Recent comments

  • Scott Lazarowitz's picture
    Scott Lazarowitz 3 years 31 weeks ago Page Guest
    "Common people might be less informed than their bankers about the technicalities of financial instruments and investment strategies, but they can read a bottom line. They can also compare bottom lines and abandon their agent if they feel other people might take better care of their money." One can apply that passage to the context of our federal government in general, as well. The public in general may not be informed as to the process of how the Federal Reserve works, and how legislation is manipulated by lawyers to benefit themselves and bureaucrats' cronies, but they can read a bottom line, and they know when they are being screwed. Everything we hear coming out of Washington is one reason after another to "abandon our agent" (the federal government, including its central bank), allow competing currencies, decentralize the banks, outlaw fractional reserve banking, enforce sound private contracts and throw fraudsters in jail, and return to freedom under the Rule of Law.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    G'day tzo, Here's the 6-billion-dollar-question, my friend, how many of Earth's inhabitants want "no government"? And, what will you do with all those individuals who don't want " no government", not to mention those who need to be governed (i.e. those individuals who need to be restrained from trespassing on other men's natural rights)? It is my opinion, that it is an individual decision whether or not to be a member of a political association, and therefore it is just as bad forcing "no government" on those individuals who want a government as it is forcing a government on self-governing individuals who want "no [external] government".
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    G'day tzo, "Yes, the democracy cancer is better than the communism cancer in that it consumes its host more slowly." Which gives you a little more time to accomplish this... "With no government, then government murders would equal zero."
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 31 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Manning (allegedly) did what Daniel Ellsberg did, but using today's tech which made it MUCH quicker and easier to do. WL is doing what the NY Times and others did with Ellsberg's material (the Pentagon Papers). Why this should be a problem for anyone in the freedom movement is hard to understand. It's always possible that some of the info WL distributes will be crafted by the elite as a psy-op -- and you can say exactly the same about ANY source of news, of any type, that will ever exist. Paul's comment (below) is the perfect, and I must say obvious, response to that: "Wikileaks (and its competitors) should be taken exactly like every other source of information on the internet. Get the information, try to find other sources to verify or disprove it, and use your knowledge of human nature to judge where the truth really lies." The biggest, most glaring flaw in the argument -- made only within the freedom movement, of course -- that WL is a psy-op, is this: Mubarak and so many other corrupt, vile, torturing dictators being affected by the current unrest were/are bought and paid-for stooges for Israel and the CIA and the oil companies and so on ALREADY. All the frantic activity on the part of Israel and the West regarding the unrest is designed to ensure that either A) the current dictators [the Saudi's, for instance] STAY in power or that any new regime that replaces a current stooge regime will be as compliant and corrupt as the regime being torn down. The complicated "psy-op" arguments sound a lot like the complicated rationales for the Federal Reserve: obscure the truth with a thicket of complex and irrelevant BS, and maybe that truth will be overlooked. Here's the truth as I see it: a significant amount of the material from WL shows the elite to be criminals, to be psychopaths, to be corrupt, and to NOT have the best interests of the masses in mind. Everything else is beside the point. I don't know what Assange is like as a person and I do not believe most of what I read about him, but in fact it doesn't matter. Maybe he's kinky in bed or cruel to puppies. So what. For certain, some of his views aren't the same as mine. He's human, so expecting him not to be flawed would be stupid. But I DO know this: the material he's helping bring to light is waking millions of people up to the corruption and cruelty of governments -- their own and others around the world. WL is exposing the coercive elite for what they really are, and showing governments for the psychopathic coercive SYSTEMS that THEY are, although that last will take longer to sink in for most people. If seeing the elite, and their tool of the coercive State, exposed in this way bothers you -- well, as I say in the column, then I have to wonder what you ARE hoping for. [Edit] -- That's an actual question, not an accusation. Do you not see, or appreciate, the way in which WL is getting people to re-evaluate the coercive State and the character of those drawn to Power? What would you prefer to see from WL that you aren't seeing now?
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 31 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Tunisia and Egyption Revolution was caused by WL? I did not read that particular W-leak,Care to share? When an american puppet out lives his usefulness, or no longer is conTROLLable,they take em out.(iam confident you can name a few.)Other times he knows to much or (and this is hard to say without laughing)is unsavory.TPTB topple governments for practise,and forment revolutions for fun. In central and south america it is almost a continuous thing. They practice every scenario possible,gleaning information to perfect their game.The bonus is it costs them nothing but stolen,monopoly money. Plus it reaps the benifit of that countries resources and further subjugates the local serfs.Seems like with every revolution the chains get tighter. They have a slogan for this also, Order out of Chaos. Apparently we need to get over to Egypt ,mach schnell, and protect american interests..... Their is only one law for two types,For those it fails to protect,and For those it fails to restrain. I agree with you about the ruling class never held accountable,but you did not have to go back half a century to make that point.Frinstance the Bush torture memos.Torture is a crime against God,a crime against humanity,against the constitution,and against statutes.Even military men/women were jailed, but the administration is insulated.Plus no heads rolled for the 911 insider job. Wait, i had an overinflated idea of the competence of people in the government and the military.You are right, 911 was done by a goat-herder hiding in a cave in A-stan. (and we can trust a Pfc with super sensitive files,that can be downloaded on his lady gaga cd. Is that not the story?)
