America in Distress

Further, did you know that 3 terrorists per day are crossing from Canada into the Land of the Free?

I know there are some of you who will read this and actually sympathise with the little Hitlers that efficiently execute (not quite literally just yet) the authoritarian rules and regulations of a state gone insane. Which begs the question, what the fuck are we going to do with you people? You never learn!

Well your adoring acquiescence is all well and good, but let’s hear from you when your shopping trip doesn’t go according to plan as in the case of the gent in the video below who had the nerve to ask that criminal question which the state will never tolerate, “Why?”

Yeah, go on, hide behind your sofas and condemn each and every victim using the tired old establishment motto, “If you have nothing to hide…”

If your privacy means so little to you, if your liberty is a thing for others to control, if your favourite response is, “three bags full sir”, or , “how high?”, then good luck and don’t come crying when the inevitable consequence of your complacency unfolds and starts biting you in the arse.

Holy hell, we thought we had it bad in the UK but we ain’t seen nothing yet. I thought we all fought a war to make sure this kind of stuff was assigned to the history bin.

Actually that’s just me being deliberately naive, that war was fought to enrich a very few people at the expense of the rest of the planet – life and limbs included. But you don’t believe that, do you? You think the war was fought to stop the spread of fascism.

Man, you’ve got to laugh.

Anyway, here’s the video. Is it fake? I doubt it, it’s more a sign of the times and a reminder of times past. And a klaxon blaring 24/7 that the majority ignore because they believe the fox will leave them be if only they show enough deference and cowardice.

It wasn’t you this time. Let’s see who it is next time, okay?

You have to hand it to the mainstream media. The control it has exerted over the general election coverage these past few weeks is a wonder to behold. A beautifully executed con job that has left nothing to chance.

Certainly what the TV presenters, interviewers, commentators and news anchors have achieved, along with their counterparts in the press, is unethical, immoral, corrosive to democracy and the idea of liberty and wholly harmful to the people of this nation. But it can’t be denied they have managed to massage an angry and vengeful electorate into a compliant and misdirected mass, on the TV screens at least.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/ or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” – Joseph Goebbels

The media prepared the pre-election ground with a campaign of fear based around the ludicrous prospect of the BNP suddenly gaining mass appeal. The message went forth that rejection of the mainstream parties represented a wasted vote or worse, an open door for extremism and fringe politics.

This was presented with a straight face as if it is possible to conceive a more extreme or crackpot outcome than the thirteen years we have suffered under New Labour.

Which “fringe” party advocated illegal war against helpless civilians and the transferral of power to casino gangsters in the City of London followed by a trillion pound bailout when the inevitable consequences unfolded? Which “extremist” party suggested empowering busybodies on the government payroll to root through rubbish bins or inspect the contents of refrigerators to ensure insane behavioural engineering diktats are obeyed? Who built the surveillance state and wants to go further with a control freak agenda that would delight and impress Adolf Hitler or the old Stalinists but leaves civil rights campaigners and libertarians shuddering and fearful for the future?

Say what you like about the BNP (and most if it is deserved) but nothing is more loony than the loony left. Yet everyone else is the madman according to a media that has played along with barely a whimper of protest, barring your cartoon Littlejohn types who are offered up as confirmation the alternative view is brash and dangerous.

Thirteen years of abuse piled upon abuse is a history vanished down the memory hole, unquestioned by political pundits like Nick Robinson who delight in the statistics of the fast approaching kick-off but never stop to consider what the game is all about. Politics as sport is their business and they come armed with fancy graphics and jarring music to blast away sober observations or awkward questions.

Even Stella Rimington, former MI5 chief, has warned against the remorseless rise of the police state – the police themselves complaining of political excess and agendas that run contrary to the beliefs upon which this nation is supposedly built. We hear nothing of this in the so-called debates sandwiched between the spinning logos and prime time advertisements.

But despite the array of tools at their disposal the “experts” can’t spin away what is obvious to even the most uninformed voter, Labour’s turn at playing government has been a disaster of epic proportions. Neither have the talking heads been able to attach significant appeal to the eternally grey David Cameron who has been engineered too precisely to the extent he evokes memories of the widely hated Tony Blair.

