on edit: !! Campaign to call READERS like us "terrorist

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

We just experienced the next move in demonizing of the 'Fifth Columnists' ("traitors") online who don't support the eugenics, torture, and wars of aggression of our God-installed president. Senator Lindsey Graham began the campaign to demonize us when he said it was time to address 'those people' during John Roberts' Supreme Court confirmation.<br><br>Fascism's elite usually demonize the middle class 'intelligentsia' <br>to wedge them away from the masses, sort of like trying to keep anti-war activists and soldiers hostile to each other. Typical is the 'snob' smear with lattes, Volvos, cheese-eating, ya know- French stuff.<br><br>But in two articles below the 'reading' class with its "dangerous ideas" is being ORWELLIFIED into what it opposes with the grotesque claim that <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>'the reading class are historically the source of War'</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> "like bin Laden" and so must be watched like criminals. <br><br>This could be:<br>*laying some covering fire at us while trying for a longer 'Zarqawi bump' in Criminal In Chief approval polls. <br>*part of a number of events around the Zarqawi wargasm to reward the military and the war-supporters at home including even little rewards like the 'news story' that "beer has an ingredient which prevents cancer."<br><br>This was a big part of the '17 terrorists in Toronto busted'-story if you actually read through that theater timed to go with the big "Post-Zarqawi Age" wargasm on this week's covers of Time and Newsweek.<br><br>Here is how stories are sequenced using psychological warfare techniques to manipulate the public using tension-release narrative techniques in our state-controlled media:<br><br>1)The Zarqawi Project is run from Pentagon as a psycho-political campaign focusing on a bin-Laden substitute to be wrathfully smitten after a big build-up including- <br>Moussaoi trial, <br>FAA tape-release of Flight 93 cockpit tapes, <br>AND a megaplex movie for heightening emotional sensitivity. <br><br>Then we are shown photos of the target, like the beginning of tv's Mission Impossible, "your mission, should you choose to accept it..." <br><br>All this in the weeks leading up to the victory dance around Zarqawi's death photo as their media oohs and aahs.<br><br>The final week accelerates the adrenalin flow-<br><br>2) 'Anti-terror funds cut for NYC and WashDC' - oh no oh no we're dooomed help daddy<br><br>3) '17 internet terrorists caught in Toronto' - oh no oh no help daddy they're still out there<br><br>4)'Zarqawi captured'- whew-dingdongthewitchisdead-YEEEEEAAAAH! Thanks daddy!<br><br>5)'Internet people have always been the root of ancient wars' - Hmph. We TV-watching recruits hate those pampered trouble-making readers! <br><br>Class divisions accomplished.<br>Military frustrations redirected at anti-war civilians, the ones trying to save our brothers and sisters in the military from the Criminals In Chief playing with their lives for oil.<br><br>This warrants keeping an eye on.<br>-HMW)<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0612/p06s01-woam.html">www.csmonitor.com/2006/06...-woam.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>Why, for some, rebellion turns to violence<br>Strong mentors and issues that hit close to home may have had role in Canada plot.<br><br>By Rebecca Cook Dube | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor<br>TORONTO – Young, well-educated, and raised with all the comforts of Western society, they had lives that shone with promise and opportunity. But they chose a path of terrible violence, plotting to kill innocent people to protest the injustice they saw in the world.<br>.....<br>Time, money, and Web access<br><br>The suburban comfort of their lives that has so confounded the Canadian public may have helped them develop a detailed terrorist plan, as officials charge. Their middle-class backgrounds would have given them the time and money - and access to the Internet - to pursue such plans.<br><br>"They have the same impulse, but the poor don't have the time and luxury to sit around and think up these ideas. The rich kids, they have grown up as leaders," says Howard Bloom, author of "The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition into the Forces of History."<br><br>"Osama bin Laden was probably the richest kid of his generation on the planet," Mr. Bloom notes.<br><br>Bloom says rebellion and violence are characteristic of adolescents throughout the animal world, and thinks people shouldn't be so surprised when they hit home. "War has been with us as long as there has been life," Bloom says. "War once a generation is our default mode."<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060613/ts_nm/security_usa_dc">news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060...ity_usa_dc</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>US officials seeing new home-grown terror cells<br><br>By David Morgan Tue Jun 13, 4:40 PM ET<br><br>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. intelligence and law enforcement authorities are discovering new home-grown cells of Islamist radicals in the United States that draw inspiration and moral support from al Qaeda, officials said on Tuesday.<br><br>Like local terrorism cells that have recently come to light in Canada and Europe, officials said the groups are comprised of disaffected young men in their teens and 20s who rely on the Internet to try to organize and plan potential attacks on the U.S. homeland.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 6/16/06 3:56 pm<br></i>

