[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

How Republicans in Key Senate Races Are Flip-Flopping on Abortion

Idaho bar sparks fury for declaring June 'Heterosexual Awesomeness Month' and giving free beers and 15% discounts to straight men

Son of Buc-ee’s co-owner indicted for filming guests in the shower and having sex. He says the law makes it OK.

South Africa warns US could be liable for ICC prosecution for supporting Israel

Today I turned 50!

San Diego Police officer resigns after getting locked in the backseat with female detainee

Gazan Refugee Warns the World about Hamas

Iranian stabbed for sharing his faith, miraculously made it across the border without a passport!

Protest and Clashes outside Trump's Bronx Rally in Crotona Park

Netanyahu Issues Warning To US Leaders Over ICC Arrest Warrants: 'You're Next'

Will it ever end?

Did Pope Francis Just Call Jesus a Liar?

Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth) Updated 4K version

There can never be peace on Earth for as long as Islamic Sharia exists

The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception.

Trump Is Planning to Send Kill Teams to Mexico to Take Out Cartel Leaders

The Great Falling Away in the Church is Here | Tim Dilena

How Ridiculous? Blade-Less Swiss Army Knife Debuts As Weapon Laws Tighten

Jewish students beaten with sticks at University of Amsterdam

Terrorists shut down Park Avenue.

Police begin arresting democrats outside Met Gala.

The minute the total solar eclipse appeared over US

Three Types Of People To Mark And Avoid In The Church Today

Are The 4 Horsemen Of The Apocalypse About To Appear?

France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront

Facts you may not have heard about Muslims in England.

George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed.

Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus.

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase

Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past?

Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues

[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

International News
See other International News Articles

Title: A World War Has Begun. Break the Silence.
Source: Information Clearing House
URL Source: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44496.htm
Published: Apr 17, 2016
Author: John Pilger
Post Date: 2016-08-08 09:08:31 by U don't know me
Keywords: None
Views: 4858
Comments: 36

A World War Has Begun. Break the Silence.

By John Pilger

April 17, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - I have been filming in the Marshall Islands, which lie north of Australia, in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Whenever I tell people where I have been, they ask, "Where is that?" If I offer a clue by referring to "Bikini", they say, "You mean the swimsuit."

Few seem aware that the bikini swimsuit was named to celebrate the nuclear explosions that destroyed Bikini island. Sixty-six nuclear devices were exploded by the United States in the Marshall Islands between 1946 and 1958 -- the equivalent of 1.6 Hiroshima bombs every day for twelve years.

Bikini is silent today, mutated and contaminated. Palm trees grow in a strange grid formation. Nothing moves. There are no birds. The headstones in the old cemetery are alive with radiation. My shoes registered "unsafe" on a Geiger counter.

Standing on the beach, I watched the emerald green of the Pacific fall away into a vast black hole. This was the crater left by the hydrogen bomb they called "Bravo". The explosion poisoned people and their environment for hundreds of miles, perhaps forever.

On my return journey, I stopped at Honolulu airport and noticed an American magazine called Women's Health. On the cover was a smiling woman in a bikini swimsuit, and the headline: "You, too, can have a bikini body." A few days earlier, in the Marshall Islands, I had interviewed women who had very different "bikini bodies"; each had suffered thyroid cancer and other life-threatening cancers.

Unlike the smiling woman in the magazine, all of them were impoverished: the victims and guinea pigs of a rapacious superpower that is today more dangerous than ever.

I relate this experience as a warning and to interrupt a distraction that has consumed so many of us. The founder of modern propaganda, Edward Bernays, described this phenomenon as "the conscious and intelligent manipulation of the habits and opinions" of democratic societies. He called it an "invisible government".

How many people are aware that a world war has begun? At present, it is a war of propaganda, of lies and distraction, but this can change instantaneously with the first mistaken order, the first missile.

In 2009, President Obama stood before an adoring crowd in the centre of Prague, in the heart of Europe. He pledged himself to make "the world free from nuclear weapons". People cheered and some cried. A torrent of platitudes flowed from the media. Obama was subsequently awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

It was all fake. He was lying.

The Obama administration has built more nuclear weapons, more nuclear warheads, more nuclear delivery systems, more nuclear factories. Nuclear warhead spending alone rose higher under Obama than under any American president. The cost over thirty years is more than $1 trillion.

A mini nuclear bomb is planned. It is known as the B61 Model 12. There has never been anything like it. General James Cartwright, a former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said, "Going smaller [makes using this nuclear] weapon more thinkable."

In the last eighteen months, the greatest build-up of military forces since World War Two -- led by the United States -- is taking place along Russia's western frontier. Not since Hitler invaded the Soviet Union have foreign troops presented such a demonstrable threat to Russia.

Ukraine - once part of the Soviet Union - has become a CIA theme park. Having orchestrated a coup in Kiev, Washington effectively controls a regime that is next door and hostile to Russia: a regime rotten with Nazis, literally. Prominent parliamentary figures in Ukraine are the political descendants of the notorious OUN and UPA fascists. They openly praise Hitler and call for the persecution and expulsion of the Russian speaking minority.

This is seldom news in the West, or it is inverted to suppress the truth.

In Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia -- next door to Russia - the US military is deploying combat troops, tanks, heavy weapons. This extreme provocation of the world's second nuclear power is met with silence in the West.

What makes the prospect of nuclear war even more dangerous is a parallel campaign against China.

Seldom a day passes when China is not elevated to the status of a "threat". According to Admiral Harry Harris, the US Pacific commander, China is "building a great wall of sand in the South China Sea".

