and totally impoverished by removing the bare minimum needs of life.....well....what's gonna happen? Nothing? Sure. No, they are going to go to jail, after causing a shitload more problems. That's obvious - and vicious. And it's no solution.

Hilarious to hear the Tories raising 'loafers on welfare' in the current jobs climate. 1980s remix. Horrible.

They want to remove benefits from people for 3 years. How do benefit claimants survive for 3 years with no income and no home? What are they supposed to do? If they're already rioting, who thinks 3 years with nothing will ease the grief? How stupid (and vicious) need one be to support it?


Benefit fraud - how extensive is it?

209 of the 6,300 people convicted of stealing public cash last year were locked up. Yet the equivalent figures for 1999-2000 were 445 jailed from 8,768.


6000 people? So they want to institute a vicious regime for everyone so as to deal with just 6000 cases.....that's madness. Why punish millions of claimants and people on the edge of extreme poverty by ratcheting up the level of oppression to deal with just 6000 offenders?

Meanwhile, in never-never land we hear
The Attorney General’s Annual Fraud Indicator report of January 2010 states that £30bn of fraudulent activity takes place each year in the UK, with benefit fraud accounting for just £1.1bn. Meanwhile tax fraud, which receives negligible coverage in the mainstream press, accounts for £15.2bn, just over half of the UK’s total fraud bill.
Personally I think most everyone in Britain undertakes fraud as a matter of routine. Most everywhere I have worked, at whatever level, everyone has been on the take to the extent they are able. And everyone criticises everyone else for doing it. One of those irregular verbs - I get perks, he takes the piss, they commit fraud.


Here's a picture of WTC collapsing. It shows a remarkable angle of tilt - the greatest of any of the pictures, I think.

Here's what that roughly translates to in diagram form:

Here's what would be necessary for the block to have toppled over:

Clearly such a condition was never reached.

Seems to me what Mackey said must be right (or what I understand Mackey to have said, rather.) As columns fail, the upper block rotates and falls one way, to which the intact structure resists, transferring the weight towards the other side. But the other side now has fewer columns to support the (greatly increased dynamic, falling load) and so they fail too, and the block falls and rotates again the other way.....and back and for....until the block is destroyed and the whole lot falls on the structure below, with level after level failing consecutively.....right to the ground.

I liked how someone summed it up - you can balance a brick on your head no problem perhaps, but lie down on the floor, and let someone drop it onto your head. You know there's a major difference - so much so you would never do it. The dynamic load is crucial.

Anyway, the upper block never got anywhere near toppling, so it fell.....down....not sideways.

So why all this stuff about how it should have toppled over? I thought so too, intuitively at first. But it surely isn't possible when you think about it....and it certainly never tilted enough to do so.

Saturday, 3 September 2011

Just to be clear......on neo-liberalism and Ron Paul

Neoliberalism is a label for the market-driven approach to economic and social policy based on neoclassical theories of economics *(see below) that stresses the efficiency of private enterprise, liberalized trade and relatively open markets, and therefore seeks to maximize the role of the private sector in determining the political and economic priorities of the state. The term is typically used by opponents of the policy and rarely by supporters

neoclassical theories of economics:
The term was originally introduced by Thorstein Veblen in 1900, in his Preconceptions of Economic Science, to distinguish marginalists in the tradition of Alfred Marshall from those in the Austrian School.

"No attempt will here be made even to pass a verdict on the relative claims of the recognized two or three main "schools" of theory, beyond the somewhat obvious finding that, for the purpose in hand, the so-called Austrian school is scarcely distinguishable from the neo-classical, unless it be in the different distribution of emphasis. The divergence between the modernized classical views, on the one hand, and the historical and Marxist schools, on the other hand, is wider, so much so, indeed, as to bar out a consideration of the postulates of the latter under the same head of inquiry with the former." - Veblen
So, according to Veblen, whom coined the phrase, the Austrian school is indistinguishable from neo-classical.

So neo-classical includes Austrian school (mises, hayek, rockwell etc) of which Ron Paul is a supposed fully subscribing member.

