Monday, March 31, 2008
Saturday, March 29, 2008
There are a number of other issues raised in the recent tribunal hearing:
- The Commission is supposed to be complaint-based, yet commission employees were lurking on discussion groups, and apparently posting entrapment hate speech, in the absence of any complaint. In other words, they weren't doing their jobs; they were just goofing off on the internet. It is no wonder that Canadian human rights commissions are horrifically backlogged.
- Once a complaint is received, I can understand obtaining passwords to lurk on a password-locked discussion group that is the subject of the complaint (of course, given allegations of Commission trickery, we have to question the origin of all 'complaints', not to mention the peculiarly conspiratorial relationship between complainants and Commission staffers). There is no possible way to justify any postings by Commission investigators. These postings are, at the very least, entrapment, and are probably actionable hate speech themselves. Canadian human rights law will be a mockery if the staffers making these postings aren't prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
- In at least one case, the Commission obtained a computer hard drive which had been seized by the police, which they then examined, in the absence of any warrant, to attempt to make their case. I'm not sure how many sections of the Canadian Constitution and Canadian law were run over in that little exercise in thuggery.
- It appears that the Commission has been sharing information with the Canadian spy agency, CSIS. There needs to be a full judicial investigation of this outrage against the privacy rights of Canadians, with the appropriate bureaucrat criminals fired and prosecuted.
"In fact, for an organization that is supposed to promote 'human rights,' the HRC's agents seem curiously oblivious to basic aspects of constitutional law. In one famous exchange during the Lemire case, Steacy was asked 'What value do you give freedom of speech when you investigate?' - to which he replied 'Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don't give it any value.' (I guess Section 2 has been excised from his copy of the Canadian Charter of Rights.)"
The Commission considers itself to be on a Mission From God to eliminate hate speech. Since there are no values higher than thought control, Commission staffers felt themselves unconstrained by any concepts of law or decency. This has to change.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
"Under the law FBI spokesman Richard Kolko said it is difficult to bring criminal charges against the operators of Web sites like RevolutionMuslim.com unless specific threats are made against an individual or individuals.How quick do you think a real American Muslim would be in indefinite detention, without access to legal representation, for even thinking about such a website? You want more funny? From the 'conversion' biography of Yousef al Khattab you'll note that he is a 'settler' (odd punctuation in original; ellipsis is mine; emphasis in red; this appears to be the same guy as he uses the same "racist cult" phrase as in the Fox article, although he claims in the conversion biography to be living in Morocco in 2006):
Kolko while not speaking directly about RevolutionMuslim said radical sites like these are not often prosecuted."
"In the year 1988 I entered a Yeshiva and started my journey into the Orthodox Rabbinical racist cult. In 1991 I wed my 1st wife (then) Luna Mellul now Qamar al Khattab. She was from the Moroccan town named Tetouan and was attending the racist Orthodox Jewish girl’s seminary known as Breuers or Sampson Raphael Hirsh Bet Yaakov aka Bais Yakov.
1992 bought us the birth of my 1st child Abdel Rahman (formally Rachamim Cohen). Alhumdulilah he was then as he is now my pride and joy. Upon the birth of Abdel Rahman we were living in Williamsburg, Brooklyn in the Satmar Hasidic community. I used to see all the lying and cheating, government scams and money laundering using the Synagogue and Yeshiva bank accounts and the poor hygiene of these folk, and was nervous for my new born son not to grow up like these folk. We tried broadening our horizons and moved to the Ocean Parkway area of Brooklyn, later that year.
1994 till 1998 bought us the birth of 3 more wonderful children alhumdulilah. Hesibeh, Abdel Aziz (formally Ezra),and Abdullah (formally Ovadia) during these years I tried to convince myself that Judaism was a true path and I just didn’t understand it because I never read the entire set of Talmud and it 3 different ways of understanding it including the "hidden level". You see this is the trick in the rabbinical cult, you will not EVER finish learning all the rabbinic text thus u are subservient to the Rabbis (aka Elders of Zion) who will interpret Judaism for you. During this time frame the Rabbis saw that we doubted there beliefs thus constantly followed our family contacting all new friends and employers etc. The Rabbis MUST ALWAYS know where you move to and who are your friends. The Rabbis were starting to be a big nuisance as were the Rabbinical Jews so seeking a better future elsewhere we loaded up the family and moved to Palestine. (then like most westerners we were brainwashed to refer to the Jew entity as Israel . . .