Pumping up the profile of the Liberal Democrats and Nick Clegg was a master stoke born from necessity and has paid off surely even beyond the mainstream’s wildest expectations. Clegg and his not so secretly fractured party offer nothing but a cosmetic reconfiguration of the traditional two party system and indeed it could be argued their policies are the most detrimental in terms of our liberty and prosperity. You may recall, though the fact has been purged from the discussion, the Liberal Democrats are determined to see us consumed entirely by the anti-democratic and instinctively authoritarian European Union.

Clegg is a lightening conductor for the public rage. The establishment feared a meltdown this election. They fretted at the prospect of the disillusioned and disgusted public rejecting the corruption now clearly exposed in Westminster by turning to genuine alternatives or staying at home.

The solution to rising public resentment has been the packaging and marketing of Nick Clegg, offered for sale as the much demanded change the people yearn for. Yet an examination of his policies on the key issues unmasks him as just another clone tightly bound to the establishment agenda. More government, more control, more taxes, less liberty. This is the “Liberal” Democrat and this is your “alternative” on May 6th.

Certainly on the trivial issues made monumental by media misdirection, such as meaningless proposals for electoral reform, Clegg is singing a different tune. He has big ideas on how to cement beyond removal the utterly crooked and perverted manner in which detached and self-interested puppets for the corporate elite are ushered into bureaucratic prominence.

In reality Clegg has nothing serious to say about bringing the decision making process closer to the man in the street. In an age of technology you might think it is possible to refer to the governed more than once every five years, especially on such huge and far reaching issues as deeper integration with the Europeans.

TV reality shows can organise snap referenda in real time having engaged the audience on a weekly basis thus provoking informed choice. Politicians can’t even honestly inform us through their shady and double-dealing manifestos. The detached “lifer” bureaucrats in parliament and the civil service believe an endorsement every half decade is perfectly sufficient, they go as far as to suggest democracy is threatened when left to the public opinion. You’ve heard them make this remarkable claim every time the idea of genuine public engagement is suggested.

Few, I suppose, would enjoy a parliament run by phone-in vote but this isn’t the point. What matters is the politicians believe the only workable system is a non-representative free hand for them until it comes time to spew a new set of lies and half truths at election time.

The fact the British public was not allowed to voice an opinion when our nation was signed away to the Europeans is staggering. This act alone proves our present form of government is far removed from the democratic principle and more akin to a plutocracy. An important discussion point, you might imagine, but it hasn’t rated a mention during the election campaign with the only party prepared to speak about it, UKIP, thrown to the sidelines and starved of media coverage.

A similar blackout has occurred in relation to the expenses scandal. Of course it has not been possible for the media and politicians to completely ignore the public backlash. Instead the three parties have all agreed to hold their hands up and have promised tighter self-regulation. A handful of the worst offenders have been thrown to the lions, ironically at the public expense. This, all three parties agree, is sufficient recompense for stealing from our wallets at a time when the banks are signing off on our generation spanning poverty.

These politicians all stand in a palace and refer to each other as “honourable” men and women. Even though the evidence indicates the opposite, there are no plans for any of the parties to look deeper into how the whole Westminster bubble operates and maintains itself.

The inescapable but unmentioned conclusion is that politics more and more attracts those most unsuited to public service. It lures dishonest nest featherers who act according to their club affiliation rather than the common good. When caught betraying the public trust they investigate themselves, reprimand themselves, it’s a closed shop.

The expenses scandal informs us beyond argument our politicians are corrupt and our political system is rotten. Now these same miscreants stand before us and tell us they have changed. What do you expect a liar to say when caught red handed? He’ll tell a lie, of course.

These “honourable” men collude with the media and propose criminals and conmen are the best we can hope for come election day. No other options have been granted air time or column inches. This is it, this is your government, this is your media. The overriding issue analysed (to death) is whether one corrupt party will dominate or if they’ll all get a “fair” crack at the trough.

Our politicians are murderers and war criminals too, not that you would know it from the media coverage. Certainly Afghanistan has had plenty of controlled exposure. The debate has been carefully distilled to an unapologetic argument about who will provide the most resources to our imperial forces so they can further destroy a nation far away. Oil and gas contracts for the big corporations is not newsworthy because motive is never considered.

The media rambles about a sham democracy confined to a few square miles in Kabul whilst Afghanistan continues to be the bloodied plaything of profiteers in glass towers in London, Washington and New York.

The invasion and occupation of Afghanistan is publicly justified by the events of September 11th, 2001. Based on a proclamation rather than a proper investigation it has been decided an ex-CIA operative and his Taliban friends, who were tolerated until they refused to play ball in handing over their nation’s resources to the west, were responsible for 911 and a “just” and “moral” penalty is the death and destruction of the Afghan people and infrastructure respectively.