What he is referring to is China building airstrips in the Spratly Islands, which are the subject of a dispute with the Philippines - a dispute without priority until Washington pressured and bribed the government in Manila and the Pentagon launched a propaganda campaign called "freedom of navigation".

What does this really mean? It means freedom for American warships to patrol and dominate the coastal waters of China. Try to imagine the American reaction if Chinese warships did the same off the coast of California.

I made a film called The War You Don't See, in which I interviewed distinguished journalists in America and Britain: reporters such as Dan Rather of CBS, Rageh Omar of the BBC, David Rose of the Observer.

The War You Don't See from John Pilger on Vimeo.

All of them said that had journalists and broadcasters done their job and questioned the propaganda that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction; had the lies of George W. Bush and Tony Blair not been amplified and echoed by journalists, the 2003 invasion of Iraq might not have happened, and hundreds of thousands of men, women and children would be alive today.

The propaganda laying the ground for a war against Russia and/or China is no different in principle. To my knowledge, no journalist in the Western "mainstream" -- a Dan Rather equivalent, say --asks why China is building airstrips in the South China Sea.

The answer ought to be glaringly obvious. The United States is encircling China with a network of bases, with ballistic missiles, battle groups, nuclear -armed bombers.

This lethal arc extends from Australia to the islands of the Pacific, the Marianas and the Marshalls and Guam, to the Philippines, Thailand, Okinawa, Korea and across Eurasia to Afghanistan and India. America has hung a noose around the neck of China. This is not news. Silence by media; war by media.

In 2015, in high secrecy, the US and Australia staged the biggest single air-sea military exercise in recent history, known as Talisman Sabre. Its aim was to rehearse an Air-Sea Battle Plan, blocking sea lanes, such as the Straits of Malacca and the Lombok Straits, that cut off China's access to oil, gas and other vital raw materials from the Middle East and Africa.

In the circus known as the American presidential campaign, Donald Trump is being presented as a lunatic, a fascist. He is certainly odious; but he is also a media hate figure. That alone should arouse our scepticism.

Trump's views on migration are grotesque, but no more grotesque than those of David Cameron. It is not Trump who is the Great Deporter from the United States, but the Nobel Peace Prize winner, Barack Obama.

According to one prodigious liberal commentator, Trump is "unleashing the dark forces of violence" in the United States. Unleashing them?

This is the country where toddlers shoot their mothers and the police wage a murderous war against black Americans. This is the country that has attacked and sought to overthrow more than 50 governments, many of them democracies, and bombed from Asia to the Middle East, causing the deaths and dispossession of millions of people.

No country can equal this systemic record of violence. Most of America's wars (almost all of them against defenceless countries) have been launched not by Republican presidents but by liberal Democrats: Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama.

In 1947, a series of National Security Council directives described the paramount aim of American foreign policy as "a world substantially made over in [America's] own image". The ideology was messianic Americanism. We were all Americans. Or else. Heretics would be converted, subverted, bribed, smeared or crushed.

Donald Trump is a symptom of this, but he is also a maverick. He says the invasion of Iraq was a crime; he doesn't want to go to war with Russia and China. The danger to the rest of us is not Trump, but Hillary Clinton. She is no maverick. She embodies the resilience and violence of a system whose vaunted "exceptionalism" is totalitarian with an occasional liberal face.

As presidential election day draws near, Clinton will be hailed as the first female president, regardless of her crimes and lies - just as Barack Obama was lauded as the first black president and liberals swallowed his nonsense about "hope". And the drool goes on.

Described by the Guardian columnist Owen Jones as "funny, charming, with a coolness that eludes practically every other politician", Obama the other day sent drones to slaughter 150 people in Somalia. He kills people usually on Tuesdays, according to the New York Times, when he is handed a list of candidates for death by drone. So cool.

In the 2008 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton threatened to "totally obliterate" Iran with nuclear weapons. As Secretary of State under Obama, she participated in the overthrow of the democratic government of Honduras. Her contribution to the destruction of Libya in 2011 was almost gleeful. When the Libyan leader, Colonel Gaddafi, was publicly sodomised with a knife - a murder made possible by American logistics - Clinton gloated over his death: "We came, we saw, he died."

One of Clinton's closest allies is Madeleine Albright, the former secretary of State, who has attacked young women for not supporting "Hillary". This is the same Madeleine Albright who infamously celebrated on TV the death of half a million Iraqi children as "worth it".

Among Clinton's biggest backers are the Israel lobby and the arms companies that fuel the violence in the Middle East. She and her husband have received a fortune from Wall Street. And yet, she is about to be ordained the women's candidate, to see off the evil Trump, the official demon. Her supporters include distinguished feminists: the likes of Gloria Steinem in the US and Anne Summers in Australia.

A generation ago, a post-modern cult now known as "identity politics" stopped many intelligent, liberal-minded people examining the causes and individuals they supported -- such as the fakery of Obama and Clinton; such as bogus progressive movements like Syriza in Greece, which betrayed the people of that country and allied with their enemies.

Self absorption, a kind of "me-ism", became the new zeitgeist in privileged western societies and signaled the demise of great collective movements against war, social injustice, inequality, racism and sexism.

Today, the long sleep may be over. The young are stirring again. Gradually. The thousands in Britain who supported Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader are part of this awakening - as are those who rallied to support Senator Bernie Sanders.

In Britain last week, Jeremy Corbyn's closest ally, his shadow treasurer John McDonnell, committed a Labour government to pay off the debts of piratical banks and, in effect, to continue so-called austerity.

In the US, Bernie Sanders has promised to support Clinton if or when she's nominated. He, too, has voted for America's use of violence against countries when he thinks it's "right". He says Obama has done "a great job".