Therefore......Ron Paul as an Austrian is a neo-classicist, which crudely means a neo-liberal.

So why is he offered as a candidate against neo-liberalism? Because he isn't. At least not in any coherent way as expressed by his cheerleaders, such as Alex Jones and Mike Rivero.

Alex Jones publishes OpEd News.....attacking Bilderberg and 'neo-liberalism'

An interesting mix - Alex Jones who is a paid-up and active Ron Paul supporter publishes OpEdNews articles, a place which describes itself as "Liberal Progressive Tough". The OpEdNews article at Prisonplanet attacks privatisation of neo-liberalism, writing of the Trilateral Commission that:
Many of its members are also Bilderbergers with the same mutual interests for the development of globalization, the so-called economics of 'neo-liberalism' including wholesale privatization of anything that moves, the new world order and corporate capitalist totalitarianism.
Now there's clearly something amiss here.

OpEdNews claims to be 'progressive liberal and tough'. But its article has been published at Alex Jones' Prisonplanet. Nevermind that Jones thinks even traditional conservatives are socialists....? That Obama's a commie.....and that it's a bad thing. So what's he doing publishing a supposedly 'liberal' opinion piece? And what is a supposedly progressive opinion piece doing at Prisonplanet?

One would imagine from OpEd news that they'd like a far more progressive Presidency than Obama's. And yet their opinion piece can be published at ultra-conservative Alex Jones' Prisonplanet......

And criticising privatisation and neo-liberalism too? If Ron Paul stands for anything it is surely privatisation - he seeks to abolish taxation and the entire federal government welfare program.

Aside from Ron Paul's tactic of playing to American Nationalism he is basically inseparable from neo-liberalism.

Elsewhere Alex Jones (and Mike Rivero et al) attack Pinochet's Chile as neo-liberalism, as part of the Chicago Boys complaint.

Sure, but quite how Ron Paul is so different to what went into the Chile experiment is never explained. Because it is impossible to explain - Ron Paul supports all the things of the Chile experiment.

Ron Paul is a supporter of privatisation, and generally of what has come to crudely be called 'neo-liberalism' - liberalisation of markets, finance, labour, regulation etc. In principle he would fully support what is usually meant by 'neoliberalism', and he would support the measures undertaken in Pinochet's and The Chicago Boys' Chile.

So what are Alex Jones and Mike Rivero doing when criticising neo-liberalism and Chile whilst supporting Ron Paul? It's incoherent.

Again, here's INFOWARS this time:
Iceland Pushes Back Against Neolib Bankers
If they're going to criticise privatisation, why support Ron 'privatisation' Paul?

If they're going to criticise neo-liberalism, why support Ron uber-liberal Paul?

And likewise, if OpEd News are going to criticise those things, what on earth are they doing bringing in the Illuminati and Bilderberg? What on earth are they doing publishing things that Alex Jones sees fit to print? How 'progressive' can it be if Alex Jones will print it?

Really, they're all saying the same things......without a clue as to what they're really saying. Neither supposed 'progressive' nor supposed 'conservative' really understand their own position, else they would recognise their own contradiction.

So, they either don't understand what they're doing......and it's just a mess.....or they do understand what they're doing, and it's a controlled purposeful cross-message.

The original OpEdNews article is here.

It's authored by someone called Rory Winter whom has a blog "Chimes of Freedom - A Dissident's Take on the News that the Corporate Media Lie About".

The most recent entry is July, "France Says NATO Bombing Has Failed - By FRANKLIN LAMB". Yes, well......not surprised they haven't posted since. Nevermind reality, eh?

One of the blogs recent entries read thus:
Decentralized Global Rebellion against Neoliberal Economic Policies

In this edition of Press TV's On the Edge with Max Keiser, Max discusses the link between the worker's struggle in Wisconsin and the revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia with the journalist and blogger, David DeGraw.

