Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
You Can't Think, and You're Goddamned Liars
January 13, 2011
In the aftermath of the horror in Arizona, all major public voices are united in their absolute, vehement condemnation of violence. Almost all minor voices, including every blogger known and unknown, join in the chorus. It seems that everyone, from the most famous and powerful personages to lowly bloggers offering their thoughts to a world which cares nothing whatsoever about what they say, profoundly opposes violence. If all such people -- which would appear to include all people -- were genuinely sincere in their proclamations (and they may well be sincere, in the manner that people are sincere in their announcement of deeply-held beliefs reflecting the intellectual and moral rigor of sayings blazoned on greeting cards or found in fortune cookies), and, of much greater significance, if they matched their actions to any measurable extent to what they insist is a profound opposition to violence, we would certainly inhabit a paradise on Earth.
You may have observed that we do not. In making this statement, I assume you have not been asleep or unconscious for the entirety of your lifetime. You need have been awake and observant for only a few brief moments to appreciate the charnel house that humanity has made of this planet for most of its presence on this cloud of dust.
As is true with regard to every subject of importance, and as is always true when a subject becomes the focus of our "national discourse," almost everyone who repeatedly and passionately denounces violence is, as my title has it, a goddamned liar. On this occasion, the lies are all-encompassing, and they extend over the entirety of the political spectrum, from craven conservatives to peabrained progressives.
It is only proper to begin with the Liar-in-Chief, the chief executive of the Death State -- who is, he reminds us, a public servant and therefore must be "good and important," as he instructed us last evening. Take a moment to appreciate the hideousness of that moment, for it captures the House of Horror quality of this sickening business. In speaking of the awful death of a nine-year-old child, Obama presumes to read the dead girl's mind:
She had been elected to her student council; she saw public service as something exciting, something hopeful. She was off to meet her congresswoman, someone she was sure was good and important and might be a role model. She saw all this through the eyes of a child, undimmed by the cynicism or vitriol that we adults all too often just take for granted.
Thus does the murdering leader of the Death State use a dead child to burnish the image of the State itself and, which is undoubtedly more critical from Obama's perspective, to burnish the image of those who direct the Death State's operations. If you dare to think that those who lead the Death State and implement its policies engage in murder, conquest, plunder, and brutalization without end, that is only because you are "cynical" and engaging in "vitriol." Our leaders are "good and important": do you want to disagree with a murdered child?
This alone should establish beyond all question the depth and breadth of Obama's loathsomeness. But, my friends, there is more, so much more. Consider:
[A]t a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.
Scripture tells us that there is evil in the world, and that terrible things happen for reasons that defy human understanding. In the words of Job, "when I looked for light, then came darkness." Bad things happen, and we must guard against simple explanations in the aftermath. For the truth is that none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack. None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped those shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man's mind.
So yes, we must examine all the facts behind this tragedy. We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future.
But what we can't do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another. As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility. Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let us use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and remind ourselves of all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together.
...
The loss of these wonderful people should make every one of us strive to be better in our private lives – to be better friends and neighbors, co-workers and parents. And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their deaths help usher in more civility in our public discourse, let's remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy, but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to our challenges as a nation, in a way that would make them proud.
It is almost impossible to describe accurately the distance between these statements and the relevant facts of Obama's record. Just this moment, as I was wondering how I might capture the enormous scope of the lies involved, I remembered a passage I wrote on the occasion of Obama's acclaimed speech on race. Very few people agreed with my assessment then; I suspect a few more people might agree now, but not many more.
In "Obama's Whitewash," written close to three years ago, I wrote:
Almost every politician lies, and most politicians lie repeatedly. Yet in one sense, Obama's speech is exceptional, rare and unique -- but not for any of the reasons offered by Obama's uncritical, mindless adulators. It is exceptional for this reason: it is rare that a candidate will announce in such stark, comprehensive terms that he will lie about every fact of moment, about every aspect of our history that affects the crises of today and that has led to them, about everything that might challenge the mythological view of America. But that is what Obama achieved with this speech. It may be a remarkable achievement -- a remarkable and detestable one, and one that promises endless destruction in the future, both here and abroad.
In brief: when he was a candidate, Obama announced (on multiple occasions to be sure, but this was an especially notable one) that he would lie about everything. And so he does.