[blanc]

disaffected young would be terrorists would have to be very very dumb to rely on the internet to organize and plan attacks. <p></p><i></i>

[Et in Arcadia ego]

Holy shit, I cannot believe Howard Bloom is talking this absolute shit.. I had a LOT of respect for that man when he wrote 'The Lucifer Principle'. This is pathetic. <p></p><i></i>

[dugoboy]

screw Al QAEDA. AL QAEDA ISN'T REAL. <p>___________________________________________<br>"BUSHCO aren't incompetent...they are COMPLICIT." -Me<br><br>"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act" -George Orwell</p><i></i>

[Bismillah]

You see? The Enemy's everywhere - not just abroad but also at home. And that protean Enemy is morphing right now: It's here, it's among us, and it no longer has to be bearded or brown. Now, it's taking possession of our own young men (who are "angry and disaffected" for reasons not worth specifying)... and it's using the eeeevil Interweb to infiltrate our enfeebled body politic.<br><br>Measures must be taken - and will be, by what Gore Vidal has just called "an Empire gone berserk":<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/11319">www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/11319</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br> <p></p><i></i>

[thurnandtaxis]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>You see? The Enemy's everywhere - not just abroad but also at home. And that protean Enemy is morphing right now: It's here, it's among us, and it no longer has to be bearded or brown. Now, it's taking possession of our own young men (who are "angry and disaffected" for reasons not worth specifying)<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Yep, the groundwork for this thinking was laid in the 90's with McVeigh,<br>Kasczinsky, Waco, Ruby Ridge, et. al. After the "collapse" of the Soviet Union<br>the good ol' Military Industrail Complex needed some justification for<br>their continued existance. Hence "the war that will not end in our lifetimes".<br><br>Muslims, White Militia types, ...I wonder what the next demographic will<br>be?<br><br>Lefties of some sort seems logical... <p></p><i></i>

[sunny]

Thanks for linking Gore Vidal, Bismillah. He is always a welcome addition to my daily reading.<br><br>My favorite part:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>GV: He just wanted to prove that he could read. Finally, somebody decided to race him across the country to find bunker to put him in, so he wouldn’t get hurt, as if that would’ve made any difference.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <br><!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :rollin --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>

[HMKGrey]

First comes the legislation about 'supporting' terrorism (already signed in to law in the UK) and then will come legislation expanding definitions within and around that. <br><br>This is a very real problem. <br><br>I can't help but wonder if the recent EU moves to make Holocaust denial a crime aren't a step toward/test case of this. Ignore the substance and look at the premise. It's now against the law in most of the EU to question the official version of an historical event. Before anyone gets excited, I'm not denying anything myself but the meaning here in terms of erosion of free speech is none too subtle. And the thing about free speech is that either it's all free or you have a problem, right? <br><br>In any kind of hysterical moment - especially, post an attack on some grand scale - who knows what might be added in to a sentence which begins with the words with the words "We need to round up all the..."<br><br>And don't forget since Gonzalez became Attorney General our local boys in blue have been carrying out regular nationwide coordinated sweep-ups of perps based on all kinds of given definitions from visa and immigration lapses to traffic violations. <p></p><i></i>

