Jenna Orkin
Might it sometimes be appropriate for the government to lie in order to reassure the public? Asked this question during a Court of Appeals hearing yesterday in Benzman vs. EPA, the case brought by residents, students and office workers exposed to and in many cases sickened by the environmental hazards following 9/11,* EPA lawyer Alisa Klein answered, "Yes."
Competing interests such as the economy or the "return to normalcy" [sic] might supercede that of public health, she argued.
There's no question that Ms. Klein accurately represented EPA's position. In addition to their compelling urge to reopen Wall St. ASAP after 9/11, the protocols they have developed to respond to a dirty bomb also take into account the economic import of the area exposed, regardless of the fact that an area that's important to the economy will also be more densely populated.
Accepting, for the moment, the mindbending reasoning that requires us to be reassured by a government which has admitted that it will lie whenever it feels like it, let us turn now to some situations in which said government has seen fit not to reassure us but in fact, to scare the sh*t out of us.
The lead-up to the Iraq war, when Condoleeza Rice dropped a metaphorical bomb into the conversation with her allusion to a mushroom cloud, comes to mind, as do the "Hoo-oo-oo - Be very afraaaaid" references at the time to chemical and biological weapons labs.
Ditto Iran, up until last week.
Then there are all those toys with kooties and that contaminated toothpaste from China. I'm not saying they're safe. I'm just wondering why they've garnered such prompt headlines while the press on American products such as Zonolite has traditionally been sluggish, never mind Agent Orange and depleted uranium. Some of the interests that have rightly decried lead-contaminated toys from China have, on the other hand, put up the strongest resistance to changing the lead laws in New York City housing, for example. (Also compare the press on avian flu with that on the numerous offenses of the American food industry.)
And remember the good old days of Homeland Security orange alerts and Osama's sneak previews? The ones that tended to come just before an election or some other sensitive event?
They don't fall into the category of reassurance but doubtless those in charge knew what they were doing those times also.
The government may not be consistent about wanting to reassure us but it certainly is consistently entertaining.
*I am one of the original plaintiffs in the case.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
IEA exec says oil supply crunch looms
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8TFC1300.htm
A prominent energy economist warned Tuesday that global oil markets are at risk of being under-supplied as national oil companies gain greater control of the world's petroleum supplies.
Some 37.5 million barrels a day of additional oil-production capacity is needed by 2015, but only 25 million barrels a day are planned, International Energy Agency Chief Economist Fatih Birol said.
China and India also must ramp up efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the IEA said in its report last month. The two countries will account for about 45 percent of the increase in global demand through 2030, when the world's energy needs are expected to be more than 50 percent higher than current levels.
I share Jenna’s perspective that you can’t expect the truth from the US Govt. or the MSM about radiation exposure.
If you share this point of view it would worth it to look into having your own radiation monitoring station.
Then you can share your data with other concerned citizens on http://tinyurl.com/vqaqn The more who join this private network the better it will be for everyone.
For my own and my family’s safety I want to know the truth and will ignore the MSM and Govt. pronouncements and look at my own Geiger counter and those on the radiation network.
acomfort
I do believe there is merit to scaring people to get there attention. But our government scares for compliance. Frightening people and doom saying are useless if you don't give practical examples of what we, as people, can do to either prepare or thwart. I appreciate Rice Farmers comments in the previous post. Very helpful indeed. I will have to check into Miso as it sounds wonderful.
Like I said though our government lies and scares to get what they want and not to be helpful.
Otherwise I don't take anything the government says as the truth. Usually the opposite! I look to find the truth by what they are leaving out. I'm not so good at this so that is why I come here and various others truth sites to try and paint a picture with the pieces.