Obama tells us that we must "make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds," and that "only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to our challenges as a nation." Despite the fact that most of us are taught early in life that "actions speak louder than words," the majority of adults have more deeply internalized a lesson directly opposed to that maxim: when you judge an authority figure, you must give special weight to his words and what he says his intentions are. If his actions profoundly contradict what he "talks" about, it is the actions you must disregard. There is a direct line between forcing a child to believe that physical and/or emotional abuse is inflicted by his parents (or other caregivers) "for his own good" and arguing that the United States must invade and destroy a village, or an entire country, for its own good. Most adults spend their lives refusing to see the connection.
In fact, how a person acts is of infinitely greater significance than what he says. And toward the conclusion of his remarks, Obama conceded as much: "We may not be able to stop all evil in the world, but I know that how we treat one another is entirely up to us."
Is it "civil and honest" to ask how Obama is treating us, those poor, lost souls who are not "good and important"? I dare to proceed in the belief that it is. In answering that question, one fact above all must be mentioned first. That it is not -- and this fact has almost never been mentioned in all the interminable debates about the violence in Arizona -- reveals a great deal about the moral and intellectual rot that suffocates these wretched United States.
Here is that fact:
Obama and his administration claim the "right" to murder anyone in the world, wherever he or she may be, for whatever reason they choose -- or for no reason at all. Obama and his administration recognize no upper limit to the number of people they can murder in this manner: they can murder as many people as they wish. And they claim there is nothing at all that may impede their exercise of this "right."
This is the game entire. Understand this: once Obama and his administration have claimed this, there is nothing left to argue about. They can murder you -- and they can murder anyone else at all. What in the name of anything you hold holy remains to be "debated" once a vile, damnable "right" of this kind has been claimed?
This is a war crime [under the Nuremberg Principles]: "murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory..."
It is also a crime against humanity: "Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population..."
Under Principle VII, all those who are complicit in these crimes are also guilty.
From The New York Times, December 7, 2010:
A federal judge on Tuesday threw out a lawsuit that had sought to block the American government from trying to kill Anwar al-Awlaki, a United States citizen and Muslim cleric in hiding overseas who is accused of helping to plan attacks by Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen.
The ruling, which clears the way for the Obama administration to continue to try to kill Mr. Awlaki, represents a victory in its efforts to shield from judicial review so-called targeted killings, one of its most striking counterterrorism policies.
In an 83-page opinion, Judge John D. Bates said Mr. Awlaki’s father, the plaintiff, had no standing to file the lawsuit on behalf of his son. He also said decisions about targeted killings in such circumstances were a “political question” for executive branch officials to make — not judges.
...
Jameel Jaffer, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, called the decision “a profound mistake” that would dangerously expand presidential power. The A.C.L.U. and the Center for Constitutional Rights represented Mr. Awlaki’s father, Nasser al-Awlaki, in the matter without compensation.
“If the court’s ruling is correct, the government has unreviewable authority to carry out the targeted killing of any American, anywhere, whom the president deems to be a threat to the nation,” Mr. Jaffer said. “It would be difficult to conceive of a proposition more inconsistent with the Constitution, or more dangerous to American liberty.”
Mr. Jaffer is a master of understatement. This policy, and it appears it shall remain the policy of the United States government in the future, places the executive branch beyond all law, beyond all challenge, and represents the triumph of absolute power.
It is literally the claim of the power to dispense life and death. Thus, it is the claim of ultimate power -- and the claim of ultimate violence.
Obama claims the power to murder you, your entire family, everyone you know, and anyone else he chooses.
Last night, Obama said: "We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future." Obama will not renounce his claim to the "right" of ultimate violence. Who will be next on his kill list? Who else is on it now? With the dutiful acquiescence of the courts -- so much for your vaunted "rule of law" -- we will never know. But wait: you may know to some extent, when the "disappearances" can no longer be explained by coincidence, or you see the corpses pile up.
Oh, that could never happen here!, you exclaim in a petulant whine. This is America! That, too, is a critical part of the mythology Obama burnished for you last night. Consult history: all peoples in all places always believe it can't happen here.
Last evening, Obama also said: "Scripture tells us that there is evil in the world." He should know.