[Mentalgongfu]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>U.S. intelligence and law enforcement authorities are discovering new home-grown cells of Islamist radicals in the United States that draw inspiration and moral support from al Qaeda, officials said on Tuesday.<br><br>Like local terrorism cells that have recently come to light in Canada and Europe, officials said the groups are comprised of disaffected young men in their teens and 20s who rely on the Internet to try to organize and plan potential attacks on the U.S. homeland.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Hugh, <br><br>I read the exact same paragraphs in the Des Moines Register this morning (carried as an AP story, I think), and I too had a reaction of disgust. I must admit, those are the only two paragraphs of the article I read. <br><br>The fear-mongering and utter irrationality in this country has gotten to the point where I feel the need to actively avoid it whenever possible, for the sake of my own sanity. <br><br>As a general rule, anytime you see blanket statements such as the two above, cited only as "officials say," you should be wary. <br><br>While such a phrase can be a legitmate journalist convenience, it also reveals many articles to be complete bs at worst or mere speculation and anonymous assertion at best. <br><br>After all, it could be referencing "officials" from Doug's RV and Auto or Ray's Appliances and Electronics.<br><br>And I'll heartily second every other post on this thread so far. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=mentalgongfu@rigorousintuition>Mentalgongfu</A> at: 6/14/06 11:07 pm<br></i>

[HMKGrey]

About 12-18 months ago the FBI released a report that said that they had found no evidence whatsoever of any terrorist cells, sleeper or otherwise in the US... <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,149999,00.html">www.foxnews.com/story/0,2...99,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>(sorry to use Fox as my link - all I could find in a flash!)<br><br>or the UK... <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,,579145,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/wtccra...45,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>this was just a year or so after TIME and NewsWeek and everyone's aunt had run 'The Enemy Within' style cover stories basically suggesting that - you guessed it - anyone and everyone pretty much fits the bill for a murderous, freedom hating scum bag. <br><br>It's so transparent what's going on here... how do they get away with it even for a day?<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[AlicetheCurious]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I can't help but wonder if the recent EU moves to make Holocaust denial a crime aren't a step toward/test case of this. Ignore the substance and look at the premise. It's now against the law in most of the EU to question the official version of an historical event.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>HMK, I couldn't agree more. This is an insidious law, first of all because it outlaws "thoughtcrime" and declares a taboo category where research and questioning is illegal; secondly because it violates the principle of universality. <br><br>Instead of specifying a category of historic events that meet certain criteria, this law outlaws any questioning -- no matter how rigorous or conscientious -- of one particular event.<br><br>I'm surprised that such a dangerous law passed with so little fanfare. After all, there are already laws against slander, libel, incitement to violence and racism, and any historical research is subject to peer review and academic scrutiny, not to mention critical and press analysis. <br><br>This is considered a sufficient barrier to keep out spurious or malicious revisionists questioning all other historical events, but not this specific one. Yet no criteria or rationale were offered to explain this anomaly. In fact, it's more than an anomaly, because what is being criminalized in this case, is vigorously encouraged when it comes to almost every other historic event. <br><br>The Da Vinci Code is a case in point; the novel draws on decades of research into such questions as, "did Jesus exist?", "did Jesus marry and have children?", "did the early Church suppress and distort the christians' message for its own purposes?", etc. <br><br>Armenians are still vainly demanding that the genocide of their people by the Turks in the early 1900's be recognized. <br><br>There is still debate on whether the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were massacred "to end the war" as the Americans claim, or whether they were sacrificed as a show of strength by a US eager to show off its atomic capabilities.<br><br>It's not illegal to question the number of Africans shipped to America to become slaves, nor of those who died in the process. It's not illegal to research the cost in human suffering of Mao's Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, nor of Stalin's agricultural policies, in which tens of millions of people allegedly died after great suffering. <br><br>Hell, it's not illegal to question whether the attacks of September 11 were "an inside job", nor, ironically, is it illegal to question whether there is such a thing as a Palestinian, and whether Palestinians were forcibly expelled from their homes so that Israelis could take their place. <br><br>I could go on and on (some might say that I have, heh, heh), but I've made my point. In case I haven't, it's like killing, for example. The law does not outlaw killing one specific person (say, "Joe Brown"), nor does it outlaw killing per se. It does lay out criteria for determining whether the killing of one person by another was a legal or criminal or even heroic act. That's what's so weird about that law. It outlaws a specific act, questioning the Holocaust, in a way equivalent to outlawing the killing of Joe Brown, regardless of the circumstances or of what he was doing at the time. <br><br>As a law, it doesn't make any sense. <p></p><i></i>

