This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Is the End Game of Wikileaks Internet Censorship?
- Afghanistan
- Bank of America
- Bank of America
- Barack Obama
- Bear Stearns
- CDS
- Department of Justice
- Fail
- Federal Reserve
- goldman sachs
- Goldman Sachs
- Great Depression
- Iran
- Iraq
- Israel
- Main Street
- Merrill
- Merrill Lynch
- Money Supply
- New York Times
- Newspaper
- North Korea
- SmartKnowledgeU
- Transparency
- Washington Mutual
- World Bank
F. William Engdahl’s first book, A
Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, discussed
the roles of Zbigniew Brzezinski and George Ball and of the USA in the 1979
overthrow of the Shah of Iran. Engdahl claims that Brzezinski and Ball used the
Islamic Balkanization model proposed by Bernard Lewis to accomplish US policy
goals in Iran. Not coincidentally, Brzezinski was a key figure in US
President Barack Obama’s 2008 election campaign and played a key role in helping
former US President Jimmy Carter get elected. In 2007, he released a book that exposed the massive dangers of GMO
foods called, Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of GMO.
One of F. William Engdahl’s latest
articles is titled “Wikileaks, a Big Dangerous US Government Con Job”. In this
article, Engdahl implies that Wikileaks is
a US government-run propaganda and disinformation operation with an end goal of restricting
freedoms on the internet. Here are some of the key excerpts from this article.
"A closer look at the details of what has
so far been carefully leaked by the most ultra-establishment of international
media such as the New York Times reveals a clear agenda. That agenda coincidentally
serves to buttress the agenda of US geopolitics around the world from Iran to
North Korea.
It is almost too perfectly scripted to be true. A discontented 22-year old US Army
soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning, a low-grade US Army intelligence
analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the military, a disgruntled “computer
geek,” sifts through classified information at Forward Operating
Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email
communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a
day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga. In
addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided WikiLeaks with helicopter gun camera
video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war
logs from Iraq and Afghanistan. It is almost too perfectly scripted to be true.
A discontented 22-year old US Army soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning,
a low-grade US Army intelligence analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the
military, a disgruntled “computer geek,” sifts through classified information
at Forward Operating
Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email
communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a
day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga. In
addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided WikiLeaks with helicopter gun camera
video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war
logs from Iraq and Afghanistan.”
"Manning
then is supposed to have tracked down a notorious former US computer hacker to
get his 250,000 pages of classified US State Department cables out in the
Internet for the whole world to see. He allegedly told the US hacker that the
documents he had contained "incredible, awful things that belonged in the
public domain and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington,
DC." The hacker turned him in to US authorities so the story goes. Manning
is now incommunicado since months in US military confinement so we cannot ask
him, conveniently. The Pentagon routinely hires the best hackers to design
their security systems.
[Assange]
selects
as exclusive newspapers to decide what is to be leaked the New York Times which did such service in promoting faked propaganda
against Saddam that led to the Iraqi war, the London Guardian and Der Spiegel.
Assange claims he had no time to sift through so many pages so handed them to
the trusted editors of the establishment media for them to decide what should
be released. Very “anti-establishment” that.
The New York Times even assigned one of its
top people, David E. Sanger, to control the release of the Wikileaks material.
Sanger is no establishment outsider. He sits as a member of the elite Council on Foreign
Relations as well as the Aspen Institute Strategy
Group together with the likes of Condi Rice, former Defense Secretary
William Perry, former CIA head John Deutch, former State Department Deputy
Secretary and now World Bank head Robert Zoellick among
others. Indeed a strange choice of media for a person who claims to be
anti-establishment. But then Assange also says he believes the US Government
version of 9/11 and calls the Bilderberg Group a
normal meeting of people, a very establishment view.
Most important, the 250,000
cables are not "top secret" as we might have thought. Between two and
three million US Government employees are cleared to see this level of
"secret" document, [1] and some
500,000 people around the world have access to the Secret Internet Protocol
Router Network (SIPRnet) where the cables were stored. SIPRnet is not
recommended for distribution of top-secret information. Only 6% or 15,000 pages
of the documents have been classified as even secret, a level below top-secret.
Another 40% were the lowest level, "confidential", while the rest
were unclassified. In brief, it was not all that secret.