There is much more that needs to be said about this hideous business, hideous in every respect. To be continued.
- The name of Tucson derives from a Pima word shookson/Cuk Ṣon story cycle of the Pima people that involves a hero murdered by public consent
- Gifford's husband is astronaut Mark E. Kelly, who has a twin astronaut brother, Scott J. Kelly. The shooter was purportedly obsessed with NASA
- Dr. David Bowman was on the scene and attended to those injured; he shares a name with the character from the Space Odyssey series, who is himself somewhat of a "twin astronaut"
- Both Kelly twins worked on the "Discovery" spacecraft, which shares a name with David Bowman's spacecraft in Space Odyssey
- Both Kelly twins also worked with disgraced astronaut Lisa Nowak
- Gifford is cousins with actress Gwyneth Paltrow and niece of actress Blythe Danner
- Christina Taylor Green was born on 9/11/01, and her birth and death dates nearly form a numerical anagram: 09/11/01 :: 01/08/11
- Christina Taylor Green is granddaughter of baseballer and Major League manager Dallas Green, whose name evokes the site of another "Lee" political assassination
- Federal Judge John Roll's next ruling was to be on currency; he was preparing to rule against Obama’s power to seize American citizens money without clear and convincing evidence of a crime being committed
- There is presumably another suspect arrested a couple of hours after the shooting in connection with the case on the nearby corners of Thornydale and Magee Roads
- Loughner wrote about many esoteric concepts, such as government mind control, the meaninglessness of words and currency, and conscious dreaming, and presumably posted on ATS, which covers fortean topics
- Gifford's Youtube page was subscribed to Loughner's Youtube page, as of Sunday midday, and the page indicated that the most recent activity had been "2 days ago," one day before the shooting
- The neighbor who brought Christina Taylor Green, Susan Hileman, was a graduate of Cornell's College of Human Ecology, which was connected to the CIA's programs of sponsoring research of mind control
- There have been reports that Loughner's father has "never worked in his life"
- The area of Gifford's brain that will likely be affected by the shooting is that which controls speech
What else?
Bruce Dazzling wrote:Luposapien wrote:Thanks for compiling the rundown of weird synchs in this story Luther. here's another that was mentioned somewhere upthread that you didn't list:
Another tie-in with the David Bowman/Space Odyssey line, the twin brother of Gifford's husband, Scott Kelly, was a pilot for the space shuttle Discovery, which is the name of the ship on which David Bowman makes his fateful journey in 2001 on his way to becoming the Starchild. Which is another interesting synch in that 2001 was the year of birth for Christina Green (the date anagram for her birth and death is pretty chilling).
Anyway, as someone else, I think Joe, said earlier, I hate to seem like I'm trying to just turn this into some kind of numbers game. Guess it's just the tendency to try to make some kind of sense out of a tragedy (and being particularly primed to look for them based on my recent reading).
[On edit: Realized I failed to mention that I had just started reading a book on synchronicities in people's life stories just before this incident occurred, hence the "being primed to look for them" comment.]
And don't forget about this 9/11/2001 Space Odyssey sync.
And they seem to be attempting to turn the Giffords shooting into a mass transformative event in the same way that 9/11 was.
Edited because I mistakenly hit 'Submit' instead of 'Preview' before I was finished with my post...
Also Thursday, a man walking his dog found a black bag holding ammunition and authorities believed it was discarded by Loughner.
One tea party leader says that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) has herself to blame for getting shot in the head Saturday.
The Arizona congresswoman shouldn't have attended an event "in full view of the public" if she had security concerns, according to Tucson Tea Party co-founder Trent Humphries.
Giffords warned MSNBC's Chuck Todd last year that there would be "consequences" to violent rhetoric and imagery after Fox News' Sarah Palin released a graphic which placed crosshairs over the congresswoman's district.
"But the thing is that the way that [Palin] has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gunsight over our district," Giffords said. "And when people do that, they’ve gotta realize there’s consequences to that action."
But Humphries thinks Giffords was just speaking out against Palin for political gain.
"It's political gamesmanship," he told the Guardian. "The real case is that she [Giffords] had no security whatsoever at this event. So if she lived under a constant fear of being targeted, if she lived under this constant fear of this rhetoric and hatred that was seething, why would she attend an event in full view of the public with no security whatsoever?"