DeGraw believes what we are seeing in Wisconsin, Egypt, Tunisia and all over the world is a decentralized global rebellion against neo-liberal global economic policies. He believes the Federal Reserve, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, the IMF and the World Bank are the constituents of this destructive force.
The post includes a ubiquitous PRESSTV (Iranian state media) report. (Conspiros always have PRESSTV or RussiaToday (RT) videos. Text is too much - it has to be a vid. And it has to come from Russia or Iran to be truly believable. lol)

THE WORKER'S STRUGGLE IN WISCONSIN EH??? Should be workers', no? But what a strange thing to see from someone published at Prisonplanet. The Workers' Struggle......sounds like......Lenin and Marx...not Prisonplanet...and certainly not Ron Paul (RP believes American workers are cosseted and overpaid.)

A few Truths for lying Troofers Pt1

Seeing as it's almost the anniversary of their cult......

Not freefall collapse, and not 'into their own footprint'.

The towers

The debris is freefalling. It is closer to the ground than the collapse zone - therefore the collapse zone could not have been at freefall. Note that the horizontal velocity of any debris has no effect of slowing freefall - it falls at freefall regardless of any horizontal speed.


A leaning collapse - therefore not symmetrical, not into it's own footprint and not at freefall. Else there could be no lean.
It's so self-evidently true that the collapses were not at freefall and not within their own footprint. It's now difficult to understand how the meme ever got started.

More here and here and here

Fisk, 911, Israel

Robert Fisk has written about 911 and Israel in an article headlined "For 10 years, we've lied to ourselves to avoid asking the one real question." Fisk believes the question "why?" has not been asked. He suggests it is has not been asked because to do so would undermine USA/Israeli relations. Not because he believes "Israel did it" but because the enemies of Israel did it, attacking USA because of its protection of its ally and client, recognition of which (so Fisk seems to believe) would drive USA away from Israel. Hence no "why" has been asked. Fisk writes
"The motivation for the attacks was "ducked" even by the official 9/11 report, say the authors. The commissioners had disagreed on this "issue" – cliché code word for "problem" – and its two most senior officials, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, were later to explain: "This was sensitive ground ...Commissioners who argued that al-Qa'ida was motivated by a religious ideology – and not by opposition to American policies – rejected mentioning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict... In their view, listing US support for Israel as a root cause of al-Qa'ida's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should reassess that policy." And there you have it.
The interesting thing about that is its mutually exclusive to the idea "Israel did it": if Israel's enemies did it to try to cleave apart USA and Israel, then it can't be said "Israel did it". And conversely, if it's said "Israel did it" (as so many of the conspiracist theories do) then it can't be said that American support for Israel was the cause.  (The implication also seems to be that if USA supported Israel even more, and attacked Islam/Arabs/Israel's enemies more, it would be safer.  Because attacking them doesn't breed terrorism.....not attacking them does.....apparently.)

 The upshot of all that - it is conspiracy theories which "lie to themselves to avoid asking the one real question". Conspiracy theory targeting Israel elevates Israeli/Jewish influence above that of real socio-political conditions and reaction in the Mid East and 'Islam'. It implicitly asserts the socio-political conditions are themselves incapable of generating such terrorism, at least amongst Arabs/Islam. (It also suggests Israel embraces it voluntarily as policy.)  It negates Al Qaida as a real force, and denies it has any real support - thereby denying the forces, conditions and history which generated Al Qaida (including Israel/Palestine).  (Whilst asserting supposed better conditions in Israel do generate terrorism.)

 Yet that isn't what the conspiracists actually say. Rather they litter their claims about 911 conspiracy with wider political issues, most notably Israel/Palestine... But consider, why would Israel do "it" and blame Al Qaida - an organisation known for attacking USA because of its support for Israel? Are they really suggesting Israel did it so as to undermine American support for Israel? That's obvious nonsense.

And if conditions in Palestine and the Arab-world are so bad, as the conspiracists keep complaining - and if all the blame lies on America and her support for Israel and tyrannical Arab regimes - why wouldn't those conditions produce terrorism against USA?  Likewise, if (as the conspiros claim) there's no such thing as AQ or Islamic terrorism, how can anyone claim things are really so bad in Gaza, Golan, Yemen, Afghan, whatever......

