MEGATRENDS: Hobbesian Terror Machine    
 Hobbesian Terror Machine15 comments
However, the theme and subject matter of Aaronovitch's 2002 memoir – his trials and travails as the son of dedicated Communist Party members, and a Commie youth leader himself in the 1970s – might have given me a clue as to what to expect. The Communists have always had a characteristic way of arguing, one that manages to avoid confronting – or even mentioning – their political opponents' views, while linking all such "enemies of the people" together in a vast conspiracy of White Guards, Hitlerites, and top-hatted capitalists. Having reached middle age, these types often change their views radically – becoming, in the case of Horowitz, at least, Bizarro World versions of their old political personas – but the overall pattern of their thinking remains pretty constant. Their polemics, once pointed like an ice-pick at dissident Trotskyites and other deviationists, are directed at new enemies: yet they remain true to form in shaping their argument in conspiratorial terms.

Aaronovitch's ire is directed at anyone who has dared challenge the cult of Viktor Yushchenko, around which transnational progressives and neoconservative internationalists are converging in an intellectual Ribbentrop Pact of mutual convenience. His primary target is John Laughland, the politically unclassifiable Euroskeptic author and publicist, whose book The Tainted Source is a panoramic and revealing historical overview of the European Idea and its dubious origins in prewar fascist thought:

"Whenever, as this past week, eastern Europe is on the news, so too is a man called John Laughland. Last Sunday he was playing Ukrainian expert on the BBC's The World This Weekend, the day before he was here in the Guardian defending the Ukrainian election 'result', and at the beginning of the month he was writing for the Spectator – also on Ukraine.

"Laughland's great strength is that he sees what no one else in the west seems to. Where reporters in Kiev, including the Guardian's own Nick Paton-Walsh, encounter a genuine democracy movement, Laughland comes across 'neo-Nazis' (Guardian), or 'druggy skinheads from Lvov' (Spectator). And where most observers report serious and specific instances of electoral fraud and malpractice on the part of the supporters of the current prime minister, Laughland complains only of a systematic bias against (the presumably innocent) Mr Yanukovich."

One has to note, first of all, that Aaronovitch starts out his indictment with an expression of sheer annoyance that Laughland is even allowed to voice his opinion on major media outlets: This, according to the moral strictures of the neocon-neocommie mindset, is his real crime. Why, Aaronovitch wants to know, is everyone paying so much attention to this upstart?

As for seeing what no one else sees – millions were sent to the Gulag for less! When Laughland reports the very real presence of neo-Nazis in the ranks of Ukrainian "reformers," Aaronovitch, rather than come right out and accuse him of lying, wonders why no one else has noticed this. Then again, no one but a few Russian émigrés and isolated right-wingers noticed the Soviet gulags when they were filling up with victims.

The accusation that Laughland's complaints lack specificity, on close inspection, appears to be utterly specious. You can't get much more specific than this:

"We are told that a 96 per cent turnout in Donetsk, the home town of Viktor Yanukovich, is proof of electoral fraud. But apparently turnouts of more than 80 per cent in areas that support Viktor Yushchenko are not. Nor are actual scores for Yushchenko of well over 90 per cent in three regions, which Yanukovich achieved in only two. And whereas Yanukovich's final official score was 54 per cent, the Western-backed President of Georgia, Mikhail Saakashvili, officially polled 96.24 per cent of the vote in his country in January. The observers who now denounce the Ukrainian election welcomed that result in Georgia, saying that it 'brought the country closer to meeting international standards'. We have become dangerously tolerant of blatant double standards in media reporting."

"Although a 75 percent turnout was recorded in the initial vote, observers reported many irregularities, particularly in the regions where Yushchenko's support was seen to be strongest. It was unclear how much of an impact this had on the result."---Wikipedia

But Aaronovitch has no interest in the facts, which is why he fails to cite any. All he cares about is upholding the media-generated myth that we are all supposed to accept without question: the utter goodness of Saint Yushie, and the demonic evil of the dastardly Yanukovich. The idea is to smear Laughland, not refute him, and Aaronovitch does this by positing what he terms "the Laughland pattern." He establishes this by means of "a quick trawl," taking the reader through a long litany of crimes against political correctness – Laughland has "criticized the International Tribunal in the Hague," for example. To Comrade Aaronovitch, this is "defending Slobodan Milosevic" – although no words of praise for old Slobo are cited, because there aren't any.