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 31 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    How about the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, and all the other unrest in the US government's Mideast client states? As to imprisoning the bastards, that usually doesn't happen. Why? Because the law does not apply to the ruling class. Only in rare circumstances (e.g. invasion of Germany and subsequent Nuremberg trials) do the rulers suffer any consequences. Note, no one paid any price for the firebombing of Dresden: http://www.rense.com/general19/flame.htm The reason it doesn't happen is that the ruling class support each other (e.g. Idi Amin ends up in Saudi Arabia), and they accumulate huge sums from bankrupting their countries. Money buys immunity. So it is a bit much to whack Wikipedia for this lack. But let's see what happens to Mubarak. There is always hope. As to your comment about Manning, you have a vastly overinflated notion of the competence of people in the government and the military.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    I just received my copy of "Death by Government" a couple of days ago. I haven't dug into it too much yet. There is no doubt that communism is the fast track to mass death, while democracy is a bit more tempered in that respect and is certainly the lesser of the two evils. I believe the author concludes that the world needs to spread democracy and eliminate communism in order to make the world a better place. Is it really better to kill 10,000,000 instead of 100,000,000? Do quantities really matter? If so, isn't zero the best? Why not strive for zero? With no government, then government murders would equal zero. The murders that did occur would be attributable to individual human beings, who could then be dealt with. Yes, the democracy cancer is better than the communism cancer in that it consumes its host more slowly. If that is the best scenario one can envision, then he is missing the obvious. But the real world requires government to slit throats, it is claimed, just a few million here and there according to democratic ritual, in order for us to get up, have our coffee, and go to work. Time to change the real world, then. At the very least, it should not be rationalized as being something other than what it is. It should not be justified as better than some worse alternative. Even communism is better than other types of totalitarian government. So why can't we be just happy with that? That's good enough, isn't it? 100,000,000 is better than 1,000,000,000, right?
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 31 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    I certainly agree that Palin, O'Reilly and that crowd are as you describe. But they appear to be pawns in a larger game that serves to give Assange more street cred. I've heard the drip-drip reasoning and the "responsible journalist" angle for only releasing such a small amount of information. So which is it: Assange is for open sources for sensitive state secrets or is he a self-appointed gatekeeper working in league with established Big Media organs? I'm familiar with the stories on Israeli plans in Gaza and their connections to Mubaraks inner circle. Do you really consider that new information much less damaging? At this rate, we may get to see half the e-mails in about 20 years. The half that don't endanger anyone, of course. As for Manning, all we know is what the CIA/Pentagon have told us. Is how he got the info to Assange on a cd that hard for them figure out? Maybe. Assange is an unabashed statist and internationalist. You may believe he is just being super careful, but that's not very hero-like, much less the renegade he is being presented as, is it? Obviously he has done some good work undermining nationalist agendas, which is why Palin, et al see him as a traitor; but to what end? Observation of events as they unfold can be misleading as to where these events may lead, especially when seen in the context of a chaotic world with bumbling, fumbling elite and their stumbling Keystone Cop agents. I give the elite a little more credit than that as things are rarely as they seem. It certainly works in their favor to be so portrayed. Existing national political/financial/industrial institutions are crumbling around the world. The elite have been planning for this for over a century. I'm sure when you profit from unsustainable mercantilist models, that a contingency plan is at the very least prudent. They have plans for international political/financial/industrial institutions ready to go in order to consolidate their positions when the old institutions fall. Now that the Global Warming/Carbon Credit scheme has been set back, the UN/IMF/World Bank international currency will likely be the first step. Nobody has control over future events, but some have more influence than is generally believed, much less understood. By influencing actors on both sides of a conflict, it becomes easier to manage the outcomes of these conflicts. This is what is happening in Egypt and why Democracy is a constant theme. The CIA props up Mubarak while at the same time they train the "activists" to overthrow him. They barely hide that Google is a CIA front in the process (do a little homework on this before dismissing it too as a "conspiracy theory"). That Assange could be an integral part in elite plans is not much of a stretch, though I'm not willing to rest so assured that I know the "truth" in such matters. In short, I hope Assange will eventually not only release the large amount of information he supposedly has, but inspire more leakers to step forward in the future. That is how this method of truth telling can continue to have an impact, not drip-dripping old information. Better yet is other alternative sites popping up to provide access for leakers that won't be controlled by a self-imposed gatekeeper working with the MSM. At the very least, I'm not ready to drink the Kool-Aid and join the cult of Assange hero worshipers just because he appears to be "the enemy of my enemy". We shall see what role Assange will play in the new international political institutions that are being set up, but it is clear that "power to the people" is not on his agenda.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    G'day Michael Kleen, "Theoretically, I am opposed to most [?] forms of statism, especially in the modern sense." ~ Michael Kleen "Theoretically" = in "theory", but not in "practice"; that's the way virtually all anarchists are, it would seem. "I believe in anarchy [no ruler]...but it can't really be done." You want to talk about "demoralization", Michael Kleen, what do you suppose most, if not all, of these same people tell an individual secessionist? "Well, you can claim to be an "individual secessionist" if you want, but it can't really be done." Translation: If my government doesn't legally recognize it, it's not real. Well, I've got news for "you [figuratively] and the horse [the government] you rode in on", "I am who and what I say I am, not who and not what you and those in your government say I am." It's ironic, when you think about it, I am a "nonperson", "someone who a government says does not exist". The irony is that I could rewrite that definition from Macmillan Dictionary to read, "someone who anarchists, libertarians and their governments say does not exist", and it would still be accurate. Sad commentary, really, but we [my natural law wife and I] refuse to be “demoralized” by it.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    G'day, once again, Michael Kleen, Yes, that word has been co-opted since Noah created it, it would seem. The original was based on the word "moral", while the new word is apparently based on the word "morale".