Residents of the middle-class neighborhood, located five miles west of where Jared allegedly killed six people and injured 14 others, described the family as anti-social. Jared, who was apparently the couple’s only son, lived with them, and the three took turns walking the family dog, a medium-sized brindled Labrador Retriever mix. That, however, was the extent of their activities beyond their property. "I've lived here 40 years, and I didn't even know their last name," a woman who lives across the street told The Daily Beast.
Randy, who’s believed to be unemployed, spent a lot of time at home. A fit 58 year old with thick, graying hair and a mustache, he moved to the neighborhood at least 30 years ago, before marrying Amy. He can often be seen working on one of three show cars, says next-door neighbor George Gayan. Though Gayan’s great grandson once played with Jared when the two were young, Gayan says Randy eventually made clear he preferred his privacy and erected a wall around the property.
Some neighbors described hostile exchanges with Randy. "He's an angry man," Stephen Woods, another next-door neighbor, said. Loughner repeatedly pestered Woods and his son, Anthony, about their trash cans, complaining when they didn’t get picked up. “I've had confrontations with him three times, and my father's had a couple more than that,” Anthony said.
Across the street, Jason Johnson described a recent incident that took place when his father greeted Loughner, who was outside gardening. "My father said hello to him, and he didn't say anything back,” Johnson told The Daily Beast. “So my dad said, 'How's your day going?' really loudly, and he just dropped the tools and went inside." In Johnson’s view, “People are scared of [Randy]. I don't think the son's the only crazy one."
...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/2011 ... lillness_1
Bruce Dazzling wrote:Arthur Silber's take:You Can't Think, and You're Goddamned Liars
January 13, 2011
Last evening, Obama also said: "Scripture tells us that there is evil in the world." He should know.
There is much more that needs to be said about this hideous business, hideous in every respect. To be continued.
82_28 wrote:Always keep in mind, as I am sure most here are, that when it comes to this modern iteration of this top down right wing, THIS IS ALL ABOUT THEM. Boehner had to have himself another good public cry today. One look at the motherfucker and what he stands for outside of these right-wing prescribed burns of tragedy and you know he really doesn't give a shit (this is part and parcel and fully fits into the mandate of dominance the right believe it owns). And I really don't give a shit what people think of me when I say that Sarah Palin's loss would not be mourned by me at all as well as I would not celebrate her being attacked whatsoever. Here's why: because she is not a leader and as a leftist I need no leader nor will I ever "follow" one. I fucking hate cults of personality. I tried it before and the more I tried the more mortified I got by these left wing personalities taking their diluted fame to levels of ever uncomfortable antics (see Mike Malloy, Garrofallo, even Michael Moore etc). Intellectual and curious lefties want to commune and also be left alone by authority. Sometimes this can be mistaken as the desire to lead. However, I disagree. I believe that just being cool is the way. I don't give a fuck.
Do not hurt
Do not kill
Do not covet
Do not obsess on evil things happening to anyone
Do not laugh when evil things do happen to evil people
Never do anything evil
Always help at all times when you can
If you have nothing good to say, don't say it. If they say it, step to them, demonstrate that your brain works too and then try and become friends
Never put up with any bullshit -- ever
Be cool, unless your fuse must be finally burned once and for all with a last gasp attempt at asserting your ideals
Choose that shit wisely
This is why these late teen and early twenty-something idiots do what they do. They're either preyed upon or they have chosen an artificial idealism outside of their own soul. They are simply too young to question their programming from the standpoint of seeing years pass before them as impermanent entities. And by "programming" I mean the shit we ALL have to deal with, not some select specimens brainwashed by some "alphabet agency" or fabled project name. Yes, I mean the the famous around these parts, cogent Bill Hicks admonishment to marketers.
But, as the old saying at RI goes, "Fuck Obama". My very first thought as he brought up the death of Christina Taylor Green and all of the rest was a deep technocratic racism on the part of the message being delivered by the puppet leader. How many, HOW MANY lives and souls have been destroyed by the perpetuation of this activity by the incognito, yet in plain sight, true nature of the United States? Why are these deaths and this misery not questioned or brought up? After all, we are "there" to help them achieve democracy. Such bullshit. Absolute bullshit. It is the act of tossing out a second soccer ball on a field of five year olds playing a soccer game. Some of the kids will go after that one too.