 Conspiros claim "It's war for Israel!" - that Israel manipulates the USA into attacking its enemies, like Iraq, for example. 9/11 was a singularly instrumental chapter in this, apparently. And Palestine is part of the reason too because Israel wants US support so it carried out 911 and blamed Arabs...guaranteeing American support of Israel and greater hostility towards her (arab/islamic) enemies. So the conpiracist narrative usually goes.

 But this makes no sense at all, if Fisk is right.

 For Fisk, it was American support of Israel (and wider social-political conditions) which produced Al Qaida.......but the conspiracists implicitly deny this by saying Al Qaida is "fake", it's a CIA/MOSSAD front, etc. If AQ is fake and is not motivated by Palestine and wider social conditions, then we don't have a problem with terrorism over Israel/Palestine or wider social conditions. So why do the conspiracists go on about it all the time if it really isn't anything to get bothered about? If the conditions are serious and unjust (as they claim) why do they deny that Al Qaida might be an expression of them?

If conditions are so bad, why shouldn't we expect them to generate terrorism and reaction?  Not so for conspiracism -  because the reaction is supposedly fake we can assume there is nothing to react to.  Else there would be genuine reaction, right?

Clearly the idea of an Israeli conspiracy obviates any discussion about support for Israel and the wider social conditions as causes of terrorism. [Even if it were agreed that support for Israel was generating terrorism, it wouldn't necessitate an end of such support. You don't stop doing something that's right simply because it is resisted by people who think it wrong.]

Friday, 2 September 2011

Thatcher / 80s / monetarism

A very brief but good look at Thatcher, early 80s.

And then the boom:

Yes, Minister


Monty Python's famous Larry sketch.

Thursday, 1 September 2011

Tories OK child-abuse

Ministers are scrapping a requirement for teachers to record instances when they use physical force, as part of a wider move to "restore adult authority" in the wake of the riots in England.

The education secretary, Michael Gove, said that he wanted greater numbers of men teaching, particularly in primary schools, so as to provide children with male authority figures who could display "both strength and sensitivity".

In a speech delivered at Durand academy, in Stockwell, south London, Gove said the regulations on the use of force inhibited teachers' judgment.

He said: "So let me be crystal clear, if any parent now hears a school say, 'sorry, we can't physically touch the students', then that school is wrong. Plain wrong. The rules of the game have changed."


Sure, they'd never say they are giving the OK to child abuse, but they make it more likely. And how are male teachers supposed to display "strength" (or sensitivity) in a fashion female teachers can't? Teaching is hardly the most machismo or physically demanding role, so what do they mean? Sounds like a lot of cock and bull to justify physical abuse, the rough manhandling of schoolchildren, an urge to return to the cane.....a short sharp shock. etc.

I think people make a big mistake when thinking about the past and how obedient and respectful people were. If they even were all that 'respectful'. I don't think that's a given. But even assuming they were, there are cultural changes which fashion the minds of youth in ways their antecedents never experience. People weren't more deferential (if they were) in medieval times simply because of the cat-o-nine-tails, or whatever. Rather, they lived in that culture, and they lacked a philosophical position like individualism from which to resist, and on which to rest their dissent. Likewise up until post-war some degree or another.....but since then popular culture has embraced ideas of liberation, individualism, even anarchism. To imagine that reintroducing the cane, for example, because it was used at a time of (supposed) greater deference for authority, and will therefore bring about the same deference once again, is to surely mistake the power of the cane, and underestimate the importance of wider culture and philosophy (even at level of popular culture).

The cane (and ANY punishment imo) are evil. And much of popular culture holds the same view, despite capital punishment also being popular (even, maybe especially, where it is outlawed). An interesting paradox, I think.

I like the sound of Bertrand Russell's school. Go to lessons if you want. If you don't, it's your loss.....

In Zen and Art of Motorcycle Maintenance the teacher (Phaedrus) stopped scoring homework, with interesting results.


I was interested what was on the web about the Russell school, and I came across Spartacus' telling of Russell's wife, Dora Black, Dora Russell. What an incredible life story.

Seems Russell's school is perhaps better described as Dora Black's school.

Anyway, Spartacus says:
Dora Black, the daughter of Frederick Black, a senior Civil servant, was born in London in 1894. Black held strong progressive views and believed that girls had the right to as good an education as boys. Dora responded well to her father's encouragement and won scholarships to Sutton High School and Girton College, Cambridge. At university she gained a first-class honours degree in modern languages.

Dora met Bertrand Russell in 1916 and soon afterwards he asked her to marry him. Dora's feminism involved a belief in sexual freedom and although she was willing to live with Bertrand, she rejected his proposal of marriage. Dora saw marriage as a restriction on women's liberty, and although Bertrand accepted her philosophical argument on the subject, he wanted a son and legitimate heir to the family title.

In the First World War Dora joined Russell's campaign against military conscription. After Russell was released from Brixton Prison in 1918 for his role in the struggle against the Military Service Act. Dora and Bertrand visited Russia and China together.

When they returned to England in 1921 Dora agreed to marry Bertrand Russell. After giving birth to her first child Dora became involved in the birth control movement. The 1923 Dora along with Maynard Keynes, paid for the legal costs to obtain the freedom of Guy Aldred and Rose Witcop after they had been found guilty of selling pamphlets on contraception. The following year, Dora, with the support of Katharine Glasier, Susan Lawrence, Margaret Bonfield, Dorothy Jewson and H. G. Wells founded the Workers' Birth Control Group. Dora also campaigned within the Labour Party for birth-control clinics but this was rejected as they feared losing the Roman Catholic vote.

Dora did a considerable amount of writing during this period. With Bertrand she wrote The Prospects of Industrial Civilization (1923) and two years later she published her book, Hypatia: Women and Knowledge. The book was severely attacked by people who disapproved of Dora's theories on sexual freedom for women.

In 1927 Dora and Bertrand Russell opened their own progressive boarding school, Beacon Hill, near Harting, West Sussex. The school reflected Bertrand's view that children should not be forced to follow a strictly academic curriculum. Other aspects of the school illustrated Dora's ideas on education. The school was run on the principle that freedom, if understood early enough, would result in maturity and self-discipline. Dora also emphasized co-operation rather than competition and believed that the best way to teach the benefits of democracy was to run the school on democratic lines. Dora's educational philosophy was expressed in her book In Defence of Children (1932).

Both Bertrand and Dora continued to have sexual relationships with other partners. This resulted in Dora having two children with the journalist, Griffin Barry. In 1935 Bertrand Russell left Dora for one of his students, Patricia Spence. When Barry returned to the United States, Dora continued to run Beacon Hill School on her own until the Second World War when she went to work for the Ministry of Information.

Dora was active in the peace movement after the war and in 1958 joined with Bertrand Russell, J. B. Priestley, Vera Brittain, Fenner Brockway, Victor Gollancz, Canon John Collins and Michael Foot to form the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). Later that year Dora organised the Women's Caravan of Peace and toured with it through much of Europe.

After retiring to Cornwall in 1962, Dora wrote Religion and the Machine Age (1982) and three volumes of autobiography, The Tamarisk Tree (1977, 1981, 1985).

Dora Russell died in 1986.

Bertrand Russell is often cited as one of the arch evils of the New World Order. That seems a vicious and poisonous accusation considering the brief biography of Dora alone. I've seen so many 'patriot' and conspiracist attacks on Russell. I'm a big fan of Bertrand Russell, and I know something of him - the attacks on him are crazily vicious and.....ignorant. I've seen Russell described as the most evil man on the planet (because he was called the cleverest man in England, presumably).

Russell is useful to the conspiracists because he links old British (English) aristocracy to modern liberalism and socialism.

Nevermind that Russell wrote an essay "Why I am not a communist". How much more clear need he make it? He didn't believe in Marx's historical materialism at all, and one thing Russell was good at was history, it seems to me.

Russell got Einstein onboard for CND (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) IIRC. He was jailed for pacifism in WW1, but a supporter of war against Nazism.

