JohnDJasper

Thanks, Ribuck, for that very useful illustration of a working solution. I'm familiar with a few shared drives in my area which are not quite so effective mainly because the various owners are not forthcoming with support.For the sake of discussion, if one or more owner in your road decided to restrict travel on their sections of road and charging a toll to cross it, would you see that as a violation the unwritten contract or an act of aggression against others with a right of way?

Unfortunately, your easy solution jumps past the important bit which is the creation of the "road service providers." No doubt, many will offer their services to manage some or all of the existing road infrastructure but they cannot offer services on roads that they don't own. If yesterday, all roads were publicly owned, and today the "public" no longer exists because we've ditched government, how do we actually reach the situation where the roads are now privately owned? Who has the right to transfer ownership? If only the homesteading rule applies, will we suddenly have a million fences built across the highway as each person grabs a share?

Interesting comments, Pepin. Thanks for pointing out that some roads would just be abandoned lest anyone should think that all roads have to be kept up. I wonder if economic factors would actually cause people to migrate away from apartments/cities to more rural areas where you can at least try to grow your own food and not be too dependent on the food supply system? I agree with your conclusion that privatizing public property would involve thousands and thousands of different proposals and agreements and that is why I started this thread. Waiting until the 'Fall' to hash out the principles of this conversion process will lead to a lot of failed attempts and disgruntled people who suddenly found that they'd be robbed by others taking advantage of the situation. One "disgruntled and armed" person can cause a lot of concern but it's more than conceivable that 100's of such people could wind up seeking restitution over an easily avoidable slight. That's a lot of concern! Being new to this movement, I'm hoping to find that the best minds available have already hashed out the process and produced a basic shell from which each unique circumstance can be guided. I live in hope! I've heard others talk about this way of dealing with the enclosed park. I wonder how many such parks exist? By what right do these homeowners have a claim to that property over an outsider who might wish to use the property for their own purposes. If one person gets up early and fences the property off completely for his own use, what moral/legal redress do the other claimants have? As is true for any other public-owned property, what is to stop any one person from claiming any public plot of land as their's even if it's a complete section of an 8 lane freeway? I suggest that the only rule that will apply in the beginning is that of "might is right" and holding that bit of freeway will depend on the amount of force you can bring to bear versus the amount of force that others will bring to you. I like your thinking here. Perhaps for something as "simple" as an access road to a closed neighborhood, the residents could agree to take bids for ownership of the road and sidewalks for which the owner would be required to provide an agreed level of maintenance, guarantee of unrestricted access in perpetuity, traffic control, etc in return for a regular contribution from each property for the duration of the contract. The owner wouldn't necessarily have to purchase the ownership but if they did, the distribution of the receipts would have to be agreed by all those with a clear interest. If this idea were expanded to a through road, the number of interested parties and other complications would grow exponentially. It would seem to be an impossible task to resolve but perhaps would become easier if resolved on a municipality-wide basis through a task force appointed by the local population for the purpose. In this situation, the structure of the deliberations would be similar to any other public project with the exception of the monopoly of force.

If, today, the people of your country stood up in unison and cast off the yoke of slavery to government and embraced morality (UPB,) respect for private property and the non-aggression principle, how would you manage the transition from publicly-owned roads to private ownership?I've seen plenty on this forum and others about the future scenario where we've magically appeared at the other end of the process and all of the problems have been ironed out but how do we get there in the first place? I say roads to focus the discussion but I suspect that the process will be similar for any publicly (government)-owned property or services. Do proposals already exist in writing somewhere that I've yet to run across? Either way, I'm interested in knowing how others see this process working.

Source Article

Yeah, I mean cuz no one dies from the flu... You're probably right (even if you didn't mean it!) Read the article and read the evidence. Even if someone did die from the flu, what's the chances that it was one of the 4 viruses that they vaccinate for in any given year? Despite the industries propaganda, the evidence says that the odds are slim of dying from the flu, of dying from one of the flu viruses being vaccinated against, and of the vaccine having given you protection even if you were vaccinated. In return for that ghost of a chance of having some benefit from the vaccine, you have the very real possibility of a serious adverse event and a guarantee of some damage from the various foreign matter injected behind your body's basic defenses.

Dr Brogan blazes a trail through the flu vaccine propaganda. She points out that they [the industry] don't know the true incidence of flu and yet we have solid proof of vaccine inefficacy "through Cochrane, through Kaiser, and even here at the Lancet where they admit that efficacy was “moderate”, “variable”, “reduced”, or “absent” depending on the season" as well as a long list of known adverse effects "Documented risks of vaccination as sanctioned by a neat little government table include vasculitis, seizure, encephalomyelitis, facial palsy, facial paresis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, hypoesthesia, myelitis, neuritis, neuropathy, paresthesia." Read the article here.

Welcome back, Ashley.