I truly am tired of being scared with no hope. I'm developing plans to: get out of debt, cut spending, and store food. If I am successful I imagine I will post the info somewhere in an attempt to help people. I'm passed the activist stage and in the preparation stage.
the Santa Rosa Press Democrat today reports that there is a bunch of "extreme flu" deaths clustered mostly around US military bases.
that is, it's a form of the flu that attacks the young and the healthy.
http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/article/20071211/NEWS/712110347
just like the flu of 1918. which was recovered by USAMRIID in approx. 1997, from graves in Norway, as reported in New Yorker magazine in 1997.
http://www.geocities.com/pedalling_faster/1918_virus_hunt__.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/pedalling_faster/1918_virus_hunt_2_.jpg
US troops get lots of vaccinations as part of their job requirement.
what other reasons for a cluster of flu deaths around military bases ?
is the US government using US troops as guinea pigs again ? can't help but wonder.
i also wonder if this is the front edge of something far more sinister. 1918 Flu 2.0.
Blame the Terrorists, Blame the Flu.
got to have something to blame a stock market crash on.
Regards, & thank you ! for the articles & info.
The attacks against China for "toxic toys" are just scapegoating and theater, of course. The Chinese do exactly what rich countries tell them to do, and then get attacked for it! We are hearing the same thing here in Japan. Spoiled Japanese consumers complain about "defective" and "toxic" Chinese goods, but are more than happy to scoop up unbelievably cheap Chinese products. More here:
http://ricefarmer.blogspot.com/2007/09/chinese-products-just-as-i-said.html
http://ricefarmer.blogspot.com/2007/08/still-more-on-scapegoating-china.html
http://ricefarmer.blogspot.com/2007/08/more-on-scapegoating-china.html
http://ricefarmer.blogspot.com/2007/07/blaming-china-is-absurd.html
Anyway, this is all a cover for the governments and corporations of rich countries to make themselves look like victims and make the Chinese look like Toxin Demons.
Peak fertilizer?
http://www.farmfutures.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=CD26BEDECA4A4946A1283CC7786AEB5A&nm=News&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=B871CB7431204ECC9C08730ED0D90B2B
I know the push for the flu shot has been exceedingly hard this year. I whole heartedly believe that the flu shot is eugenics.
My wife got the shot this year, much to my opposition, and now feels run down and tired for 5 weeks now.
I haven't posted here in a while - I've mainly lurking as I mull over certain concerns.
For example, since we're speaking of scare tactics, doesn't it occur to people that when Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) members preach "Peak Oil", the end result is higher profits for other CFR members who control the oil and finance industry? Why is it never mentioned that Matt Simmons is a CFR member, an "invite only" member whose been invited alongside of the CEO's of the largest banks and energy corporations?
Additionally, how about the fact that every time Simmons screams "Peak Oil!" his own profits go up?
Are these not legitimate questions? How could we possibly implicate the CFR members with manipulating and controlling the US economy for a profit, yet rule out the fact that the CFR members may also be manipulating oil and production data for a profit?
This blog is obviously not a fools paradise - you people should be quite capable of recognizing a deception when it's afoot.
I have many more documented concerns with regards to this agenda, but I'll hold my breath for now. Just consider this: A CFR member is the lead promoter of Peak Oil, it lines his pockets, and he's a member of a secretive organization that includes the CEO's of big finance, the CEO's of big oil, the US Vice President, and the vast majority of our cabinet level positions in government.
A coincidence? You're all smarter than that.
Crude Futures Spike After Energy Department Reports Supplies Fell, Fed Announces Credit Plan
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/071212/oil_prices.html
Crude supplies fell 700,000 barrels during the week ended Dec. 7, according to a weekly inventory report from the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration. Analysts had expected a 100,000 barrel increase.
And supplies of distillates, which include heating oil and diesel fuel, fell 800,000 barrels; analysts had expected inventories to rise by 300,000 barrels.
"Traders are concerned about that drop in distillate supplies," said Phil Flynn, an analyst at Alaron Trading Corp., in Chicago.
--
If you don't trust Matt Simmons because of his connections with the CFR, I suggest you read what Ali Samsam Bakhtiari and Kenneth Deffeyes have to say on the subject.