Wiki says "In 1950, Russell was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, "in recognition of his varied and significant writings in which he champions humanitarian ideals and freedom of thought.""

Well, that's where my interest in Russell came from, I think. His humanitarianism and freedom of thought. And his great liberalism. Strange then to see him so maligned amongst the American patriot/libertarian movement.

The school? This gives a little flavour. I didn't know it was W Sussex. Shame.

Beacon Hill School
Having children of their own and being dissatisfied with the existing educational methods Dora and Bertrand Russell became increasingly interested in the problems of the education of children. They became convinced that a fundamentally new approach to education, especially primary education was required.

With this in view they founded in 1927 Beacon Hill School at Telegraph House, Harting, Petersfield, Sussex, where they educated on progressive principles a small group of young children together with their own children. They hoped their school would lay the foundation for modern education by combining all that was best in available academic knowledge ( 75).

Religious education was excluded and science, history and politics were all treated on progressive lines. In addition to classes there were many activities, such as arts and crafts, plays and puppet shows and the care of the children's personal gardens and pets.

Discipline was minimal and free expression was encouraged. There was self-government by a council of adults and children, in which everyone had one vote.

The children were divided into three groups, called: 'bigs', 'middles' and 'smalls'.

Special attention was given to teaching methods, psychological theory and practice, nutrition and health.

After Bertrand Russell left the school in 1932, Dora Russell ran the school by herself. In 1934 Bertrand Russell wanted the school to vacate Telegraph House, which belonged to him after the death of his brother. The school was then moved to Boyles Court, South Weald, near Brentwood, Essex, and later in 1937 to Kingwell Hall, near Bath, Somerset, since the outbreak of war was thought likely. In 1940, when invasion threatened, the War Office requisitioned Kingwell Hall. No compensation was forthcoming and the school faced ruin. Dora Russell managed to carry on with a small group at her private home in Porthcurno, Cornwall, near Land's End until 1943, when she was forced to close down.

While Bertrand Russell was connected with the school he wrote popular books to keep the school going. After he had left, the school had recurring financial difficulties.
Her closest colleague in the later years of the school was Gordon (Pat) Grace, whom she married in 1940. He died in 1949. Along with A.S. Neill 'Summerhill' Beacon Hill School was the best known model reform school before the Second World War.

What an incredible woman.

Reality vs Patriot/Truther Conspiracism

I'll do this in reverse, for once.

Here are some of the facts of the matter (which took all of 10 minutes to find): Gibson Guitars have been raided under suspicion of trading in illegal wood. Again.

This from just one source of many:
Gibson Guitar under federal investigation for alleged use of illegal rainforest timber from Madagascar
November 19, 2009

Federal agents from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service raided Gibson Guitar's factory Tuesday afternoon, due to concerns that the company had been using illegally harvested wood from Madagascar, reports the Nashville Post.

No one from the company was arrested during the raid but agents seized boxes of guitars, wood, computers, and boxes of files. The Fish and Wildlife Service took action under the Lacey Act, which holds U.S. companies to environmental laws in the countries from where they source plant and wildlife products.

Madagascar's rainforests have been plundered in recent months for rosewood and ebony, the woods Gibson Guitar is accused of using. The illicit harvesting to hardwoods in Madagascar has occurred in the aftermath of a coup which disposed the island nation's president. Illegal logging has also been linked with the slaughter of endangered lemurs.