What
is emerging from all the sound and Wikileaks
fury in Washington is that the entire scandal is serving to advance a
long-standing Obama and Bush agenda of policing the until-now free Internet.
Already the US Government has shut the Wikileaks
server in the United States though no identifiable US law has been broken."
"The process
of policing the Web was well underway before the current leaks scandal. In 2009
Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller and Republican Olympia Snowe introduced the Cybersecurity
Act of 2009 (S.773). It would give the President unlimited power to
disconnect private-sector computers from the internet. The bill "would
allow the president to ’declare a cyber-security emergency’ relating to
’non-governmental’ computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the
threat." We can expect that now this controversial piece of legislation
will get top priority when a new Republican House and the Senate convene in
January.
US Department of Homeland Security, an agency
created in the political hysteria following 9/11 2001 that has been compared to
the Gestapo, has already begun policing the Internet. They are quietly seizing
and shutting down internet websites (web domains) without due process or a
proper trial. DHS simply seizes web domains that it wants to and posts an
ominous "Department of Justice" logo on the web site. See an example
at http://torrent-finder.com (My note: Do click on this link. It's worth checking out.)"
On the
political front, I agree with Engdahl’s assessment of Assange’s leaked
government cables. In the cables I have seen discussed in various newspaper articles thus far, there is nothing more than the occasional embarrassing
quote, nothing top-secret, and nothing remotely damaging to any US allies
revealed in any of these supposedly top-secret government cables.
And regarding Assange’s threat of leaking thousands of confidential documents
contained in a 5 gigabyte drive regarding a big US bank believed to be Bank of
America as an “anti-establishment” act, I’m not buying it. According to a Forbes
interview, Assange stated that his leak would “give a true and representative
insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will
stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume.” I say, so what if this big leak
Assange is in possession of pertains to Bank of America and if it reveals
documents that result in the demise of BofA? If this is how this drama plays
out, this event would ultimately be more pro-establishment and pro-elite than anti-establishment. The
demise of BofA would only mean that JP Morgan, as they have already done with
Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual, would have yet another opportunity to stamp
out their competition, swoop in like vultures, and pick up BofA’s carcass for
pennies on the dollar. Or perhaps Goldman Sachs will be given this carcass to
pick clean. Either way, if this
happens, it consolidates power for the elites at the top and could not have worked
out any better if Assange was a paid employee of Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan. Remember
that BofA bought up Merrill Lynch when Merrill Lynch failed, so an acquisition of BofA would translate
into a delayed acquisition of Merrill Lynch.
In
the book, “The Great Depression of the XXI Century,” Tanya Cariina Hsu wrote:
“In
1907, J.P. Morgan, a private New York banker, published a rumor that a
competing unnamed large bank was about to fail. It was a false charge but
customers nonetheless raced to their banks to withdraw their money, in case it
was their bank. As they pulled out their funds, the banks lost their cash
deposits and were forced to call in their loans. People therefore had to pay
back their mortgages to fill the banks with income, going bankrupt in the
process. The 1907 panic resulted in a crash that prompted the creation of the
Federal Reserve, a private banking cartel with the veneer of an independent
government organization. Effectively, it was a coup by elite bankers in order
to control the industry."
"When
signed into law in 1913, the Federal Reserve would loan and supply the nation’s
money, but with interest. The more money it was able to print, the more
"income" it generated for itself. By its very nature, the Federal
Reserve would forever keep producing debt to stay alive. It was able to print
America’s monetary supply at will, regulating its value. To control valuation,
however, inflation had to be kept in check.
The
Federal Reserve then doubled America’s money supply within five years, and in
1920, it called in a mass percentage of loans. Over five thousand banks
collapsed overnight. One year later, the Federal Reserve again increased the
money supply by 62 percent, but in 1929, it again called the loans back in, en
masse. This time, the crash of 1929 caused over sixteen thousand banks to fail
and an 89 percent plunge on the stock market. The private and well-protected
banks within the Federal Reserve system were able to snap up the failed banks
at pennies on the dollar."