Certainly Laughland has been a major critic of an institution that is little more than an international kangaroo court – along with the U.S. government, for one, which refuses to subject its own soldiers and agents to The Hague's authority. But I don't recall a single word of political support or admiration for the imprisoned Serbian strongman on Laughland's part, and Aaronovitch never produces any. That's what "a quick trawl" will get you.

Laughland, says Aaronovitch, has "generally argued that the problem in countries normally associated with human rights abuses is, in fact, the intervention of western agencies." What is the purpose of using the word "normally" in this context? What can the good comrade mean? "Normally associated" – by whom?

By organs of the State, of course, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the EU, and, of course, commentators with the same views as Aaronovitch. What else to expect from a neoconnish neo-commie? This is the source of Commissar Aaronovitch's vendetta against the British Helsinki Human Rights Group, which has documented election abuses on both sides, albeit while highlighting the underreported shenanigans of the Yushchenko camp. You see, they aren't an officially sanctioned, government-created-and--directed group of outright partisans, like the OSCE election "observers," but a completely private and politically independent agency.

The Eurocrats have set themselves up as the guardians of "democracy" in the 50-plus countries of the OSCE/EU superstate, but who will watch the watchers? The answer is: the BHHRG and local affiliates, and that's an answer that enrages Aaronovitch. There will be no private initiative in his neocon dystopia – especially not in the realm of foreign affairs.

With millions of taxpayer dollars at their disposal, and platoons of European and American "advisors," "observers," and front-group NGOs, Western governments got their boots on the ground in Ukraine, deploying prefabricated propaganda, barrels of cash, and enough tents to house a giant circus in the middle of Kiev. What happened in Serbia – or, rather, to Serbia – and in Georgia, was merely a rehearsal for what is today taking place in the streets of the Ukrainian capital. However, the newer model – the "orange revolution" – is sleeker, flashier, and even more facile than its predecessors. There is the innovation of the exit polls – in effect, substituting them for the real elections. In order to claim "fraud," all one has to do is point out the discrepancy between the actual results and the preliminary polling numbers crunched by your very own bought-and-paid-for "experts."

The BHHRG is suspect, by Aaronovitchian standards, because it

"Writes reports which – along Laughlandish lines – almost invariably dispute the accounts given by better known human rights organizations."

Better known – to whom? Most ordinary people couldn't name a specific human rights organization, except in some vague sense: maybe the UN, perhaps Amnesty International in some rare instances. But certainly no one associates governments – any government – with human rights: no one, that is, except for Aaronovitch and his fellow neos, for whom the governments of the West are the liberators of all mankind.

Can't you hear the tone of the Commissar, the secret policeman's voice raised to a high pitch as Aaronovitch demands to know:

"So what on earth is going on here? I know nothing about BHHRG's finances, but the ideological trail is fascinating…."

It's a detective story, in Aaronovitch's eyes, because a crime – a thought crime – has been committed: an unapproved dissenting view has been admitted into the public's purview, and the idea is to trace the conspiracy all the way to the end, so as to identify the ringleaders. The trail leads him to former columnist Christine Stone, BHHRG co-founder, and this leads him to …

"A US website called where, for a while, Stone had a regular Thursday column. But was not a leftwing site opposing the Iraq war. It was a rightwing site set up to oppose the Kosovo intervention in 1999. Its 'editorial director' was a man called Justin Raimondo who was active in the small US Libertarian party before joining the Republican party. In the 1992, 1996 and 2000 elections he supported the campaigns of Pat Buchanan, the far-right isolationist candidate.

"Raimondo is also an 'adjunct scholar' with the Ludwig von Mises Institute. This is a libertarian think-tank in Auburn, Alabama, founded by one Lew Rockwell, who describes himself as 'an opponent of the central state, its wars and its socialism'. A contributor to Rockwell's own site is Daniel McAdams, who is – in his own words 'honoured to be associated' with the British Helsinki Human Rights Group."

Aha! It's a rightwing conspiracy! How thrilling for the leftish readers of the Guardian to know that the premier antiwar site on the internet, with 60,000-plus readers daily, recommended by such leftie worthies as Michael Moore, is really "rightwing." Of course, as anyone who reads our statement of principles and mission can easily learn, we aren't rightists or leftists but libertarians. The rightist label, however, serves certain purposes: in the Orwellian world of Tony Blair's England, where left-wing political correctness is a kind of secular religion, it evokes images of Sir Oswald Mosely, the BNP, and skinhead gangs. It all reads like some shoddy little pamphlet by Harry Pollitt, except this isn't the 1930s and we're not talking about Communism but about another (rival) form of Jacobinism – and yet, the methods are the same.

