Super-committee fails - shock!

The Guardian reports that "...the 12-member committee announced on Monday that after months of talks it was unable to bridge the deep ideological divide between Republicans and Democrats."

Who is surprised?

Republicans are concerned that the automatic cuts in military spending, amounting to $600bn over 10 years, will severely damage the Pentagon's ability to maintain national security.

The cuts in military spending will be matched by $600bn in domestic spending.

Defence secretary Leon Panetta has described the size of the military cuts as "devastating".

Two Republican senators, John McCain and Lindsey Graham, issued a joint statement saying: "As every military and civilian defence official has stated, these cuts represent a threat to the national security interests of the United States, and cannot be allowed to occur."
SOURCE

Substantial military cuts? Excellent!!

The deadlock on the supercommittee was blamed by the Democrats on a long-time Republican political lobbyist, Grover Norquist, who leads a campaign against tax rises. Norquist has persuaded Republican members of Congress over the years to sign pledges never to raise taxes. All six Republicans on the committee had done so.

If they had agreed to tax rises, they would be open to charges of reneging on the pledges they gave to Norquist, potentially damaging when they stand for re-election.

But the Repubs knew this when they decided on those 6 members of the committee? The answer was decided then, obviously.

So, no tax-rises but automatic spending cuts. Just what the 99% asked for? Well, some of them certainly did, not that you'd get that impression if you asked OWS......

But again, it's more evidence of how divided the nation is, how divided the people and their representatives are. Conspiracists like to make out that there's some great conspiracy subverting democracy and moving events to some predetermined end. But the reality is people cannot agree amongst themselves, neither can the representatives they elect. It isn't that everyone agrees on everything - rather people strongly disagree across the aisles, even though they're politically very close (there's no raving socialists in the Congress, for example).

The super committee came about because of an inability to agree over the budget, re the debt-ceiling (some wanted cuts, some opposed cuts). So it's no surprise the committee can't agree a few months later (and why should a committee of 12 decide it anyway?) 12 can't agree, 300 million can't agree. This is not evidence of a coherent 99%. Not at all - they are split, near 50-50.

Reductions in fuel-duty tax -- paid for by cuts in social security benefits

How despicable is that? There's the measure of your 99%!!! Cut fuel duty, and make people on benefits pay for it. The poorest are being made to suffer so as to subsidise travel costs of industry and commuters. Brilliant! How many on benefits have cars? Not many, obviously.

The very poorest are being made to make life more bearable for the many, rich and poor alike. Seems fair, right? It follows a campaign by Britain's best-selling newspaper, The Sun, which is read by working-class audiences whom one might presume to be most supportive of the 99% thing. But no.....

These are the people Occupy need speak to, not bankers and stockbrokers and 'the powers that be'.

Despicable. Let's see the outrage of the 99% now? Keep looking, I suspect.

I had previously asked how OWS (and the 99%) would respond to proposals to cut benefits. We shall see.

OWS/OLSX included in its first list of demands the abolition of the Royal Mayor of London! Laughable. Nobody gives a shit. Whereas Benefits cuts will effect millions of the very poorest and most vulnerable. Lets see some action?

Spain shifts right

Spain has elected the conservative right. After all those protests about cuts etc? Now they are in for even more. So much for the revolutionary 99%.

Spain has evicted the incumbents. Just as happened in UK. And whilst people protest cuts, they elect parties which will deliver even more stringent cuts.

BBC says:

Correspondents say many are angry with the Socialists for allowing the economy to deteriorate and then for introducing tough austerity measures.

So now they're going to get even more cuts? Err....K.

People are simply reacting against the ruling parties, and electing the opposition - regardless of the policy. This certainly doesn't speak of a major sea-change shift leftwards....certainly not towards some class-conscious revolution as OWS supporters seem to claim. Rather it speaks of the 99% not really knowing what to do, other than throw out the incumbent. People want change but not any particular ones. 'Socialists' are thrown out for conservatives, conservatives are thrown out for 'socialists'. Difficult to see that as a changed political landscape - rather it's reaction.

Greece had an election in 09, in which the socialists were elected over the incumbent conservatives (who were blamed for the crisis.) Now the socialists are being blamed for the ongoing crisis. We might say the same of America - Bush out, Obama in - with Obama suffering from the fallout and the ongoing crises.

But in Spain (and UK) 'socialists' were blamed for the crisis - as the incumbents - and were voted out in favour of conservatives.

Has it made any difference to the respective outcomes?