If this
sounds familiar, it should. This
seems to be the blueprint by today's banking elites for today’s banking industry as well. During the Bank Panic of 1907 and the Great Depression,
JP Morgan was one of the biggest beneficiaries of a panic that many
historians claimed they, along with the Federal Reserve, helped to manufacture (JP Morgan is alleged to have helped engineer both the Panic of
1907 and the Great Depression while the Federal Reserve helped engineer
the Great Depression). If the future scenario
regarding Wikileaks's release of incriminating big bank documents plays out anywhere close to the one I presented above, Julian Assange would, in essence, be performing a massive favor for the most favored private banks
of the Federal Reserve system. One must remember that during this manufactured global monetary crisis, not all banks are created equal and a handful of banks are hand picked for survival and prosperity at the expense of hundreds of others. Just because Wikileaks threatens to release incriminating documents on a big bank that could make it look bad, this should not be naively or blindly interpreted as an anti-establishment act.
Admittedly, like millions of others, I was fooled by Wikileaks's intent in the beginning. But the more and more I research them, the more it seems as though Wikileaks is cooperating with governments and banks rather than serving as their adversary or as their watchdog to increase transparency. Now, if Mr.
Assange releases cables that expose detailed correspondences between the US
Federal Reserve and JP Morgan regarding silver price suppression schemes or how
Goldman Sachs deliberately releases misinformation about gold prices, or if he
releases diplomatic cables exposing secrets between the US and Israel that have
been concealed from the public, I might start once again believing that the goal of Wikileaks is to provide greater transparency
about government and banker actions. One thing I have learned over the years about the shadowy world of banking and politics is that if something appears to be a great coincidence, it usually is not, and that things rarely are what they seem to be on the surface.
About the author: SmartKnowledgeU is a fiercely independent investment research & consulting firm dedicated to helping Main Street avoid the fraud of Wall Street.
»
- advertisements -
I do not find a difference in support of Israel and Neo-con agenda between Jews, Christians or other.. I think one would find that statistically, the Jews do not support Israel or Neo-con war mongering Christians more than the general population.
That's not to say that influential Jews should shrink from controversy, but if they are singled out, it only bolsters the "anti semitic" claim and strengthens the defense of the elite.
We need to examine policy, not people.. As much as possible anyway..
This seems like a much more level headed approach.
Actions do speak louder than words, or loose associations for that matter. I guess you can't really be anti-semitic against a policy. Good call...
I can and have been called anti Semitic for being against policy. But, in the long run, it diminishes the credibility of the accuser rather than the accused.. This is the only path that that will prove fruitful..
Those that say it's "the Jews" are first (and most importantly) incorrect and second, playing right into their (the elite) hands..
The battle for minds will only be won if we are pure and remove the ability of our enemy to label us.. That's not to say they will not try..
Exposing TPTB will not be accomplished by singling out AIPAC, ADL or Israeli policy alone.. There are PLENTY of non-Jewish areas to attack.. Let's not forget them..
i'll rephrase:
I guess you can't simultaneously indict someone for being anti-semitic against a policy and be intellectually honest.
who was it who said that, 'if you label me, you negate me"? I like that. It shows how our lizard brain tries to summarize everything. How do you summarize a person? You can't really, you can only articulate limited aspects of people. This is just because we are so vast and creative and dynamic.
Ever since I discovered the fallacy of left-right politics in our country, I have been trying to keep an eye out for any artificial divisions between groups and individuals. Most people are the same, we want to eat our sandwiches and be free to seek our fortunes.
Obama's cabinet (religions of) :
note: indeterminate means wikipedia won't tell me. This probably means the person is either not religious or religion isn't a big part of their life.