U.S. authorities have recently intensified customs monitoring and inspection of wood products from Madagascar to stem illegal trade.
So it's not the first time they have been investigated. This was the second time Gibson have been investigated for these offences. More on the previous investigation:
In September 2009, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported to a U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement agent the import of a shipment of Madagascar ebony wood at the port of Newark, N.J., from a Germany company called Nagel to Gibson Guitars.
Its import declaration package and invoices were for 5,200 pieces of sawn ebony and 2,133 pieces of sawn Madagascar black ebony, with a total value $76,437.
Gibson had placed the order via Nagel GMBH and Co KG of Hamburg, Germany, which exported the ebony through its affiliate Hunter Trading Corp. of Westport, Conn.
When the wood entered the U.S. en route to Gibson, it was missing the plant products declaration required by the Lacey Act. This looks like it's where Gibson got caught.
When the declaration was made a day later, it was listed as ebony harvested from Madagascar.
Madagascar has had rules in place restricting the harvest and export of ebony and rosewood since 2000. From what I've read, it does authorize some shipments of fallen timber. But mostly, that ebony is illegal timber.
Nagel has been Gibson's exclusive supplier of imported Madagascar ebony since 2006 and continued to import from it after the Lacey Act Amendments came into effect on May 22, 2008.
Nagel purchased the timber from its exclusive supplier of Madagascar timber, Roger Thunam, whose business dealt "almost exclusively in sawn wood or logs which at least as of 2006 were illegal to export from Madagascar," court documents said.
How much did Gibson know about this?
"[A] Gibson employee…wrote that '[t]he true Ebony species preferred by Gibson Musical Instruments is found only in Madagascar (Diospryos perrieri). This is a slow-growing tree species with very little conservation protection and supplies are considered to be highly threatened in its native environment due to over exploitation.' In fact, [he] 'spent two and a half weeks in Madagascar this June [2008],’ writing on his return, 'I represented our company along with two other guitar manufacturers.... All legal timber and wood exports are prohibited because of wide spread corruption and theft of valuable woods like rosewood and ebony.'"

The federal prosecutors say that while Gibson knew of the questionable timber, and even acknowledged it as such, the guitar-maker went ahead with buying ebony from Nagel, a supplier in Germany.

"Gibson sourced its unfinished ebony wood in the form of blanks (for use in the manufacture of fingerboards for Gibson guitars) from Nagel (in Germany), which obtained it exclusively from Roger Thunam (a supplier in Madagascar). Madagascar prohibits the harvest of ebony wood as well as the exportation of unfinished ebony wood."
Clearly a case to answer, on the face of it.

But let's look at how the Patriot/Conspiracist movement reports it?

Here's how the story appears at WhatReallyHappened, with a comment by Mike Rivero:
US Department of Justice orders Gibson Guitar to SEND JOBS OVERSEAS!!!!!!!!!
It seems that the Department of Justice wasn’t satisfied with merely raiding the law abiding factories of Gibson Guitar with armed agents, shutting down their operation costing them millions, and leaving the American company in the dark as to how to proceed without going out of business.

Now, according to CEO Henry Juszkiewicz, agents of the United States government are bluntly informing them that they’d be better off shipping their manufacturing labor overseas.

Mike Rivero: The government hands Trillions of YOUR dollars to Wall Street with the promise that somehow this will create manufacturing jobs for Americans, and then that same government orders a US company to send their jobs overseas?
The link leads to an article in which the CEO of Gibson is interviewed, claiming that:
The Gibson Guitar saga has taken a sinister turn. .... In an interview with KMJ AM’s “The Chris Daniel Show,” Juszkiewicz [Gibson] revealed some startling information.

CHRIS DANIEL: Mr. Juszkiewicz, did an agent of the US government suggest to you that your problems would go away if you used Madagascar labor instead of American labor?

HENRY JUSZKIEWICZ: They actually wrote that in a pleading.

CHRIS DANIEL: Excuse me?

HENRY JUSKIEWICZ: They actually wrote that it [sic] a pleading.

CHRIS DANIEL: That your problems would go away if you used Madagascar labor instead of our labor?


Sinister? It's ridiculous and senseless not sinister. And why say Gibson is "law-abiding"?

Isn't it easy to turn any story into some sinister extension of the police state? Rivero and co include this story so as to suggest just such a creeping Police State, and they thereby completely distort the import of it. Ha - illegally imported wood, from rainforests being plundered in wake of political turmoil and an ABSENCE of government and regulation. Not the point they'd ever seek to make.

The story is filed under "Dictatorship" at WRH.

So, what's Freedom mean then, if not to plunder Madagascar? Freedom is relief from laws preventing the plunder of wood from Madagascar. Right.