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    Excellent, Darkcrusade, excellent!! Here's a link to it, if anyone wants it.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    "Let not any be alarmed, therefore, at the promulgation of the foregoing doctrine. There are many changes yet to be passed through before it can begin to exercise much influence. Probably a long time will elapse before the right to ignore the state will be generally admitted, even in theory. It will be still longer before it receives legislative recognition. And even then there will be plenty of checks upon the premature exercise of it. A sharp experience will sufficiently instruct those who may too soon abandon legal protection. While, in the majority of men, there is such a love of tried arrangements and so great a dread of experiments that they will probably not act upon this right until long after it is safe to do so." ~ Excerpted from The Right to Ignore the State by Herbert Spencer
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    HOW MANY DID COMMUNIST REGIMES MURDER? DEATH BY GOVERNMENT
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 31 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Is this not the old recipe of; problem + reaction = solution? Problem, Truth is escaping to the drooling masses. Reaction, Psychos must impose their will(pass a 'law'). Solution= Internet killswitch. I admit i have not been following the WL like i would if i thought it legit. Why is george Soros &c supporting it? Plus it wouldn't have been 30seconds before someone was standing over Priviate Bradley's workstation,looking over his shoulder as these downloads are monitored real-time. If Julian Assange had released any information that was not thoroughly veted,he would have been suicided but quick. Of course i could be mistaken,as that has happened once before. Another question is;What damage has the WL done? Have the leaks caused any military/politician to be charged/imprisioned? If yes,than that would lend great weight to the legitimacy. IMHO
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    Hmmm.Reminds me that- The lesser of two evils is still evil. Plus ,history is written by the victors. Grateful Slave by Paine's Torch I am a grateful slave. My master is a good man. He gives me food, shelter, work and other things. All he requires in return is that I obey him. I am told he has the power to control my life. I look up to him, and wish that I were so powerful. My master must understand the world better than I, because he was chosen by many others for his respected position. I sometimes complain, but fear I cannot live without his help. He is a good man. My master protects my money from theft, before and after he takes half of it. Before taking his half, he says only he can protect my money. After taking it, he says it is still mine. When he spends my money, he says I own the things he has bought. I don't understand this, but I believe him. He is a good man. I need my master for protection, because others would hurt me. Or, they would take my money and use it for themselves. My master is better than them: When my master takes my money, I still own it. The things he buys are mine. I cannot sell them, or decide how they are used, but they are mine. My master tells me so, and I believe him. He is a good man. My master provides free education for my children. He teaches them to respect and obey him and all future masters they will have. He says they are being taught well; learning things they will need to know in the future. I believe him. He is a good man. My master cares about other masters, who don't have good slaves. He makes me contribute to their support. I don't understand why slaves must work for more than one master, but my master says it is necessary. I believe him. He is a good man. Other slaves ask my master for some of my money. Since he is good to them as he is to me, he agrees. This means he must take more of my money; but he says this is good for me. I ask my master why it would not be better to let each of us keep our own money. He says it is because he knows what is best for each of us. We believe him. He is a good man. My master tells me: Evil masters in other places are not as good as he; they threaten our comfortable lifestyle and peace. So, he sends my children to fight the slaves of evil masters. I mourn their deaths, but my master says it is necessary. He gives me medals for their sacrifice, and I believe him. He is a good man. Good masters sometimes have to kill evil masters, and their slaves. This is necessary to preserve our way of life; to show others that our version of slavery is the best. I asked my master: Why do evil masters' slaves have to be killed, along with their evil master? He said: "Because they carry out his evil deeds." "Besides, they could never learn our system; they have been indoctrinated to believe that only their master is good." My master knows what is best. He protects me and my children. He is a good man. My master lets me vote for a new master, every few years. I cannot vote to have no master, but he generously lets me choose between two candidates he has selected. I eagerly wait until election day, since voting allows me to forget that I am a slave. Until then, my current master tells me what to do. I accept this. It has always been so, and I would not change tradition. My master is a good man. At the last election, about half the slaves were allowed to vote. The other half had broken rules set by the master, or were not thought by him to be fit. Those who break the rules should know better than to disobey! Those not considered fit should gratefully accept the master chosen for them by others. It is right, because we have always done it this way. My master is a good man. There were two candidates. One received a majority of the vote - about one-fourth of the slave population. I asked why the new master can rule over all the slaves, if he only received votes from one-fourth of them? My master said: "Because some wise masters long ago did it that way." "Besides, you are the slaves; and we are the master." I did not understand his answer, but I believed him. My master knows what is best for me. He is a good man. Some slaves have evil masters. They take more than half of their slaves' money and are chosen by only one-tenth, rather than one-fourth, of their slaves. My master says they are different from him. I believe him. He is a good man. I asked if I could ever become a master, instead of a slave. My master said, "Yes, anything is possible." "But first you must pledge allegiance to your present master, and promise not to abandon the system that made you a slave." I am encouraged by this possibility. My master is a good man. He tells me slaves are the real masters, because they can vote for their masters. I do not understand this, but I believe him. He is a good man; who lives for no other purpose than to make his slaves happy. I asked if I could be neither a master nor a slave. My master said, "No, you must be one or the other." "There are not other choices." I believe him. He knows best. He is a good man. I asked my master how our system is different, from those evil masters. He said: "In our system, masters work for the slaves." No longer confused, I am beginning to accept his logic. Now I see it! Slaves are in control of their masters, because they can choose new masters every few years. When the masters appear to control the slaves in between elections, it is all a grand delusion! In reality, they are carrying out the slaves' desires. For if this were not so, they would not have been chosen in the last election. How clear it is to me now! I shall never doubt the system again. My master is a good man.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    Well, the goal of striking the root is to subvert all governmental ideologies by remoralizing the populace. Choosing the lesser of two government ideology evils is such a vote-y thing to do. You can find my arguments against minarchism, which is the type of government I assume you theoretically support, sprinkled throughout this website. Your choices, Michael, in the real world include making change, and standing for what's right and voicing that position because it is right. Red scare articles are a bit dated and off-point, but for what it's worth, I could care less if the commie bastards overrun the capitalist pig dogs. Whoever willingly hitches their wagon to a government ideology deserves the Calvin and Hobbes finish to their wagon ride.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 31 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    (This is a reply to jd-in-georgia, but it got detached from his comment when I edited this to add the Greenwald link below). Yes, knowledge is power -- although there are other kinds of power, which knowledge cannot always overcome, unfortunately. But you are absolutely right that this is about the power of information, and in particular about allowing more of the truth out into the world. As to conspiracies: a coercive elite -- not a single club or anything, but certainly a group using the meme of "government" as a tool, directly and indirectly -- ALREADY runs the world; WL is simply making it harder to hide the fact that this meme is a lie, and that by sanctioning organized coercion, the system behaves psychopathically and attracts psychopaths (and others with little empathy) into power. The nature of the coercive state leads governments around the world to do things their citizens strongly oppose, whether it's trillion-dollar giveaways to the banks (90% of Americans oppose them, if emails to congress are any indication), aggressive foreign wars, or blatant, shocking, and disgusting (not to mention counter-productive) torture of people who are sometimes just shepards who were sold to the US by locals who wanted the reward money, just to name three. When you start looking, nearly everything the government does is opposed to the people's interests. Even if it's something people want done (like safety nets and social security), the government turns it into a Ponzi scheme, wastes whatever isn't stolen, and the end result is what we see all around us: an epic disaster, even in something that might well have worked if handled honestly. Much of this is outright illegal, even under our own laws, so if the folks responsible ever get HELD responsible, they go to prison. They have every reason to fight something like WL -- and since a conspiracy is just two or more people working together to do something, it is a near-impossibility that there is no conspiracy against Assange and WL. In any case the conspiracy is out in the open, with members of congress, shills in the media, Sara Palin, talk radio hosts, television commentators, and others openly calling for everything up to and including assassination to stop WL from darkening the world with (shudder) the truth. It's a national security issue! See also http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/02/11/campaigns/i... -- today's column by Glenn Greenwald, "The leaked campaign to attack WikiLeaks and its supporters."
  • Michael Kleen's picture
    Michael Kleen 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    Theoretically, I am opposed to most forms of statism, especially in the modern sense. But given my choices in the real world, I would much rather live in a capitalist state than a communist one, thanks
  • Michael Kleen's picture
    Michael Kleen 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    "Being demoralized by an avalanche of information only works on people who make decisions based on the opinions of others" - That may be true, but you just described 98 percent of the population...
  • Michael Kleen's picture
    Michael Kleen 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    I don't think that Bezmenov was using the term "demoralization" in its literal sense, although destroying or lessening the effect of moral principles might be part of the demoralization process. The purpose of demoralization as part of ideological subversion is to make your enemy unsure of his own ideology, of his own system of government, and perhaps even to work against them.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 31 weeks ago Web link strike
    "A classic but always a good read. He had it all figured out in the 1800's. Too bad we cannot learn from the lessons about what a Just law is supposed to be." ~ strike Yeah, agreed, strike, but just look at all the positive comments, ONE, and all the ten-star ratings, ONE, this great submission of yours garnered and it becomes very clear, IMO, why we haven't.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 31 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    Much, (if not most), of what the average U.S. citizen believes to be natural rights are, in fact, political or civil rights. Since all rights are "entitlements" conditional upon membership in a group, one must first be a member of the political group, the body politic[1], in order to be “entitled” to these political or civil rights, and, he must also meet all the other “conditions” that his benefactor, the god[2] called STATE, wishes to place upon these rights. And, like the so-called "laws" of the STATE, these conditions can change with the mere flick of the pen, so that one may, in the blink of an eye, find that he is no longer "entitled" to these rights. Endnotes: [1] MEMBER, n. ...Every citizen is a member of the state or body politic. ~ Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language [2] ″…in modern society, with its religious, ethnic, and cultural diversity, it would be much harder for any single group to demand allegiance — except for the state, which remains the one universally accepted god.″ ~ Roderick T. Long, Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    Thumbs up on your comment, tzo! "It's like arguing about if 2 + 2 should equal 5 or 6. Which is the best interpretation? Because obviously the truth of the matter is unimportant." ~ tzo That reminded me of the question asked by Captain J. J. Jones, Lincoln Heights Division of the LAPD, who wanted to have Christine Collins committed to the Los Angeles County General Hospital Psychopathic Ward, because she refused to bow the knee, in the movie Changeling, "A true story", starring Angelina Jolie. (Highly Recommended!) "Either you know you're lying or you're not capable of knowing if you're lying or telling the truth. So which is it?"
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    "Define your terms, you will permit me again to say, or we shall never understand one another...” ~ Voltaire The word "demoralize" was coined by Noah Webster, c. 1793, so let's go to him for its correct definition. DEMORALIZE, v.t. To corrupt or undermine the morals of ; to destroy or lessen the effect of moral principles on; to render corrupt in morals. ~ Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language MORALS, n. plu. 1. Conduct; behavior; course of life, in regard to good and evil. Ibid. Now that we have established what the word "demoralize" means, what, or who, would we say has had the greatest influence on "corrupting or undermining the morals" of Americans?
  • Guest's picture
    Martin Lindfors (not verified) 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Mediamatters is an extremely biased group, so I don't take anything they publish seriously.
  • Will Groves's picture
    Will Groves 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Glen, thanks for this article. The pathocracy and its "6-percenters" have managed for generations to define the limits of acceptable discussion and barricade the critical pivots of opinion in spite of their deep minority. The power of the internet resides in the ability of non-psychopathological people to transmit information without censorship, and we have begun to see the effects all around us. Funny that the elites have no problem invading our privacy but take great offense at having their secrets brought to light. As I read somewhere: Hey G-man, as you've been telling us all these years, if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    The hold-up (according to Assange and other sources) is that WikiLeaks is A) going through the material carefully to prevent publishing material that would endanger individuals and B) to gain maximum impact from the cables -- a steady drip-drip-drip keeps the topics in the news, whereas a single dump would be news for a week and then recede into the background. Ethics and marketing sense, in other words. I disagree that nothing big other than the helicopter incident has been released (have you not been following the news on this topic?), and you are certainly wrong about Israel not being part of the leaked material -- although that's a common canard among the anti-WL crowd. I link to one story about Israel ("WikiLeaks: Israel Plans Total War on Lebanon, Gaza") in this column and there are more out there, such as "WikiLeaks: Israel's secret hotline to the man tipped to replace Mubarak" ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8309792/WikiLeaks-Is... ). Manning has been kept in solitary confinement for over half a year, allegedly under conditions that Amnesty International, international law, and simple decency all consider torture -- and he's not been convicted of a thing. When I say that the coercive State is a psychopathic structure and that it encourages psychopathic behavior (even among non-psychopaths; this is the corruption of power) and attracts actual psychopaths into its ranks, Manning's mistreatment is a good example of what I mean. In any case, proving he got the info isn't the problem, apparently: proving he and Assange were conspiring together is what the US is hoping to do, and that apparently didn't happen. The whole apparatus of WikiLeaks is designed to keep the identities of whistleblowers from anyone in the WL organization. I agree that critical analysis, in and of itself, is not "pathological obedience to the State" -- and you'll note I did not mention DailyBell. But increasingly I see their commentary on this topic as disconnected from the truth.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Has anyone noticed the irony in this psy-op argument? "Assange is one of us, one of the elite." That is, they can only smear him by claiming he is another one of those evil bastards in the elite, or a tool of them. That is a smear on themselves, if you think about it. I'm finding this highly amusing, since it reveals the level of desperation they feel. It's either that, or kill Assange, it seems. Not many palatable choices left to them, heh. Excellent article, Glen. I don't buy the Daily Bell argument. We have to assume that the ruling class has placed provocateurs in all sorts of places, and it wouldn't be much of a stretch to think that Daily Bell has one. We have kicked one or two out of the Free State Wyoming group (freestatewyoming.org), for example. And if it is not that, it's that some people just have to believe that there are conspiracies within conspiracies within conspiracies, and aren't satisfied if the world turns out to be simpler. Anyway I think some "conspiracy theorists" are actually provocateurs too, seeking to discredit the notion of conspiracy by drawing up wilder and more silly false conspiracies. Wikileaks (and its competitors) should be taken exactly like every other source of information on the internet. Get the information, try to find other sources to verify or disprove it, and use your knowledge of human nature to judge where the truth really lies. The problem with the psy-op theory is that it goes against human nature. It asks us to believe the elite would do things it doesn't make sense for them to do.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    This reviews books published in 1973 and 1985. I wish it had mentioned that...
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 32 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    "Then, we must develop the habit of investigating, questioning, and determining the motives behind all sources of information. Finally, we must work on strengthening the arguments in favor of our own beliefs." I would say that motives and beliefs are fluff. Look to find the truth. Sources are only valuable if they are based in fact. If your beliefs are based on sources, and your sources have, in your opinion, good motives, you have discovered nothing. Being demoralized by an avalanche of information only works on people who make decisions based on the opinions of others, all of whom have their own motives. Eggs are good for you. Now they're bad. Then good again. Ten articles say this, another ten say that. I give up. No one knows. I'm confused. Obedience and deference to authority is what schools teach. Don't think for yourself, don't investigate for yourself, don't develop the ability to think critically. Listen to and obey the experts. In the arena of politics, there is an abundance of unclear terminology and contradictions. But political ideology discussions should all boil down to deciding either that human beings are sovereign or not. The typical political discussion today centers on which type of not-sovereign existence is best. Communist ideology vs socialist ideology vs democratic ideology are all battles to be fought given the axiom that human beings are innately subject to government. Again, what is the truth of the matter? Every independent and objective investigation of human existence and society should lead to the rejection of the human-as-subject axiom. If it is not patently false, it is at the very least not to be given axiom status. If schools are dedicated to give historical perspective based on some system of government sovereignty and human subservience, then the pursuit of truth in the area of politics (the organization of violence in society) cannot be the goal. If the truth is that politics is rightly defined by something like the non-aggression principle, then schools will never, ever, discover the truth about how human society may be best organized. It's perspective on history will be necessarily twisted. Who cares what Howard Zinn thinks? Who cares what historian Joe Rebublic thinks? What is the "proper" way of interpreting history within a statist context (republicanism vs communism) if statism is improper? It's like arguing about if 2 + 2 should equal 5 or 6. Which is the best interpretation? Because obviously the truth of the matter is unimportant. Why should anyone care if one statist ideology is being subverted by another? If you care, then you give value to one of them and admit your own subservient status. Which is not only a bad idea, it is objectively false. You are guarding the root. A school should be a place to learn how to learn. Parents must learn to teach their kids how to learn how to learn. A single generation of little philosophers can change the world. No one was ever demoralized by knowing the truth, only by not knowing how to find it.