[havanagilla]

AliceC, we have had a new law passed here in Israel last year, a sort of offshoot of this thought police idea. It is called a law against the contempt of the holocaust, making it illegal to ridicule or misues holocaust imagery. It was designated against the settlers who protested against the disengagement (using the yellow patch or something to make their case). It was a classic trap for the left, because they will sign their own death warrants if its bad for the settlers. But of course, this law wlil probably be applied to lefties protesting against the Nazi elements within our gov/army. I suspect this is how things are happening now, partly a fault of the "good people" who go along with immoral actions only to "spite" someone else.(usually, it doesn't even spite those they intend to needle). This is used cleverly by PTB's of sorts. So, whenever people on the left start talking about how they need to be more snaky against the fascists, I am worried. This is precisely what sets up the way for a takeover. Whenever, in Israel, an official is speaking highly about the sacred memory of the holocaust, be sure he is covering for some very real abuse of holocaust survivors here in Israel (those poor remains of the disaster have been ridiculed, ripped off of their assets and later from their german compensation, and recently we learn they were experimented on.). So, I am certainly not impressed with the rhetoric coming from the Israeli gov, about "denial and commemoratoin", this too is used as identity politics to reinforce a takeover by the elite fascists here, over the entire populus. <br>---<br>This "holocaust denial law" is of course not intended to protect the survivors (who cares about them anyway), and indeed it might be the precursor of other similar prohibitions of more relevant nature to our time, than the historical event of WW2. its a bad law, and it draws on guilt, but it is a misguided response IMHO. Independtly, though, some holocaust deniers are around and active, and are pretty disgusting. <br>---<br> <p></p><i></i>

[AlicetheCurious]

Hava, the medium IS the message. If someone advocates or is willing to use 'their' tactics, then this person is by definition 'one of them', no matter what justification they use.<br><br>The only way this could be not true, is in the context of a tribal conflict, or at a purely animal level, in which it's simply a primitive fight for resources, where no law, principles or values apply. But if the struggle is based on conflicting ideals of justice, then adopting methods you supposedly abhor means that you've been coopted into the enemy's camp.<br><br>One danger is that the enemy, realizing this, will deliberately provoke an emotional "tribal"-type response, through outrageous and cruel assaults, so that members of the injured side, driven to fury, will abandon the moral high ground and fight dirty. The more powerful aggressor can then put on the mantle of principles and purity, not because he is so good, but because his 'enemy' is soooo baaad... <p></p><i></i>

[havanagilla]