_Michael, You're English is miles better than my Polish (nonexistent) so do not apologise for it. The more you use it, the better it will get.You already know that you're not the cause of your dysfunctional family life, only the victim, so the real problem is convincing your subconscious mind, which is where the hard work is. Besides getting some professional therapy, which might be out of your reach for various reasons, one thing you can do to self-help is to immerse yourself in the helpful writings and podcasts that are available from Freedomain.com and other sources. I listened to the mp3 versions of Stefan's books several times to help drive in the logic arguments provided and I usually listen at least twice to any of his podcasts that I find helpful. Your need seems to be greater than mine so read or listen to Stefan's material and when you find one that really resonates with you, go through it repeatedly until you cannot stand it any more! Then revisit it at a later date. And yes, get involved in the discussions on the forum and be forthcoming with your feelings and concerns. The worst that can happen is some inconsiderate person may make an insensitive comment (or maybe an insensitive person will make an inconsiderate comment?!!!) but as we like to say in the UK, ignore it "like water off a duck's back!" Best wishes to you.

That's an odd retort to make but I suppose your laundry list of criticisms is based on some facts that you don't care to share or you're just putting branding before substance. Kokesh's plan to invade DC with guns would have put a lot of people in a cage although not Kokesh because he wouldn't have been there having decided that his followers didn't need a leader. I would rather listen to a person who has called it right on every major event in the last 5 years that I've been reading his blog. Creighton doesn't preach which philosophy people should follow but spends a lot of time flagging up the flaws of prominent movements. If you think you have a valid point to make, post it as a comment on his blog and give him an opportunity to rebut it. One of you might learn something.