In Australia, there is a kind of mortuary politics, in which tedious parliamentary games are played out in the media while refugees and Indigenous people are persecuted and inequality grows, along with the danger of war. The government of Malcolm Turnbull has just announced a so-called defence budget of $195 billion that is a drive to war. There was no debate. Silence.

What has happened to the great tradition of popular direct action, unfettered to parties? Where is the courage, imagination and commitment required to begin the long journey to a better, just and peaceful world? Where are the dissidents in art, film, the theatre, literature?

Where are those who will shatter the silence? Or do we wait until the first nuclear missile is fired?

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: U don't know me (#0)

In Australia, there is a kind of mortuary politics, in which tedious parliamentary games are played out in the media while refugees and Indigenous people are persecuted and inequality grows, along with the danger of war. The government of Malcolm Turnbull has just announced a so-called defence budget of $195 billion that is a drive to war. There was no debate. Silence.

I know this bullshit is for american consumption but this is a pack of lies. Australia will be making this expenditure over the next twenty years in response to strategic identified threats, such as upgrading the submarine and frigate fleet, purchases that have been on the drawing board for years. There is no "debate" because these expenditures have bipartisan support. The Australian defense spending remains below 2% of GDP, we would all hope america would take similar fiscal responsibility. Australia regularly carries out military exercises with a number of nations so there is no implied threat in carrying out these exercises.

As far as the american stance in Asia is concerned, I don't think they have the ability to fight in two theatres at once so thy should be careful who they antagonise, they are not dealing with tin pot little dictators who can be swept aside. We all suggest they finish the wars they started rather than starting more of them

paraclete  posted on  2016-08-08   9:33:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: U don't know me (#0)

China IS a threat. A real threat. They are a nationalistic fascist nation. Their brand of "communism" is national socialism, in a very nationalistic nation.

They are claiming an absurd fantasy line as their sea boundary, and building fake islands to try to assert it, assuming they are so big nobody can challenge them.

China is a threat.

Russia is not. To continue to oppose Russia today is completely counterproductive. We made a hash out of the Ukraine. We need to get out and let it return to the Russian orbit, where it belongs.

To face China, we will need a naval and air buildup, and modernizing nuclear weapons is generally a good thing.

Fighting a new Cold War with Russia is stupid, and will bankrupt us. We have common interests with Russia in a quiet and stable Europe, in a pacified and divvied-up Middle East, and in not having China run riot in Asia.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-08   10:45:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: paraclete (#1)

As far as the american stance in Asia is concerned, I don't think they have the ability to fight in two theatres at once so thy should be careful who they antagonise, they are not dealing with tin pot little dictators who can be swept aside. We all suggest they finish the wars they started rather than starting more of them

For my part, I would prefer that the United States completely withdraw from Asia militarily. We have no vital interests there. It's far away, expensive and dangerous for us. By entering into entangling alliances with various small Far Eastern countries, we risk getting dragged into wars with China or North Korea, all in order to defend countries who are our economic competitors.

It would be far, far better for the US to withdraw from Asia, and allow the Western Pacific powers to have to arm themselves to face China. That would cost each of those countries quite a bit more of their GDP, which would reduce their economic competitivity with us. We have all of Latin America for cheaper labor, resources and markets, and Latin America is a far less dangerous place than Asia.

Getting out of the business of military alliance with the Western Pacific will greatly reduce our need for large deployable military forces, reduce the burden on our economy, and shift the full burden of local defense onto our competitors. The same is true for getting out of Europe.

America surged to being the first world economic power by the end of the 1800s precisely because we did NOT go engage in a military building and foreign empire building. Our money was reinvested here. The Europeans and Japanese spent theirs in a race for overseas empires.

It is true that American isolationism allowed World War I and World War II to rage for a long time. It's also true that those long, destructive wars effectively annihilated all of our chief competitors, that American losses were relatively quite light, and because we stayed out of the wars until the later phases, we were much more developed, and had a relatively easy path to victory once we did enter. Net-net, American isolationism allowed the British and French Empires to exhaust themselves and go bankrupt and falling apart, opening up all of those formerly restrictive colonies to American trade and influence. It wrecked the Soviet Union, leaving it uncompetitive economically. And we destroyed and occupied Germany and Japan, eliminating any future threat from either.

The way we fought World War I and World War II was precisely right. Stay out of it completely, let the foreigners destroy themselves, and come in at the end to pick up the pieces.

Right now, instead, we are promising the security of Europe AND much of Asia. Very foolish of us. We don't get anything by way of gratitude for this - and even if we did, you can't eat gratitude. Who cares if they like us?

We need to thrust their defense burden on them, rather dramatically reducing the economic prospects of all of our competitors because they have to defend themselves.

Of course they could then just cave and all just fall in line under Chinese hegemony, but that won't make them competitive either, and the Chinese don't do a great job at running their own economy.

You're right that the US shouldn't be fighting in two theaters at once. We shouldn't be fighting in ANY theater. Bring the troops home, let the foreigners slaughter each other, and pick and choose among the immigrants and foreign goods you're going to let into the American market. There are hundreds of millions of relatively peaceful and similar people in Latin America, right on our doorstep. The defense needs of Latin America are very modest. And the US has the natural leadership in the region.

We need to stick to developing our OWN neighborhood, and get out of Asia, Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-08   10:58:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Vicomte13, ConservingFreedom, Willie Green, sneakypete, TooConservative (#2)

hina IS a threat. A real threat. They are a nationalistic fascist nation. Their brand of "communism" is national socialism, in a very nationalistic nation.

Or perhaps they are just a Confucianist nation.

I was at the meeting with George Soros at Harvard University.

