Monday, January 28, 2008

Have you Googled Today ? Found What You Needed?

SOTT Editors
Signs of the Times
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:47 EST

Google omitting from search results?

A few days ago one of our readers brought this curious detail to our attention. While searching for an article on Google, they discovered a problem with results from being consistently omitted from Google listings.

Our correspondent writes:

"I find just now that if you search any of the text in "quotes" from Henry See's 'Provoking Stupidity and Violence' piece on Hal Turner, Google brings back zero results from SOTT. The same text will be brought up from other sites carrying the story though.

So, say you grab the first few words from it: "Dave Neiwert at Orincus" and search it, according to Google it doesn't exist on SOTT!

But if you do the same with the title: "Provoking Stupidity and Violence", the article is there!

Other search engines do bring back the SOTT page though. Now how might that happen!?"

How indeed!

Well, our curiosity piqued, we thought it best to go have a look. Was it possible that original articles written by the SOTT team were being 'disappeared' by Google, the thread back to the author snipped? Well, lets see...

Agents, Witches and other omissions

First up is the article brought to our attention:

Provoking Stupidity and Violence: Hal Turner outed as Agent Provocateur

Click the images for larger view.

Sure enough, if you copy the first few words of the article - "Dave Neiwert at Orincus" - as a search term for Google, the above is what you get and no, no sign of SOTT in there. To find SOTT we had to click "repeat the search with the omitted results included" and dig for another five pages to find where the original article lay buried.

Now that might just be some quirk of the system, so to be fair we gave it another shot with this next article written around the same time:

Wars Pestilence and Witches

This time taking the key phrase "triggered by reading Victor Clube", something specific so as not to have results diluted by any possible returns from other articles. The result, one return!

So you're thinking, well that has to be SOTT right? Wrong! Click below to see the results, on the left is the solitary return from Google, on the right the "repeat the search with the omitted results included" results - where once again we find SOTT and the Laura-Knight-Jadczyk blog.

Well, maybe these articles are 'too new' and for some reason not yet picked up by Google as 'relevant' enough. Though how a copy of an article on a lone blog in the example above is more 'relevant' than the article's originating page would seem more than a little nonsensical.

So for good measure, here we have some 'not so new' examples, to see if time has made any difference (apparently not). As above, initial quoted text search results are on the left, Google's 'omitted' results to the right.

Ultra-terrestrials and 9-11

Transmarginal Inhibition

The Bushes and The Lost King

Seems is one site that Google does not want inquiring minds to visit!

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Sharing the Spotlight

It's time to redeem the word holocaust. It is not the exclusive provinence of one group of people. Evil, tragic events have happened throughout history to people and groups of people all over the world. The Turkish expulsion and starving of Armenians(1.5 million) in WWI qualifies imo. Stalin's manufactured famine in the Ukraine (2-3 million) The carpet bombing of Dresden (100,000 dead in under a week), dropping nuclear bombs in WWII (500,000 in two days, who knows how many from long-term radiation poisoning?). The horrible slow-motion crushing of the Palestinians by Israel in Gaza. Darfur. The tragedy below qualifies as a holocaust though it won't be labeled as such because the perpetrators currently hold the upper hand. But not forever. Evil will always collapse in on itself.

Blue Ibis
Operation Desert Slaughter - Thoughts on Holocaust Memorial Day

Felicity Arbuthnot
Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:31 EST

As I write, on Holocaust Memorial Day, it is impossible not to reflect that it does not take forced labour camps, forced transport and Zyclon B to create a holocaust. When the figures of the dead in Iraq, Afghanistan and Gaza, reach six million, as the world stands by, will they too get their own Holocaust Memorial Day? Will we all, regardless of colour or creed, ever learn, before it is too late?


It is seventeen years since America and Britain embarked on their 'Final Solution' for the population of Iraq. The forty two day carpet bombing, enjoined by thirty two other countries, against a country of just twenty five million souls, with a youthful, conscript army, with broadly half the population under sixteen, and no air force, was just the beginning of a United Nations led, global siege of near mediaeval ferocity. Having, as James Baker boasted they would, reduced 'Iraq to a pre-industrial age', the country was denied all normality : trade, aid, telecommunications, power, sanitation, water repairs, seeds, foods, pharmaceuticals, medical equipment.

As I write, seventeen years ago, Iraq would be entering the second week of a barbaric, near twenty four hour a day, carpet bombing, which, then, as now (lest we forget - yet again) scrupulously ignored Protocol 1, Additional to the Geneva Convention of 1977: 'It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensible to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestocks, drinking water installations and supplies such as irrigation works (denying them) to the civilian population or to the adverse Party ... for any motive.'

The blitzkrieg on Iraq deliberately targetted all 'indispensable to survival'. Within twenty four hours, most was destroyed. The electricity went off within two hours, leaving patients on life support machines and vital equipment, babies in incubators, or those on oxygen to die. Refrigerators defrosted, all medicine needing refrigeration, blood banks and vital saline solutions for the injured were destroyed. Food rotted and between the bombing and the bank closures (latter for fear of looting) replacements were scarce to unbuyable.

In Najav, seventy dialysis patients, 'old friends', said the senior nurse in charge of the unit, died for want of electricity. The water supply was deliberately destroyed, parts denied subsequently by the pathetic, US-UK dominated Sanctions Committee - a Committee without a backbone between them - and remains lethal to this day. The plan, by US Central Command, it seems, all along. (See: How the US deliberately destroyed Iraq's water. by Thomas J Nagy) The destruction of Iraq's water system has been described by Professor Nagy and Stephanie Miller as: 'a slow motion holocaust'. Few could have put it better.

The telecommunications tower was also one of the earliest casualties, an elegant, soaring, structure on the edge of Baghdad's Mansur district. It lay, broken and crumpled, as did the remains of those who worked inside it. Iraq was thus cut off from the world, the extent of the bombing and atrocities largely unknown for considerable time. Iraqis throughout the world had no way of knowing if their families, friends, loves, were dead or alive. Radio and television stations across Iraq were blitzed so no warnings to populus could be given (journalists too have special protection in wars, but decision makers, seemingly are not only illiterate, but ignore legalities.)

Hospitals, health clinics, schools and kindergartens were bombed, education eradicated so totally that the stores for educational materials, in buildings separate from the schools (usually in a central distribution point some miles away) were also bombed.

Agriculture in all forms was deliberately targetted. Chicken farms bombed, flocks of sheep and goats, broadly half of all buffalo were killed, dairy farms obliterated. Crops, food processing factories reduced to rubble. A war crime stupendous in its immensity, for which not one murderous, genocidal, infanticidal, decision maker or pilot has stood trial. Pharmaceutical factories were bombed, the medical syringe factory was destroyed. And in an especially psychotic policy, the countries who were Iraq's trading partners and had built factories and installations for the country, bombed those which they had built. America's gung-ho goons whoopeed over bombing the Pepsi and Coca Cola factories. 'Bravery' doesn't come more deviant, sub-normal and retarded than that.