And so begins Douglas Valentine's excellent commentary and review of the movie Dirty Wars. The movie might be a complete sham (I won't know as I'll never watch it) but it serves as a useful prompt to review the real history of the "dirty war" philosophy and Valentine pulls no punches in his delivery. Read the rest of the article here Let me begin with some background not covered in the film. Dirty War derives from La Sale Guerre, the term the French applied to their counter-terror campaign in Algeria, circa 1954-1961. Algeria wanted independence, and France resisted. Like subject people everywhere, the Algerians were badly outgunned and resorted to guerrilla tactics including “selective terrorism,” a hallmark of the Viet Minh, who fought the French until 1954, when America claimed Vietnam as its rightful property. Viet Minh tactics were derived largely from Mao’s precepts for fighting a People’s War. Selective terrorism meant the murder of low-ranking officials – collaborators – who worked closely with the people; policemen, mailmen, teachers, etc. The murders were gruesome – a bullet in the belly or a grenade lobbed into a café – designed to achieve maximum publicity and demonstrate to the people the power of the nationalists to strike crippling blows against their oppressors. Whether the Great White Fathers are French or American or English, they agree that putting down a People’s War means torturing and slaughtering the people – despite the fact that most people are not engaged in terrorism or guerrilla action and have no blood on their hands. As John Stockwell taught us years ago, Dirty War means destabilizing a targeted nation through covert methods, the type the CIA has practiced around the world for 66 years. Destabilizing means “hiring agents to tear apart the social and economic fabric of the country. “What we’re talking about is going in and deliberately creating conditions where the farmer can’t get his produce to market; where children can’t go to school; where women are terrified inside their homes as well as outside; where government administered programs grind to a complete halt; where the hospitals are treating wounded people instead of sick people; where international capital is scared away and the country goes bankrupt.” Economic warfare – strangling nations like Cuba, Iraq and Iran in Medieval fashion – is a type of Dirty Warfare beloved by the Great White Fathers who control the world’s finances. Though no less deadly than atomic bombs, or firebombing Dresden, it is easier to sell to the bourgeoisie. You’ll hear no mention of this in Scahill’s film, nor will you hear any references to Phil Agee, or the countless others who have explained Dirty War to each generation of Americans since World War Two. You will not hear about psychological warfare, the essence of Dirty War. America’s first was terror guru was Ed Lansdale, the advertising executive who made Levi’s blue jeans a national craze in the 1930’s. He applied his sales skills to propaganda in the OSS and after WW II, concocted a new generation of psywar tactics as an agent of the Office of Policy Coordination assigned to the Philippines under military cover. Lansdale’s bottomless black bag of dirty tricks included a “skull squadron” death squad that roamed the countryside, torturing and murdering Communist terrorists. One of Lansdale’s counter-terror “psywar” tactics was to string a captured Communist guerrilla upside down from a tree, stab him in the neck with a stiletto, and drain his blood. The terrorized Commies fled the area and the terrified villagers, who believed in vampires, begged the government for protection. Lansdale referred to his sadism as “low humor,” an excuse borrowed liberally by American officialdom during the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. Lansdale formalized “black propaganda” practices to vilify the Communists: one of his Filipino commando units would dress as rebels and commit atrocities, and then another unit would arrive with cameras to record the staged scenes and chase the “terrorists” away. Lansdale brought his black propaganda and passion for atrocity to Saigon in 1954, along with a goon squad of Filipinos mercenaries packaged as “Freedom Company.” Under Lansdale’s guidance, Freedom Company sent Vietnamese commandoes into North Vietnam, under cover as relief workers, to activate stay-behind agent nets and conduct all manner of sabotage and subversion. Disinformation was a Lansdale specialty, and his agents spread lurid tales of Vietminh soldiers’ disemboweling pregnant Catholic women, castrating priests, and sticking bamboo slivers in the ears of children so they could not hear the Word of God. In the South, with the help of the American media, Lansdale re-branded the heroic Vietminh as the beastly Viet Cong. Lansdale’s greatest innovation, still used today, was to conduct all manner of espionage and terror under cover of “civic action.” As a way of attacking Viet Minh agents in the South, Lansdale launched “Operation Brotherhood,” a Filipino paramedical team patterned on the typical Special Forces A team. With CIA money, Operation Brotherhood built medical dispensaries that the CIA used as cover for terror operations, as depicted in the book and movie The Quiet American. Levis never went out of fashion, nor did Lansdale’s dirty tricks. Think Saddam Hussein killing babies in their incubators. Such disinformation invariably works on an American public looking for any excuse to rationalize its urge for racist genocide. Think Argo and Zero Dark Thirty and every Rambo and Bruce Willis film. - See more at: http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/06/dirty-wars-as-self-indulgence/#sthash.IlYb01DT.dpuf Let me begin with some background not covered in the film. Dirty War derives from La Sale Guerre, the term the French applied to their counter-terror campaign in Algeria, circa 1954-1961. Algeria wanted independence, and France resisted. Like subject people everywhere, the Algerians were badly outgunned and resorted to guerrilla tactics including “selective terrorism,” a hallmark of the Viet Minh, who fought the French until 1954, when America claimed Vietnam as its rightful property. Viet Minh tactics were derived largely from Mao’s precepts for fighting a People’s War. Selective terrorism meant the murder of low-ranking officials – collaborators – who worked closely with the people; policemen, mailmen, teachers, etc. The murders were gruesome – a bullet in the belly or a grenade lobbed into a café – designed to achieve maximum publicity and demonstrate to the people the power of the nationalists to strike crippling blows against their oppressors. Whether the Great White Fathers are French or American or English, they agree that putting down a People’s War means torturing and slaughtering the people – despite the fact that most people are not engaged in terrorism or guerrilla action and have no blood on their hands. As John Stockwell taught us years ago, Dirty War means destabilizing a targeted nation through covert methods, the type the CIA has practiced around the world for 66 years. Destabilizing means “hiring agents to tear apart the social and economic fabric of the country. “What we’re talking about is going in and deliberately creating conditions where the farmer can’t get his produce to market; where children can’t go to school; where women are terrified inside their homes as well as outside; where government administered programs grind to a complete halt; where the hospitals are treating wounded people instead of sick people; where international capital is scared away and the country goes bankrupt.” Economic warfare – strangling nations like Cuba, Iraq and Iran in Medieval fashion – is a type of Dirty Warfare beloved by the Great White Fathers who control the world’s finances. Though no less deadly than atomic bombs, or firebombing Dresden, it is easier to sell to the bourgeoisie. You’ll hear no mention of this in Scahill’s film, nor will you hear any references to Phil Agee, or the countless others who have explained Dirty War to each generation of Americans since World War Two. You will not hear about psychological warfare, the essence of Dirty War. America’s first was terror guru was Ed Lansdale, the advertising executive who made Levi’s blue jeans a national craze in the 1930’s. He applied his sales skills to propaganda in the OSS and after WW II, concocted a new generation of psywar tactics as an agent of the Office of Policy Coordination assigned to the Philippines under military cover. Lansdale’s bottomless black bag of dirty tricks included a “skull squadron” death squad that roamed the countryside, torturing and murdering Communist terrorists. One of Lansdale’s counter-terror “psywar” tactics was to string a captured Communist guerrilla upside down from a tree, stab him in the neck with a stiletto, and drain his blood. The terrorized Commies fled the area and the terrified villagers, who believed in vampires, begged the government for protection. Lansdale referred to his sadism as “low humor,” an excuse borrowed liberally by American officialdom during the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. Lansdale formalized “black propaganda” practices to vilify the Communists: one of his Filipino commando units would dress as rebels and commit atrocities, and then another unit would arrive with cameras to record the staged scenes and chase the “terrorists” away. Lansdale brought his black propaganda and passion for atrocity to Saigon in 1954, along with a goon squad of Filipinos mercenaries packaged as “Freedom Company.” Under Lansdale’s guidance, Freedom Company sent Vietnamese commandoes into North Vietnam, under cover as relief workers, to activate stay-behind agent nets and conduct all manner of sabotage and subversion. Disinformation was a Lansdale specialty, and his agents spread lurid tales of Vietminh soldiers’ disemboweling pregnant Catholic women, castrating priests, and sticking bamboo slivers in the ears of children so they could not hear the Word of God. In the South, with the help of the American media, Lansdale re-branded the heroic Vietminh as the beastly Viet Cong. Lansdale’s greatest innovation, still used today, was to conduct all manner of espionage and terror under cover of “civic action.” As a way of attacking Viet Minh agents in the South, Lansdale launched “Operation Brotherhood,” a Filipino paramedical team patterned on the typical Special Forces A team. With CIA money, Operation Brotherhood built medical dispensaries that the CIA used as cover for terror operations, as depicted in the book and movie The Quiet American. Levis never went out of fashion, nor did Lansdale’s dirty tricks. Think Saddam Hussein killing babies in their incubators. Such disinformation invariably works on an American public looking for any excuse to rationalize its urge for racist genocide. Think Argo and Zero Dark Thirty and every Rambo and Bruce Willis film. - See more at: http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/06/dirty-wars-as-self-indulgence/#sthash.IlYb01DT.dpuf