The hunt for bin Laden has long ceased to be an issue, ever since he was allowed to escape when cornered – so the story goes. The Taliban, once defeated, are the main focus now. Apparently if we don’t keep fighting over there they will all come and fight us over here. The easy interchangeability of manufactured boogie-men provides the ever present threat useful for policy makers at home and the lucrative opportunities for our big brand companies in the war zones.

If it’s not Al-Qaeda it’s the Taliban or Saddam or the “new Hitler” in Iran. Enemies that have no record whatsoever of having targeted our nation prior to us deciding to bomb them and steal their national resources. Yet the mainstream media is happy to confirm the lie, they hate us because we are free.

How many Afghans have paid the price of this lie is unknown because we don’t count the corpses. What we do know is there is no end in sight to the carnage nor the monetary expenditure at a time when we are told we have no money left to spend. Gordon Brown has been boasting about extending expenditure way beyond any estimations offered when we decided to follow along with tail wagging behind the American war machine.

None of the mainstream approved parties suggest reviewing our commitments overseas and the media hasn’t pressed them. It is silently implied the war in Afghanistan will continue without question or exit strategy.

Worse still is the sordid history of our engagement in Iraq. This issue has been airbrushed out of the campaign entirely. Our nation (or the fathers, sons and daughters of a portion of it) went to war based on the lies told by our political leaders and at least hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions of human beings have been murdered as a result.

Four million Iraqis have been reduced to refugee status. Our crazed warmongers boasted they would bomb Iraq back to the stone age and they have delivered on that promise. Regime change and nation building are now the norm and International law is only ever applicable to the other guy.

All the parties strain to heap praise on “our boys” over there who do a marvellous job building nations for Johnny Foreigners who, thanks to previous and similarly disastrous imperial interventions, have failed to build viable states of their own accord. History is parcelled up into detached segments which are then switched in and out according to the demands of the imperial agenda. The media sells each new justification for aggression without a blush.

Iraq is a crime of such magnitude it can scarcely be comprehended, the ultimate war crime of the type we determined to hold Germany accountable for at the conclusion of World War II but for which we now throw away our own laws because we are the aggressor. Behind the scenes the resources of Iraq are silently signed away to Shell and Exxon Mobil, the media ignore the dots that beg to be connected and studiously avoids the repeated patterns that scream of a guiding hand behind these “fateful” events.

The war criminal Tony Blair walks free, in this country at least, and lines his pockets explaining to paying audiences how he would commit his crimes again even though his lies about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction have long since been exposed. The war criminal Gordon Brown, who wrote out the cheques, has been rewarded by promotion to the highest office without seeking any endorsement from the electorate. He is so detached from morality or the fundamentals of justice he has the nerve to run for office again and the media plays along by averting their eyes from his blood soaked past.

In eight hours of televised debate Brown remained unchallenged on his criminal past by the other two candidates. Clegg is fond of using the term “illegal” to describe the invasion and occupation of Iraq but he shuns the next obvious step by failing to associate the policy of prominent British politicians with the illegal act. If a crime has been committed is it not usual to ask who committed that crime and attempt to bring them to justice?

For Clegg the word “illegal” is useful as a campaigning device but it’s plain enough he’d rather not push things further. That’s because he sat in the same parliament as the war criminals and is tarnished by association. He may not have voted for war but he observed the criminal behaviour anyway and did nothing other than show his total commitment to our invading forces once the killing spree commenced. At Nuremberg such a defence resulted in hanging. In modern Britain, regardless of the scale of the crime, the greatest threat to our politicians is banishment to a lucrative boardroom safe from public scrutiny.

Of course David Cameron overtly supported the aggression against Iraq, a fact you may (despite the media silence) still recall.

Perhaps the most glaring omission by the mainstream media in the coverage of this election is the unprecedented fraud conducted by the banks against not just the people of Britain but the entire planet.

Much like the expenses scandal the media would have you believe the underlying problems in the banking system lie with corrupt individuals rather than an inherently corrupt model. Gatekeepers like Robert Peston of the BBC will dutifully relay the latest news that Goldman Sachs stands accused of criminal behaviour but they aren’t disposed to laying out the whole laundry list of crimes attributable to these banksters. And there are many on record.