Largest oil terminal shut at NYMEX oil delivery hub
http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNewsAndPR/idUSN1150003120071211
The largest crude oil terminal at the delivery point for NYMEX crude oil futures at Cushing, Oklahoma, and two major pipelines at the hub were still shut Tuesday after an ice storm hit the area Monday, a spokesman for the terminal said.
Enbridge Energy Partners LP's (EEP.N: Quote, Profile, Research) 16.7 million barrel crude oil terminal and the Spearhead and Ozark crude oil pipelines operated by parent company Enbridge Inc (ENB.TO: Quote, Profile, Research) were shut Monday, Enbridge spokesman Larry Springer said.
Springer said that the crude oil terminal at the Cushing was also closed due to power outages.
Springer said Enbridge was working with the local power company to restore power after ice storms knocked out power to more 500,000 customers.
Three oil products terminals on the Magellan pipeline were also shut Monday by the storm.
Shorebreak, that is of course a legitimate question. All information and claims must of course be held up to the light of scrutiny and corroborated with other sources. So you should ask yourself if Simmons' claims square with other sources at your disposal. For example, do you read sources like The Oil Drum? Energy investment sites?
Of course Simmons stands to profit. Is that his only motive? How is that different from people like us buying precious metals (or investing in oil stocks) because we know these commodities are skyrocketing in value?
There are many puzzle pieces on the table. Some fit, others are bogus. If Simmons were the only person screaming peak oil, that would certainly be grounds for suspecting that he's just trying to line his own pockets. What do you think?
Illuminating interview with oil analyst Henry Groppe.
http://globalpublicmedia.com/groppe_iea_oil_spike
Demand for Imported Fertilizer Highlights Vulnerability in the Global Food System
http://www.energyfarms.net/node/1479
Major Chinese cities told to keep food, oil reserves
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-12/12/content_6314411.htm
Morgan Stanley issues full US recession alert
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=A1YourView&xml=/money/2007/12/11/cnusa111.xml
"Slipping sales and tightening credit are pushing companies into liquidation mode, especially in motor vehicles," it said.
"Three-month dollar Libor spreads have jumped by 60 to 80 basis points over the last month. High yield spreads have widened even more significantly. The absolute cost of borrowing is higher than in June."
"As delinquencies and defaults soar, lenders are tightening credit for commercial, credit card and auto lending, as well as for all mortgage borrowers," said the report, written by the bank's chief US economist Dick Berner. He said the foreclosure rate on residential mortgages had reached a 19-year high of 5.59pc in the third quarter while the glut of unsold properties would lead to a 40pc crash in housing construction.
"We think overall housing starts will run below one million units in each of the next two years -- a level not seen in the history of the modern data since 1959," he said.
I really like Shorebreaks condescension. I mean, the whole Alex Jones approach of "global elitists" manipulating us all is really a sound practice, especially without any facts. Oh sorry, you have one: Simmons is/was a CFR member.
I will now proceed with a statement by statement response to his post.
"doesn't it occur to people that when Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) members preach "Peak Oil", the end result is higher profits for other CFR members who control the oil and finance industry? "
Who in the CFR “preaches” this besides Simmons? Names please.
"Why is it never mentioned that Matt Simmons is a CFR member(?)"
Maybe because Simmons has never made any bones about making money off the oil industry...and as far as I can tell he is one of the few (literally, FEW) IN the oil industry that has come out about Peak.
"how about the fact that every time Simmons screams "Peak Oil!" his own profits go up?"
Prove it. Please provide interview dates and coinciding earnings reports to prove your "fact."
"How could we possibly implicate the CFR members with manipulating and controlling the US economy for a profit, yet rule out the fact that the CFR members may also be manipulating oil and production data for a profit?"
Actually, I don't know of anyone that has denied this...what's your point? I do believe that Ruppert addresses this in "Denial" saying how countries have cooked the books on reserves in order to bring in more investment. Or, how about the reality that oil companies have a practice of taking over other oil companies and adding acquired companies reserves to their own and boast of increased production levels?