He was asked about China, and he got very agitated and angry. He said:

"I did some business in China and made good money. Yet I do not want to do it anymore - this country is hopeless because it is not compatible with Open Society" (as Greenspan was a follower of Ayn Rand Objectivism cult, Soros is a follower of Karl Popper).

Participants were bewildered and asked him to explain. He answered:

"When you you do business with Chinese you entered into a permanent relationship, you can get favors and are expected to provide favors (like in God Father I suppose). But Open Society is based on unobliging deals, you do a deal and say goodby. I hate it!"

It looks that Open Society means an atomization and alienation of separate individuals, dealing and wheeling freely. I looked at the audience and they seemed to be in deep thought - perhaps they pondered an idea that Chinese are wiser?

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-08   12:11:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: A Pole (#4)

perhaps they pondered an idea that Chinese are wiser?

When the Europeans decided to free the serfs and industrialize, there was some dirt and a lot of shortened lifespans. There was social tension and neglect and people growing up in dirty conditions.

When China decided to do it, in a "Great Leap Forward", they starved 40 million of their own people. It was efficient. Wiser? Not convinced.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-08   13:07:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Vicomte13 (#5)

When China decided to do it, in a "Great Leap Forward", they starved 40 million of their own people. It was efficient. Wiser? Not convinced.

At that time Chinese tried to learn what works in the modern West formed world, which was very hard for them to grasp because the cultural gap was so great.

They tried Soviet style system in few forms (and nationalist capitalism earlier). Finally they tried under Deng Xiaoping to go back to Lenin's NEP and it worked.

As one Chinese man said - "we were like fish out of water, that was trashing and jumping until it got to the pond".

(This 40 million dead was probably pulled out of Western MSM collective a**)

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-08   17:23:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Vicomte13 (#3)

We need to stick to developing our OWN neighborhood, and get out of Asia, Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

I'll endorse those remarks. The Chinese don't need to be restrained, the only reason you need to be anywhere near the place is the unfinished war with North Korea, and they may be willing to stand down if you weren't in their face. Japan can and should stand on its own feet and you may think you are guaranteeing Taiwan soveriegnty but really all you are doing is goading the Chinese into an arms race

paraclete  posted on  2016-08-08   20:37:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: A Pole, sneakypete, A K A Stone (#4)

You should omit "sneakypete" from your ping list as Stone purged the site of any of Pete's capability to post a reply. It is very sad.

buckeroo  posted on  2016-08-08   21:47:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: buckeroo (#8)

Why don't you and Ahole, the sites token Democrat, go find a room together. A healthy dose of lithium might help you deal with the loss of your closet sausage stuffer, Stinky Peter Puff.

I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح

GrandIsland  posted on  2016-08-08   22:15:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: GrandIsland, sneakypete (#9)

Why don't you CHOMP DOWN WITH YOUR TEETH on some your 50,000 primers that you claim that you have in your mother's home, testing the capability of the value or worth of your "possession?"

Just asking ... of course. .... snicker

buckeroo  posted on  2016-08-08   22:21:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: buckeroo, sneakypete (#8)

You should omit "sneakypete" from your ping list as Stone purged the site of any of Pete's capability to post a reply. It is very sad.

He still can read

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   4:08:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: GrandIsland (#9)

Why don't you and Ahole, the sites token Democrat, go find a room together. A healthy dose of lithium might help you deal with the loss of your closet sausage stuffer, Stinky Peter Puff.

I'm the infidel.

Hmm ...

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   4:10:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: A Pole (#12)

"Hmmm" all you want, but your past liberal comments on this site and LP is well known. It is what it is... you've earned the title. Embrace it.

I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح

GrandIsland  posted on  2016-08-09   7:07:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: GrandIsland (#13)

"Hmmm" all you want, but your past liberal comments on this site and LP is well known. It is what it is... you've earned the title. Embrace it.

On economic issues I tend to be on the left, on moral/cultural issues I am conservative. Like a New Deal old style Democrat. Is it your definition of a liberal?

On matters of debate, I try to be polite and respectful of my opponents.

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   7:22:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: A Pole (#14)

On economic issues I tend to be on the left, on moral/cultural issues I am conservative. Like a New Deal old style Democrat. Is it your definition of a liberal?

Of course I do. When you are left on "economic issues", that tells me you're a socialist bastard. You've earned your Commie Sandards award. I'll give you partial credit for being conservative on social issues... but that doesn't help this country much being 19 trillion in the hole, now does it?

Here is a "social issue" test. Let's see how conservative you are. Do freaks of nature deserve their own bathrooms? Should a baker be forced to make a fag cake? Tell us how we should treat most of Stinky Peter Puff-a-lot's family?

Just remember, WE ALL ARENT EQUAL. We all don't deserve the same wealth.

I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح

GrandIsland  posted on  2016-08-09   7:46:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: GrandIsland (#15) (Edited)

Here is a "social issue" test. Let's see how conservative you are. Do freaks of nature deserve their own bathrooms? Should a baker be forced to make a fag cake? Tell us how we should treat most of Stinky Peter Puff-a-lot's family?

"Freaks of nature" (I would call them unlucky individuals, either with congenital abnormality, disordered or confused) do exist and need to pee or more ;)

I would say that a person with male plumbing should use male restroom. The best solution would be unisex bathrooms, same as you have in your home. If feasible but it should not be mandatory.

Certainly bakers should not be forced to do things that are in conflict with their convictions. More, I think that the establishments for men or women ONLY should be allowed, same with blacks, white, Catholic, Jewish, bikers, or whatever. Freedom of association is one of the litmus tests for liberty.

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   8:52:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: GrandIsland, Vicomte13 (#16) (Edited)

Returning to economic issues, there should be a policy directed to lower stratification of wealth.

Great too big to fail" corporations either should be broken into smaller units or be under government supervision. The rest of society of society should not be forced to bail them out and to make the owners richer.

Custom duties and border control should be restored to reasonable levels, to protect wages of working people. Trade unions should be restored, and workers representatives should be included in decision making (as they do in Germany for example).

Great fortunes (higher than 50 million?) should be subject to the large inheritance tax. Federal Income tax should be either abolished and replaced with tax on wealth, or brought back to the levels and application of 1950s or earlier. (originally it was applies to a small, most prosperous minority).

Military spending should be reduced by half and money saved should be either used for payment of debt, or infrastructure and protecting Social Security.

Anti-usury laws should be restored.

Minimum wage should be raised to level that workers do not need government assistance in order to survive.

Price of drugs should be regulated, drugs developed on government grants should have a royalty paid by pharmaceutical companies.

Single payer medical system should be introduced, following example of the best systems in Europe (not the worst).

A thoughtful reform of electoral system should be designed so all groups can have their real representation.

Student debt should be allowed to be discharged or reduced through either bankruptcy in justified cases (new chapter should be created?) or tied to the income.

Bill of Rights and Amendments should restored in practice.

Small companies should be supported. Corporations should not have rights that belong to the citizens.

Schools should turn from political correctness to science and classics (the later being the foundation of of our civilization), history of philosophy since the ancient times (without prejudice) should be introduced based on reading original texts. Religion should be allowed in schools and in public sphere.

Etc, etc ...

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   9:52:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: A Pole (#6)

You're making excuses for the deaths unleashed on people by the Communists. People do not have the right to kill other people in the service of ANY ideology. When people make excuses for that, they lose me forever.

Human beings do not have the right to kill other human beings - and causing starvation is killing other human beings. When they do, they are evil servants of Satan and doomed to hell, no matter what their nationality or religion, in every case.

I discount anybody's opinion who argues differently.

So I think we're not going to get anywhere on this. The Communists were mass murderers, and they and the ideals that led them to that were evil on account of it.

This is also true of the religious who burnt people alive. Evil, based on evil religious principles.

As long as people will not admit the evil, all that I will do is focus on the evil and just keep trashing the people and the institution worse and worse - evil does not get to hide, and must be ADMITTED, without apology and without excuse.

No matter what the nationality.

Only then is it possible to actually have a discussion. Otherwise, people are just defending evil because they happen to like some aspect of the evil people. I won't go there and just become a vicious dug-in donkey.

Look at how discussions with Americans involving slavery and segregation devolve every time. America as a nation was evil as hell until we abolished slavery and apartheid, and whoever defends those things, at all, needs to be punched in the face and the gut again and again, and personally trashed as the evil malignant stupid son-of-a-bitch that he is, until he either admits it or flees or dies of old age. There can be no compromise, at all, with murderers.

You have to make the Germans carry the bodies out of the concentration camps and bury them, and make them admit that they were personally cowards for doing nothing, for shielding their eyes, and that their country and culture itself were evil and that any defense at all, any excuse, is itself evil.

You have to do the same thing to Americans regarding slavery and the treatment of the blacks.

You have to do it to Catholics and the Catholic Church for their evils.

And you have to do it to Communists for theirs.

Nobody ever gets a path. The pride MUST BE BROKEN, evil cannot EVER be defended. Not ever.

Mao was a mass murdering son of a bitch who very probably will spend his time in Gehenna before being thrown into the lake of fire at final judgment. There is no excuse. None.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-09   10:09:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: A Pole (#17)

Returning to economic issues, there should be a policy directed to lower stratification of wealth. AGREE

Great too big to fail" corporations either should be broken into smaller units or be under government supervision. OR ALLOWED TO FAIL.

The rest of society of society should not be forced to bail them out and to make the owners richer. TRUE.

Custom duties and border control should be restored to reasonable levels, to protect wages of working people. TRUE.

Trade unions should be restored, and workers representatives should be included in decision making (as they do in Germany for example). NOT NECESSARY IF SOCIAL WELFARE SYSTEMS ARE PROPERLY IN PLACE TO EASE THE CHANGING OF JOBS.

Great fortunes (higher than 50 million?) should be subject to the large inheritance tax. HIGHER THAN $2 MILLION.

Federal Income tax should be either abolished and replaced with tax on wealth, ALL TAXES SHOULD BE REPLACED BY A UNITARY WEALTH TAX, OF ABOUT 2%

or brought back to the levels and application of 1950s or earlier. (originally it was applies to a small, most prosperous minority). THE PROPER ANSWER IS A GROSS WEALTH TAX.

Military spending should be reduced by half and money saved should be either used for payment of debt, or infrastructure and protecting Social Security.

SOCIAL SECURITY SHOULD BE PAID OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND. WE HAVE TOO MUCH INFRASTRUCTURE AS IT IS. DEBT SHOULD BE PAID OFF.

Anti-usury laws should be restored. AGREE. THEY SHOULD BE SPECIFICALLY APPLIED TO CREDIT CARDS.

Minimum wage should be raised to level that workers do not need government assistance in order to survive. TRUE.

Price of drugs should be regulated, drugs developed on government grants should have a royalty paid by pharmaceutical companies. OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

Single payer medical system should be introduced, following example of the best systems in Europe (not the worst). TRUE.

A thoughtful reform of electoral system should be designed so all groups can have their real representation. IT IS NOT IMPORTANT THAT EVERYBODY "HAVE A VOICE". IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE LAWS BE RIGHT. IF DEMOCRACY WILL GET THERE, GREAT. IF IT WON'T, AS IN SHARIA-POSSESSED LANDS, THEN DEMOCRACY IS NOT AS IMPORTANT AS THE RIGHT LAWS. ERROR IS NOT ENTITLED TO AN EQUAL VOICE.

Student debt should be allowed to be discharged or reduced through either bankruptcy in justified cases (new chapter should be created?) or tied to the income. TRUE IN BOTH CASES. BUT ULTIMATELY, COLLEGE IS EDUCATION, AND SHOULD BE PAID FOR BY THE GOVERNMENT.

Bill of Rights and Amendments should restored in practice. OK.

Small companies should be supported. Corporations should not have rights that belong to the citizens. INDIVIDUALS SHOULD NOT BE SHIELDED FROM PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ILLEGAL ACTS. CORPORATIONS DON'T COMMIT CRIMES, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE MINDS. THE PEOPLE IN THE CORPORATIONS COMMIT THE CRIMES, AND THEY SHOULD BEAR FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THOSE CRIMES.

Schools should turn from political correctness to science GLOBAL WARMING? OK, IF THE ALTERNATIVE VIEW IS ALSO TAUGHT. RANDOM EVOLUTION? OK, IF INTELLIGENT DESIGN IS TAUGHT ALSO.

and classics (the later being the foundation of of our civilization), OK

history of philosophy since the ancient times (without prejudice) should be introduced based on reading original texts. OK. THAT'S A VERY FRENCH CONCEPT OF EDUCATION.

Religion should be allowed in schools and in public sphere. CATHOLIC/ORTHODOX RELIGION, YES. PROTESTANT RELIGION THAT DOESN'T GO OFF THE DEEP END INTO POLYGAMY OR SNAKE HANDLING, FINE. JEWISH RELIGION THAT ISN'T MALE-DOMINANT BLACK-HAT HASSIDIC INSANITY, OK. SHARIA? NO. VOODOO? NO. SATANISM? NO. BUDDHISM AND HINDUISM? FINE. JAINISM? SURE. THESE LATTER THREE ARE PEACEFUL, SO THE QUIRKINESS DOESN'T MATTER. JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS "RELIGION" DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT HAS TO BE TREATED AS EQUAL TO TRUTH. CATHOLICISM/ORTHODOXY ARE TRUE RELIGION, AND THEY SHOULD NOT BE TRAMMELLED. PROTESTANTISM CAN BE QUITE TRUE, OR QUITE RIDICULOUS, DEPENDING ON WHERE IT FALLS ON THE SPECTRUM. ISLAM IS EVIL AND EVIL ERROR DOES NOT HAVE RIGHTS. THE EASTERN STUFF IS GENERALLY PEACEFUL, SO IT SHOULD BE LEFT ALONE TO DO AS IT PLEASES. IF WE END UP HAVING OUR ATHEISTS BECOME BUDDHISTS AND OUR VEGANS BECOME JAINS, THAT WILL BE A MORAL IMPROVEMENT.

Etc, etc ... YEP.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-09   10:22:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Vicomte13, ConservingFreedom, Willie Green, sneakypete, TooConservative (#18)

You're making excuses for the deaths unleashed on people by the Communists.

Where did I made excuses? Unless you think that understanding is excusing.

People do not have the right to kill other people in the service of ANY ideology.

I have a lot of sympathy for the pacifists and Quakers. I was not aware that you are one.

Mao was a mass murdering son of a bitch who very probably will spend his time in Gehenna before being thrown into the lake of fire at final judgment.

It is very prudent of you that you used word "probably". God is the Judge, and you and me have enough of our own sins to pass judgements on others. Especially that the "facts" are delivered to us by our trustworthy MSM.

A bonus for you:

A mass murdering son of a bitch Milosevic got exonerated

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   10:24:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: A Pole (#16)

More, I think that the establishments for men or women ONLY should be allowed, same with blacks, white, Catholic, Jewish, bikers, or whatever. Freedom of association is one of the litmus tests for liberty.

Not black and white. The other things, fine. But America was particularly evil regarding blacks, and it never admitted it the way that the Germans were forced, and accepted, the real evil of Naziism. There is still a latent desire of many White Americans to see themselves as superior to Blacks.

And so no quarter must EVER be given on that issue. Whites who don't like it must be FORCED, nevertheless, to share EVERYTHING with blacks, and never, ever, given any legal protection for any organization outside of the home to exclude blacks.

The particular flaw in American culture is our particular evil, and we still do not fully admit it. And so every generation's nose must be rubbed in it, and reminded that, in the end, the power of law will always break the power of nasty bigoted invididuals, just as the Union Army broke and slaughtered the arrogant South.

As long as men want to fly a Confederate flag without admitting that it was, and is, a racist symbol, then the uneven and powerful sword of Sherman must be on their neck and the boot on their ass.

Bakers don't have to bake cakes for gays. But they DO have to bake them for blacks.

Churches don't have to marry gays. But they DO have to admit blacks (or whites).

Clubs can exist for bikers, but if they sell anything, have any commerce, do anything at all that involves any advantage or profit, they have to admit blacks.

Jews can be Jews, but if a black wants to convert, they have to let him - otherwise they lose their tax exempt status.

That one issue: black white, is different, and the concept of absolutely free association, in America, must give way to the necessity to not let anybody in America get away with erecting any piece of that black white barrier.

It is important that the losing side of that fight not only keep losing it, but that any asshole in each successive generation takes up that flag to renew it be crushed publicly and destroyed, as a fixed and permanent example, age to age, that this particular subject is closed to debate in this country, forever.

Indulgence of personal proclivities ends in America on the black-white issue, for exactly the same reason that any German who decides he is going to start promoting Naziism is arrested and silenced. Germans have lost the right to be Nazis, forever. French and English and American fools can be Nazis if they please, but Germans who go that way must be crushed. And any American Nazi party must admit blacks, or it must be crushed, not for hating Jews, but because the first corrective principle of American social organization is that anybody who proposes to raise a barrier against blacks must be annhilated as an example to the rest of society, forever. This will never change.

Well, maybe once America is Latino, the Latinos can discriminate against blacks if they want to. But whites lost that right in this country forever, and the subject, for whites, will never, ever be revisited.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-09   10:41:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: paraclete (#7)

I'll endorse those remarks. The Chinese don't need to be restrained, the only reason you need to be anywhere near the place is the unfinished war with North Korea, and they may be willing to stand down if you weren't in their face. Japan can and should stand on its own feet and you may think you are guaranteeing Taiwan soveriegnty but really all you are doing is goading the Chinese into an arms race

China is massive. To defend themselves against the Chinese, South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and Taiwan need their own nuclear weapons. So let's withdraw American forces and encourage the East Asians to defend themselves.

China wishes to be the bully. Let them try to bully local nuclear powers that hate them.

It is not our affair.

We failed in Korea and we lost in Vietnam. I do not support sticking around out of pride. I have no use for spending trillions to try to put a band-aid over our wounded pride.

We failed in Korea and lost Vietnam because we were fools. We need to learn from our foolishness and not double-down. We lost, and we should learn the lesson from our losses.

Bring the troops home. Put them on the Border (then you don't need a wall). Draw down the forces. Keep the nuclear deterrent strong.

Use the extra money to retire the national debt. As money frees up, retire more debt. Debt free in 20 years should be our objective.

As debt goes down, necessary social spending can go up to the level required to make Social Security the national retirement plan (which is what it ought to be), to make public education go K-College, and to provide universal health insurance. Eventually, the government should be the primary mortgage lender, at 0% interest. Do that, and the need for poverty relief will be dramatically reduced, practically to zero.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-09   10:48:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Vicomte13 (#22)

Use the extra money to retire the national debt. As money frees up, retire more debt. Debt free in 20 years should be our objective.

As debt goes down, necessary social spending can go up to the level required to make Social Security the national retirement plan (which is what it ought to be), to make public education go K-College, and to provide universal health insurance. Eventually, the government should be the primary mortgage lender, at 0% interest. Do that, and the need for poverty relief will be dramatically reduced, practically to zero

Utopian Dreams, commendable that you should retire the national debt but you won't do that with Dump's lower taxes

paraclete  posted on  2016-08-09   11:16:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: paraclete, Willie Green, Vicomte13 (#23) (Edited)

Utopian Dreams, commendable that you should retire the national debt but you won't do that with Dump's lower taxes

Viscount wants higher taxes on the wealthy who can pay more. Not on highly paid workers like physicians but on the independently rich who do not have to work, but are Work Creators for their working serfs.

I suspect that you make a fundamental mistake, being hypnotized by the Free Market fundamentalist.

Their fundamental fraud is that deceive the general public and more stupid or servile economists in a key issue:

Macroeconomics DOES NOT work like microeconomics!

The microeconomics applies to a single economic player, like your household. The primary rule for it was formulated by Dickens:

"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen [pounds] nineteen [shillings] and six [pence], result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."

But in the whole (macroeconomics) it can work differently - if you borrow to grow the national economy the debt can shrink as a part of GDP and it results in happiness, if you tighten the belt the economy might shrink and debt can grow in proportion and it results in misery (like in Greece).

The wealthy deceivers do it to buy on the cheap during depression and then to relax austerity vise ending up with more national wealth.

I am not to elaborate on the another level - political economy, with third set of rules, because I do not want to be accused of being a Socialist ;)

"Too bad, it would open your minds to the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities"

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   12:22:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Vicomte13 (#19)

Religion should be allowed in schools and in public sphere. CATHOLIC/ORTHODOX RELIGION, YES. PROTESTANT RELIGION THAT DOESN'T GO OFF THE DEEP END INTO POLYGAMY OR SNAKE HANDLING, FINE. JEWISH RELIGION THAT ISN'T MALE-DOMINANT BLACK-HAT HASSIDIC INSANITY, OK. SHARIA? NO. VOODOO? NO. SATANISM? NO. BUDDHISM AND HINDUISM? FINE. JAINISM? SURE. THESE LATTER THREE ARE PEACEFUL, SO THE QUIRKINESS DOESN'T MATTER. JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS "RELIGION" DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT HAS TO BE TREATED AS EQUAL TO TRUTH. CATHOLICISM/ORTHODOXY ARE TRUE RELIGION, AND THEY SHOULD NOT BE TRAMMELLED. PROTESTANTISM CAN BE QUITE TRUE, OR QUITE RIDICULOUS, DEPENDING ON WHERE IT FALLS ON THE SPECTRUM. ISLAM IS EVIL AND EVIL ERROR DOES NOT HAVE RIGHTS. THE EASTERN STUFF IS GENERALLY PEACEFUL, SO IT SHOULD BE LEFT ALONE TO DO AS IT PLEASES. IF WE END UP HAVING OUR ATHEISTS BECOME BUDDHISTS AND OUR VEGANS BECOME JAINS, THAT WILL BE A MORAL IMPROVEMENT.

Why, you man of a small faith?

If the children, both Christian and Muslim read Gospels and Koran, who will prevail in the comparison?

The Good News of Jesus Christ is stronger. Because He is meek and lowly in heart and His burden is light.

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   12:47:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: A Pole (#25)

Why, you man of a small faith?