Hillary Rodham Clinton -- Methodist
Timothy Franz Geithner -- indeterminate
Robert Michael Gates -- probably christian
Eric Himpton Holder, Jr - Episcopal
Kenneth Lee "Ken" Salazar -- Roman Catholic
Thomas James "Tom" Vilsack -- Roman Catholic
Gary Faye Locke - Baptist
Hilda Lucia Solis -- Roman Catholic
Kathleen Sebelius -- Roman Catholic
Shaun L.S. Donovan -- indeterminate
Raymond H. "Ray" LaHood -- Maronite Catholic
Steven Chu -- indeterminate
Arne Duncan -- indeterminate
Eric Ken Shinseki -- indeterminate
Janet Napolitano -- Methodist
Peter Mikami Rouse -- indeterminate
Lisa Perez Jackson -- indeterminate
Jeffrey D. Zients -- indeterminate
Ronald "Ron" Kirk -- Methodist
Susan Elizabeth Rice -- indeterminate
Austan Dean Goolsbee -- indeterminate
For your education:
Vice President of the United States Joseph R. Biden - Jewish
Chief of Staff to Vice President Biden Ron Klain - Jewish
Department of State Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton - Jewish
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano - Jewish
Office of Management & Budget Director Peter R. Orszag - Jewish
Federal Reserve System Chairman, Benjamin Bernanke - Jewish
National Economic Council (former) Chairman, Lawrence Summers - Jewish
Economic Recovery Advisory Board Chairman, Paul Volcker - Jewish
Chief Economist and Economic Adviser Vice President, Jared Bernstein - Jewish
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Chairman, Gary Gensler - Jewish
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman, Mary Schapiro - Jewish
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Chairman, Sheila Bair - Jewish
Small Business Administration (SBA) Administrator, Karen Mills - Jewish
IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman - Jewish
Federal Communications Commission Chairman, Julius Genachowski - Jewish
Council of Advisors on Science and Technology Chairman, Eric Lander - Jewish
TARP Executive Compensation Special Master Ken Feinberg - Jewish
Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke - Jewish
President's Automotive Task Force Senior Advisor, Ron Bloom - Jewish
Dept. of Homeland Security Special Representative for Border Affairs, Alan Bersin - Jewish
Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern - Jewish
Advisor to the President and the Vice President on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Issues Lynn Rosenthal - Jewish
US Department of State Special Envoy Guantanamo, Daniel Fried - Jewish
Special Advisor for the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia (which includes Iran) Dennis Ross - Jewish
Office of Management and Budget United States Chief Performance Officer and Deputy Director for Management, Jeffrey D. Zients - Jewish
Office of Management and Budget Director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Cass Sunstein - Jewish
Office of Science and Technology Policy Director, John P. Holdren - Jewish
White House Medical Czar Ezekiel Emanuel - Jewish
Ambassador-at-large Richard Haass - Jewish
Deputy Secretaries of State Jacob Lew - Jewish, James Steinberg - Jewish
Deputy White House Chief of Staff Mona Sutphen - Jewish
Federal Trade Commission Chairman, Jon Leibowitz - Jewish
Food and Drug Administration Commissioner, Dr. Margaret Hamburg - Jewish
deleted
i am learning about this, spent my youth basically in a shell ! BUT WHY ? I WANT TO KNOW WHY ? does anyone know why there are so many jewish people in our government ? I just learned the other day that Rahm Emmanuel holds two passports !! ........ surely, this isn't good for our country is it ? Didn't our founding fathers warn us about entanglements with Europe & foreign governments ? ........ if anyone knows why i'm interested to learn.
I'm tellin' ya. Kennedy, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, out of America's last 10 POTUS office-holders, 5 of the 10 are of Irish descent. I think it's a conspiracy. It cuts across ideology, it cuts across party. Had Kerry won in 2004, it would have been 6 out of 10. They must have a cabal out there.
Maybe every member of Skull and Bones is secretly flown over to kiss the Blarney Stone. Only those who do so passionately and willingly has a Presidential election rigged on their behalf. Rediculous? No more so than claiming the USG is just a fixed game of Jewopoly.
" does anyone know why there are so many jewish people in our government"
uhh, i dunno. Why are there so many poorly framed questions on the chat boards of internet blogs?
Read 'babylon's banksters' by joseph farrell
that should start you off
For the same reason that JP Morgan pulled Tesla's funding, Internet threatened mass media monoply population control profits, so controlling corporations moved to co-opt it through legislating Cybersecurity and the Patriot Act
(The ultimate population control the Food Safety Modernization Act the House votes on today and monopoly media refused to discuss intelligently)
Re Judiasm, there are 13 M Jews in a 6 Billion world population
Only the Palestinians are fewer and better educated
Only the Koreans and Polish are brighter
Michael Eisner, Adolf Hitler, Henry Kissinger, Karl Marx, George Soros, Hollywood and major media are Jewish in proportions more than ten times the percentage of American population
Thus Mel Gibson, Pete McCloskey or anyone else who complained about AIPAC or the Jewish Lobby was quickly censured for anti-semitism
So why do they belong to the Bilderbergs, founded by Nazis, and why did Kissinger tell Nixon he didn't care of the Soviets committed a second holocuast?