"This blog is obviously not a fools paradise"
Then why are you here trying to make a point with NO facts?
"I have many more documented concerns with regards to this agenda, but I'll hold my breath for now."
Are your concerns based in FACTS or loosely tied together theories? It doesn’t really make a difference if they're "documented?"
"A CFR member is the lead promoter of Peak Oil, it lines his pockets, and he's a member of a secretive organization that includes the CEO's of big finance, the CEO's of big oil, the US Vice President, and the vast majority of our cabinet level positions in government."
Did anyone elect Simmons as the mouthpiece for the peak oil awareness society? Again, another assumption. Oil has been lining Simmons' pockets for decades, that's why he's in the business, this isn't a startling new revelation to any of us here. Furthermore Simmons isn't close to being the first proponent of Peak, so why all the emphasis on ONE person within the whole area? Maybe you should consider where you get your information from and what is the basis for the formulation of your baseless theories.
"A coincidence? You're all smarter than that."
It sounds like you are thriving on coincidence, and not any of us. Yes, we are all very smart here. Maybe you should post more so that we can see how smart you are too!
Another consideration that you would be well-advised to account for is all of the oil industry executives that flat-out DENY peak and have CFR memberships.
My year long obsessing to answer the question:
How can millions of people learn about the evils of MSM?
has just been launched.
http://milliondollarcinema.com
I'd like to get your suggestions for peak oil documentaries (and others) to be included in the cinema.
There will be a total of 30 and I have 6 to start.
Thanks.
so far you've exercised good judgment, thumbto.
contact dailyreckoning.com they're making a documentary
I belong to the "Running on Empty Australia" (ROEOEZ), email list - and there's just been an extended thread on Peak Oil in relation to 9/11. The moderator of the list (who I've met personally, he's a nice guy), absolutely refuses to believe the US Government (or elements in the US Government), was responsible for 9/11. Last time the subject was raised (many, many months ago now), he actually banned all further discussion of 9/11 - at which point I un-subscribed (which didn't make him very happy). I joined again a fair while later, and this time (when the issue was raised again), he didn't repeat the "Ban" thing. However, he won't look at the DVD's I (and others), have recommended ("Oil, Smoke & Mirrors" & "Improbable Collapse") - and his quoted source of information is "Popular Mechanics" (which as I've pointed out, is part of The Hearst Corporation).
And there's another guy on the list who is red hot when it comes to analysing anything relating to energy/technology (knows the tiniest detail re things I wouldn't have a clue about), but just lapsed into posting a meaningless (and abusive), rant when it came to recogising US Government responsibility for 9/11.
As I result, I posted this (to someone on the list who shares my views, and there are others too) - I thought it might be of interest:-
I absolutely loved what you wrote Malcolm. I my book, you're spot on. And as the events of 9/11 seem to generate intense emotion, I wonder if this is the pivot at which the personal meets the political?
Having worked as a psychiatric nurse since 1975 (started training when I was 18), and almost completed a sociology degree in the early 80's, when the likes of Marcuse, Fromm and Willhelm Reich et al were in vogue (just think Freud meets Marx), my whole life has been an exploration of the personal/political continuum.
Willhelm Reich actually wrote a book called "The Mass Psychology of Fascism," where he postulates that a certain authoritarian family structure fosters our sub-conscious attachment to "Strong" and charismatic leaders. Obviously, material conditions are also part of the equation - Reich just presents us with an interesting and unexplored part of the puzzle.
Resistance to the idea that "Our" government would murder "Us" seems to bring up intense horror and deep denial in many people - the same reaction to the truth (in some families), that Daddy's abusing the kids. I don't think that's coincidental (while not saying everyone who refuses to look at the 9/11 evidence comes from an "Abusive" family, just that concluding our Government would deliberately kill us is as hard as concluding "Daddy" would take a knife to our throat for some).