For those who aren’t afraid of digging where journalists never tread it quickly becomes apparent the banks are a cancer that has eaten away at global economies and hence our personal prosperity for centuries. Boom and bust is the tell-tale sign of the real banking function.

Originally designed to safeguard gold deposits the bankers learned they could cheat their customers by issuing paper promises against those deposits but in amounts that far outweighed the physical quantity of gold in the vaults. Eventually the banksters persuaded kings, queens and politicians this fraud was beneficial to the economy and so fractional reserve banking, a euphemism for counterfeiting, was born.

This crime is now so ingrained in modern economic models most observers sing loudly about the overall benefits of allowing a few individuals to prosper by repeatedly diluting the wealth of their victims. It is proposed that capital driven economics (capital being a euphemism for debt) builds long term prosperity and were it not for fractional reserve banking and the fiat currency (money created from thin air and backed by nothing of tangible value) mankind would have progressed at a slower pace.

Never mind that every bubble must burst if it is inflated sufficiently. Set aside that slavery is the underlying price of the bankster economy as well as the horror of war and a world where a third of the population battles obesity whilst the rest of humanity starves to death. Out of sight, out of mind is the real magic formula behind the first world miracle.

The final nail in the coffin of a free and prosperous humanity arrived when control of the money supply was taken from the state and handed to the banksters. This allowed the latter to cyclically inflate the money supply, thereby expanding the public debt, and then reduce it causing defaults and the transfer of tangible assets to the banks in settlement for debts they had written using money pulled from thin air. Thus their risk was cut to zero and their return guaranteed. The very same model persists today but with a few more avaricious twists applied.

Herein lies your eternal boom and bust cycle that politicians laughably claim they seek to eradicate. All three political parties stress an immediate return to debt production by the banks is imperative. The credit must flow again, they declare. The wheel must turn again. You’ll notice how they use positive terminology to describe highly undesirable circumstances. Debt is credit, money is debt. Freedom is slavery but that’s another story never to be told.

Our economy does not have to operate like this, it could cast off the vampire bankers that suck the nation’s blood. The government could easily create money backed by real assets and then regulate the money supply. In fact this is how it used to be before the banksters cornered the market on everything. Now such concepts are laughed at by “experts” who tell us that paying interest on our own money is an essential ingredient to any modern economy. How convenient.

Of course it’s true that our gleaming consumer debt economies could never have grown so large without voodoo banking practices. We have all become richer in paper terms as a result of this grand fraud but, because of the inertia in the system, we have been saved from a final accounting. Until now perhaps.

Certainly we possess a lot of consumer “things” we never owned before but in reality we are worse off than the penniless pauper. He has nothing but we are submerged in debt and the interest on that debt can never be repaid. After all, if the banksters produce all the money in the system then where does the money required to pay interest come from? Think it through.

In light of this, how should we tackle the banks that have extracted a trillion pounds (£1,000,000,000,000) under threat of a global financial collapse? That’s called an extortion racket, a tool much favoured by your average gangster but taken to new extremes by our expensively suited banksters.

Brown, who handed even more control to the banks, calls it an outrage, Cameron wants more freedom for the banks, Clegg is promising “tough” action so that nobody will ever hold the nation hostage again. They all suggest a limit on bonuses and a tax on the illicit spoils. Would you think justice had been served if a bank robber was forced to pay a small percentage of his loot back to the bank and then had the interest on his ill-gotten gains taxed at a couple of percentage points? This is what the frontrunners in this election are suggesting as a fitting punishment for the greatest criminals ever to foul the planet. It’s a joke.

And what do they offer by way of reform? They urge the banks should be broken up at the very same time they suggest huge and unaccountable money lenders be given sweeping global powers. The Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, the Bank of England, the IMF, these are the organisations that will be tasked with building a more robust and stable model. They also happen to be the greatest practitioners of the global counterfeiting and debt scams. You couldn’t make it up but because the media carefully conceals the real nature of banking the electorate can be tricked into believing real action has been taken.

Sorry, but it’s only your money that has been taken and your jobs and houses and land and the future of your children. Don’t be fooled, nothing is changing and if anything the future is bleaker than at any time in history.

I really have wandered off the election track now and I could go on and discuss the third world sweat shops and the permanent war economies and the drugs trade and all the other tin foil hat “conspiracies” that our “honest” politicians and bankers would never be involved in. I’m the madman, remember. It’s the guy who stole your wallet that has your best interests at heart.