September,1998 we now arrived in Ghaza or what the Jewish squatters refer to as Gush Qatif. Quickly my wife was turned off by the lies of the folk there and my son Abdel Rahman came running home from school one day saying "Daddy, my teacher doesn’t cover her hair properly, her dress is to short, they don't learn Torah here and all they do is play"!! Maashaallah, my son was very correct so with no possessions or money we set off to find a home in the nearby Jew settlement of Netivot in occupied 1948 Palestine. Shas, a "religious political party" immediately helped us by providing a home and their private school system and my kids went from knowing NO Hebrew to being tops in there class alhumdulilah. During our stay in Netivot I met a Muslim from UAE and we had conversations for about 2 years where he would ask me questions about Jewish Aqeedah or Jewish creed, and then compare it to Tawheed al Elohiya a part of Islamic Monotheism. I would then go and ask major Rabbis questions about the Jewish creed and always got 60000 different answers. The Jews can't even tell you where there God is based on text; rather they say God is everywhere! (authubilah) One day I decided to go to the Arab souk and buy a translation of the meaning of the Holy Quran in the English language. Subahanallah!!!!! I could not put it down!! Every problem I had with Jews and Judaism was being addressed by Allah the Most High, in the 1st 3 chapters of the Quran Allah swt answered most of my doubts about Judaism. The Quran is firm with the Jews and invites them to a just truth (Islam) to save them from the hellfire their ancestors are currently in.
When I finished reading the entire Quran,I could no longer associate with Jews any longer, thus I was obliged to tell my wife I am a Muslim. Alhumdulilah within 2 weeks my wife decided to read the Quran and became a Muslimah!!! Then the kids after her alhumdulilah"
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
The effects of the Depression caused by the cost of the Wars For The Jews is starting to become symbolic, particularly given the connections between this city and the financing of Zionism.
"Investigators at the Canadian Human Rights Commission share control of an online identity called Jadewarr, which they have used to anonymously monitor and contribute to controversial far-right and white supremacist Web sites, in a strategy that a prominent defendant calls entrapment.
The admission came in testimony Tuesday at the final day of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's hearing in the case of Marc Lemire, who is charged with violating the Human Rights Act's controversial hate speech section because of comments posted on his FreedomSite.
Legally, the admission by CHRC investigator Dean Steacy, and the subsequent cross-examination by Mr. Lemire's lawyers, was the most significant part of the day, in that it bolstered Mr. Lemire's case that he should not be held accountable for what others post on his site, especially if those others are government employees."
"There were moments of drama, such as when Mr. Steacy bluntly and repeatedly refused to answer a question (he was asked for the identity of an anonymous complainant, who never filed a formal complaint), to the evident shock of Athanasios Hadjis, the one-man tribunal hearing the case.
'You refuse to answer?' he said twice."
and (time to investigate themselves!):
"Mr. Steacy himself raised the strange hypothetical scenario of an investigator being charged for online writing that, in the words of section 13.1, is 'likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt.'
'My understanding of the legislation is there's not an exemption for anybody, so that would have to apply to investigators. If an investigator posted hate, then a complaint could be brought against them,' he said."
and (wow!; note how the worst newspaper in the world tries to use this outrage by the Commission to slur the victims of the Commission):
But, for skeptics of human rights commissions, the coup de grace came when the Tribunal wrongly outed an innocent person as a Commission operative, thus exposing her to the unwanted attention of the vast army of bloggers who support Mr. Lemire, or at least do not support the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
For a government agency that has fought for months to protect the personal security of their own staff, even going so far as to (unsuccessfully) invoke national security to keep them off the witness stand, their handling of the 'Nellie Hechme' question was shocking.
. . .
Once Mr. Hadjis explicitly ordered him to do so, Mr. Monfette reported that Bell's technical staff learned that whoever logged on as Jadewarr that day in 2006 had accessed the Internet through a Bell account controlled by Nellie Hechme. He gave the phone number and the street address of the apartment where the account was registered.
By the morning coffee break, associates of Mr. Lemire had already tracked down the value of Ms. Hechme's apartment, but not her identity. By the end of the day, the Commission's lawyer Margot Blight said that Ms. Hechme is a mystery to everyone involved, including Mr. Lemire's team.
Reached by phone last night, Ms. Hechme, 26, told the National Post she has no connection to the tribunal, has never known any of the investigators, and has never accessed a Web site as Jadewarr. She said that in the relevant period in 2006 she did have a Bell Sympatico account with a wireless connection that was not password controlled, meaning anyone within range of her apartment could have accessed the internet with it."
It appears that the Commission may have effectively stolen somebody's identity in order to hide what they were up to!
Mr. Lemire's live blogging of the hearing is here and here and here and here and here.
It's a given that Mr Lemire must be acquitted, as he can hardly be held responsible for the wrongful acts of the investigators. We can also go further, and note that every single prosecution by the Commission that involves alleged hate on the internet also has to be voided, as it is impossible to know whether the 'hate' was the work of the accused or some government employee (we can hardly now rely on the employees themselves to tell us they had nothing to do with it). Finally, all the staff of the Commission have to be subject to their own hate crime investigations, which cannot be held by the Commission itself (for obvious reasons). Perhaps the government could appoint a special judge to investigate and prosecute.
You can see know why the Commission wanted this hearing to be private, and why the lawyers for free speech had to force the testimony out of the witness.
We can't forget that the only reason this has turned into a big media circus is because Canadian Muslim groups had the audacity to turn hate crime legislation, traditionally used to promote the idea of Jews as victims, against the Jewish-led international campaign of hatred against Muslims. Canadian human rights law has to be dismantled so Bibi Natanyahu's 'war on terror' can continue to provide the propaganda basis for Israeli colonialism.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Monday, March 24, 2008
Sunday, March 23, 2008
- Just how many Tibetans has China killed over the past sixty years? This reminds me of something.
- The old hotness was that Jews are the eternal and unique victims, justifying uniquely severe tactics to kill the Palestinians and steal their land. To back that up, we needed human rights commissions to provide constant reminders of the ubiquity of anti-Semitism. Now that it difficult to maintain the idea that the new American Establishment and nuke-monopolist Israel are victims, the new hotness is that all the Muslims are coming to convert the 'white' people they haven't already blown up. Thus America and Europe share Israel's problem of having to hate (and kill) Muslims. Bibi Netanyahu's 'war on terror', a hate campaign against Muslims, ran smack dab into the efforts of human rights commissions whose job it was to punish expressions of hate. Thus the Jewish Billionaires have decided that the commissions have to go, and Canada, as always at the forefront of this kind of thing, is the battlefield. Much as Israeli colonialism has gained from the concept of anti-Semitism, the 'war on terror', i. e., promoting the hatred of Muslims, is more important. The latest from the National Post is here (read the second-last paragraph for a comment on the attempts of the disgusting Commission to protect itself!). Jonathan Kay had been retired from the file - and his article expunged from memory - as his enthusiasm led to Richard Warman issuing a libel notice against the National Post (the libel notice info is from Frank magazine, the only source of useful information in Canadian journalism, and seems to relate to Kay's treating the unproven allegations against Warman as fact).
- Nicholson Baker, meet Charles Lindbergh:
"The bold solution, then, is to reposition Nazi Germany as the victim, and America (and Britain) as the aggressors. This, in essence, is the job the novelist Nicholson Baker appears to have taken on in his new non-fiction book Human Smoke. Baker, who in his novel The Fermata explored the erotics of excreting, seems here to immerse himself in its politics. He is the outrider for paranoid revisionism.
According to Adam Kirsch, writing in the New York Sun, Baker sets out to 'convince the reader that America should not have fought Germany or Japan; that Franklin Roosevelt connived to get us into the war at the behest of the arms manufacturers, and probably knew about the bombing of Pearl Harbor in advance; that Winston Churchill was a proto-fascist; that in Japan's invasion of China, China was the aggressor; that after the fall of France, Churchill was culpable in vowing to fight on, and not acceding to Hitler's "peace" terms; that the Holocaust was, at least in part, Hitler's response to British aggression, and that the only people who demonstrated true wisdom in the run-up to the war were American and British pacifists.'"
The author compares Baker to the 9/11 'Truthers', " the most egregious example of this mushrooming cult" of "intellectual nihilism".
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
The article is flawed for two reasons:
- it refuses to abandon the idea that the war was fought for oil, even when everything in the article conclusively proves that it could not possibly have been fought for oil; and
- it falls back on a no less silly argument - which is largely that of the American isolationist Right - that you can no longer control resources by fighting wars, based on the conservative view of the supremacy of international trade and markets.
Falling back on market explanations won't help. The market doesn't explain years of Saudi cooperation, and the decision in the last few years that Saudi cooperation will become much more selective. It doesn't explain why every major oil company in the world that isn't associated with the Anglo-American Empire is getting hugely lucrative deals in Iran (and elsewhere in the Middle East). The rest of the world is completely fed up with Americans squandering their wealth on Wars For The Jews, partly because of the extreme immorality of these wars, and partly because of their extreme stupidity. People who have cooperated with the inevitability of American strength for decades have decided that they no longer can do business with people who are so stupid they can't even grasp their own basic self-interest. Oil development contracts are being awarded on the basis of ideology. Markets have very little to do with it.
The article is a classic example of what happens when you try to deal with a subject while avoiding the only issue that matters.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Could Spitzer have been inadvertently caught up in an American counter-intel operation against a Mossad honeytrap? Unlikely, as we have seen countless examples of Israeli intelligence operations caught in the U. S., with the perps allowed to scurry back home. The American government is far more likely to ask to share the results of an Israeli intelligence operation than to try to stop it. I'm not saying that this was not an operation with intelligence connections (the operator had two Israeli passports - was one of them a special passport that indicated to officials that this person should be given special treatment? - and had special IRS credentials, when the IRS was involved in the investigation!), just that the American government was probably not interested in shutting it down.
A Wall Street conspiracy is the best bet. Wall Street was furious with Spitzer, both for demonstrating that you could build a successful political career attacking high finance crooks, but also in doing so with a moralizing zeal. There was a lot of interest in deterring politicians from any future efforts to attempt to clean up corporate corruption.
Palast's theory, that Spitzer was removed specifically to prevent him from interfering in the sub-prime crisis corruption, doesn't really make sense (note that lite-Zionist Palast can't help throwing in a completely irrelevant reference to 'Gulf sheiks') . Had Spitzer still been N. Y. Attorney-General he might have still been a danger to them, but as Governor he had his own problems to look after, and was no longer a direct threat to Wall Street. Palast refers to Spitzer's recent bang-on attack connecting Bush Administration regulatory skullduggery directly to the sub-prime crisis, but this was published well after Spitzer was in the sights of law enforcement officials.
The Sunday Times probably is closest to the truth (although it wasn't just "the presence of a federal prosecutor from the political corruption squad that first alerted New York Times reporters to the possibility that a politician might be involved"; there was an actual, and illegal, leak; my emphasis in red and green):
"Yet not even a hoard of saucy Dupré photographs unearthed by the New York Post on Friday could distract Wall Street lawyers and bankers from intriguing anomalies in the small print of the prosecution case against Spitzer . . .
While there was little sympathy, there were plenty of questions about how a handful of outwardly innocuous payments from his bank account came to trigger a federal investigation into his sexual activities.
'The movement of the amounts of cash required to pay prostitutes, even high-priced prostitutes over a long period of time, does not commonly generate a full-scale investigation,' noted Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor and former member of OJ Simpson’s legal team. Others on Wall Street were wondering whether Spitzer’s financial dealings had been singled out for scrutiny as revenge for his past prosecutions.
The beginning of Spitzer’s end can be traced to three banking transfers that left his personal account at the North Fork Bank in New York last spring and summer. For reasons that have not been satisfactorily explained, these payments totalling $15,000 attracted the attention of bank employees who monitor accounts for signs of suspicious activity.
After the terrorist attacks of 2001 on New York and Washington, laws relating to money-laundering were significantly tightened, requiring banks to file so-called 'suspicious activity reports' whenever there is evidence that clients might be trying to sidestep routine regulations.
Spitzer’s transfers to a company called QAT International Inc – later revealed to be a front for the Emperors Club – were reportedly considered by the bank to be an attempt to avoid another law that requires all transactions over $10,000 to be reported to the US Treasury. Breaking down payments with intent to avoid reporting is an offence known as 'structuring'.
Yet Spitzer is the son of a multi-millionaire property tycoon and has substantial assets of his own. The notion that as few as three payments from his account of less than $10,000 might be considered suspicious 'raises as many questions as answers', said Dershowitz.
'We are talking about a man who is a multi-millionaire with numerous investments and purchases,' he said. 'It’s simply none of the federal government’s business that a man may have been moving his own money around in order to keep his wife in the dark about his private sexual peccadilloes.'
Prosecution sources said last week they had no idea at first that the money was related to prostitution. Even after a second bank, HSBC, reported suspicious activity at QAT’s account – and a link was found to Spitzer – it was at first assumed that the money might be related to corruption or improper use of political campaign funds.
The case was initially turned over to the section of the Manhattan prosecutor’s office that deals with political corruption. The ensuing investigation duly established QAT was banking payments to a prostitution network and that Spitzer was a client.
When the case against the one man and three women accused of running the international network reached court earlier this month, it was the presence of a federal prosecutor from the political corruption squad that first alerted New York Times reporters to the possibility that a politician might be involved.
It has since been established that both North Fork and HSBC were on the receiving end of Spitzer investigations in his days as attorney-general. In 2003 North Fork was obliged to refund $20,000 to dozens of home-owners after Spitzer claimed that the bank had been charging illegal fees.
No evidence has been produced that the bank reporting of Spitzer’s transactions was maliciously intended, yet Dershowitz and other commentators have noted that the system was designed to ferret out drug dealers, the mafia, terrorists and major financial fraud.
'Once federal authorities concluded that the ‘suspicious financial transactions’ attributed to Mr Spitzer did not fit any of [these categories], they should have closed the investigation,' said Dershowitz.
Instead, they went after Spitzer with the raw, relentless enthusiasm that the governor had so often displayed towards his own targets in the past. And although his speedy resignation defused much of the political tension in New York, many questions remain about how a man so familiar with the politics of personal destruction exposed himself to inevitable ruin."
As I have already noted, Spitzer wasn't reckless. In fact, he was almost absurdly careful in avoiding the usual traps of prosecutors and law enforcement. He first alerted suspicion when he asked to have his name removed from a wire transfer. If you read between the lines just a bit, it is apparent that Wall Street actually had private detectives following him (watching him buy money orders: another traceless way of moving money). When the two banks involved in alerting the authorities were special targets of Spitzer, and the alerting otherwise makes no sense, and Wall Street was following him around, it looks like Spitzer's fate was part of a Wall Street campaign specifically directed against him. It's a combination of revenge and a warning that Wall Street's information gathering capacity is vast, and will be used to take down any politician that dares challenge Wall Street corruption in the future.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Friday, March 14, 2008
- Egyptian diplomats painstakingly craft a de facto ceasefire between the Israelis and Hamas.
- Although the Israelis won't admit there is a ceasefire (as they don't acknowledge that they might negotiate with 'terrorists'), they halt their military operations in Gaza.
- Whoever is firing the rockets in the general direction of Israel stops firing them (the end of the rockets is what the Israelis claim is their main goal).
- Hamas re-presents its proposals for a full ceasefire agreement with Israel, which must include the cessation of Israeli violence in the West Bank (Hamas takes its responsibility as the elected government of all the Palestinians seriously).
- Israel attacks the West Bank (one of its famous, and utterly illegal, targeted assassinations).
- Rockets start firing again.
- Israel mounts an aerial attack against the northern Gaza Strip, described by the Israelis, of course, as a retaliation for the rockets.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
The deeper, more Machiavellian, strategy is also based on mathematics, her age. McCain won't run again. Obama, if he wins, will. She'll be too old to run if she has to wait through two more terms. He only hope is to ensure that McCain beats Obama, and then run against the new Republican candidate in 2012. She therefore has to make race a big issue, to make sure that McCain wins. It is not a 'suicide pact': she is intentionally attempting to make sure that McCain wins so that she can run in 2012.
The Clintons' strategy is risky as it runs the risk of backfiring. They are basically insulting Americans by assuming Americans are racists. Even racists don't like to have somebody make that kind of insulting assumption! Here's an idea: why doesn't she throw caution to the winds, switch parties, and run as McCain's VP? Do you think her elderly female fans would follow her, on the assumption that the bigger deal is that she can then run as the super bipartisan (and MWFTJP) candidate in 2012? Too crazy, right?
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
- Holier-than-thou Spitzer is laid low by a hooker scandal.
- Spitzer's care in not being discovered was just the thing that led to his downfall, not to mention the unraveling of the whole (Israeli) pimping ring.
- Bibi's 'war on terror' has directly destroyed the career of the most promising Jewish-American politician.
- This interview - or at least part I with the second part to come - by Wajahat Ali with Ishmael Reed is a must read for conspiracy theorists (my emphasis in red):
"Now, Whites have been the most subsidized group in the history of the United States and maybe the history of the world, while Blacks were enslaved and were the assets of Whites. Slavery, [we were] like property. Native Americans were driven off their land. Lincoln even took part in the Black Hawk campaign against the Native Americans in Illinois. While they were being exterminated and driven off their land,
Whites were collecting assets. The Great Society programs were for Whites. Two thirds of those who gained from the War on Poverty were White. I mean Marlon Fitzwater, former Reagan aide- when he talked about the Los Angeles riots, where the typical rioter was Latino, and the Whites burned down Korea Town but they blamed on Blacks. He said the riots were a result of the Great Society programs, pushing the myth of Black dependency, when 80% of the people getting Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security are White.
Also, the mortgage tax write-off is benefiting Whites to the tune of trillions since the FHA has discriminated against Blacks for many years. They have come around, half-heartedly, only recently. My mortgage was just sold to Wells Fargo; they will not give up records about their lending to African Americans as well as Whites. A report issued by the Association of Community for Reform Now in Sept.2005, said of Wells Fargo's lending practices: 'When reviewing the combined totals of all of Wells Fargo's lending operations, one out of every four mortgages made to African-Americans was a high rate loan (24.71%), and one out of every nine loans made to Latinos (11.65%) had a high rate, compared to just one of out every thirteen loans to whites (7.44%). In comparative terms, this means that African-Americans were 3.3 times more likely than whites to receive a higher cost subprime loan from Wells Fargo and that Latinos were 1.6 times more likely than whites.'
So, African Americans who have the same credit or better credit are charged higher interest rates than Whites. That's been documented: the Center for Responsible Lending, another place people can go to. Contrary to newspaper myths, two thirds of those homeowners who have been caught in this sub prime mess had good credit. They went to the sub prime predators because they were denied loans by red lining banks.
So, I'm in the position of backing White businesses and homeowners because of my mortgage is at Wells Fargo. So, they use my money to finance White businesses and White mortgages. So, we're out trillions of dollars over the years for financing White industries. In other words, why don't Obama and Henry Louis Gates and other 'post race' intellectuals and politicians preach 'personal responsibility' to Whites?"
Reed also describes in some detail the importance of the Eugenics Movement in covertly sponsoring a lot of American public debate, and considers the basis for the mysterious appeal of Obama to Wall Street:
"Wall Street wants him, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, J.P.Morgan are his contributors, and these wealthy people are beyond countries. Some of them don't even live here anymore. I think that the Firestones live in Turkey.These multinationals, some of them, they've been around, they are more sophisticated than the average American, they've seen diversity in the world. So, they're saying, 'We need this guy to represent our interests.' Because, this whole 1950's Country Club, Bush type image is not going to work anymore. I mean, those types of guys can't go anywhere, I mean they can't even travel places anymore. Bush, I mean, he can't go to Spain or he might get arrested. (Laughs.) So, what they need is this really pretty, dark face. When Bush traveled through Africa he was confronted with questions about Barack. It must have got to him because he started attacking Barack when he returned. An Obama election would be an enormous boost to the capitalist system, which seems on the verge of collapse. I could see enormous crowds turning out to greet him as he fronts for the system. If he went to Baghdad he'd receive a ticker tape parade and even the Taliban would turn out to get a glimpse of him. He'd be mobbed in Africa and Asia."
In other words, a Black President would fix some of the PR damage done by all the Wars For The Jews.
- Speaking of that damage, the big bomb would be when Americans figure out the direct connection between the cost of one of the Wars For The Jews (the one against Iraq), and the sub-prime crisis.
- The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is going to hold its own secret hearing to determine whether it has engaged in any wrongdoing! At least they are consistent in their cluelessness about issues of procedure! You know you are in trouble when your own human
rights tribunal doesn't respect human rights, including the basic right of a public hearing into the allegations of wrongdoing against the tribunal itself! Remember that some of the allegations of wrongdoing include what I would call real hate speech - making statements which might incite violence against specific individuals, including a Canadian Senator!! - things which would aptly be dealt with by the criminal court system. Remember also that the only reason that this is now a political issue is that Canadian human rights law is drawing dangerously close to stopping the organized international campaign of hatred against Muslims, an integral part of Bibi Netanyahu's 'war on terror'. That's a real hate crime, one that is hurting people all over the world.
- "Pursuing the Millennium: Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel" (also here). The problem of a few crazies is acute as the settler movement controls not only the Israeli government, but also, through the Jewish Billionaires and the peculiarities of American campaign financing and the Jew-controlled American media, the American government.
- The hate crimes you never hear about.
- "Still no answers on bombing of UN post"
Monday, March 10, 2008
"We are not scientists
I am not a scientist and you are not a scientist. In the real world, the density of scientists is quite low. On the web, where real science can be found, the density increases significantly but in the worldwide climate-change-debate-o-sphere the density approaches zero. Science is not debating the big conclusions. Scientists are complaining about the media scare-mongering, individual findings are debated, methodologies challenged and the magnitude of predictions are doubted but not that greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed increase in global warming over the last 50 years. Read that last part carefully because that is the core of the IPCC consensus. Don't let anyone fool you into believing that there is some other scientific consensus - there isn't. Any stories you've heard about any other scientific consensus on AGW are the result of science illiterates doing the reporting or worse."
I first heard about this twenty-five years ago, talking to a physicist who was working on one of the climate-change computer models. He was sure of the conclusions back then, and we have had nothing but decades of further data added to the models, all of it confirming the same conclusion, and all of it predictive of what has actually happened (you know how much I like predictiveness). The models are as good a set of models as you are going to find.
There is no certainty, of course, but do the Pascalian math (Pascal's Wager probably doesn't work for religion, but is an excellent description of rational behavior: a rational person will go a long way to avoid even a very small chance of a terrible eventuality). The chance of the model being wrong is very low. The downside of failing to act is literally the worst conceivable outcome, the end of human civilization. There is not the slightest question that a rational person would act on the overwhelming scientific consensus in order to avoid even the smallest chance of the worst possible outcome. Unfortunately, the chance of the worst possible outcome isn't small at all.
The Bloggers for Exxon are excited that one cold winter disproves decades of a very successful model. This is pathetic. Even more pathetic is the 'progressive' wing of the Bloggers for Exxon, the group that says we should not do anything about global warming because some rich people might make money solving the problem. Obviously, we are in the middle of some very bad conspiracies where corrupt governments are actively mis-solving the problem with the biofuels scam, a scam intended to protect Big Oil while simultaneously enriching, using taxpayer dollars, the agricultural-industrial complex. The fact that biofuels is a massive fraud, and an extremely harmful one, does not mean we should give up. That's exactly what Big Oil wants.
I find it amusing that the libertarians (the current polite word for those with a fetish for the very rich) love what they call 'creative destruction', supposedly one of the great benefits of untrammeled capitalism, as long as the destruction only happens to poor people. The kind of reorganization of society which will be required to attempt to save the world will cause the kind of 'creative destruction' that will gore the oxen of a few rich people, and thus is inconceivable.
We have to start making rational decisions based on the best evidence available to us, evidence which is frankly very good. The downside of failing to act is so high that there is only one possible intelligent decision. There is no magic to it: we have to cut the emission of greenhouse gases, and do it by making it prohibitively expensive (using taxation) or illegal to emit the levels of gases being emitted now.
Sunday, March 09, 2008
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
"Israelis and Jews are portrayed as child killers and brutal assassins, while no mention is made of the Palestinian terrorists responsible for the rockets that have injured and killed scores of Israeli civilians, or the role Hamas has played in promoting the attacks."
Of course, Hamas has consistently and repeatedly been seeking a ceasefire, a ceasefire that Israel won't agree to because to do so would be, in the wonderful circular reasoning of Zionism, negotiating with 'terrorists' (and I have to point out that the number of Israelis injured and killed by the rockets is a tiny, tiny percentage of the Palestinians injured and killed by the utterly illegal Israeli collective punishment response). Abe better get used to having the Israelis and their apologists compared to Nazis, as this is a meme with a long life ahead of it.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Monday, March 03, 2008
The recent massacres in Gaza - most of the deaths apparently due to aerial bombardment (no sense risking the lives of the chosen people in conducting the Shoah) - have completely changed international law. It is now acceptable to engage in the collective punishment of mass murder of civilians . . . as long as the murder is 'proportionate' (in the ratcheting immorality of Zionism, this concept actually started with complaints about the last illegal Israeli attack on Lebanon). All of the international calls for restraint have stated that the massacres were wrong only because they were disproportionate, meaning that it is now acceptable under international law to murder a proportionate number of civilians if that would accomplish your military or political goals (another curiosity is that Israel is still allowed to distinguish between the deaths of civilians and 'militants' when the slaughter is conducted with bombs dropped on civilian housing, as if the bombers get special dispensation for being lucky). It is not clear what would be proportionate, but it must be at least somewhat less than the 200-300 to 1 ratio of deaths favored by the Zionist state. We must not forget that Israel, as a de facto occupying power, has a positive obligation to protect the people under its occupation. We must also not forget that the deaths can't be compared: Palestinian killing of the oppressors is permitted under international law as the Palestinians are fighting a war of national liberation (it remains unclear whether that license extends to the civilian population of the oppressing country, or even whether any adult in a country like Israel can be considered to be a civilian).
Not only is proportionate collective punishment now allowed (at least if conducted by Israel), but it can extend to proportionate mass murder of civilians. The destruction of international law is yet another disaster we can lay completely at the feet of Zionism and its apologists.
Sunday, March 02, 2008
"I know that many Jews, especially Zionist Jews, have developed almost instinctive knee-jerk defensive reactions to any comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany. However, the truth must be proclaimed aloud, irrespective of how many Zionists will get angry.
Israel claims that it doesn’t murder innocent civilians deliberately. But this is a big, obscene lie, of which even most Israelis are aware. Mistakes happen a few times, but when the wanton slaughter of children occurs each day and every day of the year, it means it is policy.
In addition, when the number of victims, especially innocent victims, as in Gaza, even intent itself becomes irrelevant.
In the final analysis, murdering knowingly is murdering deliberately, regardless of the prevarication and the verbal juggling.
Hence, Jews around the world, especially those who support Israel, should be willing to bring themselves to recognizing that what their wonderful state is doing to these helpless Palestinians is a virtual holocaust or at least a holocaust in the making."
"If Jews who support this satanic entity are not willing to call the spade a spade and recognize a holocaust as a holocaust, then they should be viewed as active accomplices in this wanton rampage of murder and terror.
This is not a war. Calling the current Israeli onslaught on Gaza a war is like fornicating with words. Wars occur between armies and states.
What is happening in Gaza is actually a merciless and brutal rampage of murder and terror waged by a Wehrmacht-like army against a blockaded, beleaguered and starved people who want to survive and be free, very much like Jews did under the Nazi occupation of Europe.
Indeed, when Israel murders a hundred Palestinian, mostly innocent civilians, for every Israeli killed, there is a name for that, it is massacre.
It is conscionable that honest people around the world, including many conscientious Jews who can’t bear watching the heinous crimes Israel is committing in their collective name, must call the spade a spade. A holocaust, after all, doesn’t become lesser when perpetrated by Jews. There is no such a thing as a kosher holocaust or kosher massacres."
I guess this is an appeal to the morality of Jews from the Anglosphere. As I've said here many times, I think this is barking up the wrong tree. These are people who feel themselves to be moral because they did not support the attack on Iraq, but they support whatever Israel does to the Palestinians, all under the outrageous Zionist lie of 'self-defense'. The absolute best we can expect from them is the lite Zionist tactical approach of calling for restraint because the IDF excesses are increasing the danger that the long-term plan - which they fully support - of ethnic cleansing may be stopped by world outrage. A more realistic quote from the comments to Desertpeace, from (the real?) Alan Cabal:
"When Jews worldwide are treated as Israel treats the Palestinians, this will stop."
Unfortunately, this kind of ScareJew, which is starting to appear in the lite Zionist sites, is the only constraint on the immorality of the Jewish community. Of course, Jews worldwide won't be treated as Israel treats the Palestinians, but only because the rest of the world is more moral than Israel and its supporters.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
- In what must be a coincidence, both Gordon Brown and Sarko simultaneously advocated teaching their respective schoolchildren about the Holocaust, Sarko by linking each French child to a Holocaust victim, and Brown by (temporarily) shipping them to Polish concentration camps. David Irving wisely suggested that it would make more sense to link French schoolchildren to the current child victims in Gaza, and Gilad Atzmon points out that the British schoolchildren should be sent to the concentration camp in Gaza. Sarko, perhaps realizing the obviousness of the Gaza alternative, has dropped his plan.
- Yonatan Mendel on the problems of language in Israeli journalism. The joke is that however bad the Israelis are, the disgusting American media is a billion times worse.
- Marc Zell (of all people!) understands that despite all the usual and expected slavish rhetoric from Obama, he is not to be trusted to keep fighting More Wars For The Jews. It is funny that only the hardest of the hard core nuts want to talk about this: those Americans - the vast majority, who usually haven't anybody to vote for - who don't want More Wars For The Jews are afraid to raise the point, for fear Obama will be forced by World Jewry into taking a More Wars For The Jews position, and the neocons don't want to raise the issue as they don't want to create the suggestion that it is even conceivable for the United States to stop fighting Wars For The Jews.
- Remember this? It is now up to three trillion, and counting. It is odd how wars of choice seem to take so much more out of you than wars of necessity (assuming there are such things).
- The Danes, who really must have some emotional problems, have been reprinting the infamous cartoons (my emphasis; see also here):
"The decision to re-print came just one day after three men, two Tunisians and a Danish national, were arrested for an alleged plot to kill one of the cartoonists, Kurt Westergaard. At least 15 papers across Denmark reprinted images of the cartoons, in what can only be described as a calculated provocation. Despite having no evidence regarding the guilt of the three detained, since the security service claimed it moved on suspicion and did not have enough grounds to charge the men, the Danish media raced to be first to print the cartoons, supposedly to underline their defence of 'free speech.'"
"Recent events confirm the fraudulent character of the Danish establishment’s claim to be defending democratic rights. The fact that those arrested for the supposed plot were not charged and that the two Tunisian nationals will be expelled from Denmark without any legal proceedings whatsoever did not raise any concerns.
Little has been said in the media about the three accused of the murder plot and their right to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty and to a fair trial. The two Tunisians, although they have been living in Denmark for more than seven years, are to be deported under reactionary legislation which provides for anyone deemed to be a 'national security threat' to be expelled from Denmark."
There is a similar provocation program in the Netherlands (although the Dutch are at least trying to be more careful).
- One in a hundred adult Americans are currently in jail.
- I find it hilarious that every single major American newspaper that reviewed the Walt/Mearsheimer book had it reviewed by a Jewish-American Zionist writer who gave it a very negative or partly negative review (most were in fact over-the-top slurring, practically describing it as hate speech), and I get criticized by referring to the 'Jew-controlled' press. Just a coincidence that would only be noticed by an anti-Semite. My psychic revenge will be watching the United States destroy itself by failing to recognize its big problem. The destruction is well on its way.
- Counterpunch continues its pathetic campaign of attempting to explain the abject failure of the traditional left (as exemplified by editor Cockburn) by blaming it on 'conspiracy theory'. We know that the real reason for the failure of the anti-war movement is the conscious decision by its leaders to abuse it for the partisan political purpose of getting Democrats elected. The worst thing that could happen for the Democrats is for Bush to authorize an end to the American presence in Iraq before the next election. The anti-war movement is a failure because it is really a pro-war movement.
- Hell thaws: David Duke rethinks his semi-endorsement of Obama.
- Josh Marshall wonders if the governing Canadian Conservative Party can possibly be as corrupt as it appears to be. Yes it can, with the facts now confirmed by three people and the Conservatives outright lying about it. In fact, this is part of a series of electoral shenanigans, including meddling in the Ottawa municipal election and an ongoing dispute with Elections Canada over election funding which appears to have resulted in the surprise resignation of the Chief Electoral Officer. The Conservatives, who try to portray themselves as the clean alternative to the corrupt Liberals, have an additional problem in their ongoing attempts to covertly help their friend Brian Mulroney as his old corruption problems continue to grind through Canadian politics.
- "An open letter to Ehud Olmert"