Due to the use of defoliants and napalm, half of all Iraq's trees, including the great, ancient palms, died. Remaining palms did not bear their succulent fruit for about five years. In the tranquil, family farming settlements, amongst the palms, women and livestock alike aborted and often died. Survivors consistently described a 'vapour' coming from the 'planes, then the horrific aftermath, affecting those living in the shelter of the palm groves or copses of trees, where dwellers settled for relative cool from Iraq's searing summers. And,of course, in this decimation from above, which dropped more ordinance daily than was dropped daily in the second world war, five times more explosive power was dropped than on Hiroshima. The weapons used were depleted uranium, which continues to irradiate Iraq and the region, the people, flora and fauna - and will continue to do so for four and a half billion years.

' of the natural environment against widespread, long term and severe damage', is another absolute dictate under the Geneva Convention. It proscribes absolutely '... damage to the natural environment (prejucing) the health and survival of the population.' Contraventions don't come bigger than condemning inestimable generations yet unborn, to death and deformity.

The Nuremberg Principles are exercised by the treatment of both civilians and prisoners and the: '... murder or ill treatment ...of prisoners of war ... further, extermination ... and other inhuman acts against any civilian population'.

The 'inhuman acts', committed against the Iraqi people in 1991 constitute war crimes which, since no one was brought to justice, one can only hope haunt those responsible for all time. The slaughter on the Basra Road, after the ceasefire, the fleeing civilians and retreating troops, ripped to pieces, or incinerated in General Norman Schwartzkop's 'turkey shoot'. The whole war, of course, was nothing else. Saddam Hussein had offered, indeed, started to retreat from Kuwait before the carnage began, but as ever, for the United States, conciliation was 'too late'.

Buses, lorries, cars were also targeted throughout the forty two day massacre. Lorries carrying medicines, meat, essentials were burned, with their drivers.Western troops took their repulsive 'trophy photos', with the pathetic remains of the incinerated and dismembered. When the (UK) Observer, to its credit, printed the picture which became the symbol of the 1991 atrocities, the Iraqi soldier, with his near melted face welded to the windscreen of his vehicle, there was an outcry. The sensitivites of readers should not be exposed to such horrors.

Maggie O'Kane, writing in the Guardian Weekly (16th December 1995) describes searingly, reality. Relatives, praying, hope against hope, that those they loved, had somehow miraculously survived the hadean inferno that was the Basra Road massacre.

"On the day the war ended, at a bus station south of Baghdad, dusk was falling and the road was covered with weeping women. The Iraqi survivors of the 'turkey shoot' on the Basra Road were crawling home with fresh running wounds. Their women were throwing themselves at the battered minibuses and trucks, pulling, pleading, begging. 'Where is he, have you seen him ? Is he not with you ?' Some fell to their knees on the road when they heard the news. Others kept running from bus, to truck, to car, looking for their husbands, their sons or their lovers - the 37,000 Iraqi soldiers who would not come back. It went on all night and it was the most desperate and moving scene I have ever witnessed."

There was worse. Think of the excesses of horrors the Western media has deluged its readers with over the years, those perpetrated by people of other cultures, with other features: Stalin, Pol Pot, indeed Saddam Hussein and consider this in Maggie O'Kane's article:

'When Sergeant Joe Queen returned to his home town of Bryson City North California, after the Gulf war, the first thing he saw was a huge banner draped outside Hardees Burger Restaurant, which read: 'Welcome Home Joe Queen.' Joe Queen, who'd been awarded a bronze star, wanted to chill out after the war, but Bryson City wouldn't let him Joe, 19-years old, had gone straight from Desert Storm to become one of the first American troops to cross the Saudi border in an armoured bulldozer. His job was to bury the Iraqis alive in their trenches and then cover over the trenches real smooth so the rest of the Big Red One, as The First Armored Mechanized Brigade is called, could come nice and easy behind him.

'Joe Queen doesn't know how many Iraqi troops he buried alive on the front line. But five years later, in his military base in Georgia, he remembers well how it worked: 'The sand was so soft that once the blade hits the sand it just caves in right on the sides, so we never did go back and forth. So you are travelling at five, six, seven miles an hour just moving along the trench... You don't see him. You're up there in the half hatch and you know what you got to do. You did it so much you could close your eyes and do it... I don't think they had any idea because the look on their faces as we came through the berm was just a look of shock.

'While I was retreating, I saw some of the soldiers trying to surrender, but they were buried. There were two kinds of bulldozers, real ones, actual ones, and also they had tanks and they put something like a bulldozer blade in front of them. Some of the soldiers were walking towards the troops holding their arms up to surrender and the tanks moved in and killed them. They dug a hole in the ground and then they buried the soldiers and levelled it.'

One survivor described the friends buried alive, who he had laughed with, eaten with ...'I really don't know how to describe it. We were friends. I ate with some of them. I talked to some of them. I cannot express how I felt at that moment..... I saw one soldier and his body was just torn apart by a bulldozer. The upper part was on one side and the lower on the other side.'

I hope your nightmares and those of your colleagues haunt for all time Joe Queen. May the spectre of those for whose live burial you and your murderous colleagues were responsible, follow in all your footsteps, for all time.

These mass graves also carry the names of the leaders who ordered the decimation of Iraq in 1991,their military Commanders and soldiers, on every one of them. Ironically, the mass graves of Saddam Hussein have seemingly not materialised, just war graves and those from the uprising encouraged by the US and UK at the end of the 1991 decimation.

The war, of course, never ended. The thirteen year subsequent embargo cost maybe one and a quarter million lives. Additionally, the US and UK, bombed Iraq (illegally) until the (illegal) invasion of 2003. In 2002, they stepped up their destruction of life, limb and of entire housing projects with families within, children playing, doing homework, flocks of sheep and goats with their child shepherds.

'Approximately a year before the United States initiated Operation Southern Focus, as a change to its response strategy, by increasing the overall number of missions and selecting targets throughout the no-fly zones to disrupt the military command structure in Iraq. The weight of bombs dropped increased from none in March 2002 and 0.3 in April 2002 to between 8 and 14 tons per month in May-August, reaching a pre-war peak of 54.6 tons in September 2002.' (Courtesy Wikipedia.)

A recent study by the Centre for Public Integrity, has also uncovered lies of impeachable stature, leading to invasion, by the Bush Administration.. ' The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them, or had links to al Qaeda, or both.

'Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al Qaeda, the study found. That was second only to Powell's 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al Qaeda.' (link)

Iraq's post invasion (2003-2007) excess under five mortality has been estimated at over one million. In Afghanistan, post invasion, at 1.9 million (2001-2007.) For another humanitarian abomination of our time, the Israeli siege of the Gaza strip (June 2007 and ongoing)total excess death figures are elusive. CIA figures for infant mortality, however (2004) are woeful at 23.54 per thousand births. Sweden (2007) just 2.76 per thousand births. Given Israel's withdrawal of electricity and just about all needed to sustain life since last June, some serious statistical data is needed - and relentless and absolute demands for humanity and human rights for our global neighbours in Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan, the forgotten of Lebanon's 'Simmer Rain' decimation, by 'we the people ...' Like Joe Queen's genocidal actions, the atrocities committed in these countries are being carried out in our name. 'Silence is complicity'. (For much more shameful complicity - since 1950 - please see Dr Gideon Polya: 'Body Count', an academic, key and indispensable work.)

'There was no one left to kill', declared General Norman Schwartzkopf after the Basra Road bloodbath, where even the injured holding white flags, and doctors accompanying them were obliterated. 'Morally, we won', an Iraqi doctor told me shortly afterwards. Indeed. 'We are the new Jews', is an oft heard, Arab refrain now.