It is an understatement to conclude the mainstream media could have done a better job of informing the public during this election build up. That it has decided once again against fulfilling its original role in society is another indicator of how corrupt and attached to the political and corporate elite it has become.

As such the voters will go into the polling booths drenched in spin, shielded from the real issues and bereft of a real choice. Some will see through the conditioning, others are already immune to it. But, I fear, most will fall victim. I get this impression from talking directly to people around me. Their issues are meaningless to me and mine are incomprehensible and outlandish to them. I believe they are well meaning but complacent, they think I’m a lunatic. I resent the majority endorsing more of what I despise and the majority despises me for even questioning the system in which they have so much faith invested.

I am a libertarian, the exact opposite of a Liberal Democrat. Therefore I would never seek to impose my beliefs or will on others. What I object to is others who feel it only right to impose their uninformed decisions on me.

It is painfully evident the mainstream parties and their complicit media have scored a decisive victory in this election. All hint of dissent has been purged, all possibility of choice eradicated.

For those of us who were hopeful the glaring exposure of the criminals in office or the direct impact of their (greedy beyond reason) bankster friends on the lives of normal people would somehow energise real change, May 6th will be a bitter blow.

Nevertheless, anyone committed to justice, a fair and level playing field (which just so happens to be the opposite of wealth distribution by force), peace, equality under the common law and above all liberty must start again and plan for the next five years.

These will be trying times in which the state consolidates its grip and the globalist agenda advances at pace. We will witness more war, more suffering and misery, more inequality, more crimes against humanity and the guilty parties will continue to walk free.

We will see the mainstream media taking big steps to recover a monopoly on information as the Internet is strangled using brute force legislation. We may even be targeted directly as the economic situation worsens and the state seeks out minority victims and “truth criminals” to be thrown to the masses as a distraction.

But I truly believe more people are waking up to the reality of the world in which we are living. I believe more realise we are endlessly repeating the same mistakes and the cycle needs to be broken for genuine progress to occur.

We didn’t get our message across this time, we were trounced by a beautifully executed media con. But nobody can afford to lose heart or give up the fight. Great social change never arrives without protracted struggle. No matter how intimidating or pervasive the enemy, take comfort in recalling that every great tyranny has eventually stumbled then fallen. Rome, the power of the Church, the Soviet empire, these are notable examples.

For all the Twittering and political wheezing that disguises the debauchery of our political system and strives to mislead, I believe most people are decent and honest and ready to do the right thing if so persuaded. We failed to persuade them this time. We must double our efforts then.

Each and every libertarian is now tasked with picking up a brick from the ruins and laying it on another to recommence the building process. Speak no more of May 6th but instead look forward to a brighter time when surely change for the better must arrive. And work to make it happen.

Remember me?

It would seem logical, considering we’re on the verge of the next election, to review all thirteen catastrophic years under this authoritarian and warmongering government. But even the opposition parties can’t seem to bring themselves to look in Blair’s direction.

You can understand why the Tories want to look the other way, they happily played along with Blair’s horrendous invasion and sat on their hands as the dire consequences unfolded.

But what of the Liberal Democrats? They’ll tell you all day long they didn’t officially vote for the war but what action did they take to try to prevent it? What did they do after the bombs started falling to put an end to the carnage? The answer is nothing at all.

Thousands of private individuals, at their own time and expense, have tried to bring Blair to justice so he can answer for his crimes against humanity. People have petitioned, attempted citizens arrests, lobbied MPs, written blogs, produced videos.

In the end though, if there is no political will to see justice applied to the powerful in society, just as it is routinely meted out to the common man, what can be done to make killers like Blair answerable for his actions? Nothing much, shout until you are purple with rage but it achieves nothing because the establishment has decided not to listen.

If the Liberal Democrats were genuinely opposed to the illegal war then where were they when they were needed most? Safe behind Westminter’s barricades, preaching loudly but practising none of it.

This is the signature of a minority party that stands to lose little by taking a popular view that runs contrary to the agenda of the state. Their trivial gamble has now paid off as they cynically parade themselves as the anti-war choice. It’s sickening.

So today we witness a Labour Party that desperately wants us to forget, Conservatives who know they’ll be dragged down by association and a bunch of Lib Dem opportunists who are happy to offer a sound bite but aren’t so keen to discuss the finer details.