  • jd-in-georgia's picture
    jd-in-georgia 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Knowledge is power. Information provides knowledge. Whomever controls the information has the power. That is really what this is about. What baffles me is that anyone using this basic example of transitive logic is immediately dubbed a conspiracy theorist with a tin foil hat. People are convinced that they need government like they need water, air and food. The "power" elite have lost control of that "knowledge" because they inadvertently lost control of their "information" and now they are frantically, like proverbial decapitated chickens, trying to regain that control (i.e. that power) and it is not working. Are there really secret groups or clubs plotting to gain complete control of the civilized world in order to maintain some kind of Draconian order? I won't go out on a limb to suggest a made for Hollywood plot about the Roman Catholic Church and the Illuminati (with apologies to Dan Brown), but if you have ever been in a situation where some person was in a position to say with some sort of authority, "do you know who I am?" and you tucked your tail and ran, then you are more lost than a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    From the article: 'WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange went from being "imaginative, energetic (and) brilliant" to a "paranoid, power-hungry, megalomaniac," a former colleague charges in a new book out Thursday.' Huh. He started out being imaginative, energetic and brilliant? And somehow that disappeared from his personality? Or did it only disappear from Domscheit-Berg's perception of Assange? And heaven forbid that someone challenging the most powerful governments (that is, violent gangs) on earth should become paranoid! Just a personal conflict, looks like. And D-B wants to branch out and do a better job. More power to him on that; competition never hurt any human effort worth doing. But the personal attacks do not reflect well on him.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 32 weeks ago
    Schools For All
    Web link Michael Kleen
    From the article: "Unfortunately, about 1830 some educators did arise who convinced many that education was a governmental responsibility..." Their convincing was done at the point of a gun. The Massachusetts legislature imported Prussian schooling at Horace Mann's request, and they had to force a lot of unwilling people to stick their kids in these government schools. See http://johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/index.htm
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 32 weeks ago
    Demoralization
    Page Michael Kleen
    I don't know, Michael. Questioning authority never seemed like a bad thing to me. And "A People's History of the United States" was and is an excellent book, particularly because it broke ranks with the "court historians" whose usual role is to sell the message of "Rah rah USA!" I don't care if Zinn was a communist. The question is, did he have a perspective worth considering? Yes. He brought information to the table that was hidden in the court histories. Should you take everything he says at face value? Of course not. But EVERY historian has an axe to grind, not just him. And his bias is easily detected, unlike the court historians whose bias is concealed by the surrounding culture. Keep in mind, questioning what Zinn was, rather than the arguments he made, is the very definition of argumentum ad hominem. Those guys in the KGB had a theory. Doesn't mean it had anything to do with reality. The demoralization in this country is not for the most part due to KGB action, but to the action of our own governments, grabbing too much power and stealing too much of our money for corrupt and vicious purposes.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Guest
    This argument, while plausible (and I believe it) sounds embarrassingly like the argument that "communism has never been tried". I keep coming back to the notion that the only way we are going to get people on board with letting us try some actual free markets, is to let them experiment (if they want) with controlled or state-run markets. We don't need to convert everyone to "laissez-faire", we just need to convince them to leave us alone, in return for us leaving them alone.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    I'm still waiting for WikiLeaks to make all the e-mails available. What’s the hold-up? That only a very small percentage of them have been made available, and those few only through five of the most connected major media newspapers there are, is reason enough to wonder about the origins of this narrative and what the end game will be. The hype and hoopla about these leaks is so extravagant compared to the puny amount of information revealed that it astounds me. None of the leaks have done more than provide mild embarrassment to fringe friends of the US government. After the initial leak of the video footage of the murdering helicopter incident, nothing has come out that directly reveals anything big, much less damaging, about the US government. And there is still a deafening silence on anything about Israeli deeds. I’m still, of course, all for WikiLeaks continuing to provide a vehicle for leakers to come to as well as releasing any and all information that it receives, but Assange is given way too much credit and needs to be taken with a grain of salt. I believe in the principle of revealing truth, especially about secretive power centers, but am skeptical about the execution and method that is being used. When someone appears to be too good to be true, they usually are. Assange’s background also looks an awful lot like that of a potential intelligence asset . The Bradley Manning story is also curious: how did he get access and copy this information so easily onto his Lady GaGa CD? And now they can’t prove or figure out how he did it? Really? I think The Daily Bell questioning this narrative, especially if you are familiar with the historical and continuing use of psychological operations by elite social manipulators is brave and path-breaking, right or wrong. I certainly don’t consider taking a long, questioning look at this emerging narrative as an example of a “pathological obedience to the state”. I always think it prudent to “be careful what you wish for” before accepting it on a silver platter.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Let's see now, isn't Daniel Domscheit-Berg, or is it Daniel Schmitt, former member of the Chaos Computer Club, the one who opened OpenLeaks in competition with Julian Assange's WikiLeaks? Oh, well, I'm sure that that has nothing whatsoever to do with this PERSON attacking the messenger (Julian Assange) instead of the messages (the leaks from the "paranoid, power-hungry, megalomaniac" ruling elite). Is it possible that Daniel Domscheit-Berg is just another Jean-Bernard Condat? And, lastly, I'm curious, if WikiLeaks is "the World's Most Dangerous Website", is OpenLeaks going to be "the World's 2nd Most Dangerous Website"?
  • livemike's picture
    livemike 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    "A tanker owners' group has urged governments to do more to combat piracy in the Indian Ocean, saying hijackings could disrupt global oil supplies." Because paying for your own security is so yesterday.
  • SensibleSolutions's picture
    SensibleSolutions 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    A good question, but market-forces apply to labor too. "The United States can learn from other countries, particularly in northern Europe, Professor Schwartz says." But all those he lists have worker protections like strong unions and enforcement of non-alien hiring practices. Where those fail, broad social safety nets make up the difference. Even if we disagree with these policies/models on principle, it is still an apples to oranges comparison. Also, "A Georgetown University study projected 14 million job openings ... such as electricians and paralegals." I've personally lived the "Iron Law of Wages" as an electrician. The inevitable market-result from an infinite labor supply is hand-to-mouth worker pay. After getting my trades-certificate and living as a member of the full-time working-poor for a year, I returned to school to complete my Bachelors degree. Paralegal? - do yourself a favor and get that law degree if you can. I am going for at least a Masters in order to reserve a place in the ever-shrinking US middle-class. As I see it, the US is headed towards the Philippine/Indonesian model where workers without a college degree earn barely enough to sustain a bad diet and live in a tin shack. As far as the college-loan debt, one pays 15% of income above 150% of poverty. If I can make that level of income again, it will be a step up from the post-globalization /inflation minimum wage and, hence, a net increase overall.
  • rita's picture
    rita 3 years 32 weeks ago
    The Fascist Drug War
    Web link Anthony Gregory
    First they came for the heroin addicts, and I didn't speak up because I've never used heroin. Then they came for the speed freaks, and I didn't speak up because I tried speed once and didn't like it. Then they came for the producers of raw milk, and I didn't speak up because I don't drink raw milk. Then they came for the Happy Meals, and I didn't speak up because I don't have backbone myself to say no to my kids when they demand Happy Meals. Then they came for me.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Guest
    Oooops! Forgot about theWidows' tax You're gonna love this one!
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Guest
    G'day Cristian Gherasim, Very good article. You wrote: "The money machine called the Federal Reserve cranks out the credit as a subsidy to...the big-spending politicians who would prefer to borrow than tax". The political advantage of borrowing rather than taxing, of course, is so that the members (citizens/subjects) don't get too clear of a picture of just how much their "big-spending politicians" are actually spending. By diversification the taxman[1] does a pretty darn good job obfuscating their spending habits, too, I'd have to say. State and Local Government Taxation Income Sales Property Federal Taxation Income tax Social Security tax Medicare tax Corporate income tax Transfer taxes Excise taxes Federal Unemployment Tax Federal & State Common Taxes Income Taxes 7 Category of Taxes 1. Income Taxes 2. Property Taxes 3. Consumption Taxes 4. General Corporation Taxes 5. Payroll Taxes 6. Capital Gains Taxes 7. Inheritance Taxes Never ending list of taxes in the United States Sales and use tax Toll Cigarette and tobacco tax Alcoholic beverage tax Retail Beer, Wine and Liquor License Taxes Tariffs Environment Affecting Tax Poll tax Retirement tax Real Property Transfer Tax Wealth (net worth) tax Commercial Motor Vehicle Tax Commercial Rent Tax Horse Race Admissions Tax Hotel Room Occupancy Tax Utility tax Insurance taxes Lawful gambling tax Fur clothing tax Deed tax Contamination tax Mineral taxes Petroleum taxes Sports bookmaking tax Wind energy production tax Social security and Medicare taxes Federal unemployment tax Environmental taxes Communications and air transportation taxes Fuel taxes Gift taxes Death tax Luxury taxes __________________________________________ [1] "Taxman" was written as a protest by George Harrison at the taxes that he had to pay. Because the Beatles were earning a substantial amount of money they were super-taxed and 96% of what they earned went straight to the taxman.
  • negator's picture
    negator 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Guest
    succinct, irrefutable, delicious.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago Page tzo
    G'day Paul, Following that same “rationale”, do you also believe that you have the lawful authority to deprive another man of his life just because it “suits [you] to do so”, and “f**k the legalistic arguments, and all the rest”, or do you believe you should only execute such an act when you have a "natural right" to do so? Self-defense would give you the "right", for example. "Without a moral code no proper human society is possible. Without the recognition of individual rights no moral code is possible." ~ Ayn Rand So you see, my friend, we are not debating “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, really”, what we are debating is whether or not a peaceful society needs a moral code. Ayn Rand, L. Neil Smith and I say it does.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago Page tzo
    "A well regulated Militia[1], being necessary to the security of a free State, the right[2] of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed[3]." [1] Militia. The body of citizens of a state, enrolled for discipline as a military force, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies, as distinguished from regular troops or a standing army. State v. Dawson, 272 N.C. 535, 159 S.E.2d 1, 9. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 993 [Emphasis added] [2] Right. ...a just and legal claim to hold, use, or enjoy [a thing] or to convey it or donate it, as he may please. Ibid. page 1324 [3] Infringement. ...a violation of a...right. Ibid. page 780 The problem with all governments is, and has always been, "the standing army", which it controls. It would be very difficult to get a militia to voluntarily go to Iraq or Afghanistan or _____________ [fill in the blank]. And, a government would have an even more difficult time getting a militia ("the body of citizens of a state") to declare war upon themselves. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? ~ Tench Coxe (a prominent American political economist of the day (1755–1824) who attended the earlier constitutional convention in Annapolis, writing as "A Pennsylvanian," in "Remarks On The First Part Of The Amendments To The Federal Constitution," in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789, p. 2 col. 1) This, in my opinion, is the real reason why "the Swiss have not been involved in a war in 800 years, despite being right in the middle of Europe", it has no "standing army" , only a "well regulated Militia"! "...you shall certainly set a king over you. You may not give an alien the rule over you, one who is not your brother. Only, he shall not create a standing army, nor cause the people to return to bondage..." Footnotes: For those of you who don't believe that there is such a thing as a "right", i.e. a just claim to anything, and therefore cannot possibly claim "the right to keep and bear Arms", good luck. This shift from “militia power” to a standing Federal army, was one of the “cons” created by your “organic United States CONStitution”. A major concern of the various delegates during the constitutional debates over the Constitution and the Second Amendment to the Constitution revolved around the issue of transferring militia power held by the States' (under the existing Articles of Confederation), to Federal control. The new Constitution effected a dramatic shift of military power from being militia based and predominately controlled by the States towards being controlled by the federal Congress and the President with the addition of a federal army. ~ Robert J. Spitzer: The Politics of Gun Control. Chatham House Publishers, Inc., 1995.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 32 weeks ago Page tzo
    I'm actually somewhat surprised to see Molyneux take this line, given past impressions I've had of his position. I see nothing to disagree about in it. One has to wonder about people who worry about the US being invaded. What country would do such a thing? I think these people must have spent their childhoods worrying about monsters in the closet or under the bed, and they haven't outgrown it yet! As to 'For those of you who don't believe that there is such a thing as a "right", i.e. a just claim to anything, and therefore cannot possibly claim "the right to keep and bear Arms"' - I don't need any right to bear arms, to bear them. I just bear them, because it suits me to do so. Fuck the legalistic arguments, and all the rest of it. But hey, if you like to imagine you have a right to bear arms, go right ahead. No need to debate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, really.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Gary North wrote a good article in a similar line: http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north941.html Someone questioned my use of wikipedia. I'm aware of the limitations of wikipedia, but I think these definitions are reasonable. If better ones are available that would refute my arguments here, let's see them...
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 3 years 32 weeks ago Page tzo
    Tzo, BrianDrake, Suverans: Excellent post and follow-up conversation. This is a real winner. I'm waiting for Michael Kleen to tap the mat and give up the ghost on this whole minarchist fantasy of his and stop working for the dark side. Excellent work.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    Hello Scott Lazarowitz, I fully agree (as would any freedom-minded person, I assume) that "With freedom comes responsibility." The question is, do children who are treated with compassion and given freedom and responsibility as they grow up become responsible adults? The answer is yes, absolutely -- it's the one reliable way to create responsible adults, in fact. There is little of such treatment for children in the world and almost none within the pro-coercion institutions that define our culture, but the evidence is very strong that giving children freedom and responsibility, and treating them with compassion in other ways as well, creates healthy adults who understand freedom, who behave responsibly, who respect the freeedom of others, and who feel connected to others and behave compassionately toward them. I describe some of the evidence for this in my own column for STR titled "Free Societies in the Real World" [ http://strike-the-root.com/71/allport/allport6.html ]. In it, I provide a short excerpt from the Report by H.M. Inspectors on the Summerhill School, 1949 [full text of report is here: http://www.paradise-paradigm.net/summerhill.htm ] -- Here is what the school and its children were like in that June of 1949, according to the British report (my emphasis below): "The main principle upon which the School is run is freedom . . . . the degree of freedom allowed to the children is very much greater than the inspectors had seen in any other school and the freedom is real. No child, for instance, is obliged to attend any lessons. As will be revealed later, the majority do attend for the most part regularly, but one pupil was actually at this School for 13 years without once attending a lesson and is now an expert toolmaker and precision instrument maker. This extreme case is mentioned to show that the freedom given to children is genuine and is not withdrawn as soon as its results become awkward." ". . . the children are full of life and zest. Of boredom and apathy there was no sign. An atmosphere of contentment and tolerance pervades the School." ". . . the children's manners are delightful. They may lack, here and there, some of the conventions of manners, but their friendliness, ease and naturalness, and their total lack of shyness and self-consciousness made them very easy, pleasant people to get on with." ". . . initiative, responsibility and integrity are all encouraged by the system and that so far as such things can be judged, they are in fact being developed." "Summerhill education is not necessarily hostile to worldly success." The report backs up that last point with a list of degrees held and careers followed by former pupils. The obvious question here is: would you rather live in a world where people had been raised with love and freedom (whether at Summerhill or wherever), or the world as it is today? There is a great deal more such evidence (look into Sudbury Valley School, for example) as well as evidence for cruelty to children being a serious danger to society at large -- and yes, Alice Miller did an excellent job of describing that dynamic, including going so far to reprint large sections of the child-rearing manuals in use in Germany before and as the Nazi era dawned. Miller's careful and well-researched work makes the question of "how could the Germans have been so stupid, so cruel, so repressive" easy to answer.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    “Former House Speaker and potential 2008 presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has suggested that our understanding of the First Amendment is incompatible with success in the War on Terror. What he seems to suggest is that we return to an old law called the Sedition Act, which criminalized speech that was critical of the U.S. government.” The constitutional basis for freedom of speech...can be traced directly to the 1735 trial of John Peter Zenger, a German immigrant who worked as a Colonial newspaper publisher. Zenger’s newspaper, the Weekly Journal, became the center of attention when he published articles critical of the governor of New York, William Cosby. When Cosby was unsuccessful in silencing Zenger, first through threats of libel and then by more violent threats of burning his press, Cosby leveled sedition charges against him. Zenger was arrested and tried on July 29, 1735. Zenger was acquitted and the value of free speech in America was firmly entrenched. Newt's suggestion goes directly against the precise intent of that portion of the First Amendment, it was intended to forbid Congress from making laws abridging speech and press “that was critical of the U.S. government”, which virtually all man-made governments had done up until that time. However, because of the vagueness of the legal language of the First Amendment, "What free speech means, exactly, has varied from era to era.”