It's all very tired, yet Aaronovitch manages to come up with at least one minor innovation: instead of being the editorial director of, I'm the "editorial director" – as if the addition of ironic quotes automatically strips the title of any legitimacy. And that's what Aaronovitch's whole piece is really about: BHHRG isn't legitimate because it isn't government-approved, and is, after all, a mere website – not a cheap broadsheet like the Guardian.

As it turns out, however, is just a small cog in a vast machine of subversion, as Aaronovitch makes all too clear to the reader when he follows "Trail 2" to the insidious European Foundation – "(patron, Mrs M Thatcher)," Boo! Hiss! – "which – judging by its website – seems to spend most of its time and energy sending out pamphlets by arch-Europhobe Bill Cash."

I love this bit of neo-commie rhetoric – or is that paleo-commie? To old-style class warriors of a Stalinist mentality, the really bad ones weren't just plain ordinary reactionaries, they were black reactionaries and arch-reactionaries – the very worst of the worst! To be an "arch-Europhobe" – it sounds like some exotic sort of racist (the Anti-Nordic League, perhaps?) or an exponent of Oriental Despotism. This is another familiar method of the Communist character assassins of yesteryear: almost never cite your opponents' actual words, except in brief snippets, and never ever argue with them, since the briefest possible statement of their hateful views is enough to condemn them out of hand. In this spirit, Aaronovitch avers:

"A synopsis of one of Laughland's own books, however, notes his argument that, 'Post-national structures ... and supranational organisations such as the European Union – are ... corrosive of liberal values (and) the author shows the ideology as a crucial core of Nazi economic and political thinking.'"

"Beginning to get the picture now?"

Well, uh, no. What picture is he waffling on about?

By the time we get to "Trail 3," Sanders Research Associates, a risk consultancy firm that Laughland writes for, the trail has become rather sparse and overgrown with all sorts of indirect and strained connections. Through the Sanders group, we are led to the writings of one Chris Black, who asserts that both sides committed atrocities in Rwanda, not just the Hutus.

The problem with this kind of linkage – a device often employed by Commies, ex-Commies, and their neoconservative heirs and legatees – is that it projects the habits of Communist-style party discipline onto the other side. But this is not at all how normal people function: that degree of coordination doesn't exist anywhere outside a Commie cell or the American Enterprise Institute. Aaronovitch constructs a fictitious amalgam, and drives his central point home:

"What we seem to have in Laughland and his associates is a group of right-wing anti-state libertarians and isolationists, suspicious of any foreign entanglements, who have somehow morphed into apologists for the worst regimes and most appalling dictators on the planet."

Oh, I don't know that Viktor Yanukovich has bombed any civilians in his career: he hasn't done to Kiev what we have done to, say, Fallujah. He hasn't killed close to 100,000 of his enemies in a war of "liberation," now has he? Perhaps Aaronovitch doesn't find such behavior sufficiently appalling. That would hardly be surprising. After all, anyone who was a member of the Communist Party after 1956 must suffer from some sort of basic moral deficiency – a kind of moral blindness. Anyone can have a change of heart, but one wonders to what extent Aaronovitch has recovered from his childhood affliction.

Is it really necessary to explain that, because we oppose the alleged duty of the U.S. and Britain to right every wrong, dethrone every despot, and undertake "regime change" from Tehran to Timbuktu, it does not follow that we endorse the status quo in every nation? dares to raise the essential question: who has the right to impose a new status quo, and at what price? To Aaronovitch, this is siding with the enemy. To the Commies of old, and their descendants, the old Leninist maxim still holds: Those who are not with us are against us!

Behind the vapid rhetorical flourishes of Global Democratism, and the gimmicky public relations campaigns, is a well-oiled propaganda machine funded by self-interested governments, which are intent on pursuing their own geopolitical, economic, and ideological agendas. These often have less to do with human freedom than they do with other, more tangible objectives, and exposing this reality is a noble cause – one that we proudly share with John Laughland, whose work we have been privileged to run. As for the BHHRG, it represents the one thing governments at all times and everywhere despise: private initiative. That's why we love it.

Neocons everywhere share one thing in common, aside from a warlike tendency and a penchant for smearing their opponents, and that is a special warmth for Israel: the socialist Sparta is, for them, an exemplar of a "democracy" that is nonetheless tough enough to measure up to their warrior ethic. Because so many of them are ex-Communists or former Trotskyites of one sort or another, they have a habit of mind that reserves a special place in their hearts for some foreign utopia as an exemplar and guiding star. The Commies had the Soviet Union, the "workers' fatherland," as they used to call it, and the neocons have Israel, which they defend just as adamantly and unconditionally as Aaronovitch's parents once stood by Red Russia. Any hint of disrespect, or even an honest appraisal of the Jewish state, causes them to fly into a rage and froth at the mouth with anger:

"And where does it all end up? A couple of weeks ago Sanders commended to his clients 'John Laughland's series of articles [showing that] the attack on Iraq is just the southern offensive of a larger campaign to tighten the noose on Russia.' And he continued, 'What is less well understood are the risks that the unravelling political compact in Israel poses for the United States and Great Britain, whose political processes, intelligence services, military, media and financial establishments are so thoroughly enmeshed with Israel's.'"

"Read that last sentence again and then ask yourself: in what way are Britain's media and financial interests 'thoroughly enmeshed' with Israel's?"

Isn't it interesting how Israel's amen corner continually assures us that Israel isn't like those other Middle Eastern countries, and needs to be supported because it's really part of the West: yet Aaronovitch takes Sanders to task for making precisely this point. Who can doubt that Israel is the major ally of the U.S. and Britain in their seemingly perpetual "war on terrorism"?

What has Aaronovitch on the warpath is the contention that this ongoing conflict seems to have morphed into a war to level the Middle East until only Israel is left standing – and seize control of the world oil supply in the bargain. Sanders is hardly the first to suggest the Israeli angle to the war: and it isn't just notorious right-wingers like Pat Buchanan and myself, but the Guardian's own Julian Borger as well as General Anthony Zinni, former CIA official Michael Scheuer, and intelligence expert James Bamford who point to the oddity of our Israel-centric foreign policy.

Are all these people part of a sinister and far-reaching conspiracy against all that's good and holy? Like our own neocons here in the U.S., the British variety are intent on smearing their opponents as anti-Semites, but this is a bit much coming from someone who dismisses the very real influence of organized anti-Semitism in the Yushchenko camp.

Like his neocon comrades on the other side of the Atlantic, Aaronovitch supported the Iraq war on the grounds that "the Yanks" have a moral duty to "liberate" the downtrodden Iraqi masses and lift them up to the level of a province in the "democratic" Empire of the West. To oppose the war was to support Saddam. Now we are told that to oppose Western intervention in Ukraine is to support Yanukovich – and tomorrow, when they've finally encircled the inner core of the former Soviet Union, and are moving in on the Kremlin, opposing intervention in Russia will be tantamount to supporting Putin or some other thoroughly Saddamized Russian strongman.

That is complete malarkey. It is the old Commie-style smear methodology, applied to new circumstances, but still employing the same tired old tricks. It hasn't worked so far in the U.S., where the neocons have been pushing the same smear campaign for years, and it isn't likely to work any better in Britain.


Speaking of Israel's amen corner, what were the cretins over at littlegreenfootballs (rightly deemed a "hate site") up to on Thanksgiving? These people are celebrating the holidays … in their own pathetic, twisted way. Ugh.

Pretty good article delineating, oh, just tons of stuff... for the full article with lots more than simply Kasher 'links' go here:




4 Oct 2006 @ 16:33 by jobrown : Vax,
you're the BEST! : )You've got the Intelligence of the Heart AND the "Balls" -or the Gutts ( which ever u prefer...heheheheh... ; ) - ; very Good Combo! : )
Thanks, buddy! /a-d

Al Lo Davar, Afwan, Por Nada...
Don't mention it, It was nothing, etc., ;)~

and or...



4 Oct 2006 @ 20:26 by vaxen : If...

Car-crash and an elevator
Make you someone else
Never try yourself
Restore you
Tick-tock clock and teddy boys
Bop 'till you're fagged out
Open windows shout
She wore me, she wore you

Walk these streets
She's concrete
All is free

Knick-knack, flashy bric-a-brac
Seesaw heartbeat, she is back
Windscreen eyes are black and blue
She saw you
The Fleet Street scooter-boys are due
They want to see you
You're vogue and hip and on a rendezvous
Adore you

Walk these streets
She's concrete
All is free  

5 Oct 2006 @ 19:34 by vaxen : The Republic is dead?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahah! yeah, right! I thought this country was a Democracy? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah! Oh, now I hear that it is a, oops, was a--- Republic! Miracle of miracles! This man is up for a rude awakening!

~ Walt Whitman


It was a dark hour indeed last Thursday when the United States Senate voted to end the constitutional republic and transform the country into a "Leader-State," giving the president and his agents the power to capture, torture and imprison forever anyone – American citizens included – whom they arbitrarily decide is an "enemy combatant." This also includes those who merely give "terrorism" some kind of "support," defined so vaguely that many experts say it could encompass legal advice, innocent gifts to charities or even political opposition to US government policy within its draconian strictures.

All of this is bad enough – a sickening and cowardly surrender of liberty not seen in a major Western democracy since the Enabling Act passed by the German Reichstag in March 1933. But it is by no means the full extent of our degradation. In reality, the darkness is deeper, and more foul, than most people imagine. For in addition to the dictatorial powers of seizure and torment given by Congress on Thursday to George W. Bush – powers he had already seized and exercised for five years anyway, even without this fig leaf of sham legality – there is a far more sinister imperial right that Bush has claimed – and used – openly, without any demur or debate from Congress at all: ordering the "extrajudicial killing" of anyone on earth that he and his deputies decide – arbitrarily, without charges, court hearing, formal evidence, or appeal – is an "enemy combatant." --- Floyd  

6 Oct 2006 @ 04:44 by koravya : To Whit
"None of the men and women who voted for this bill has any right to speak in public about the rule of law anymore, or to take a high moral view of the Third Reich, or to wax poetic about the American Ideal. Mark their names. Any institution of higher learning that grants honorary degrees to these people forfeits its honor. Alexander, Allard, Allen, Bennett, Bond, Brownback, Bunning, Burns, Burr, Carper, Chambliss, Coburn, Cochran, Coleman, Collins, Cornyn, Craig, Crapo, DeMint, DeWine, Dole, Domenici, Ensign, Enzi, Frist, Graham, Grassley, Gregg, Hagel, Hatch, Hutchison, Inhofe, Isakson, Johnson, Kyl, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Lieberman, Lott, Lugar, Martinez, McCain, McConnell, Menendez, Murkowski, Nelson of Florida, Nelson of Nebraska, Pryor, Roberts, Rockefeller, Salazar, Santorum, Sessions, Shelby, Smith, Specter, Stabenow, Stevens, Sununu, Talent, Thomas, Thune, Vitter, Voinovich, Warner.

To paraphrase Sir Walter Scott: Mark their names and mark them well. For them, no minstrel raptures swell. High though their titles, proud their name, boundless their wealth as wish can claim, these wretched figures shall go down to the vile dust from whence they sprung, unwept, unhonored and unsung."
from: Congress's Shameful Retreat From American Values
By Garrison Keillor
The Chicago Tribune


Oh wow! Thankyou so much Koravya san! Just as I was trying to climb up out of the doldrums boomba, a shot in the arm! Inspiration from a friend...  

6 Oct 2006 @ 07:25 by hgoodgame : What have they done?!
It's beyond comprehension that this country has reached such a low point in morality, in honorablity, and in such a relatively quick time. My stomach twists and turns when I the see pictures like those on Jazz's log, and hear the stories, of what we've become. Yes, print every one of their names in bold letters, exhibit their pictures so we'll recognize them on sight, make posters and stick them on every street corner; in the background, criminals against the constitution and the bill of rights - lets show images of the tortured nameless tormented victims of nothing except some vague suspicion, in what is becoming and perhaps has been from the beginning an all out holy war! Remember, tomorrow it could be you or someone very close to you that is taken away for questioning.

What barbaric people we've shown ourselves to be. It's shocking and disgusting beyond my understanding that things have been allowed to go so far. Indeed, how can we evermore critize any other dictator or their methods, Hitler, Stalin, Papa Doc, Edi Amin, et. al. when we are proving ourselves just as depraved and cruel. We've allowed our policy makers to sink us to an all time low that makes us no better than these pariahs we've held up as examples of pure evil, of what must never happen again; and yet, here we are, now the ones doing it!

Many Americans still have the illusion that we are the policemen of the world. I remember as a child being given the advice if you are ever lost or in trouble, find a policeman. What a joke that is now, who in their right mind will take the US serious after this affront on human rights and dignity. How can any American feel even the smallest degree of safety not only in foreign countries but even here at home after this. What says the UN about these travesties? Does any individual or country still dare to truly dispute us? Or have we shut them up with fear tactics?

I'd like to print a poster with all those names, call them for the traitors that they are, with images of the tortured 'detainees' in the middle, and the men and women listed above surrounding them in the margins, grinning, and of course with our learing leaders smiling on as if to say, 'good job, good job! Now we can be safe'. Ha! This will make us less safe than ever, more hated than ever. The Ugly American just became Butt Ugly! Wait and see atrocities committed against Americans now who are in other countries, innocent people too, just like the political detainees here in our prisons. We've sanctioned it by our actions against foreigners in our country, why should we expect better from them?

I'm disgusted beyond words (though I seem to have found a few..) Yes, and let's not forget to add to our poster the words of Sir Walter Scott, for this is vital too.
If it were still possible, everyone of these cowards and self-serving bozos should to be run our of town on a rail,(and no, I''m not referring to the Amtrack)- tarring and feathering come to mind too.

We'll see how quickly people begin to disappear now, some in hiding, some taken in the night by Terrorist Patrols. It's Nazi Germany all over again. Already we are cautious what we say and to whom we say it.

And of course as a non-citizen, though I've lived here since I was a 7 year old child, that puts me in a position of questionablity. No wonder I had a dream where they put a sack over my head and called me a terrorist and were going to beat me to death simply because I couldn't understand what the officer was mumbling and I'd asked him to please repeat it for me!

When I think of all the years I felt so guilty over what the German people had done.. Even though those atrocities happened before I was born, I still felt a cultural shame for what had happened. I was shocked that such cruelty could be inflicted from one human against another, haven't we learned we all bleed, we all weep, we all suffer and if given a choice most of us would simply want to be left alone to live our lives without disruption, enjoy our families, earn a living; now I am ashamed again, this time for the country I've lived in almost my entire life. Home of the brave, land of the free?? Where?

I'm about to side with Bushman, let them all burn in hell, they've certainly voted themselves into it!

And, if this is the manifestation of the darkness before the dawn, let's hope the sun hasn't grown completely disgusted with foolish mankind or there may never be another dawning of the light in our lifetime. How much worse will it get? Stick around, We're sure to find out soon.

Thanks Vax, and koravya, for thought-provoking, revealing and courageous messages.


Yes, yes... and thankyou Heidi chan for your message. Posters would be fine but tearing down the monstrosity called Washington D.C. would be finer still and certainly running them out of that horrid burgh on rails would be just grand but that would be so like them... and I am not like them anymore. Non Serviam. Not Gods and certainly not Governments! What guides are these foul creatures?


You're absolutely right, it would serve no one to stoop to their level. 'Forgive them for they know not?' 'Turn the other cheek?' We're running out of cheeks. And you're right about the posters too, it would be much too small a step in such urgent times.

I'm beginning to believe that most people are not just sleeping, but are actually comatose! It's encouraging though to see there are still a few kicking and screaming.  

6 Oct 2006 @ 14:26 by gordon @ : Mislead?
I was reading Hugo Chavez's U.N. speach and got to wondering again...... Is it possible we are being set up to accept world government (NWO) by villianizing Bush so that we accept that our own government is out of control and the U.N. will save us? I personally think we already have one world government and have had it for some time..... I can't help but think that the masses are being set up..... as usual.... Problem, reaction, solution type stuff.

......then again, according to "the experts" I'm not exactly sane.... Opposition defiance disorder or something like that, I think 'they' call it. Always questioning authority.... and refusing to take the 'proper meds.'


"Ye shall know them by their smell." Necronomicon

We sure know them by their smell don't we Gordon? Opposition, Defiance, Disorder... How very ODD! Must be an Odd fellow, eh? Heh, heh...

Rather reminds me, in an oblique sort of way, of R.Hs' Goal, Problem, Mass... theory. Service facsimiles abound in the NWO. Yes, I agree with you as to how the people are being ''set up.'' Hegelian dialectic all the way. If you want to push something through then you go out and create a problem then offer the soultion. The Mafia does it all the time. I think it's called a "Protection Racket." Yup... good old government con.

"I can't help but think that the masses are being set up..... as usual.... Problem, reaction, solution type stuff." --- Gordon

How very right you are Gordon. Thanks for the inspiration. ;)  

6 Oct 2006 @ 17:36 by vaxen : World Bank:
World Banks' dirty power plan:  

6 Oct 2006 @ 19:11 by gordon @ : Public Law v. Public Policy
I just came across this. Link at the bottom.

""...........One of the judges stopped and said "You're an interesting man, Mr. Freeman. If you're ever in town, stop by and if I'm not sitting on a case we will visit."

America is Bankrupt

Later, when I went to visit the judge, I told him my problem with the Supreme Court cases dealing with Public Policy rather than Public Law. He said, In 1938, all the higher judges, the top attorneys and the U.S. Attorneys were called together into a secret meeting and this is what we were told:
"America is a BANKRUPT NATION -- it is owned completely by its creditors. The creditors own the Congress, they own th Executive, they own the Judiciary and they own all the State Governments.
Take silent judicial notice of this fact, but never reveal it openly. Your Court is operating in an Admiralty Jurisdiction -- call it anything you want, but do not call it Admiralty.""  

6 Oct 2006 @ 22:25 by hgoodgame : From another time
But equally appropriate now - The Windows of the World

The windows of the world are covered with rain,
What is the whole world coming to?
Everybody knows when men can not be friends
Their quarrel often ends where some have to die.
Let the sun shine through.  

7 Oct 2006 @ 01:00 by vaxen : The midi...
Angels or Angles?

Not imbedded? Thanks Heidi san...

Here is a link you may enjoy as well:  

7 Oct 2006 @ 02:21 by hgoodgame : Nice touch
Musik hath charms to soothe..

Muchas gracias for the links.  

7 Oct 2006 @ 03:03 by jobrown : Heidi, Heidi,
what wonderful, thought and CONSCIENCE -provoking comments you've had lately in many place here on NCN! You make "Sahara" blossom! THANK you,thank you, my Sweet Little Pixie! : )/Astrid  

12 Oct 2006 @ 09:59 by jazzolog : Low, Slow Chimes
Sorry I haven't been around to chime in to this lovely elegy for a nation with the possibility of dreams toward lofty heights. Ascending, greed grabs one by the pockets and pulls off your pants. Some of us just fly higher but most, I guess, cower into the lower shadows.
Cave(d) beings. Deception. Don't miss The Departed! Jack with blood soaking his shirtsleeves up to the elbows: "Bring a mop!" And, as an afterthought, having exited, shouts offscreen..."Bring a pail!"  

30 Dec 2006 @ 00:52 by Shonuff @ : Billy Idol
words and music by: Billy Idol/Mark Younger-Smith/
Robin Hancock/Ace Mackay-Smith/Greg Stump, 1993

Age of destruction
Age of oblivion
Age of destruction
Age of oblivion
Discovered love,
In the rancid days of ruin
My body's sweatin' toxins,
Of my own demise
Only from space, can you see
How much earth is burning
Smokin' out the innocense inside
The child
It's the age of destruction
In a world of corruption
It's the age of destruction
And they hand us oblivion
Neuromancer and I'm trancing
I'm the Neuromancer--and I'm trancing
Man wallows in his insatiable greed
More in the answer that sweats
From desparate palms
Turn on the lies, the secrets,
Of our desolation,
Or be smothered, by the red hot core
It's the age of destruction,
In a world of corruption
It's the age of destruction
And they hand us oblivion
The neuromancer and I'm trancing
I'm the neuromancer and I'm trancing
I'm the neuromancer--I'm trancing
and I'm trancing
Denied love in the age of ruin
Suicide toxins of my own demise
In cyberspace, you know how much
The earth ain't learning
Smoking out the man, inside the child--yeah
It's the age of destruction
In a world of corruption
It's the age of destruction
And they hand us oblivion
The neuromancer and I'm trancing
I'm the neuromancer and I'm trancing
Age of destruction
Age of the neuromancer
Age of destruction
Age of oblivion
Age of destruction
Age of the neuromancer  

5 Jan 2017 @ 04:23 by Carlos Byrd @ : bcarlos123  

Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:

[< Back] [MEGATRENDS] [PermaLink]?