Hint: It's not about religion, maybe more the lack of it
More about population control profits and usury
Good luck to Ron Paul with that Fed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_of_media_ownership
http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/world-jewish-population.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_American_politicians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_lobby
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/17/nyregion/17nyc.html?pagewanted=print
http://www.infowars.com/plan-to-turn-post-office-trucks-into-stasi-data-...
You have to ask, are these people the way they are because of their psychopathy or their "jewishness"?
"why did Kissinger tell Nixon he didn't care of the Soviets committed a second holocaust?"
I would say he told nixon this because he is a psychopath, not because he is a jew.
Yes, I am biased. We're all biased and limited to our own unique point of view. It's a side effect of not being omniscient.
Joseph Robinette "Joe" Biden, Jr. Religion: Roman Catholic
You're proving my point about non-sensically talking out of our ass.
Here is something that isn't being said. It wouldn't matter if these people are jewish or hindi or frekin mennonite, and bringing up racial/religous identity only alienates people who don't understand that you actually mean zionist, you silly bastard. What does matter is what this supposed group is doing to the collective. I agree there does appear to be a group that seems to have common incentives to sort of exploit humanity at large. I don't contest that. What I have an issue with is you saying it is jews, all jews, and only jews. You can't actually believe that. I don't think you do.
Don't be a hate-filled loser.
I love you human, i forgive you. I wish you would just say zionistinstead of jew, because there is a difference that you're not acknowledging. Then, we may be able to get past this single silly semantic issue and on to fixing the problem of our enslavement.
From the man's own mouth.
http://www.jewishjournal.com/elections/article/video_joe_biden_tells_sha...
I suppose it was just for "support." The first step to abolish enslavement is identify the captor. The captor is incorporation (the proxy) of a creed of people -- and it's not Yale they have in common.
DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER!!!
"In an April 2007 interview, Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) declares “I am a Zionist’ and discusses his support for Israel. "
ZIONIST; that is the word i've wasted all morning trying to get you to use. You have to distinguish between jewish and zionist. That is all i've been getting at. When you use them interchangeably, you indict all non-zionist jews who would probably be on your side if they had your perspective and your knowledge.
"The captor is incorporation (the proxy) of a creed of people..."
And those people are zionists, which is different from Jews. If you're intent is to make others believe that these are one and the same so be it. I will be out here clarifying your misinformation. See you around.
Thanks Downrodeo. I've had this EXACT same argument multiple times on this forum. No question some Zionist Jews have been extremely damaging to the good guys. Likewise there are many awesome Jews who work for human liberation. Same with Catholics, look at the Supreme court some of the most evil justices are Catholic, does that mean my Catholic grandmother was secretly evil while she lived in poverty? Or how about some average joe jews I've worked with who aren't even cracking the $40k a year barrier? Part of some VAST cabal? I think not.
Or since Rockefeller and Bush families are old English and French should we round up all those of English and French descent? Ridiculous and dangerous.
Scapegoating Judaisim has allowed the Central Banks to get away with their crimes, same with many other organizations that had jews involved. Instead of focusing on the dangerous behaviors of groups, people want to blame it all on one group or another. Frankly if you want to blame some group the best by far is the elite English. They've been responsible for quite a bit of bloodshed over the past 500 years. But so what, my grandmother was poor and English and lived through the blitz and then emmigrated to America. Should she be damned because the Queen of England is evil? No it's just stupid to say so.
Widowmaker
"Of course Julius Genachowski is a jew, just like Lieberman"
I can never tell if those Jews control the world posts are from BIGOV agitators or just your typical idiot fuck.
my money is on the latter
'just do some [internet] research; look around you and you'll see the obvious truth' is what they bleat out.
Whatever happened to providing evidence for your claims?
Your money isn't even yours.
I won't say it because you won't look at any evidence provided anyway, only your bullshit internalized bias.' The monetary system is dripping with evidence. How about government policy. What is the US doing in the desert anyway? No evidence here, either.
Your argument seems to imply a conversation is only what is said, even though most would conclude it is what isn't said that is just as important. The latter is a proxy for secrecy and control, but what about evidence it exists...
I'm trying to make you see how saying that it is all the jews is fucking stupid.
Provide the links, and i will read them. I have many jewish friends and loved ones. When you go gallivanting around screaming, 'it's the jews', you look like an f-ing idiot. Just use a different term that doesn't include everyone who would lay a claim to being jewish, because being jewish doesn't mean you're a zionist who wants to enslave humanity. It just doesn't. It is a counterproductive stance. It is incendiary and it doesn't do anything to help further understanding. This makes it looks like you're only trying to incite an emotional response and not educate. So please, provide your evidence so I may be educated.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3666241.stm
See comment below.
Don't take my word for it, pull your head out of your ass and look for yourself. Follow the money, fraud, lies, broken promises, and double-standards.
hey widowmaker, FUCK YOU. you probably believe the PROTOCALS OF ZION are true!Right, one of the world's tiny minority groups have for millennia been slowly succeeding in dominating the world. The world's most peaceful and educated group historically had to regroup in the desert and become warriors to survive in their own country after a huge proportion of their population was burned in ovens buy nut cases like you.
During the Spanish Inquisition the rule was if an ordinary person could read or had a book they were immediately suspected of sorcery. Guess what group was the most literate and had a book? It was the Jews. So now an ordinary pervert like you can read just like a Jew. Now you are nearly equal to a Jew. The only difference between you and a Jew is you want to kill, cordon off or deport Jews. The Jews just want to be left alone and protect themselves from skin-head born again Nazi worms like you. Why don't you look for the real cause of your misery? Maybe it is your twisted belief that someone else is the cause of your fate and not who you see in the mirror.
Nice try. Always the same argument from opposition - shift the frame of victim.
What you fail to address is the systematic annihilation of the common good through incorporation, leveraged by a single creed of people. In the case of net-neutrality it is a clear case (yet again) of promises on one hand broken on the other.
Wake up and look for yourself -- you will find the premises above to be nothing but correct, and accurate over, and over, and over.
Instead of tearing up with ruffled feathers, prove it otherwise starting with homeland insecurity and Internet neutrality -- to protect WHOM? Prove your point with one example other than trying to reframe the "victim."
P.S. Fuck the Nazi's.
no. you bring the evidence. you're the one claiming it is all the jews. Call me crazy, but I would bet that somewhere in there, a christian is involved. Perhaps even a muslim. Hey, actually, if it wasn't for islam, you wouldn't have your national security apparatus, am I right? Oh i get it, the jews set up the muslims as the scapegoats in order to curtail our freedom. It was the jews and the jews alone who did this. They had no outside help I guess is what you seem to be saying.
Look, there are bad jewish people, and bad christian people, and bad muslim people, bad LDS, and maybe even bad buddhist people. Of course, all of these people have good sides as well. Nobody is entirely evil, nobody is entirely good. Start there and you might actually be able to forgive those who have wronged you, soften your heart, and get yourself to the point where you can stop channeling personal pain into the hate for an entire people. It makes you look ignorant. If it doesn't come from personal pain or familial conditioning, where does it come from?
Look dipshit, I brought two recent examples of the last two months.
I see right through your bullshit religion tangent, this has nothing to do with religion and silly books. This is about money and power.
Find me any other more faceless-incorporated people with nothing but secrecy and oppression for anyone "not in the club.
You can't.
" Find me any other more faceless-incorporated people with nothing but secrecy and oppression for anyone "not in the club"
skull and bones
the CFR
white people (just kidding, keep your pants on)
I must have missed your two recent examples but I'm sure they were just anecdotal stories involving a singular person. You don't have any evidence to suggest it is only jews. And, you're a dipshit!
Just use different terminology please. Say deranged zionist, tptb, the elites, the controllers and it is still the same group and we still know what you're talking about. You sound like an ignorant prick when you just say it is all the jews and only the jews.
That agenda coincidentally serves to buttress the agenda of US geopolitics around the world from Iran to North Korea. It is almost too perfectly scripted to be true.
Yeah because we're just knocking the cover off the ball these days in the geopolitics department and this explanation would fit right in perfectly with that pattern.
Just maybe we really do have an unsustainably massive, unwieldy and out of control government run by a bunch of delusional fuckwits. Most of the time the government can't figure out how to get laid in a whore house with a fist full of $100 bills...but now they're going to put the Internet back in the bottle? How many diversity counselors do you think you need for that?