Obama offends me as much as Palin, however from a position in which I would invariably would support Obama first. I do not like this happening to my brain. However I must. My fears, my family's fears, my friend's fears are being played upon. I am far beyond the time of recognition that we're being fucked with and quite honestly were it not for the work of Jeff, PKD, Goro Adachi (gah, sounds so cheesy) and so many others that are into the synchs, the history, the legacy, the drugs, the extant fascism, abuse, mind control I would have never ever recognized all of this shit outside of what it is.
This is something to truly behold. I don't care how you cut it, but a map on a computer screen is one thing, with or without the cross-hairs, but the absolute vastness of this planet compared to our size as individuals has never been more apparent. Yet the smallness of what programmed humans are willing to do for their leaders has never been more apparent either. I am a human who cannot conceive of what we did before the Internet. I lived it. But I cannot conceive of a time where I cannot look something up on my phone during a conversation, let alone go home and look it up on my PC. What did we do back then? Did we just forget about it? Did we hurry to the library the next day to make sure? Or did we just live and let live? I can't even go into a grocery story anymore with my girlfriend and wind up texting her "where are you?" anymore. What the fuck did we do in 1980? What will 22 year old would be killers of watered down jurisprudence do in 2020 with absolutely no knowledge of life in 1980? What will the generations of the Christina Taylor Green's of the future do with this deep intrusion by techno-fascism and their erasing of history as they go along?
Are these times akin to the protestant schism of centuries ago? (the Vatican has always been nothing more than a "proto" corporation) The Internet is kind of a bible that any of the parishioners can read in their own language (ala that Monbiot article posted today)? Is the only reason a "big deal" has been made of this because a congresswoman was nearly assassinated -- her husband an astronaut? How many fucking mass murders have occurred since Columbine, besides at the iron hands of our corporate military, which warranted a visit by the figurehead of state? The last one was a democrat, Bill Clinton, at Wadsworth and Bowles in Littleton CO. I was there. Many, many, many more have died between then and now.
In my book, they are diluting the power of the house. There will be another and another until we no longer care in the same way we do not even flinch at a school shooting any longer, when we have gone the way of Mexico -- just a few short miles from the service today.
Bruce Dazzling wrote:
And don't forget about this 9/11/2001 Space Odyssey sync.
And they seem to be attempting to turn the Giffords shooting into a mass transformative event in the same way that 9/11 was.
The hotel is a high-rise black glass building which pays homage to Arthur C. Clarke's vision of the Monolith in "2001: A Space Odyssey" - complete with canopy, flags and ornamental trees at the entrance.
undead wrote:I think there will probably be something like this circulating soon, considering all the other parodies.
=======
Hi, this site is all about Conscious Dreaming, REAL Conscious Dreaming. This site is awesome. My name is Jared and I can't stop thinking about Conscious Dreaming. Conscious Dreaming is cool; and by cool, I mean totally sweet.
Facts:
1. All Conscious Dreaming at this moment is asleep.
2. Jared is Conscious Dreaming at this moment.
3. Thus, Jared is asleep.
Iamwhomiam wrote:I don't think he's schizophrenic at all. Mentally ill, perhaps very possibly so. However, a few have touched upon the subject of occultic influence, and I do believe he may be partially possessed. The sought after chaos, his 'normal teen' to 'bizarrely behaved teen' transition, his alter, er, 'scuse me, altar, the 'mad' blog ramblings, and what's in that black bag? His dad must know. And what do we really know about his dad? High Priest? Who knows. Who knows when he started dabbling in the 'arts'?
Reading what little I did of his blog, I find it hard to believe he could read. And who's to say he actually set up his blog? If he was being controlled, 'used' to commit this act, wouldn't you think someone could have created it without his knowledge solely to mislead us to believe he was simply nuts?
Lastly, going woo here... who's to say that the target wasn't the child? Seemed destined to someday occupy the WH. We talk here about time-travel, aliens, and all sorts of bizarre stuff. Couldn't this have been a preemptive assassination of a future president? Taking advantage of the event and taking out others to mislead us from the true target?
Probably just a deranged kid with a grudge, a regular, run of the mill egocentric gun nut. Discounting all the woo.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests