Some anti-'Iran-talk'

There are indications that the 'adults' - that's the code word, and a very appropriate one, for 'anti-Zionists' - in Washington would like to have some kind of rapprochement with Iran, and indications that the representatives of the Iranian plutocracy are also looking for a mutually economically beneficial resolution. The Iranians just saved the Americans and their semi-stooge from great embarrassment, or even worse, by ordering both al-Maliki and al-Sadr to back off. Even more impressive, this Iranian effort is being honestly acknowledged in the tightly controlled American press. American 'hard power' was useless to help al-Maliki, and Americans have absolutely no 'soft power' in the Middle East, so it took Iran to save the day from another American- Zionist attempt to stir up trouble. Will Iran get points in Washington for saving the Americans from yet another Zionist-inspired disaster?

Wi-Fi Surfing with the CHRC

It must pain the Canadian human-rights-industrial complex to see Ernst Zundel's old site as the go-to place for finding out about the criminal wrongdoings of the Canadian Human Rights (sic) Commission. The Freedom-Site considers the details of one of the crimes, the use of wi-fi surfing to hijack the internet identity of an innocent woman in order to disguise the fact that the posters to various websites were Commission employees. Of course, the Commission considers members of these 'hate' sites to be violent racists, and used wi-fi surfing to disguise their identity on the assumption that somebody would be able to trace the postings back to the source. They were therefore prepared to subject an innocent bystander to the possibly violent reprisals of these 'hate-mongers'.

There are a number of other issues raised in the recent tribunal hearing:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.

The attitude of the Commission is summarized by Jonathan Kay:

"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.

The mystery of Joe Chandler

Some time ago, I mentioned the mysterious 'Joe Chandler' as a possible Zodiac suspect (everybody is now keen on Richard Gaikowski as the Zodiac, with Gaikowski's only big flaw as a possible suspect being questions whether he was in the Bay area early enough). There is a long and detailed article on Chandler written by James Renner (and see the 2005 article by Steve Huff), which considers the theory of Chris Yarbrough that Chandler was a wanted bomber named Stephen Craig Campbell. The main problem with this is a huge height discrepancy - Campbell was 6'2", Chandler 5'7" or 5'8" (there also appears to be an age discrepancy of about 10 years). I'm still having trouble with the fact that investigators could find no fingerprints for Chandler.

Adam Gadahn II

The very strange saga of Adam Gadahn has been so successful that it has inspired at least one imitator (found via here), a Jewish American claiming to be a convert to Islam with a 'terrorism'-supporting website (this does not appear to be the original site, and the internal link appears to have been changed due to the Fox article) The funny part:

"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.

Kolko while not speaking directly about RevolutionMuslim said radical sites like these are not often prosecuted."

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):

"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"

All Americans got was a lousy t-shirt saying 'So?'

Dick Cheney went to Saudi Arabia, and all Americans got was a lousy t-shirt saying 'So?' Actually, he first wanted approval for his war on Iran. They said 'no' (although he probably had something to do with encouraging the usual silly Arab infighting with respect to how to deal with the increase in Iranian influence caused, ironically, by the American attack on Iraq). Then he wanted them to turn up the oil spigots to try to save the American economy from the effects of all the expenditures for the Wars For The Jews. They said 'no fucking way'. Cheney is now trying to talk around it, but the United States' single most reliable ally for at least the last thirty years has finally had enough. Enough with being insulted and ignored, enough with putting up with a country unable even to look after its own self-interest due to the stranglehold of Zionism.

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.

Really rough day for the Canadian Human Rights (sic) Commission

Really rough day for the Canadian Human Rights (sic) Commission (my emphasis in red):

"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."

and:

"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.

Better late than never

Jeffrey St. Clair arrives at Hillary's two-part strategy. I can imagine that there may even be a deal between Hillary and the Republicans, arranged through their common Christian Zionist friends, for Hillary to knee-cap Obama in return for the Republicans agreeing not to run anybody good against her in 2012 (maybe Bob Dole will run again!). This deal makes even more sense if you consider that the two American political parties are really the NMWFTJ Party and the MWFTJ Party. Hillary's braintrust, which seems to be incompetent, may be arranging for at least eight more years of MWFTJ Party rule. After that, the United States will officially be a third world country.

The Iraq War was a Conspiracy

Juan Cole reprints Craig Unger's refutation of arguments that Jim Lobe is wrong in ascribing conspiratorial motives and methods to the neocons in their various efforts to trick the United States into attacking Iraq. Unger reminds us of the critical importance of the forged Niger documents (and we can't forget that these documents arose out of the Italian circle of Ledeen, which is quite a coincidence, even if you have a lot of faith in coincidences). The only unfortunate part of Unger's refutation is his last word, when any fool can now see that oil, at least American access to oil, had nothing to do with the attack on Iraq. As predicted by many smart people, including the American oil companies, the attack has actually gravely decreased American energy security (although, as I have pointed out, this may have been part of a larger plan to reconfigure world oil dependencies, with the U. S. looking more and more to Canada for oil). The motivation of the deceiving neocons was entirely Zionist, and Zionist motives are the only explanation for the 'surge', which is intended to break up Iraq into three parts, a prospect with no possible strategic benefits to the United States.

MWFTJ Forecast

In case you're worried, the forecast on the likelihood of More Wars For The Jews is good, at least in the near future (somehow getting the issue into the mainstream of American discourse - a problem caused by all the slurrers who attack if you even raise the issue - is the only way to permanently fix this problem). Dick went begging, cap in hand, to the Saudi king, for a war against Iran, and got shot down (he didn't get much help on oil prices either!). More importantly, the next WFTJ, the next utterly illegal and unprovoked slaughter of innocent civilians on behalf of Jewish supremacism, will be met by retaliatory and completely self-defensive rocket fire from whomever the victim country is, whether the attacker is Israel itself or the Americans, tricked yet again into fighting another WFTJ. The rockets will be a decisive PR problem for Israel, and one for which the Israeli leaders need to prepare. The had rejected their own system, the useless 'Iron Dome', as it would not be ready until at least 2010. They went shopping for an American system, but rejected it when a rigged sales demonstration showed only eight of thirty-six test rockets shot down (excuse me while I indulge myself in a little laugh). No rocket defense system will work (a fact which hasn't forced its way through the 'Iron Domes' of the Israeli defense establishment, probably because they refuse to admit that rockets have ruined their violent plans), but the Israelis aren't even attempting to fool their own citizens that there will be a semblance of protection until at least 2010. So no WFTJ until then.

Revisionisms

Revisionisms:

1. Just how many Tibetans has China killed over the past sixty years? This reminds me of something.
2. 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).
3. 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".

Kissing the Blacks Goodbye

Politico analyzes the daunting math facing Hillary, even on her best-case-of-best-case scenarios. Her strategy comes back to arguments to sway superdelegates, based on the concept of 'unelectability', which is a subtle way of saying 'did you notice he's black?'. It is interesting that the Democrats lost their natural 'base', the support of racist Southern whites, due to their moral support for the Civil Rights Movement. Now they are on the verge of permanently losing the support of black voters. The debate can continue forever amongst white analysts whether the Clinton campaign is racist (I think you have to be remarkably blind not to see it). If Hillary manages to find a trick to keep the nomination away from Obama, there will be no debate in the black community over the real reason (not to mention the ethnic nature of the group of strategists behind it), and the Democrats can kiss another huge chunk of the electorate goodbye, forever. In fact, clever marketing by the Republicans - say, a black V-P candidate with some community credibility - might mean that black American voters permanently return to the party of Lincoln.

Why Did the US Invade Iraq?

Jim Lobe is slightly tentative in considering the question "Why Did the US Invade Iraq?", and settles on a combination of 'imperial reach' and, of course, Israel. He rightly rejects the light-Zionist theory of oil, which is practically an insult to the intelligence. I think that the sales pitch crafted by the Zionists to some American leaders did probably include an aspect of imperial reach, as that fitted into the 'end of history' ideas made popular in the 90s by some of the dumber American Empire academics, who felt that the U. S. had a once-in-a-lifetime chance to take over the entire world after the fall of the Soviet Union. The sales pitch was a trick, which is obvious to everybody now. The invasion of Iraq was just another War For The Jews.

American Confused Conservative

Useful but fundamentally flawed article from the American Conservative by Robert Bryce on the amount of oil being used by the American military in killing the innocent civilians of Iraq, and the fact that almost none of it is coming from Iraq. We all remember how the neocons insisted that all that Iraqi oil was going to pay for the war and the occupation and the rebuilding (for the real world, see here and, taking into account the unreliable source, here). There is a slow dawning that it is the cost of the fuel used by the Americans in Iraq - both the sheer quantity of it and the fact that the military has to source it at ultra-premium prices - that has led to an increase in the price of oil. Of course, the main reason for the price increase has been the fact that oil has been denominated in increasingly worthless American dollars. American Dollars are increasingly worthless due to the fact that the U. S. government had to finance the war by borrowing money it didn't have on a massive scale, thus permanently destroying the complicated mechanism by which the American economy soared on the basis of borrowed money, and leading directly to the current sub-prime crisis (aka, New Great Depression) and the plummeting American Dollar (aka, American Peso). The system of financing American consumerism was so finely calibrated that it simply couldn't take the competition for new borrowed money required by the American Treasury to pay for the Iraq war, and the house of cards came tumbling down.

The article is flawed for two reasons:

1. 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
2. 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.

The two issues are connected, and the connection shows how the American isolationist Right is no better than the neocons. We all know that the war wasn't directly about oil: it was a War For The Jews. We are also seeing a great danger that the next American Presidential election will be fought between two candidates for the More Wars For The Jews Party, a direct result of the failure to acknowledge the real reason for the attack on Iraq by the American chattering classes.

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.

The credibility of Sequoia Voting Systems

I would have thought that a letter like the one sent by Sequoia Voting Systems to a team of independent voting machine auditors led by Ed Felten would be sufficient, in and of itself, to prevent all government officials from ever considering buying a voting machine made by Sequoia. Can you imagine what would happen if an automobile company sent a similar letter to a consumer reviewer of automobiles?

DOE like a novel

There is the complete basis for a mystery novel in this DOE Network Case File.

Two-part strategy, continued

On the way to give a political speech, Bill Clinton was subjected to a 'mugging' (found at Covert History). The two-part strategy continues. The Clintons aren't stupid. The race-baiting has to be obvious enough that it can't be missed, but subtle enough that the elderly ladies who still support Clinton can claim, while winking broadly, that it is not really going on. The best part about this is that the Clintonistas have tacitly acknowledged that it was Bill's ham-handed misuse of race that made Obama the national figure he has become. Bill could see a fellow charismatic winner a mile away (and knew the threat that Obama posed, as Hillary is completely charisma-less), and started in on Obama even before he was considered to be a plausible candidate. It was an uncharacteristic tactical error by Bill, and explains why he disappeared from the Hillary campaign for a while. Now he's back, apparently working on the second part of the strategy, ensuring that McCain is elected so Hillary can win in 2012.

Spitzer conspiracy theories

There are lots of Eliot Spitzer conspiracy theories flying about. The Mossad did it? How likely is it that the Mossad would take out the best candidate for a Jewish President? Assimilated as he may have been, he was much better than the alternative: arranging for Lieberman to be McCain's VP, and then assassinating McCain. Messy.

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.

Richard Gaikowski

The latest Zodiac Killer suspect being bandied about (main thread here is a little confusing as the posters are privy to information that is not fully disclosed; other threads here) was named Richard Gaikowski (for some odd reason, the name is never allowed in the postings). He had the newspaper/film/military/counterculture connections usually associated with the Zodiac Killer, and "some emotional turmoil in the 1970s". Gaikowski was also a USENET (pdf:easier to read cache here) pioneer, and you have to wonder whether he participated in internet discussions about the Zodiac Killer before his death in 2004. He is not a new suspect - his name has come up before, e. g., here - and he falls into the class of San Francisco ‘characters’ who seem to surround the story.

Like clockwork

Like clockwork:

1. Egyptian diplomats painstakingly craft a de facto ceasefire between the Israelis and Hamas.
2. 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.
3. 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).
4. 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).
5. Israel attacks the West Bank (one of its famous, and utterly illegal, targeted assassinations).
6. Rockets start firing again.
7. Israel mounts an aerial attack against the northern Gaza Strip, described by the Israelis, of course, as a retaliation for the rockets.
   

Hillary's two-part strategy

It is impossible to continue to pretend that the Clinton race-baiting isn't a conscious strategy of the campaign. They can do the math. She can't possibly obtain enough elected delegates. She needs to convince the superdelegates that Obama is unelectable, and the only way to do that is to make it appear that race will be enough of an issue that it will lead to a McCain win over Obama.

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?

Unintended consequences: the deep ironies of Eliot Spitzer

Eliot Spitzer was well on his way to becoming the first Jewish President of the United States. Bibi Netanyahu is a jerk from Israel whose think tanks concocted something called the 'war on terror' to create hatred of Muslims to allow Israel to continue to build its Middle Eastern Empire. The 'war on terror' focuses on preventing something called 'terrorism', and has created a hyper-vigilance amongst American law enforcement authorities with respect to cash transactions, it being assumed that Muslims are shifting chunks of cash around to fund the next September 11 attack. Spitzer was paranoid about his escapades being discovered. No paper trail: no credit cards, no wire transfers. Just cash, delivered. The 'war on terror' has caused relatvely small cash transactions to attract the attention of the Feds, who actually thought Spitzer might have been up to something entirely different, like tax evasion or corruption. It was the cash, Spitzer's attempt at being careful, that led to the investigation.

The ironies:

1. Holier-than-thou Spitzer is laid low by a hooker scandal.
2. 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.
3. Bibi's 'war on terror' has directly destroyed the career of the most promising Jewish-American politician.
   

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Tuesday, March 11, 2008:

1. 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.
   


2. 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.


3. 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.


4. "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.


5. The hate crimes you never hear about.


6. "Still no answers on bombing of UN post"

Blaise Pascal versus the Bloggers for Exxon

From "Time To Shut Up And Act" by C.M. Burns (my emphasis in red and green and blue):

"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.

Historical roots of the depravity

Sorry for the infrequent posting - I'll blame the snow, amongst other things - but I will preface my getting back into the blogging with this link, explaining the long historical roots of the current Israeli depravity. The brutality didn't just appear by accident. When you think of all the very unlikely roots of the plight of the Palestinians and other peoples of the Middle East, including such oddities as the rise of the American Jewish aristocracy, the electoral importance of Christian Zionists and their bizarre connection to Israel (although that connection wasn't an accident!), and the corrupt peculiarities of American elections, including campaign financing and computer voting, you have to conclude that the Palestinians are remarkably unlucky people.

I haven't enough time

I was going to write about three classic media manipulations - the advertising campaign for sleazy Bank Julius Baer, the attempted rehabilitation of the reputation of that rotter Prince Harry, and the classic lite Zionist attempt in the 'Gaza Bombshell' to connect the semi-rogue operations of Abrams with the legitimate workings of the American government (I might also mention the new attempts to connect September 11 with the Saudi government), but I haven't enough time, so I'll just refer you to this surprisingly good article.

Glass jaw

They can dish it out but apparently they can't take it. Whenever the Zionists want an excuse to steal land or water, all we hear about is the Holocaust. On the other hand, even after an Israeli politician calls for a holocaust against the people of Gaza, a holocaust which the IDF then delivered and more, World Jewry does not like to see Israelis compared to the Nazis. The ADL has conveniently assembled a collection of some of the best cartoons. The ADL:

"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.

Holocaust revisionism, and revisionism, and revisionism . . .

Via jews sans frontieres, an entertaining account from Eine Kleine Nichtmusik of the trials and tribulations of the poor beleaguered BBC in its attempts to bury and obfuscate the fact that a prominent Israeli politician used the term 'holocaust' to describe what the Israelis were going to do to the Palestinians (additional irony points come from the insistence that the story was wrong due to 'mistranslation', with real mistranslation being the stock-in-trade of MEMRI and the entire basis for the Jewish attempts to start a new War For The Jews against Iran). The BBC essentially got the story right the first time, but then had to go through nine successive revisions - deftly presented here - before World Jewry pronounced itself satisfied. It is unclear if this was Jewish interference within the BBC, outside the BBC, or a combination of both, but you can bet it wasn't the Establishment insisting on these changes. The media is Jew-controlled, and political correctness won't change this fact. You wonder why World Jewry just doesn't draft acceptable versions of all stories on the Middle East and present them to media outlets, instead of relying on this 'twenty questions' style of 'journalism', with the poor scribes having to guess what their masters want the truth to look like. Of course, American media outlets are already sufficiently well trained that their product can't be improved upon.

'Proportionate' civilian slaughter

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.

Shoah 'nuff

Quotes of the day, from Khalid Amayreh (my emphasis in red; found on Desertpeace, from Israel, and, unlike the sites of almost all the American 'progressive' Jews, not merely another a lite Zionist tactical trick):

"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."

and:

"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.

I've been lazy in compiling links recently:

1. 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.


2. 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.


3. 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.


4. 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).


5. 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.'"

   
   and:
   

   "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).


6. One in a hundred adult Americans are currently in jail.


7. 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.


8. 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.


9. Hell thaws: David Duke rethinks his semi-endorsement of Obama.


10. 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.


11. "An open letter to Ehud Olmert"