This is the only thing that gives me hope. Most bureaucrat types couldn't think themselves out of a hallway. IDK....
Keep the reigns in your hand and look out for snakes.
.
reins...
DavidC
Aye Sir!
copy that
We will soon see movies, documentaries, books, condoms based on Assange...
He will become a celebrity.....probably make millions by selling movie rights...and book deals..
but the bottomline is ...NOTHING got leaked....all the information released so far we already knew...good to get some confirmation..but NOTHING more..
Lets see if the bank info leads to something...
Holy CRAP...
cant believe i could be right...hahahah
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/dec/21/julian-assange-memoirs
Julian Assange is understood to have sold his memoirs, to publishers Canongate in the UK and Knopf in the US.
and from that conspiracy of conspiracy publications there is this:
Monitoring America
This WaPo series was a very good piece........up to a point. What it doesn't discuss is far more important that what it does. Most people don't recognize that part of the process of oppression is letting your victims know how defenseless they are.
"You're powerless, this is how you're powerless, there isn't a damn thing you can do about it, now shut the hell up and do as your told."
Take some time to study domestic abuse. The abusive spouse (usually the male but not always) makes sure that after the initial beat downs, most of the abuse is psychological and emotional in nature. After a while all it takes is a raised hand to elicit the desired response. I consider the WaPo series as part of the psychological terror campaign against "we the people".
"We the government are "protecting" you. But if you ask too many questions we can and will beat the shit out of you."
Yep. I'm practical. Always realized that most of us are little puppets, and that the big boys always win. And that was fine, because it was done in a wink 'n' nod sort of way. I mostly just want to be left alone, and have no giant aspirations. But then TPTB were suddenly willing to show you they were in control. They didn't care that those of us paying attention were asking for the holes in their stories to be filled in. And in the last 6-12 months that power display has turned into a peacock in heat. And if history is any indicator, that's not the best sign for what's coming.
works, really well. even to those who think they are on top of it, and would never let it happen to them.
And laughing at it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbCv6b96OK0&feature=related 10:57
Apple Removes WikiLeaks App From App Store
Apple removes controversial WikiLeaks software from iPhone App Store
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/12/21/apple_removes_controversia...
Oh AAPL that bastion of free thought how you have let the zombies down...
What an Orwellian turn of nature.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R706isyDrqI
I'm still on the fence on this one, but Assange believing the government story about 9/11 does make me concerned.
Perhaps this will push you off the fence:
http://911review.org/Storage/Http/www.nerdcities.com/guardian/WTC/WTC7-s...
I meant regarding Assange, not 9/11.
this should get you off the fence;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mg5Nc0USdKQ
As a side note, Tarpley blames "the free market" and deregulation for the financial crisis. Here is Tarpley praising FDR and "New Deal" economics: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW008yJA5_8
Here is Tarpley slamming Mises: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_wNddoUvgE
People seem to forget. There is nothing inherently noble about the Free market. It's inherently the most efficient perhaps, but not necessarily the most "good" (subjective I know). For instance. In a TRULY free and unregulated market you would have to allow for child slavery, heroin sales, hit men paid to kill, organ harvesting, poisoning of drinking water and on and on and on. A totally unrestrained free market would NOT be a good thing.
That said, I think that aside from protecting some obvious things such as human rights and certain parts of the environment (Drinking water etc.) that less regulation is better. I find arguments for a totally free market to be as naive as those calling for a Command Economy due to supposed "Capitalist" excess.
Nothing inherently noble about anything humans do. We have to find balance and alas it's dynamic as society and circumstances change so to must regulation or lack thereof come back to some sort of harmony. Simply throwing out Austrian economics (which I tend to agree with actually) doesn't mean that certain things from FDR era (Glass-Stegall leaps to mind) weren't INCREDIBLY helpful to preventing the kind of madness we've seen recently.
I don't have the perfect answers, but reductionist BS about how it's the Capitalists fault or it is soley the fault of government largess are far too simple. The problem is one of human nature at the end of the day and figuring out how one restrains sociopathic and psychopathic behaviors in society.
The big issue of our era is the sociopaths have created a global network and use the psychopaths to enforce their NWO. How to deal with sociopaths working together seems to be the issue. How's that for a reductionist argument? ;)