This is why I really like Carolyn Baker's stuff, she addresses the psychology of 9/11 and Peak Oil too:-
http://carolynbaker.net/site/component/option,com_frontpage/Itemid,1/
And very strangely as it's an ancient oracle, "The Tower" card in the Tarot relates very strongly to the events of 9/11, check it out (and it could equally describe the intense catharsis/change relative to honestly facing abuse in the family):-
http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/basics/tower.shtml
And here's an example of the card itself:-
http://www.geocities.com/laura_galan/images/tower2.jpg
d!,
You seem a liitle bit confused.
I'll start right away with a report by "The Oil Drum" that demonstrates two CFR members, both of them who are former CIA chiefs, who state that we're facing peak oil, without actually using the phrase "peak oil". CIA, CFR, and the promotion of Peak Oil connected in a single peice - without CFR member Matt Simmons:
The Oil Drum connects CFR, CIA, and Peak Oil
Here's another: CFR member/former CIA chief James Woolsey on peak oil crisis in 1999.
Isn't it very interesting how the CIA leadership, who are all CFR - (To quote Mike "CIA is Wall Street") are all involved in reporting to CFR members that we're facing an oil supply crisis?
Ask me for more and I'll show you MUCH more. Don't assume that I don't know EXACTLY what I'm talking about simply because you aren't familiar with me. Your immediate characterization of me to the "Alex Jones" conspiracy crowd has piqued my interest into your motives.
But moving on, your next question was to show evidence that energy prices have increased after specific Simmons speech dates. That request indicates several things, the most predominant being that you either don't understand the nature of energy exchanges, futures, and the various other factors that are at play, or that you've asked a loaded question with no possible answer. Try again.
But not to leave other readers empty handed, here are links to several pages on Simmons' website:
Archive of Simmons speeches and papers
20 year snapshot of downstream energy stocks - blue line reflects Simmons' clients
US retail gasoline margin
Now look at the dates when Simmons began his speeches, look at the dates of increased stock activity among his clients - primarily exploration - and then look at the gasoline margin that increases that have profitted the major US oil companies, most of whose CEO's are CFR members. Does anyone see a pattern?
The bottom line is that the peak oil theory, which is promoted by CFR members within both the oil industry, and by the CIA (Wall Street), has led to enormous profits for the petroleum industry - and for the oil producing nations who use supply and demand, along with regional tensions (which are rooted where?) to justify higher oil prices.
We live in dangerous political times. Question, question, question. Question everything. Question me and research. Don't align yourself with political hero's or ideology, and do not let your feelings or beliefs to guide your responses. Base them solely upon facts.
In the case of Peak Oil, there is questionable alignment suggesting that an energy shortage would contribute to the financial and strategic goals of an empire - both domestically and on a foreign basis. Do not put it past them to use media, government, and their CIA operation to convince citizens that dramatic, devastating, and costly change will be the likely result.
Campaign: 'No New Taxes Means No New Bridges'
http://wcco.com/local/campaign.bridges.transportation.2.610627.html
Here's another example of the Catch-22 of fuel taxes and road construction. If you raise fuel taxes (which are the biggest source of money for road construction), you make fuel even more expensive, and that will ultimately take people off the roads. But if you don't raise taxes, the roads will fall into an even worse state of repair, which will also ultimately take people off the roads.
People don't realize the staggering amount of petroleum energy invested in our vast road networks. How much was oil back when Eisenhower launched the Interstate system? And how much is it now? Clearly, all the needed maintenance can never be done, so traffic infrastructure is fated to continue crumbling.
Happy motoring!
Alan Greenspan admits Peak Oil:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119763743685729349.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Sorry, I had to...
Shorebreak:
The first article has 26 contributors, not two. I direct your attention to a very important nugget of information from page 19 of the first report, which wasn’t produced by the oil drum…
“Myth #3: Large Western companies like Exxon Mobil, BP, Shell, and
Chevron control the price of oil.