Clearly there's little reason to crudely blame either party exclusively because both parties have been in power in different places and all face similar problems. So electing the opposition in place of the incumbents is hardly likely to seriously address the issues.

I wish somewhere would at least have the nerve and audacity to try a seriously leftwing approach to the problem. Maybe we can look at Venezuela as an example, but it's an oil economy, and a developing one not a mature mixed economy like a major European state.

In ways it'd be most interesting if Ron Paul won in upcoming US elections (next year?). At least he'd finally be proven as ineffectual, or highly destructive, or - what would be a big shock - successful. At least it'd be something different instead of this ineffectual musical chairs thing.

Whilst supposed 'socialists' vie with 'conservatives' for power, we see there really isn't much difference in the policies, nor the outcomes. No-one is trying genuinely socialist or radical policies.

This is the roar of the 99%?

The 99% are the problem

All organisations and institutions must submit to democratic, parliamentary authority. That battle has already been won, generally, in the West at least.

The problem is the use the 99% put their vote to. Wall St must already submit to Congress - the London Stock Exchange must already submit to Parliament.

The problem is the electorate - not Wall St - not the London Stock Exchange.

Most of the voices claiming to speak for and with the authority of the 99% have nothing to offer - they have nothing to replace that which they seek a revolution to dispose. This is the height of stupidity.

I applaud the sentiments of OWS etc, but it's laughably vacuous imo. Abolish "greed"? Yes, sure. How? SILENCE.

Reduce inequality? Sure. HOW? Silence.

Oppose bank bailouts? Sure - and then we have no banks and the role they play in the economy is gone.....with the effect that....what? There's no economy? Nobody can borrow money to start a business? Great!

And what of the depositors? If the banks are allowed to fail, the depositors lose all their money. The depositors are the 99%. Did OWS forget, or do they not know?

Printing money costs nothing - and moderate inflation only hurts those with money saved: anyone on index-linked pensions, benefits and wages is safe. The wealthy with money hate inflation more than anyone else - debtors love it. Creditors hate inflation - debtors love it.

OWS speaks of public ignorance and self-interest imo. It's framed in rhetoric of concern and class solidarity but I think all that is a fraud. The public never much cared for class solidarity on the way up, only on the way down. Indeed, on the way up that was exactly what they threw overboard - I AM ALRIGHT JACK. Has everyone forgotten? It seems so.

Surprised? I'm not. I think OWS is full of shit. I'm sure lots of people really believe in what they're doing, but they're late to the party and we really need ask why. Well, they're upset because their "I'm alright Jack" paradigm isn't working, and so now they're asking for social/class solidarity. Oh right.....now you insist on it?

I'm appalled by the responses I have been getting from OWS supporters to my criticisms. I'd suspected OWS might be prone to fascism and the responses I have had are outrageously (verbally) violent and aggressive. Hardly dissuades me from my original position. It's grotesque.

Black smoke means cool fire? Rubbish

911 Troof has frequently claimed that black smoke in fires is evidence of a "cool" fire. FireEngineering.com say otherwise: they say the blacker smoke, the hotter the fire. They call energetic, dense black smoke "black fire" and say that it can reach temperatures of 1000F, that it causes damage to steel and that it should be treated 'like fire'.

In the UK there was a major fire at a oil storage depot - Buncefield. The fires produced highly energetic, dense black smoke. Nobody can say they were 'cool' fires (they melted the storage tanks). For example:

Troofers have been known to claim about 911 fires that

the smok [SIC] in the clip I posted is very BLACK smoke meaning the fires aren't as hot. Whiter smoke means a more hotter fire.

SOURCE

How can they be taken seriously? Here's another photo of an oil fire, in Pembrokeshire during WW2:

I think you can just about make out the black smoke, right?

The fire burned for three weeks and is the largest single seat fire in UK ever.It took 650 firemen to fight it. But according to 911 Troof, it wasn't a "hot" fire.

Sure.

FireEngineering.com have an article called 'THE ART OF READING SMOKE'. It says

"the more black the smoke, the hotter the smoke."

“Black fire” is a good phrase to describe smoke that is high-volume, turbulent velocity, ultradense, and black. Black fire is a sure sign of impending autoignition and flashover. In actuality, the phrase “black fire” is accurate-the smoke itself is doing all the destruction that flames would cause-charring, heat damage to steel, content destruction, and victim death. Black fire can reach temperatures of more than 1,000°F! Treat black fire just as actual flames.....
SOURCE

Oh, and oil-fires can't melt steel?

robertlindsay.wordpress.com on Curt Maynard

I don't know if I agree with this dude on racism, but there we go. It's here for the record - what Curt Maynard was.