For a recap of the 19 Lies mentioned above: willyloman, on December 8, 2012 at 3:25 pm said: so I gotta list them all for you, huh? Well, why not… 1. “The regime was unable to pull off anything other than the ongoing, what have now become “normal” atrocities…” It has been made clear by MANY sources that the ongoing atrocities have been committed by Hillary’s “FSA” and even she admits that. So his insinuation that the Syrian government is doing it, is absolutely false 2. “… that so far have claimed over 40,000 lives” This one is based entirely on the London based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and the FSA “rebels” claims. it is baseless. SOHR is run by a guy using a fake name and his agenda is to help London recolonize Syria 3. “The fighting that was previously restricted to the outer areas of the country…” The “professional jihadists” have been hit and running throughout the entire nation for quite a while now. They actually had an assault on Damascus 3 months ago which, if you remember, they lost miserably. They have been shelling with mortar rounds various places throughout the country. If you remember a year ago when the peace keeping mission was attacked, they were attacked in and around Damascus and the whole nation. Again, this statement of his could be based on ignorance, but later he says.. 4. “… but now it’s starting to get a little closer to home…” The lie here is to present the “rebels” as winning or at least as putting up some kind of real resistance, which they aren’t. They are just terrorists fighting an “unconventional warfare operation.” 5. “… for the embattled dictator…” Bashar al-Assad is not a dictator. He has brought several reforms forward in the years past and won what amounts to a vote of confidence from his people. The VAST majority of the people of his country support him and the direction the country is going in. But like Gadhafi and Castro and Chavez, when on dares to oppose our “national interests” (corporations and banking system and the petro-dollar) then you become a “dictator” kinda like Morsi is now. Our country doesn’t hate on dictators because we just love all that “freedom” we promise the world (and don’t seem to like here in the states). Here’s a short list of dictators whom we liked, installed, and supported as long as we could (SHORT LIST): Mubarak, the Shah of Iran, Pinochet, Ben Ali (Tunisia), the Saudi royal family, Suharto (Indonesia), Botha (South Africa), Diem (Vietnam), Franco (Spain), Somosa Garcia (Nicaragua), Papa Doc (Haiti), Baby Doc (Haiti), Pervez Musharraf (Pakistan), Saleh (Yemen)…. And that is just a small list. These are people who are hated by their populations and rule their countries for the benefit of US interests. You can Adolf Hitler to that list as well till he went too far in his world conquest plans. The Bush family just loved him to death. 6. “… it seems the tide is decisively turned…” The tide has only turned in so much that they are now planning to use a chemical weapons false flag to justify a NATO invasion without a UN security council resolution. 7. “… and we can call this one for the (8.) rebels” Two lies here… obviously you can’t call this one for the “rebels” because they are losing on all fronts. And they are terrorists not rebels. 9. “either way Assad is out…” No, he isn’t 10. “… and has been covertly seeking asylum opportunities…in Cuba, (11.) Venezuela, and (12.) Ecuador “ No he isn’t. That is part and parcel of destabilization psyops, trying to make the targeted population think that their government is falling apart and their leader is abandoning them. Not true. Assad is still there and has no plans to leave. Direct lie on his behalf. Several lies there with each country (the list is of countries the corporate industrial complex does not like) 13. “… where Syria’s deputy foreign minister has delivered letters to foreign ministers” Syria’s deputy foreign minister just said that Syria would never use chemical weapons against the Syrian people. So I don’t know where this comes from… “Assad’s deputy foreign minister Faisal Maqdad said Thursday that they would never kill Syrians with chemical weapons, dismissing the Western intelligence reports as “theater.”" NBC News “I guess Muslims don’t like it when you kill a bunch of self-righteous Muslims… (14.) so he’s not trying to stay too close to home” Kinda racist as well as a lie. Assad has no intention of leaving. 15. “What are the odds he will make a clean getaway after the SLAUGHTER” The people committing the “slaughter” are the “professional jihadists” hired by state department and NATO, and I have already shown that there are more than enough examples of even the state department admitting that. 16. “… if only they enforced this BEFORE they NEEDED to be violently overthrown…” If only indeed. Then, we could run around and kill off everyone who doesn’t bend to the will of our “national interests”. He doesn’t NEED to be “violently overthrown”… and the “rebels” our “antiwar” hero is praising are actually not violently overthrowing him, they are attacking civilians and infrastructure and industry, just like their friends in the SOCOM teach them to do (see “unconventional warfare manual” for details) 17. “… in costly civil wars…” Obviously this is NOT a civil war. He himself already admitted that it was being funded and backed by outside forces driven toward regime change. So even he knows that is a lie… “Assad has vowed to live and die in Syria…” So he knows all the shit he claimed about Assad planning to leave is also bullshit lies, right? “.. which is much more likely for him if he decides to stay much longer” The disgusting Hillaryesque smirk on his face while he makes that statement should be enough for each and every one of his fans to understand exactly what he is… disinfo agent working to support the imperialist regime change agenda for the corporate interests and the global banking industry. (18. and 19.)The first two I counted are from his opening remarks about us not knowing “how or who or why” the Syrian internet and communication lines went down… in fact, we do know, the “FSA rebels” attacked their communications networks just like they have been targeting the state run TV stations across the country. So, there you have it… 19 lies told by “antiwar” Adam Kokesh in support of Hillary Clinton imperialist regime change agenda in Syria.

Adam Kokesh is either dangerously stupid or he thinks the public is. If for no other reason, I have no respect for him because of his pedalling of anti-Assad propaganda. Scott Creighton has also taken an intense dislike of him as is evident from this December 2012 blog post: Count the Pro-Regime Change Lies from Adam Kokesh Posted on December 7, 2012 by willyloman by Scott Creighton UPDATE: the following is from Adam’s Facebook page. Apparently not everyone drinks the koolaid over there: Andrew Panken “So you agree with the numbers put out by the so-called rebels, Adam? Also, it really seems like you’re saying that Assad should have been removed a long time ago? Who would have removed him, how and under what authority? UPDATE: Now wait, all you Kokeshites…. why are you all voting for the first one? I’m confused… I thought is was “Adam VS the man” not Adam IS the man”? You see, that’s the joke… get it? no I guess you don’t which explains why you’re Kokeshites…. UPDATE: yeah…. right…. UPDATE: Ah… come on… who voted “none”? Adam? Was that you? —- It’s almost pointless to highlight the fact that Adam Kokesh is obviously a disinfo shill and has been since day one. He served for a year with the 3rd Civil Affairs group in Iraq, propagandizing our efforts there before and after Fallujah and then he decided for some strange reason to take his handgun home with him which of course got him discharged without the possibility of re-enlisting. He then immediately joins anti-war protests, wearing his military uniform to garner him attention in the movement and credibility, and becomes a neoliberal libertarian joining the ranks of the likes of Alex Jones and Ron Paul. Months ago Kokesh decided to come out against Ron Paul once it became obvious that he had deliberately aided the nomination process of the Mormon fall-guy Mitt Romney. He was clearly working to corner that “disillusioned with Ron” market in order to keep them sipping the “libertarian’ ideological poison. Then he seemed to turn on AJ but he recently did a video with Mark Dice in which they both pretended to have problems with that CIA/Mossad agent as well but of course, during the entire video all they did was pay fealty to the fraudster over and over again. It was a limited hangout critique of a limited hangout agent. Now he’s out with a video which apparently has garnered a whopping 61 views in which he lies through his teeth about Bashar al-Assad and the so-called Syrian “civil war”. I tell ya, it sounds like his script was written by Hillary Clinton. It’s pathetic. So let’s play this game: count the pro-regime change lies Adam Kokesh tells during his disinfo propaganda video. (Visit the post to see the results of the survey! - JJ) [View:http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HFROmsG-4hE]

Naomi Wolf: My creeping concern that the NSA leaker is not who he purports to be Posted on June 14, 2013 by willyloman by Naomi Wolf from her Facebook page (H/T David) I hate to do this but I feel obligated to share, as the story unfolds, my creeping concern that the NSA leaker is not who he purports to be, and that the motivations involved in the story may be more complex than they appear to be. This is in no way to detract from the great courage of Glenn Greenwald in reporting the story, and the gutsiness of the Guardian in showcasing this kind of reporting, which is a service to America that US media is not performing at all. It is just to raise some cautions as the story unfolds, and to raise some questions about how it is unfolding, based on my experience with high-level political messaging. Some of Snowden’s emphases seem to serve an intelligence/police state objective, rather than to challenge them. a) He is super-organized, for a whistleblower, in terms of what candidates, the White House, the State Dept. et al call ‘message discipline.’ He insisted on publishing a power point in the newspapers that ran his initial revelations. I gather that he arranged for a talented filmmaker to shoot the Greenwald interview. These two steps — which are evidence of great media training, really ‘PR 101″ — are virtually never done (to my great distress) by other whistleblowers, or by progressive activists involved in breaking news, or by real courageous people who are under stress and getting the word out. They are always done, though, by high-level political surrogates. b) In the Greenwald video interview, I was concerned about the way Snowden conveys his message. He is not struggling for words, or thinking hard, as even bright, articulate whistleblowers under stress will do. Rather he appears to be transmitting whole paragraphs smoothly, without stumbling. To me this reads as someone who has learned his talking points — again the way that political campaigns train surrogates to transmit talking points. c) He keeps saying things like, “If you are a journalist and they think you are the transmission point of this info, they will certainly kill you.” Or: “I fully expect to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.” He also keeps stressing what he will lose: his $200,000 salary, his girlfriend, his house in Hawaii. These are the kinds of messages that the police state would LIKE journalists to take away; a real whistleblower also does not put out potential legal penalties as options, and almost always by this point has a lawyer by his/her side who would PROHIBIT him/her from saying, ‘come get me under the Espionage Act.” Finally in my experience, real whistleblowers are completely focused on their act of public service and trying to manage the jeopardy to themselves and their loved ones; they don’t tend ever to call attention to their own self-sacrifice. That is why they are heroes, among other reasons. But a police state would like us all to think about everything we would lose by standing up against it. d) It is actually in the Police State’s interest to let everyone know that everything you write or say everywhere is being surveilled, and that awful things happen to people who challenge this. Which is why I am not surprised that now he is on UK no-fly lists – I assume the end of this story is that we will all have a lesson in terrible things that happen to whistleblowers. That could be because he is a real guy who gets in trouble; but it would be as useful to the police state if he is a fake guy who gets in ‘trouble.’ e) In stories that intelligence services are advancing (I would call the prostitutes-with-the-secret-service such a story), there are great sexy or sex-related mediagenic visuals that keep being dropped in, to keep media focus on the issue. That very pretty pole-dancing Facebooking girlfriend who appeared for, well, no reason in the media coverage…and who keeps leaking commentary, so her picture can be recycled in the press…really, she happens to pole-dance? Dan Ellsberg’s wife was and is very beautiful and doubtless a good dancer but somehow she took a statelier role as his news story unfolded… f) Snowden is in Hong Kong, which has close ties to the UK, which has done the US’s bidding with other famous leakers such as Assange. So really there are MANY other countries that he would be less likely to be handed over from… g) Media reports said he had vanished at one point to ‘an undisclosed location’ or ‘a safe house.’ Come on. There is no such thing. Unless you are with the one organization that can still get off the surveillance grid, because that org created it. h) I was at dinner last night to celebrate the brave and heroic Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights. Several of Assange’s also brave and talented legal team were there, and I remembered them from when I had met with Assange. These attorneys are present at every moment when Assange meets the press — when I met with him off the record last Fall in the Ecuadoran embassy, his counsel was present the whole time, listening and stepping in when necessary. Seeing these diligent attentive free-speech attorneys for another whisleblower reinforced my growing anxiety: WHERE IS SNOWDEN’S LAWYER as the world’s media meet with him? A whistleblower talking to media has his/her counsel advising him/her at all times, if not actually being present at the interview, because anything he/she says can affect the legal danger the whistleblower may be in . It is very, very odd to me that a lawyer has not appeared, to my knowledge, to stand at Snowden’s side and keep him from further jeopardy in interviews. Again I hate to cast any skepticism on what seems to be a great story of a brave spy coming in from the cold in the service of American freedom. And I would never raise such questions in public if I had not been told by a very senior official in the intelligence world that indeed, there are some news stories that they create and drive — even in America (where propagandizing Americans is now legal). But do consider that in Eastern Germany, for instance, it was the fear of a machine of surveillance that people believed watched them at all times — rather than the machine itself — that drove compliance and passivity. From the standpoint of the police state and its interests — why have a giant Big Brother apparatus spying on us at all times — unless we know about it? Naomi