It's got nothing to do with faith but practicality. It is well that, if my child is killed, she will go to Heaven.

I'll still kill a city right now, if that's what it takes, to prevent that.

It's not small faith, it's perhaps a different set of priorities than pious Christians think I ought to have.

And ultimately they may be right. But I don't really care.

We did not tolerate Nazi or Communist immigration, and we did not and still don't tolerate either Nazi or Communist participation in any activity requiring a security clearance. Islam is a fanatical ideology as evil, and much more powerful, older and seductive than Naziism and Communism combined ever were.

It is violent and evil, and I am not willing to give it the right to speak and grow. It's a serpent, and it's head needs to be crushed even as it is hatching. You don't let vipers set up in your yard and trust that, when you and your kid die from the bite, you'll both go to Heaven. Not good enough. Send the viper to heaven now, and then in your old age, go yourself.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-09   14:14:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: A Pole (#25)

Why, you man of a small faith?

If the children, both Christian and Muslim read Gospels and Koran, who will prevail in the comparison?

The Good News of Jesus Christ is stronger. Because He is meek and lowly in heart and His burden is light.

I suppose that this is the difference between Catholics and the Orthodox.

You are willing to meekly submit and rely on God to make it right in the end. And perhaps that is the more Christlike thing to do.

I would rather launch a Crusade and defeat the human enemy now, and then rely on the forgiveness of God in the afterlife.

The mindset is different. The Orthodox are more otherworldly, and less violent. The Catholics are more in this world, and violent therefore.

I don't deny that the Orthodox are probably right. But I also don't care enough to not kill now the sons of bitches who are trying to kill me.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-09   14:19:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Vicomte13 (#2)

China is a threat.

Russia is not. To continue to oppose Russia today is completely counterproductive. We made a hash out of the Ukraine. We need to get out and let it return to the Russian orbit, where it belongs.

To face China, we will need a naval and air buildup, and modernizing nuclear weapons is generally a good thing.

Very good points.

Non auro, sed ferro, recuperando est patria

nativist nationalist  posted on  2016-08-09   14:40:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: Vicomte13 (#3)

Getting out of the business of military alliance with the Western Pacific will greatly reduce our need for large deployable military forces, reduce the burden on our economy, and shift the full burden of local defense onto our competitors. The same is true for getting out of Europe.

An America First grand strategy would be coupled with an America First trade policy, rebuilding the arsenal of democracy that was outsourced. If we ever got into a situation where we needed to deploy large expeditionary forces abroad we would need an industrial base to support it, and we would be able to build the equipment we would actually need rather than planning ahead for some type of war that will not unfold according to theory anyway.

Non auro, sed ferro, recuperando est patria

nativist nationalist  posted on  2016-08-09   14:47:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Vicomte13 (#27) (Edited)

I would rather launch a Crusade and defeat the human enemy now, and then rely on the forgiveness of God in the afterlife. [...] I also don't care enough to not kill now the sons of bitches who are trying to kill me.

Orthodox are permitted to fight. But they ought not to hate or to despise enemy and they should embrace defeated as brothers.

And if you kill, you need to do penance after war, and you cannot be ordained to the priesthood.

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   15:29:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: A Pole (#30)

Orthodox are permitted to fight. But they ought not to hate or to despise enemy and they should embrace defeated as brothers.

And if you kill, you need to do penance after war, and you cannot be ordained to the priesthood.

I cannot be ordained to the priesthood anyway: I'm married. And if I were not married, I still want to fuck sometimes more than I want to pray all the time.

Perhaps I SHOULD not be that way, but I AM that way, and it is unlikely to change. Therefore, I do not qualify for the priesthood, and I would not WANT to be a priest, because I wouldn't be very good at it. Not everybody is made for that sort of life.

Embracing defeated enemy who surrender and ask for mercy, and who repent and want to follow the light is good. Embracing defeated enemies who do not change their minds about right and wrong, who hold onto their belief systems that caused the war in the first place, is not good. It is weakness.

Killing always requires penance. The failure to kill when killing is needed means that you go meet God sooner, and so do other people. Perhaps it is better in the afterlife. I'm ready to let the enemy go find that out first. If our religion is real, by killing them I'm doing them a favor, after all.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-09   16:40:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Vicomte13 (#31)

I cannot be ordained to the priesthood anyway: I'm married.

In Orthodox Church men are encouraged to marry before ordination, because they cannot marry ofter. Having a lot of children is seen as a badge of honor for Orthodox priests. It makes them good confessors, gives example to the families in the parish and keeps them out of trouble :)

The failure to kill when killing is needed means that you go meet God sooner, and so do other people. Perhaps it is better in the afterlife.

Just and necessary killing is justified, but it leaves stain on the soul, it is an impurity.

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-09   16:56:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: A Pole (#32)

Just and necessary killing is justified, but it leaves stain on the soul, it is an impurity.

So does lying. And illicit sex.

I have a very colorful soul, I'm afraid.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-09   18:14:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: A Pole (#4)

It looks that Open Society means an atomization and alienation of separate individuals, dealing and wheeling freely. I looked at the audience and they seemed to be in deep thought - perhaps they pondered an idea that Chinese are wiser?

No, they are not the more wiser; just more cunning.

goldilucky  posted on  2016-08-10   10:55:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: goldilucky (#34)

No, they are not the more wiser; just more cunning.

Blame Confucionism and Taoism

A Pole  posted on  2016-08-10   11:39:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: A Pole (#35)

Just after I posted, I was just thinking about Confucionism and how my elementary teacher used to mention about it. Then I read your post. Incredible.

goldilucky  posted on  2016-08-10   12:29:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com