-------------------

The other White Supremacist death is that of Curtis Maynard, another WN nutcase, just like Barrett. I had read Maynard’s blog a few times, and it was really over the top! Ranting, raving, screaming, yelling and racist as all get out. He struck me more as a raving nut as opposed to your often cool-headed White racist. It turns out, incredibly, that Maynard, like Barrett, was also sampling some interracial sexual forbidden fruit (What is it with these guys, anyway?)

His ex-wife was Hispanic. They had a big messy divorce and breakup, and the other day Maynard went over to her house with a shotgun and chased her around the yard. She hid, terrified, with her young child, in the bushes.

Maynard found her and shot her dead.

Then he ran to his truck and drove away. A neighbor came out with his rifle but decided it was too dangerous to engage Maynard. The police quickly caught up with him and pulled him over.

Maynard pulled out his shotgun and blasted a round in his skull.

The strange saga of Curt Maynard was over.

I must say I don’t understand these guys. If they hate non-Whites so much, why can’t they stop fucking them? Fucking’s about as intimate as you can get. If you as a White person want to screw non-Whites of your own, the opposite, or both sexes, by all means help yourself, but why be a White Separatist at the same time? Something tells me a lot of these WN types are just not right in the head.

It’s a common line these days, mostly promoted by anti-racist Jews after the Holocaust, that racism is some sort of a mental disorder, and racists are all mentally disturbed, if not stark raving nuts. They’re all portrayed as dysfunctional fuckups and societal outcasts. I doubt if this is true. It’s understandable the Jews want to get back at their enemies for what was done to them, but there’s no reason to lie. A lot of this stuff is coming out of the Frankfurt School in Germany, where Jewish sociologists recast anti-Semitism and racism as a mental illness.

The Old South was extremely racist, and much of the rest of the US was too. Racism against Indians, Blacks and others was simply normal. Even in most of this century, casual White racism was the norm. In Germany, an entire nation went over to wild racism during World War 2. The Arab and Muslim World is furiously anti-Semitic.

I seriously doubt that the majority of Southerners, Germans, Arabs or Muslims are mentally ill, dysfunctional societal fuckups and losers. Racism isn’t all that healthy, but a society seething with racism is not a society of the mentally ill losers, outcasts and fuckups. Forget it. Many people can be well-adjusted in spite of their virulent racism.

The reason so many WN”s are whacked-out mentally disturbed loons nowadays is that White Supremacism is proscribed, thanks to decades of hard work by us anti-racists. As a condemned and disparaged philosophy, most normal Whites will shy away from it, whether they have tendencies that way or not. A society of outcasts will tend to attract a lot of flaky people who are already on the margins of society in addition to more normal folks.

This is the reason there are so many kooks and whackjobs on the WN scene.
SOURCE

Banned from Big Dan's Little Fascist Blog - Again

So confident of their "Troofiness" are Big Dan and his side-kick-parrot, Plunger, that they can't stand the least criticism. When asked to stand up claims about the dancing Israelis and UMS being MOSSAD (claims made by their Fascist sources but which Dan, Plunger and 911 Troof repeat ad nauseum as FACT) they blathered various vague and inconsequential rubbish about Jews - even citing 1954 and such like. All the usual rubbish, but nothing to substantiate the claims of their fascist sources - AmericanFreePress and Chris Bollyn.

Big Dan's is yet another little fascist, conspiracy hole that purports to criticise fascism whilst promoting Fascist sources, Fascist views, Fascist news.

Big Dan's Little Fascist Blog links to former AFP writer Chris Bollyn under the heading, "Fighting Fascism". It includes a listing for Willis Carto's American Free Press under the heading "NEWS" and Mike Rivero's WhatReallyHappened appears under a heading of "THE BEST NEWS".

Big Dan defends his use of the Fascist Press on the grounds it is "more honest" than mainstream. Dan offered Bollyn's book on 911 (which scapegoats Jews, obviously) as evidence.

Anyway, after proving Bollyn, Big Dan and Plunger to be liars making claims based on nothing, they banned me, and deleted my comments. Again. The usual response of the Troofy wing of the Fascist party.



For some previous on 'Big Dan's Little Fascist Blog' - here.

Highlights include recommendation to read Hitler's Last Testament, so as to get the real lowdown on Jooos. Other sources include various Carto organs, Benjamin Freedman, Father Coughlin, William Luther Pierce....you know, the usual leftwing, liberal and anti-fascist stuff, right? Sure. Far-right dude! Errr, I mean "Far out!"