No, the resources and production controlled by large international oil companies are small compared with the NOCs. The pace of increasing extraction of hydrocarbons probably rests largely with NOCs, many of which are not governed solely by economic considerations. The international major companies control only about one-tenth of the world’s proven hydrocarbon resources.”
But you probably read the report, right? You should know this already. As far as the second report, Woolsey seems to be much more concerned with national security rather than profits. Maybe that’s because he has never worked with Wall Street corporations… In fact he has worked primarily for the U.S. to use LESS oil, not BUY more of it. You did your homework right?
“Isn't it very interesting how the CIA leadership, who are all CFR - (To quote Mike "CIA is Wall Street") are all involved in reporting to CFR members that we're facing an oil supply crisis?”
It’s interesting that you don’t research. A lot like Alex Jones. No, it’s not interesting. It’s obvious that these are the people that would actually know about it. The articles that you post speak only of the threat to national security and causes for concerns, i.e. our countries unprecedented addiction and need for CHEAP oil. It is certain that Peak is real, and people are making money. Massive amounts (like Simmons), no one argues that. It makes sense to any logical person that people in the oil industry, at home and abroad, would want to make as much PROFIT as they could before depletion renders that impossible.
My motives are simple: To keep people like you from coming across as an authority on the subject influencing people with radical and wild conspiracy theories.
“Do not put it past them...”
Who? You nut! You are a conspiracy theorist. Next, attack Angelina Jolie and Barbara Walters, for being CFR members. I’m sure they get a cut for their stoic silence on the subject. To reduce Peak Oil as you have, you must start by disproving the SCIENCE. Another element you choose to ignore. To reduce it down to being the brainchild of an American think-tank is narrow-minded, downright ignorant. Can you not go back and see how dead-on Hubbert’s predictions have been? Was he CFR/CIA? Did he reap millions in profits? Is every scientist that has gotten behind peak oil on the CIA or CFR payroll? Are they part of the “deception?”
In conclusion, get over the CIA/CFR connections. It’s too obvious anyway. Look at Peak for what it is, which means actually researching PEAK OIL. If you can scientifically disprove peak oil then you will be a hero to many, and then an enemy of those who you say are using it as deception.
Until then…
One thing to add to the Peak Oil debate currently taking place in here.CIA and the military is and has been investing heavily in renewable energy(as FTW has reported with a list of sources on more than one occasion).Did CIA deceive itself into believing Peak Oil is real?SHould Big Oil be nudging them in the ribs and saying "You don't need to invest in renewables guys.Peak Oil(along with global warming)is a scam remember?"?
Bad vibes for Japanese agriculture: Well, winter is here, and it's been seasonably cold. That's the action, and the reaction is skyrocketing fuel prices. I mentioned the other day that the national government has announced kerosene (heating fuel) subsidies for low-income families and small businesses. According to a feature article in today's newspaper, the crunch is now bearing down on agriculture. In this prefecture (state) as in other parts of Japan, there is a lot of winter greenhouse agriculture which depends on large heaters burning fuel oil. According to the report, fuel prices have reached the level at which some farmers are just giving up and SHUTTING DOWN operations. Dairy farmers are the victims of a double whammy: high-priced fuel makes it expensive to heat water for cleaning their milk cans and tanks, and the high cost of feed for cows adds to their woes. Here we can see how readily expensive crude can shut down modern agriculture. Just a few months ago I predicted at a town meeting that this would happen. Most of the people there thought I was nuts. Now I am telling them, "I told you so."
Shorebreak--
Causation and correlation are not the same thing. People don't make money off the "peak oil theory" but of the reality of declining supply and therefore rising price. If "theory" influence reality the way (I think) you imply, you shoudl be able to lower the price of oil by blogging about abiotic oil or hydrogen, etc.
Simmons' influence on the market is considerable, but as more than one analyst has said "money talks and b.s. walks" in the long term. Simmons might well have made minor spike s because he is right. People who were in the know for years regarding petroleum have been in profound denial about peak. And business people will listen to Simmons because he is a money and energy guy, not an environmentalist or Communist or whatever.
Simmons wears two hats. Of course he advises people on M&A in energy as he has for 35 years; this does not mean that he is unable to do his own analysis, or that his analysis is unreasonable.
Data Center Power Demands Raising Fears of an Impending Crisis for Thousands of Major Corporations
http://energytechstocks.com/wp/?p=639
Next time, evacuees subject to criminal checks
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5380868.html
Check out the bracelets.
I've got chills up and down my spine, read this insidious piece in the Murdoch press last Sunday (re "Flu"). It very much relates to what others have posted here:-
Stockpile food for flu crisis
EVERY Australian household should stockpile at least 10 weeks' worth of food rations to prepare for a deadly flu pandemic, a panel of leading nutritionists has warned.
Continued here:
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22929648-953,00.html
I've just been publicly "Banned" from the ROEOZ email list (after being a member, on and off, for several years with no problems):-
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/roeoz/
. . . directly (and as clearly stated), for posting this:-
Subject: Demand Destruction & Collateral damage
We're heading towards a 32% decline in oil production by 2020 (if not more, relating to exporting nations no longer exporting). Just what plans do you think the-powers-that-be have for us? Do you think they're sanguine, and looking forward to it - like some of us? Do we
think just because they're not articulating their "Plans," they don't have any? Just what kind of rosy, depletion crystal ball are some of us looking into?
Ever heard of "Collateral Damage"? Another name for it is "Demand
Destruction." And whatever personal "Plans" we have, believe me,
we're just irrelevant, non-human dross to some of these psychopathic
bastards. I fully believe a relatively narrow clique of extremely evil and extremely determined men, in the ruling elite, were responsible for 9/11. Do you think they're too dumb not to have plans for the horrendous energy cliff we're facing? Do you think they don't see it? And if they're capable of 9/11 - what else are they capable of?
And I'll qualify the above by saying I personally believe they're a very NARROW clique (but powerful, and well connected) - BUT they're not "All powerful" (though they think they are are), and they're also capable of amazing fuck-ups, related to hubris. They're not invincible.
Fallujah was genocide. What's happening all over Iraq is genocide. The Holocaust is here and now. Try living in a Muslim skin for a year, then saying the completely outrageous "Conspiracy Theory" of 19 Arab hi-jackers collapsing the World Trade Centres is "Peripheral," and NOT intimately related to our energy crisis. Not related to "Peak Oil"? "Off topic"? Give me a break. And Richard Heinberg agrees with me. Here he is on Global Public Media:-
Richard Heinberg at the 9-11 International Inquiry
http://globalpublicmedia.com/transcripts/218
We're next, unless we wake up.
And you have read this lately? It was in the last edition of The
Sunday Mail, and it made my blood run cold:-
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22929648-953,00.html
Ever heard of bio-warfare? Do we think (stealing a line from Dylan
Thomas), men of such huge egos and habituation to power will
go "Gentle into that good night"? It's like telling an alcoholic to
stop drinking (been there, done that). What other choice do these
people have (from their perspective), but "demand destruction"? And while mentioning that, here's the link to that poem (one I love):-
http://www.bigeye.com/donotgo.htm
Because for me, 9/11 was the "Dying of the light." It was the dying of the light of truth - as grave as the burning of the Reichstag was for millions of Jews and other victims. Denial kills, lies kill - we're living in a fools paradise, the calm before the storm. Do you think these people are too "Nice" not to make victims out of us, and our kids? Do you think they're not intelligent enough? Do you think
they're not determined enough? Do you think they don't have enough
resources at their fingertips? Our only defence is truth, and to
graphically show what I mean, I think Naomi Klein's short film, "The Shock Doctrine" says it all (especially in the final clip):-
http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine/short-film
kim - many thanks for your message. email addresses don't come through to the moderator and i didn't see a contact link on your webpage so this is the only venue in which i can communicate with you.
Post a Comment