alice, I agree with you, on both counts. however, it has become very difficult recently to distinguish between struggle over ideals and raw tribal/resource conflicts, some are disguised as others. (some cynics would doubt the validity of the distinction to start with, and they too have a point). I am speaking, then, theoretically, in simplified terms. A pitfall to watch for is the spiritual falacy that the righteous MUST prevail or that there are any assurances in being on the good side, this sometimes leads to "joining the other camp", on a slippery slope. The challenge of being on the weaker side, yet in what one perceives as the morally superior side, is tricky. This is where many slide...into finding moral rationalizations for survivalist, immoral acts. ("I am doing this for the "light" people; i am doing it for god, for the higher cause..what not). Now there's a false "light" to start with, in some cases, but assuming this is really the true light, still, it has no temporary guarantee of victory. Minorities in these losing situations, over the centuries developed some coping strategies, some are mystical bordering on infantile magical . You can see Tibetan buddhism struggling with the severe loss, and of cousre judaism passed through 2000 years of questioning etc. Ghandi, MLK etc., were defeated by a gunshot. So, I was raising it re today's world, when some people feel overpowered and disempowered BECAUSE of a moral stand. Perhaps it is almost true as well. So, what do you do. Playing the martyr is wrong, morally ! in my opinion, because if you carry an important MeMe, you are responsible for keeping it alive, after the storm. So you might appear like a "sell out", right ? but then, what is your real responibility ? its a hard one. there is no glory in creating a martyr myth, rather than bending and waiting a BUsh-scale disaster out. these are tough questions. <br>Personally, I feel like an individual failure to hold up to MY very little responsibility, which I now perceive as protecting my very BEING from harm by PTB's, no matter what the cost or appearance is. My pitfall was thinking short term. One is easily lured into trading the important things for temporary false victories. It plays on some megalomania, in me at least, as well as in everyone else. <br>--<br>So, we were talking about the bad law of holocaust denial. I think we both agree it is a bad law. I think also that at this point, the political odds are difficult. I think we are looking at a situation that has a lot in common with the WW2 (which is denied :-)), and so what are the lessons ? <p></p><i></i>

[AlicetheCurious]

Ultimately, although we'd like to fix the whole world, we are each only responsible for the choices we make. That's the one thing we have and it's the one thing that can't be taken away from us.<br><br>It's those choices that determine who we become. It's not only a rational process, it's also very emotional. Until I had kids, the very concept of self-sacrifice seemed ridiculous to me. Suddenly, I had something that was worth far more than my life. It's not 'martyrdom', it's a simple calculation of relative value. My child is worth more to me than my life.<br><br>When my kids were very small, around two and a half years old, I took them shopping with my mother once. We were in a big supermarket, and they were riding in my shopping cart. Everytime they saw a toy, they'd point and beg for it. To my mother's dismay, I would just say, "That one? Sure." and throw it in the cart with them.<br><br>My mother kept saying, "Are you crazy? Do you know how much that costs?" And I kept telling her "It's ok, don't worry." We finished our shopping (I used my mother's cart for groceries), then headed for the candy counter.<br><br>I said to the kids, "Now, what would you like: all these toys, or...A LOLLIPOP!" Of course, the kids had already got bored with the toys, which had lost their glamour once they had them in their hands, so they chose the lollipop, which was a rare treat indeed. So, instead of having whiny, miserable kids all the time I was shopping, which would have happened if I'd had to tell them "NO!" each time they pointed at something, they were entertained, and happily gave up the toys as we headed for the cashier.<br><br>Some people might think it's stupid to give up all those expensive toys for one lollipop each. But the kids weren't sacrificing anything, from their 2-year-old perspective, they had made a great deal. The lollipops brought them more excitement and joy on the way home than those boring toys would have.<br><br>I think we each have to discover what makes us feel alive, powerful, joyful, comfortable in our skin and connected with others, and then prioritize our values accordingly. After that, it's much easier to know what you can live with and what you can't. When you know the true value of things TO YOU, you can evaluate which of them you can bargain with and which are non-negotiable, because they are essential to your being -- the being you can live with. <br><br>So, you only feel like a martyr when you're trying to please someone else or live up to some artificial standard. Either you feel like a victim, or you fail and then make yourself miserable with guilt and self-loathing. It's a lose-lose situation.<br><br>What I'm talking about here is bringing the power of choice home where it belongs, within each individual, as well as the responsibility for those decisions. Growing up, in other words. <p></p><i></i>