As I write, on Holocaust Memorial Day, it is impossible not to reflect that it does not take forced labour camps, forced transport and Zyclon B to create a holocaust. When the figures of the dead in Iraq, Afghanistan and Gaza, reach six million, as the world stands by, will they too get their own Holocaust Memorial Day? Will we all, regardless of colour or creed, ever learn, before it is too late?

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Yep, People are Crazier in the US: Symptoms on the Ground (pt 3)

Henry See
Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:11 EST


We have looked at the cycle of good times and bad times that affects nations and countries, known as the Hysteroidal Cycle. The cycle gets its name from the similarities between the psychological state known as hysteria that affects individuals and the psychological state of a society during the course of the hysteroidal cycle.

You have probably noticed that certain aspects of American society are becoming more and more hysterical. One of the most noticeable is the overreaction of police, using extreme measures for very ordinary incidents. Some of the following come to mind:

  • A woman from Iceland on a shopping trip to New York City is arrested and humiliated for a visa violation in 1995.

  • A man in a pizza place in Boston gets the SWAT team called in on him because he looked "jittery". Turns out he was executive director of Geneva-based U.N. Watch, Hillel Neuer.

  • Drivers are being tasered for taking too long to get out of their cars when stopped for traffic violations. One man was recently killed by a taser in Minnesota.

  • But that hasn't stopped people from having taser parties and they can now get a holster that doubles as a mp3 player.

  • A mother was shot and killed in her own home as she held her one year old child in her arms.

To a normal individual, that is, one who has not been infected by a pathology, any of these stories should provoke outrage. Unfortunately, they are often met with attempts at justification. All of them together are part of a horrifying trend towards ever greater and more open police brutality and use of extreme force, that is, force uncalled for by the situation. The trouble is, when police forces get the new "security" toys, they want to use them. And if someone dies after being tasered, it isn't the product's fault, because how could the police have known about the heart condition....

These events mirror the same hysteria we see in US foreign policy. Remember when French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin spoke out against the invasion of Iraq at the UN in 2003? Immediately everything French was ridiculed. French fries were renamed "Freedom Fries", and French wine was poured into the rivers. The French people were labeled "surrender monkeys". Such behavior is childish to the extreme, and yet it passed for a serious form of political expression among senators and congressmen and sycophantic talking heads on the television.

The fact that it was childish and ridiculous didn't matter. It was effective.

This behavior fits in to the hysteroidal cycle.

Let us look more closely at where the United States fits on this cycle. Andrew Łobaczewski wrote over twenty years ago:

[...] America, especially the U.S.A., has reached a nadir for the first time in its short history. Grey-haired Europeans living in the U.S. today [1984-ed.] are struck by the similarity between these phenomena and the ones dominating Europe at the times of their youth. The emotionalism dominating individual, collective and political life, as well as the subconscious selection and substitution of data in reasoning, are impoverishing the development of a psychological world view and leading to individual and national egotism. The mania for taking offense at the drop of a hat provokes constant retaliation, taking advantage of hyper-irritability and hypo-criticality on the part of others. This can be considered analogous to the European dueling mania of those times.

Think again of the media reaction to the French prior to the invasion, the illegal invasion, of Iraq. Can the reader step outside of the emotionally induced traumatism delivered at the time of 9/11and recognize the absurdity of these actions? What kind of a thinking process, if it can be called 'thought' at all, could result in such ridiculous notions taking hold? Might we suggest that such reactions are part of an "individual and national egotism"?

Łobaczewski points to the mechanism leading to this egotism: "emotionalism" and "the subconscious selection and substitution of data in reasoning". In other words, Americans are being whipped up into a form of hysteria by the media to a state where they are incapable of thinking clearly. Their emotions are so strong that they cling to what they wish to believe is true rather than accepting what is. We saw in an earlier article in this series that it is one of the traits of the psychopath to think that reality is whatever he or she declares it to be. What Łobaczewski is saying is that the psychopathic view of the world is being accepted by normal people, people who under different circumstance wouldn't think that way at all. Let's look at this in more detail.

The first step, emotionalism, should be clear. I am certain you can think of incidents in your own life, either at work, with friends, or at home in the family, where you were unable to think rationally for a period of time because you were too emotionally charged. The same effect holds true in the body politic.

The media whip up, yet again, emotions against the victim of the week, such as the French prior to the war in Iraq. The talking heads made jokes about WW2 and how French "surrender monkeys" were overrun so quickly by the Nazis. They arrogantly preened and strutted while insisting that without American help, France would still be under Nazi rule.

The point is, however, that the French were absolutely correct about the disaster that would become the invasion of Iraq. The French were thinking rationally. They were seeing the world as it was. There was no proof that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, just as today there is no proof whatsoever that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. The French were correct, and US leaders knew that the French were correct, and so they had to be attacked for other reasons, reasons that had nothing to do with the issue at hand. The French were probably also aware that the reasons given by Bush for the invasion were not the real reasons. It had nothing to do with freeing the Iraqis and everything to do with dismembering a country that Israel has long considered a threat. The real reason for going into Iraq was to split the country up into Kurdish, Sunni, and Shi'ite territories that would fight amongst themselves rather than stand united against Israel aggression in the area.

The phoney "terrorist" attack on 9/11 was another such emotional manipulation. The neocons in Washington along with their cohorts in Tel Aviv brought down the twin towers to deliver an emotional shock that permitted the population to be led into the fake "war on terror", the justification for the stripping away of constitutionally guaranteed rights and liberties of American citizens, not to mention the thousand humiliations every time you board a plane.

If the population hadn't been under such emotional stress, it would not have been so easy to do. Give them 9/11 and it was a piece of cake.

Subconscious substitution and selection of data comes in when the reality doesn't meet one's fanciful image of how things should be, so those parts that are too upsetting to one's world view are ignored and "data" supporting the cherished illusion are put in its place. Americans are loathe to imagine or admit that their country is not the freest, most democratic country with the highest standard of living in the world. They are loathe to admit that their leaders and their soldiers have engaged in crimes against humanity. It is too much for many Americans to even consider these ideas as a remote possibility. Their entire self-image would fall apart if they looked without their patriotic blinders at what their government was doing in the world in their name because those acts go against everything they believe the country stands for. They have identified so closely with this vision of America that admitting it is not true would entail some form of psychological breakdown.

Therefore, to prevent this breakdown, they are willing to accept the ludicrous story that there is a small group of crazed terrorists led by Osama bin Laden who hate them for no good reason and are trying to destroy America and the American way of life no matter where it may seek to flourish around the globe. They are willing to believe the decider-in-chief when he says that our rights and freedoms must be curtailed in order to have the tools to fight these savages. They don't fight fair, so neither can we. They use torture, and so must we. They are barbarians, so we must become barbarians to beat them.

But by becoming barbarians, we lose because we become the image of everything we claim we are fighting against. We become a police state, the country where the population is spied upon constantly, where the simple task of boarding a plane becomes an experience of trauma and humiliation, where being stopped by the police for speeding can finish in the spastic throes of "non-lethal" taser electrocution.

Stephen Lendman details the legislative measures that have been undertaken to remove our rights in two recent articles: "Institutionalized Spying on Americans", and "Police State America - A Look Back and Ahead". The list isn't pretty; it is downright frightening.