Manufactured Hero Edward Snowden: Why? and Why Now? Article by Scott Creighton No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. UN Declaration on Human Rights As I have been writing on the subject of Edward Snowden’s “ground-breaking leak” since June the 7th, many people have written me or left comments, mostly in support of the notion that something is going on here, if not exactly what I think, it’s something that doesn’t pass the smell test. If you look around the internet at alternative sites as well as the MSM though, you will mainly find journalists and investigators parroting the consensus line that Edward is the most heroic human in the history of mankind or at least ranking up there between Jesus and Luke Skywalker. Cracks are starting to develop in his story in the main stream press, cracks sites like this one and others have been exposing from the beginning. But while the self-proclaimed leaders of various alternative movements and networks alike are calling for Snowden’s sainthood while ignoring multiple falshoods and exaggerations in his story, it seems to me the general public is less enthused with the validity of the story. More and more comments litter the consensus spewing write-ups questioning the facts of the story and whether or not this information he leaked is actually something new, which of course it isn’t. As I progress in my own understanding of the situation, I find I am being asked quite often if this is some kind of measured leak crafted by the very agencies and administrations who seem on the hook for the decimation of our civil liberties, why on earth would they do that? Here is my attempt to explain what it is we are seeing and why they chose now to do it. (long post, sorry) Some posit that it’s infighting in the intelligence universe, like Tarpley’s Mormon Mafia in the CIA striking out against other elements. Some suggest it may be a threat to get Obama to act more aggressively on Syria and Turkey. Some say it’s all a distraction designed to take attention away from the IRS scandal and the AP wiretapping scandal or the drone policy of Obama. Some say it’s been done to take attention away from what is happening in Syria and Turkey in the wake of Sarin gas being found on a couple of our mercenary terrorists over there. Having the Peace Prize “winning” President arming terrorists with a chemical weapon of mass destruction can’t be good for his falling approval numbers. You can probably make an argument for most of these though I strongly disagree that any of the powers that be want Obama out of office and Syria is being backed to the launching of the nukes by Russia so no one wants that or blames Obama for not launching WW III while they are making so much money… especially now that the neoliberalization and recolonization of Africa is well underway (thanks to Benghazi) The questions put to me basically center around the “why” of it all and honestly, though I put forward a hypothesis at the start (June 7th) I would like to modify that theory a bit in relation to what we have seen thus far. The truth is, you don’t have to ask “why” at this point. They have already told us the why of it. You’re just not listening. When these kinds of psyops take place, it’s almost a race by the interested parties to get on-board before their colleagues do. They want to ensure that the powers that be take notice of their ability to see the agenda and their willingness to help them achieve it. We live in a world dominated by corporate ladder climbing yesmen. Mediocre at best wannabes with no moral center. In fact, they revel in that description, thinking somehow that makes them better than all the rest of humanity who are still stymied by archaic belief systems of “right and wrong” or the evil “altruism” To this class of “new normal” sycophants to power, it’s not about doing the right thing, it’s about doing the right thing for those who matter. And you and I we simply don’t matter. So they are rushing as fast as they can to help craft the endgame of this psyop in service to the “why” of it all. You don’t have to guess at it anymore folks. The “why” is all around us. Now at first I figured it was damage control for a different psyop. Let me explain. They had been running all kinds of leaks in the month of May just after another sycophantic servant of their interests announced his big “Final Revolution of America” armed march on Washington. That little psyop was sniffed out immediately and even after staging his little “disappearance” act, Adam Kokesh found himself sitting alone with his big plans and no one buying his crap anymore. People knew he was setting up gun owners and libertarians for what appeared to be a painful fall on July the 4th of this year and he got reamed pretty hard for it. His credibility tanked and his staged arrest made it even worse. Provocateur Kokesh announces “The Final American Revolution” (May 6, 2013) Armed March Announced Benghazi memo rewrites (May 10, 2013) Benghazi memos reportedly revised 12 times FBI surveillance of AP (May 13th, 2013) Justice Department secretly obtained AP phone records IRS Informs on themselves in Audit Scandal (May 14, 2013) Treasury Inspector General Review James Rosen leak probe (May 17, 2013) A rare peek into a Justice Department leak probe Edward Snowden gets on a plane to Hong Kong (May 20, 2013) drone program (May 23th, 2013) Obama Looks to Shift Focus to Drone Strikes As Scandals Swirl Justice Department Admits to Spying on Over 100 Individual Associated Press Journalists – See more at: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/breaking-justice-department-admits-to-spying-on-over-100-individual-associated-press-journalists-over-two-month-period_052013#sthash.uy0YeVuV.dpuf NSA leaked contract with Verizon (June 6, 2013) NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers daily So the leaks they rushed through were designed to generate an anger and a panic in the country especially in the libertarian/Tea Party types and this final straw, the revelation of the mass surveillance of everyone by “big government” in violation of their civil liberties then coupled with abuses from their other big enemy, the IRS, would be more than they could take, fermenting the very same “Final Revolution of America” just as their other asset Kokesh had planned. Or at least, that would be the story pushed by the MSM and their complicit “alternative truth tellers” when all hell breaks out at the march on July 4th. Read the rest of the article here

I'm not knocking your comments but strangely enough, my two youngest daughters suffered continous ear infections starting shortly after their first vaccinations and one daughter ending up with a big hole in her eardrum in her teens AND that was under constant medical supervision by first American and then British doctors. As you'll notice in both mine and "dazed and confused"'s posts, it doesn't matter whether you're using medical treatments or alternative treatments, you're doing it wrong. Don't treat the symptoms of disease - remove the causes - then the symptoms will mostly go away by themselves. If you want, have the chemo, radiation and surgery which attack the symptoms of cancer, but meanwhile, remove the causes of the disease so that it doesn't come back. The big problem with that approach is that the conventional cancer treatments actually cause cancer themselves. As far as judging people goes, I fully understand that people will vote with their faith when it comes to the crunch and we've been trained since birth to trust medical professionals. This is just as natural as a religious person turning to the church or "God" in times of crisis or a citizen turning to their government. It doesn't make it any more effective.

Dear "dazed," Stefan has actually responded to these comments in general by warning his readers of the danger of offering advice to people. I fully agree with what you have written about health and the absence of "cures" but for every person offering these helpful words, there's at least 10 more swearing to the efficacy of this herb or that other treatment. For every person who might take what we see as the correct path, think of how many would be led astray by various quacks. You and I both know that health is about living a healthy lifestyle and removing the causes of disease. Poisoning the body is what causes disease and can in no way be a path to health. However, we see "healthy" people walking around everywhere who were "cured" with radiation, chemo or surgery! What life these people would have had if they'd followed a different path is an unknown. The fact that most will suffer their next bout of cancer in just a matter of years is not figured into the equation. I caught up with an old friend this week who has suffered two bouts of cancer in the last 5 years and his last course of chemo damaged his heart severely. He's slowly dying but still credits the chemo with giving him several more years of life. I've heard that people who refuse all cancer treatments tend to live, on average, an extra 9 years over those who receive the treatments and that the quality of those years far exceeds that of the conventional patients. I have yet to see any solid proof of this claim but it would be nice to think it's true. But in the end, it's up to each individual to decide what path they put their faith in. We can only offer up our knowledge so that they can take advantage of it if they choose.

Not half as crazy as the idea that we don't need a state. :o) It's just a matter of getting past your lifelong programming and reviewing the facts. I fully believe that the "animals for food" industry is unhealthy due to the quality of the products and the ill-effects it has on our bodies and unethical due to it's inherent cruelty and its bias to wealthier consumers. Having said that, World Hunger is not about a lack of food; it is the inability to afford food and not just during times of drought/famine. The big players, I believe, are greed and corruption (am I repeating myself?) of which we can only hope to influence by not contributing to or condoning in our own lives.

Of course, a perfectly heatlhy person should have survived the savage beating and struggle. [] According to the official story, the man was acting strange in the first place and then got even stranger when the police arrived. He appeared to be resisting arrest which is a capital offense in the USA which often leads to summary execution regardless of what crime the person may have been suspected of.

So what have those Free Syrian Army "rebels" been up to lately? (Source: InfoWars) Please explain to me why western nations are backing the FSA?

Source: American Everyman

That is a very good article which repeats, eloquently, an oft-made point about the incorrect use of the word "terrorism" when members of an aggressor nation's military are attacked in retaliation for that aggression. Thanks for posting it, xelent.

My apologies for conflating in public! :o) I'm not saying that there is a conspiracy behind every murder or act of violence. What I am saying is that there is historical support for being suspicious of every claimed terror attack as, to-date, we haven't seen even one that has stood up to the intense scrutiny of an independent public enquiry. We know what our governments are capable of because they admit to what they have done in the past but always with an air of "those were different times and we'd never do that today!" We are justified in extrapolating continued criminal behavior based on their previous history and the evidence unfolding before us in current events. Just listening to the messages coming from the politicians and the media should raise the hackles of any savvy observer. As an aside, when politicians and their press agents tell you anything, we know that we cannot take what they say at face value. Some well known examples: Nixon: "I am not a crook!" Clinton: "I did not have sex with that woman" In your earlier post you said "This incidence was no Gulf of Tonkin or WMD claim." Whatever does that mean? The WMD claim was made up by the US government to garner support for their eventual invasion of Iraq, just as they have done with the claims of civil atrocities by Gaddafi and Assad, and continue to do with their claims of nuclear weapon manufacturing in Iran. So, no, Woolwich was not a false claim against another regime's danger to society, ours or their own. But the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a ship full of dead and wounded, continously attacked by Israeli fighters and warships, the survivors of which were ordered not to divulge the truth of the incident while the politicians used it to justify ramping up the Vietnam War. I don't know why the Israeli's launched the attack but I have no reason to think that it was accidental especially with a big American flag flying prominently from the mast. Woolwich was definitely not a Gulf of Tonkin incident in that apparently only one person died and there was no obvious Israeli involvement. But regardless of the historical precedent, each event must be judged on its own evidence and Woolwich is already looking pretty shaky. To say that these guys aren't clever enough to devise all these false flags is to overlook their current success rate. The FBI in the USA are racking up bogus terrorist arrest routinely only to admit that they recruited the patsies, provided the plan and materials and then lay in wait to make the arrests. On one occassion, their patsy chickened out and insisted on flying home to visit his family before the attack so they just arrested him then. The British seem happy to let the Yanks play this game for the most part but are not above it. They don't make such a show-and-tell of theirs so if you miss the news that day, you probably will never hear about it until the case comes to court. High profile events such as this are few and far between.

Please allow me to share this comment from Mr Creighton which was in response to a comment left on his blog about how denying Muslim terrorism allows "Muslims to keep their heads in the sand about the extremism that exists in a significant minority of their community." It represents my thoughts exactly and as far as I can see, it also represents the facts exactly.

Further to my previous post, I present this article which goes into some useful detail for discussion: Woolwich Attacks – Video Mirrors Exact Same Ending as Video of Boston Bombings Shootout Some of the highlights: The similarity with the Boston Bombing "shootout" The highly-edited video Waiting around for the cops and then rushing them The cops immediately applying first aid to the attackers without searching for weapons or worrying about the proximity of their own weapons. Bystanders still standing in the street even though they would have been in the line of fire.