Let's return to Łobaczewski's analysis of the United States and the hysteroidal cycle:

America's psychological recession [caused by its emotionalism and subconscious selection and substitution of data in reasoning] drags in its wake an impaired socio-professional adaptation of this country's people, leading to a waste of human talent and an involution of societal structure. [...]

A highly talented individual in the USA finds it ever more difficult to fight his way through to self-realization and a socially creative position. Universities, politics, and businesses ever more frequently demonstrate a united front of relatively untalented persons and even incompetent persons. The word "overeducated" is heard more and more often. Such "overqualified" individuals finally hide out in some foundation laboratory where they are allowed to earn the Nobel prize as long as they do not do anything really useful. In the meantime, the country as whole suffers due to a deficit in the inspirational role of highly gifted individuals.

Remember, this was written over twenty years ago. If anything, the situation Łobaczewski describes has only gotten worse. The war on academia has deepened, as witnessed by Norman Finkelstein's rejected tenure application this past summer or the work of David Horowitz to harass liberal academics who question anything having to do with Israel. The image of the Ph.D. holder forced to drive a cab has become a cliché. The point is that the country is squandering the talents of its people. It can not make use of them, and in their place are quislings who put political loyalty before an objective scientific interest in truth.

As a result, America is stifling progress in all areas of life, from culture to technology and economics, not excluding political incompetence. When linked to other deficiencies, an egotist's incapability of understanding other people and nations leads to political error and the scapegoating of outsiders. Slamming the brakes on the evolution of political structures and social institutions increases both administrative inertia and discontent on the part of its victims.

The current 'debate' about immigration is certainly bringing out the "scapegoating of outsiders". This manipulation is perfectly understandable as so many Americans are struggling to pay the rent or the mortgage and feed their kids. It is easy to turn them against immigrants, illegal or otherwise. They want a scapegoat, and the media will give them one. What isn't discussed are the various internal and external reasons behind the influx of immigrants. The exploitation of Latin America over the decades since the end of WWII has led to the horrifying poverty in those countries. If the US had not overthrown the democratically elected governments in Latin America that were improving the lives of their people, if the US hadn't backed repressive military dictatorships or a corrupt single party in the case of Mexico, these people would be living their lives where they were born. They would not wish to leave to find the American Dream.

Yet when Americans themselves are being shut out of the American Dream, it is natural that they become hostile at "foreigners" who come and compete.

The lie is that the American Dream never existed, but we have been told so many times that "anyone could become President" that we accept it at face value. We accept the myth and mumble something about Abe Lincoln and the log cabin. We fall victim to the "subconscious substitution and selection of data" that props up our fairy tale vision of the United States. The horrible truth is that the myth of the American Dream serves to scapegoat the individual for his or her failure and ignores any structural factors. If someone doesn't succeed, it is entirely his or her own fault.

How convenient for those who profit from the system and from the failure of so many people to put the idea of the American Dream into question.

Łobaczewski continues.

We should realize that the most dramatic social difficulties and tensions occur at least ten years after the first observable indications of having emerged from a psychological crisis. Being a sequel, they also constitute a delayed reaction to the cause or are stimulated by the same psychological activation process. The time span for effective countermeasures is thus rather limited.

Remember that this diagnosis was delivered in the early 1980s. We are now twenty years on in the cycle. If the period for countermeasures is "rather limited", as Łobaczewski suggests, then have we gone too far to be able to enact them?

Łobaczewski suggested that, compared with Europe, the US was behind the curve of the hysteroidal cycle. He suggests that the US is now in the period of the cycle that compares with the period between the two wars in Europe. The first half of this century saw two world wars and the rise of fascist and communist authoritarian regimes. Today in the United States, we see the rise of a 21st century fascism with a distinctly American face. Obviously it doesn't look exactly like Hitler's Germany or Mussolini's Italy. Unfortunately, Mussolini's description of fascism as the merger of the corporations and the state is certainly a very accurate description of the situation in the US today. Not only does the US government follow the dictates of the corporate donors to their election funds and the lobbyists on Capital Hill, the government itself is being privatized and given away to those corporations. Look at the role of mercenaries in the Iraq war or in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. In the few short years of the Bush regime, an entire industry of security specialists under the guise of 'Homeland Security' has arisen to feed at the teat of public funding. The Constitution has been thrown aside. According to the president, it is only a piece of paper.

The one right and responsibility left to the American people is the right to shop, although even that is becoming more of a responsibility. You must go into debt to defend America.

And when the inevitable happens, when the house of cards, the illusion comes crashing down, you will be holding an empty sack. If the news from the first two weeks of the new year is any indication, the meltdown has already started. As we saw in the last article, you are being set up to be reprogrammed. You are being brainwashed. And the means they are using on you have been tested and perfected in Chile, in Brazil, in Iraq, in Palestine, anywhere the methods of shock and awe have been imposed upon the population. The crisis is being used to push you over the edge so that you will accept an overtly authoritarian leader, one who promises to restore law and order if only you make a few more necessary sacrifices....

These are the bad times, but as we have seen, they can also be a time when people are pushed by circumstances to look reality in the face and let fall the illusions that have kept them bound. People learn that the subconscious selection and substitution of data only makes things worse, and they become hungry for the truth. The truth that strikes home the most clearly, that throws the brightest light on the chasm between words and deeds, between our wishful thinking and the reality staring us in the face, is knowledge of psychological deviance. It is that knowledge that people seek out during bad times. We'll look at that in more detail next.

Sunday, January 20, 2008

Yep, People ARE Crazier in the US: The Whys (pt 2)

Henry See
Tue, 11 Dec 2007 07:29 EST

©Signs of the Times

In the previous article in this series, we introduced the concept of the hysteroidal cycle and saw that good times contain the seeds of bad times, while bad times invite people to return to analysis and critical thinking necessary to pull themselves out of the crisis. However, the insiders are also aware of the hysteroidal cycle. They are aware that certain shocks can serve to awaken people from their slumber, can provoke individuals onto the path for answers. To counter the positive aspect of bad times or periods of shocks, they have done vast research into how, when, and for how long shocks need to be administered in order to keep people submissive.

Naomi Klein documents how many countries in Latin America were subdued and then radically transformed through the application of disaster capitalism or The Shock Doctrine, as the title of her new book puts it, from Brazil under military dictatorship in the sixties, through the military coup that overthrew Allende in Chile on September 11, 1973, onto Argentina, Uruguay... you get the picture. The "free" market and military dictatorship go hand in hand because the only way that these countries' economies could be completely changed was through the application of continual and massive shocks to the population, including the wholesale murder of activists, union leaders, and health and welfare workers, rendering the people stunned and unable to protest and resist.

Furthermore, Klein draws parallels between the application of Friedman's free market ideas and experiments carried out by Dr Ewen Cameron at the Allen Institute in Montreal during the fifties and early sixties, experiments that became the basis for the 1963 CIA manual on torture and served as the handbook for the tyrants in Latin America. The two go hand-in-hand because people will not willingly accept such a radical transformation of their lives for the worse without a fight. So the fight must be kicked out of them.

And so a science of torture and human reprogramming was developed.

In the first four articles of this series, we looked at the players who are running the United States from the point of view of political ponerology. For convenience, we call them the insiders. We saw in the second article that this type of person was also found in our everyday lives. Then we took a look at the insider enablers, that is, the insider wannabes, those people in society who form the support base for power.

We noted that the core group of insiders suffer from different forms of pathological traits that are genetic in some individuals, due to accidents that affected the brain in others, and the result of societal influence in still others, or perhaps a mixture in some cases. Among the genetic deviants I include essential psychopaths. Those created by society are commonly known as sociopaths.

The wannabes have been infected by certain pathological forms of thought that leave them open to influence by the snake charmers in the first group. Rather than having developed their own capacity for critical thinking and analysis, the wannabes are lost in a sea of slogans and ready-made formulae taken from the mainstream media that they mindlessly repeat as explanations for everything. These solutions have no basis in reality.

Finally, we looked at the notion of reality itself and saw that psychopaths believe they can create reality by fiat; by merely declaring a thing to be so, they can call it into existence. We gave an example of this type of thinking from an insider at the Bush White House.

We are now looking at the social implications of the arrival of such types to positions of power. Last week I introduced the concept of the hysteroidal cycle. In this article, we will see that the pathocrats have been preparing a counter-offensive to the positive possibilities inherent in bad times.

But the studies into shock and its use to mold the minds of men does not start in Montreal in the fifties. Cameron was building on the work of Ivan Pavlov, the Russian psychologist known for his experiments with dogs.

Pavlov spent years looking into the question of stimulus and response and formulated a model that has frightening implications for us today. Pavlov studied how an organism reacted to stimuli, including, but not limited to, pain. He discovered that an organism's level of tolerance to various stimuli varied significantly depending on fundamental differences in temperament and defined four personality types. Each type reacts differently to stimuli and so the shocks need to be applied in different ways for each type. He commented "that the most basic inherited difference among people was how soon they reached this shutdown point and that the quick-to-shut-down have a fundamentally different type of nervous system."

Pavlov was interested in this shutdown point because it was only then, after the nervous system passed the ultraboundary, that people could be conditioned with new behaviors.

In other words, his research dealt with finding the ways and means, in scientific terms, of how to push organisms beyond their threshold of tolerance. This "ultraboundary" response that he called Transmarginal Inhibition was the brain's protective mechanism. When it occurred, it meant that the brain had no other means of avoiding physical damage due to fatigue and nervous stress. It could then be reprogrammed.

Pavlov was able to bring about what he called a "rupture in higher nervous activity" by utilizing four main types of imposed stresses.

  1. The first type of stress was simply an increase in the intensity of the signal to which the dog was initially conditioned. If this was gradually increased, at a certain point, when the signal was too strong for its system, the dog would begin to break down.

  2. The second way of achieving the ultraboundary event was to increase the time between the giving of the signal and the arrival of food. If a dog was conditioned to receive food five seconds after the warning signal, and this period was then prolonged, signs of restlessness and abnormal behavior would become evident in the less stable dogs. Pavlov discovered that the dog's brains revolted against any abnormally long waiting period while under stress. Breakdown would occur when the dog had to either exert very strong, or very prolonged, inhibition. (Human beings also find protracted waiting while under stress to be debilitating: worse than the event that produces the anxiety.)

  3. The third way of inducing a breakdown was to confuse the dogs by anomalies in the conditioning signal. If positive and negative signals were given one after the other, (yes, no, yes, no, etc), the hungry dog would become uncertain as to what would happen next and this disrupted the normal nerve stability. This is also true with human beings.

  4. The fourth way of inducing a breakdown in a dog was to destabilize the dog's physical condition in some way, either by subjecting it to long periods of work, inducing gastro-intestinal disorders, fever, disturbing the glandular balance, surgery, etc.

If, in any case, the first three methods would fail to induce a breakdown in a particular dog, it could be achieved by utilizing the same stresses that had failed after initiating the fourth protocol: physical destabilization. Pavlov also discovered that, after physical destabilization, a breakdown might occur even in temperamentally stable dogs and also that any new behavior pattern occurring afterward might become a fixed element of the dog's personality even long after recovery from the debilitating experience.

I mentioned in the previous article that most people have other concerns than a quest for the truth. In many cases, it is a simple struggle for putting food on the table. US workers are forced to work longer and longer hours. Whatever rights and benefits they have won in the past through strong unions are being taken from them. People are forced to drive longer distances to work, live in a constant climate of fear with "downsizing" and "offshoring" and the frenetic take overs that mean the elimination of whole departments in one fell swoop.

Think about this environment with the work of Pavlov in mind. It keeps people constantly in fear, continually on guard, constantly subject to stress, Pavlov's first form noted above. The population as a whole is being pushed beyond the ultraboundary, a mass case of transmarginal inhibition. And where does this lead? What is the result?

Mass brainwashing, or as it is termed in the Pavlovian literature, mass reconditioning.

The permanent state of stress is the softening up. The events of 9/11 were the massive shock. In the instant it took the two towers to fall, Americans were reprogrammed to view Arabs and Muslims as untrustworthy, devious, bloodthirsty, and potential terrorists. The neocon policy of the dismemberment of Iraq could never have been carried out without the shock of 9/11. With it, it was a piece of cake. People were demanding revenge and retribution.

The attack was followed by a long period of Pavlov's third type of shock: the rapid switching between yes and no as the infamous "terror alert" went up and down. People were being programmed to ask themselves, "When will the next attack come?", "Will it be me or my children?". That constant waiting with no actual follow-up attack can be likened to Pavlov's second type of stress. But lest the population tire of the constant pushing and pulling with never a bomb a bomb in sight and become oblivious to the stimuli, the bombings in Madrid and then London provided the necessary substitute shocks. Not only were people in the US potential targets of these madmen, but the Brits and the Spanish, and by extension, others in Europe, were also at risk.

Now let us bring this discussion back to the hysteroidal cycle, which, as we mentioned in the last article, gets its name from the psychological term of hysteria.

Pavlov demonstrated that when Transmarginal Inhibition began to take over a dog, a condition similar to hysteria in a human manifested. The applications of these findings to human psychology suggest that for a "conversion" to be effective, it is necessary to work on the subject's emotions until s/he reaches an abnormal condition of fear, anger or exaltation. If such a state is maintained or intensified by any of various means, hysteria is the result. In a state of hysteria, a human being is abnormally suggestible and influences in the environment can cause one set of behavior patterns to be replaced by another without any need for persuasive indoctrination. In states of fear and excitement, normally sensible human beings will accept the most wildly improbable suggestions, such as:

"They hate us for our freedoms."

"We are bringing democracy to Iraq."

Or the idea that it is tyranny when Hugo Chavez seeks the possibility to be freely elected president of Venezuela for a third term, while it is the flourishing of democracy when the Bush and Clinton families install a rotating presidency.

I suggest that we are in a situation where a battle for the American mind is being fought. The insiders, the pathological deviants in power, are using Pavlovian methods, which amount to a form of torture, on the American people. Although they deny that they use torture, only forceful interrogation techniques to make the "terrorists" talk, the widespread dissemination of the photos from Abu Ghraib and the continued discussion on its use implants in your minds the knowledge that it is being used and that you might be the next victim... if you are "unpatriotic" and do not "support the president". The fight is being stepped up because the insiders are aware that "bad" times also create the potential for people to wake up and begin to ask questions. Their goal is to put us in a state of transmarginal inhibition in order to reprogramme us before that can happen.

Our goal is to wake people up before it is too late.

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Yep, People ARE Crazier in the US (pt 1)

Henry See
Mon, 03 Dec 2007 22:41 EST


In the first four articles of this series, we looked at the players who are running the United States from the point of view of political ponerology. For convenience, we call them the insiders. We saw in the second article that this type of person was also found in our everyday lives. Then we took a look at the insider enablers, that is, the insider wannabes, those people in society who form the support base for power.

We noted that the core group of insiders suffer from different forms of pathological traits that are genetic in some individuals, due to accidents that affected the brain in others, and the result of societal influence in still others, or perhaps a mixture in some cases. Among the genetic deviants I include essential psychopaths. Those created by society are commonly known as sociopaths.

The wannabes have been infected by certain pathological forms of thought that leave them open to influence by the snake charmers in the first group. Rather than having developed their own capacity for critical thinking and analysis, the wannabes are lost in a sea of slogans and ready-made formulae taken from the mainstream media that they mindlessly repeat as explanations for everything. These solutions have no basis in reality.

Finally, we looked at the notion of reality itself and saw that psychopaths believe they can create reality by fiat; by merely declaring a thing to be so, they can call it into existence. We gave an example of this type of thinking from an insider at the Bush White House.

We will now begin looking at the social implications of the arrival of such types to positions of power. We will step back from the individuals and look at society as a whole.

A society can be the custodian of a vast quantity of knowledge, but if that knowledge is not spread out, held, and utilized by the entire population, it can do little good. It remains theoretical and is not applied. If the knowledge remains concentrated in the hands of the few, it has the same consequences as the concentration of money, resources, or business ownership in the hands of a few. It becomes a lever of power and oppression, not freedom and justice. A monopoly of knowledge is created.

Such is the situation in the United States today. A small few have real knowledge of what is going on in the world. The others are fed a diet of lies, half-truths, and wishful thinking.

Look at the news delivered via the mainstream media. The American people are told nothing but lies about the actual situation in Iraq, from the true numbers of US soldiers and Iraqi citizens killed and wounded to the long-term goal of the US occupation. We are also told lies about our history and the history of the world. Unfortunately, too many people are not interested in the truth. They have other concerns, and as long as they are unable to see the the effects of these lies on their own lives, they won't change. They won't be able to make such connections until their own daily lives are disrupted in some way, preventing them from carrying on as they are. Then the people, the outsiders, will start to ask questions.

Some observers have suggested that societies and countries, like the individuals that make them up, pass in cycles from good times to bad times and back again. They have called this pattern of change the hysteroidal cycle, from the psychological definition of hysteria: a psychological state of uncontrollable fear or exaggerated excitability. Here it is being used to describe "fear of truth" or fear of thinking about unpleasant things so as to not "rock the boat" of current contentment.

When a country is in a period of "good times", the search for truth, especially the unpleasant ones, makes people uncomfortable because it asks them to give up their comforts, hard-won after a period of crisis. Rather than peer under the surface of the illusion, people want to relax and think only about pleasant things. They begin to eliminate unpleasant data from their thinking, and, before long, it has become a habit. The trouble is, thought process based upon such limited information cannot be correct. They can only produce correct conclusions by accident. Unfortunately, because the pathologized thinking process has become internalized, ever more convenient premises must be substituted to patch over the errors in thinking.

After the Second World War, Americans benefited from a long period of economic growth. The fruits were more evenly distributed than they are today. Real incomes rose. Jobs were much more secure, on the whole, than today. The fact is, however, that this growth was based upon the exploitation of the US's new economic colonies. American's benefited at the expense of people elsewhere. However, to point out this fact at the time was to invite accusations of being a communist. During good times, people don't want bad news, even if it is true.

Another example of this is the view of Arabs and Muslims propagated in the US media. The US has a blatantly one-sided approach in the Middle East that comes down to: Israel can do no wrong; the Arabs can do no right. The only way this lie can be sold is to portray the Arabs as more and more bloodthirsty and bestial, all for no reason at all, simply because "They hate our freedoms", as Bush Jr. put it.

The actual atrocities committed against Arabs are hidden, swept away, and eliminated from our thinking in order to make the victims appear crazed and inhuman and deserving of abuse, violence, and even genocide. They are portrayed as if they are calling it upon themselves rather than reacting to injustices committed against them.

During bad times, on the contrary, faced with mounting difficulties, unable to continue to live in the old ways, people are open to new ideas in their search for solutions to current problems. People are more willing to look problems in the face and to accept unpleasant truths about themselves and their country because the falsity of the old ideas has been made apparent. The old ideas have run into the wall of reality and have been cracked or shattered.

Here is how psychologist Andrew Łobaczewski describes the process:

During "good" times, the search for truth becomes uncomfortable because it reveals inconvenient factors. It is better to think about easier and more pleasant things. Unconscious elimination of data which are, or appear to be, inexpedient gradually turns into habit, and then becomes a custom accepted by society at large. The problem is that any thought process based on such truncated information cannot possibly give rise to correct conclusions; it further leads to subconscious substitution of inconvenient premises by more convenient ones, thereby approaching the boundaries of psychopathology.

Such contented periods, which are often rooted in some injustice to other people or nations, start to strangle the capacity for individual and societal consciousness; subconscious factors take over a decisive role in life. Such a society, already infected by the hysteroidal state, considers any perception of uncomfortable truth to be a sign of "ill-breeding"... In such times, the capacity for logical and disciplined thought, born of necessity during difficult times, begins to fade. When communities lose the capacity for psychological reason and moral criticism, the processes of generation of evil are intensified at every social scale, whether individual or macrosocial, until they revert to "bad times"...

When a few generations worth of "good-time" insouciance results in societal deficit as regards psychological skill and moral criticism, it paves the way for pathological plotters, snake-charmers, and even more primitive impostors to act and merge into the process of the origination of evil as essential factors in its synthesis... Those times which many people later recall as the "good old days" thus provide fertile soil for future tragedy because of the progressive devolution of moral, intellectual, and personality values which give rise to Rasputin-like eras. [Andrew Łobaczewski, Political Ponerology: A science on the nature of evil adjusted for political purposes.]

The final point Łobaczewski is making above is that the intellectual and psychological poverty of a society after several generations of "good times" allows snake charmers and pathological plotters such as the Bush gang (following the Clinton gang) to come to power. Think of the glaring and outrageous lies that fall from the lips of the president. He appears to be completely unconcerned that what he says is not true.

And, unfortunately, so does a large portion of the populace.

They do not have the psychological knowledge necessary to see that the president of their country, as well as those around him, are pathological deviants. Excuses are found and served up hot daily through the mainstream media. Moreover, ordinary people project their own "goodness" onto people who have no such qualities.

However, since the leaders are living in their own reality, as we discussed in the last article, circumstances in the country deteriorate. Reality does eventually reassert itself. The daily life of the people, the outsiders, worsens. Eventually something snaps and individuals begin to ask questions again. The shocks that have been delivered to the Iraqis or the Palestinians begin to fall on those at home. They are awoken from their slumber. They wonder why and how things could have gotten so bad. They wonder why it is that they work 50 or more weeks a year while people in other countries have five or six weeks of paid vacation. They wonder why all the jobs are being sent overseas, why people who have studied for years to get a diploma cannot find work that allows them to apply what they know, or why it is that the house they purchased last year is now worth less than they paid.

They look for answers.

That moment marks the upturn. While conditions may continue to deteriorate for some time, the important moment comes when people begin asking "why?" because that is the moment when the outsiders begin to take power back into their own hands.

Of course, the insiders are well aware of this process and have taken things into hand to ensure that the shocks are so great that the population is too traumatized to even ask questions. We'll look at that process next

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Israel Comes Clean on Gaza Policies

Yossi Wolfson
Challenge Magazine
Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:41 EST

©Wissam Nassar
Gaza City, January 8, 2008. From a demonstration against the Bush visit: empty coffins symbolize 62 patients who have died since June because Israel denied them access to medical treatment outside Gaza.

No more lies or twisted tongues. Israel is saying at last what, in the past, it always refused to acknowledge: its war is against the Palestinian population.

Until now, in discussions about the separation wall, closures, blockades, house demolition, and other sorts of collective punishment, the State Attorney's Office lacked the gumption to admit in court that the aim of such measures is to harm civilians. It always came up with convoluted security claims in order to present some vital military necessity for the sake of the War against Terror. Harm to the population was described as a regrettable side effect.

But now a Rubicon has been crossed. This happened after ten human-rights organizations petitioned the High Court on October 28, 2007 against cuts in the supply of electricity and gasoline to Gaza. The petitioners claimed that the cuts amount to collective punishment, which is forbidden under international law. The State might have answered that the cuts are a necessary military measure aimed at stopping the production of Qassam rockets. Or it might have tried some other tongue twister. But no. In their response to the petition, Dana Briskman and Gilad Shirman from the State Attorney's Office announced openly, without blinking an eye, that the cuts' main purpose is to exert pressure on the economy as a way of influencing Hamas.

Thus the State clamps the arteries of life for 1.5 million Gazans and describes its action as an economic war. Here it infringes a basic principle of the international laws concerning warfare, which distinguish between the civilian population and the armed forces. One main purpose of these laws is to shield civilians from the battlefield and mitigate the effects war can have on them. The lawyers for the State Attorney do not dispute this principle. Rather they would limit it to strictly military operations. Cutting the supply of electricity or gasoline is not a strictly military operation. In an economic war, they hold, the principle does not apply. Following this logic to its absurd conclusion, we find that it is forbidden to blow up a civilian installation, but it is permissible to disable it by cutting off raw materials. It is forbidden to blow up a power plant, but it's OK to turn off the electricity.

This is not to imply that Israel abides by the law in its strictly military decisions. In summer of 2006, for example, it did blow up the Palestinian power plant in Gaza, raising the Strip's dependence on itself for electricity - the same electricity that it today proposes to cut.

The state turns international law on its head. Various provisions regulate civilian supplies in wartime, with the aim of keeping the situation from reaching the threshold of a humanitarian crisis. Israel cites these provisions but interprets them as allowing it to harm civilians as long as it stops short of that threshold, defined by it.

What is the humanitarian threshold in Israel's view? The blockade of Gaza has been going on at various levels for years. Since Hamas ousted Fatah there in the summer of 2007, the shipment of goods to the Strip has been restricted almost totally to basic foods, medicines, medical equipment, cooking gas, gasoline and electricity. Karni, the main checkpoint for transfer of goods, earlier functioned in a spotty manner, but today it is completely shut. The code for importing goods to Gaza has been deleted from the computers of Israel's Customs Authority, which (according to the Paris Protocol) is supposed to collect the tariffs. The supply of fuel (except cooking gas) has been cut (without court interference). The electricity cut has not yet been implemented, but the shortage is already severe. Electricity and water are available only intermittently. Most of the industrial plants are closed for lack of raw materials and replacement parts. Hospitals, water and sewage services have been operating for the last year and a half (since Israel blew up the power plant) by means of emergency generators. Because replacement parts are lacking, the infrastructures are running down, and there is increasing danger of disaster. A harbinger was the bursting of the cesspool wall in Um al-Nassar last year, where five people drowned in a river of sewage.

According to statistics from the summer of 2007 (See the Gisha web site: "New Report: Commercial Closure"), before Israel hardened its measures, 87% of Gazans lived beneath the poverty line, which was reckoned at $2.40 per day. Already then there were perceived shortages in basic products, and food prices rose by tens of percentage points. According to figures of the World Food Program, 85% of Gazans depend on aid to purchase food.

In the view of Israel, however, the existing supply of goods is above what the law obligates it to allow, and the supplies of electricity and gasoline are even twice the minimum required. Below the humanitarian threshold as defined by it, Israel includes little more than hospitals run by generators, ambulances, supply trucks, and minimal public transport. On November 1, it repeated its assurances to the Court that its measures are carefully weighed and considered. It promised to watch the situation closely to prevent a humanitarian crisis. Yet the government had no up-to-date figures on the likely effects of an electricity cut. The Court asked for data, but the State did not provide them. Instead, it became clear that even the partial statistics cited earlier were misleading (See the Gisha web site: "Court criticizes State Attorneys...").

Israel claims in court that it has the right to choose the countries it trades with, as if Gaza were just one independent state among the many. It views a cut in electricity to Gaza as not essentially different from, say, a cut in the sale of diamonds to Spain. This claim conceals the self-righteous notion that Israel, having disengaged, is no longer responsible for the Strip. But who presides over Gaza's borders? Who rules its air space? Whose jets and attack helicopters are those up there? Who controls Gaza's sea, preventing the erection of an independent harbor?

Gaza's economic dependence on Israel is the fruit of a deliberate policy that has been in effect for decades. Here as well as in the West Bank, Israel stymied any fledgling industry that might compete with it. It developed Gaza's dependence on it for electricity and gas. It turned the Gazans into a cheap labor force to serve Israeli industry - at first by having them commute into Israel and later by developing an industrial area at Checkpoint Erez. Israel also benefited from Gazan dependence on its products. When Karni was closed, among the loudest protestors were Israeli farmers. According to reports from the summer of 2007, about a fourth of the fruit grown in Israel was marketed in the Occupied Territories. The cut in gasoline shipments also made a dent in the income of Dor-Alon, the Israeli energy company supplying Gaza.

Yet Israel's conceptual change about Gaza is not consistent. Disengaged or not, it can't resist the temptation to exploit the Strip's resources. Parallel to the discussion on cutting energy supplies, there is another petition before the High Court that also concerns energy - but here the supply would go from Gaza to Israel. In this petition, two corporate groups are battling for an Israeli license to pump natural gas from the reservoir off Gaza's coast, a reservoir that - if Gaza belonged to a Palestinian state - would be in its territorial waters. The pumped gas is slated to become a major energy source in Israel's economy. Did the Justices happen to recall another case they are hearing, in which the State says it no longer occupies Gaza? If so, they haven't indicated this. Needless to say, no Justice cried in astonishment, "By what right do you intend to exploit the gas reserves of the Gaza Strip? This is against the provisions of international law, which forbid an occupying power from exploiting the natural resources of an occupied territory for its own use!"

Finally, we cannot ignore the similarities between Israel's policies in Gaza and in Lebanon. In southern Lebanon too (if to a lesser degree), Israel for years used the population as a cheap commuting workforce and as consumers of its products, all in the framework of the so-called "Good Fence" policy. This ended, as in Gaza, in a unilateral withdrawal (May 2000). Israel's interest in controlling the water that flows its way from southern Lebanon brings to mind its interest in Gaza's gas reserves. Its attack on Lebanon in 2006 also has its Gazan parallels. In both places Israel learned that it has no military answer to the threat of rockets in the hands of militias. With Hezbollah as with Hamas, Israel refused to negotiate. In Lebanon too, it hesitated to open a broad ground war, and rightly so. It learned that it cannot rule a hostile area in the face of attrition from guerrillas. When it undertook military action in Lebanon, the weakness of its own armed forces became apparent. This weakness derives from the moral corruption of the military and political leadership. The war revealed an impossible combination: on the one hand, the leadership's overall contempt for human life, and, on the other, Israeli society's unwillingness to accept battle casualties.

In both cases, Gaza and Lebanon, Israel has made indiscriminate war from the air on civilians while hesitating to commit ground forces. In both it has sought to destroy the economic infrastructure and reduce the civilian population to primitive conditions. By harming them, it was thought, you could get them to pressure their leaders and thus make political gains. This notion proved false in Lebanon, as in Gaza. The Israeli attacks amount to an expression of weakness, but the price will not be paid by those who launch them, rather by civilians on both sides.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Presidential Elections: Meaningless, But Still We Watch

Well, the New Year isn't so new now. Been busy with other stuff, but now (reluctantly) we'll have to give some attention to the current edition of the circus known as the US Presidential elections. Ralph Nadar has made a run for the post. He can lead off with some pertinent remarks. Brought to you courtesy of SOTT

Blue Ibis

Ralph Nader
Tue, 15 Jan 2008 02:19 EST

Here is a short list of what you won't hear much of from the front-runners in this presidential primary season. Call them the candidate taboos.

* You won't hear a call for a national crackdown on the corporate crime, fraud, and abuse that have robbed trillions of dollars from workers, investors, pension holders, taxpayers and consumers. Among the reforms that won't be suggested are providing resources to prosecute executive crooks and laws to democratize corporate governance so shareholders have real power. Candidates will not shout for a payback of ill-gotten gains, to rein in executive pay, or to demand corporate sunshine laws.

* You won't hear a demand that workers receive a living wage instead of a minimum wage. There will be no backing for a repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act of 1947, which has blocked more than 40 million workers from forming or joining trade unions to improve wages and benefits above Wal-Mart or McDonald's levels.

* You won't hear for a call for a withdrawal from the WTO and NAFTA. Renegotiated trade agreements should stick to trade while labor, environmental, and consumer rights are advanced by separate treaties without being subordinated to the dictates of international commerce.

* You won't hear a call for our income tax system to be substantially revamped so that workers can keep more of their wages while we tax the things we like least, such as pollution, stock speculation, addictive industries, and energy guzzling technologies. Nor will you hear that corporations should be required to pay their fair share; corporate tax contributions as a percent of the overall federal revenue stream have been declining for 50 years.

* You won't hear a call for a single payer health system. Almost sixty years after President Truman first proposed it, we still need health insurance for everyone, a program with quality and cost controls and an emphasis on prevention. Full Medicare for everyone will save thousands of lives a year while maintaining patient choice of doctors and hospitals within a competitive private health care delivery system.

* There is no reason to believe that the candidates will stand up to the commercial interests profiting from our current energy situation. We need a major environmental health agenda that challenges these entrenched interests with major new initiatives in solar energy, doubling motor vehicle fuel efficiency, and other quantified sustainable and clean energy technologies. Nor will there be adequate recognition that current fossil fuels are producing not just global warming, but also cancer, respiratory diseases, and geopolitical entanglements. Finally, there will be no calls for ending environmental racism that leads to more contaminated water, air, and toxic dumps in poorer neighborhoods.

* The candidates will not demand a reduction in the military budget that devours half the federal government's operating expenditures at a time when there is no Soviet Union or other major state enemy in the world. Studies by the General Accounting Office and internal Pentagon assessments support the judgment of many retired admirals and generals that a wasteful defense weakens our country and distorts priorities at home.

* You won't hear a consistent clarion call for electoral reform. Both parties have shamelessly engaged in gerrymandering, a process that guarantees reelection of their candidates at the expense of frustrated voters. Nor will there be serious proposals that millions of law-abiding ex-felons be allowed to vote.

Other electoral reforms should include reducing barriers to candidates, same day registration, a voter verified paper record for electronic voting, run-off voting to insure winners receive a majority vote, binding none-of-the-above choices and most important, full public financing to guarantee clean elections.

* You won't hear much about a failed war on drugs that costs nearly $50 billion annually. And the major candidates will not argue that addicts should be treated rather than imprisoned. Nor should observers hope for any call to repeal the "three strikes and you're out" laws that have needlessly filled our jails or to end mandatory sentencing that hamstrings our judges.

* The candidates will ignore the diverse Israeli peace movement whose members have developed accords for a two state solution with their Palestinian and American counterparts. It is time to replace the Washington puppet show with a real Washington peace show for the security of the American, Palestinian, and Israeli people.

* You won't hear the candidates stand up to business interests that have backed changes to our civil justice system that restrict or close the courtroom to wrongfully injured and cheated individuals, but not to corporations. Where is the vocal campaign against fraud and injury upon innocent patients, consumers, and workers? We should make it easier for consumers to band together and defend themselves against harmful practices in the marketplace.

Voters should visit the webpages of the major party candidates. See what they say, and see what they do not say. Then email or send a letter to any or all the candidates and ask them why they are avoiding these issues. Breaking the taboos won't start with the candidates. Maybe it can start with the voters.

Ralph Nader is the author of The Seventeen Traditions

Thursday, January 03, 2008

See the 9-11 Video Banned on Google!

Brasscheck TV
Thu, 03 Jan 2008 09:18 EST

Earlier this year, we posted a video called the "9/11 Solution."

After a huge run up a viewers it was removed from Google Video three days later.

I tried to post it to YouTube and it was rejected by YouTube too. I appealed to subscribers to repost the video on as many sites as possible. Someone re-posted the video to YouTube Canada and surprisingly it stuck.

The result? So far 585,567 views which makes it one of the most viewed News videos on YouTube Canada of all time.

Currently, this video is the most discussed new video on YouTube Canada of all time.

On YouTube Canada the video is called: "Here's the video that Google Video pulled down!"

Here's the video in case you missed it:


Brasscheck TV has made this important part of the 9/11 puzzle available again. See it here:

This video is an important companion piece to the video that I call "Inside Job" (see the Brasscheck TV archive.)

"Inside Job" shows that thousands of eye witnesses and millions of live TV viewers heard and heard about MULTIPLE explosions in the Twin Towers that preceded their sudden and inexplicable collapse.

"The 9/11 Solution" shows that even as the World Trade Center was burning and immediately after the collapses, a stream of disinformation laying down the key official 9/11 myths was being actively being put in place via the US mass media (i.e. the impact of the planes weakened the structures, the "intense" fires caused the collapses, Bin Laden was the only possible suspect.)