This election campaign has been condensed to two issues, taxation and cuts in public services. Both arising from economic policies that all three parties watched unfolding, much like the carnage in Iraq.

The parties don’t want to go into detail on the “approved” issues either. They won’t tell you how much they’re going to tax you in return for providing less. In fact none of them want to speak about anything much at all.

That’s because, when you peel back the media filter, they are all guilty of failing the British public and refusing to represent our interests over those of the warmongers and the banksters. They all sat and fiddled expenses and turned a blind eye as Britain fell into ruin and Iraq and Afghanistan burned.

These charlatans want your vote on May 6th. Close your ears to their lies, close your eyes to the staged debates and instead use your mind. And remember, remember, because that’s what they fear the most, your memory. Your realisation of how corrupt and deceitful they truly are.

Then take a cold, hard look at the state of this nation and where we are headed if we, as a people, don’t put a stop to this once and for all.

Leading to War is a film that indicts Bush and his warmongers by using their own words and their own blatant lies. It covers the period following September 11th, 2001 leading up to the onset of the illegal aggression against Iraq.

From the film makers:

How does a government lead its people to war? How does it communicate to its citizens – and to the wider world – the reasons and rationale for initiating military conflict? What rhetorical devices and techniques are employed? And how is a nation brought to support the profound decision to wage war against another nation?

LEADING TO WAR is comprised entirely of archival news footage – without commentary, without voiceover – presented chronologically from President Bush’s State of the Union address in January, 2002 (the “axis of evil” speech), and continuing up to the announcement of formal U.S. military action in Iraq on March 19, 2003.

This compressed, chronological view offers a unique opportunity to examine the media record from a historical perspective, allowing the material to speak for itself.

Looking back on it, it’s both terrifying and comical how so many people were duped by such a wafer thin argument delivered by a gang of utterly unconvincing thugs.

It’s also worth noting that this whole recent business in the UK about whether the war was legal or not is rendered irrelevant as you hear Bush admit on camera that the policy of his administration was regime change in Iraq – a war crime as defined without ambiguity in International law.

Bush’s little helper, Tony Blair, makes a couple of appearances, cutting an absolutely pathetic figure and reminding us it is not only Americans who can be stupidly naive.

The film is free to view online and available with subtitles in a large number of languages. Worth a watch.

An exciting, star-studded line-up at Chilcott’s theatre in the coming few days. Here’s the performers’ roster, should be worth a watch if Ashcroft’s hysterical cameo is anything to judge by. Do you see how childishly plain and flawed these individuals are when you pull away their rock?

• 27 January, Rt Hon (sic) Lord Goldsmith QC 10.00-13.00 and 14.00-17.00 Attorney General, June 2001-June 2007

• 29 January, Rt Hon (sic) Tony Blair 09.30-12.30 and 14.00-17.00 Prime Minister, 2001-June 2007

• 2 February, Rt Hon (sic) Clare Short MP 10:00-13:00 International Development Secretary, 2001-2003

• 8 February, Rt Hon (sic) Jack Straw MP 14:00-17:00 Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, 2001-2006

Full details here: Iraq Inquiry

Tune in – it’s free(ish)!

Ignorance is Bliss (David Shankbone)

Further, Americans live in a democracy and enjoy liberty. Americans worship a Christian God who is a God of love. Iranians are enslaved under a tyrannical and backward religion that is founded in violence.

Americans do good, they help police and protect the world, they liberate those who are enslaved. Iranians do evil, they sponsor terrorism and conduct secret programs to build weapons of mass destruction.

Americans live affluent lifestyles because they have worked hard to build a modern economy. They live in big houses with modern amenities. They drive luxury cars and wear fine clothes. Iranians are poor because their culture is medieval and their economy archaic.

Americans are intelligent and attractive, they are healthy and have great teeth. Iranians are simple folk. They are either old goat herders or young, indoctrinated terrorists. They dress in rags and funny headdress. They are dirty, unhealthy and have very poor teeth. And they speak a silly language and always have an AK-47 in their hands, even when they sleep.

And if I haven’t insulted your intelligence by now then I guess you watch a lot of western mainstream media. And I guess you’re wondering why I’m bothering to state the “obvious”.

For the rest of us there is grey space between the black and white. The documentary “Wake Up Call (2008)” lives in that grey space.

The film is a compilation of clips from several non-mainstream sources, spliced together by commentary or reflective messages. The format works well. The topics covered are diverse with each segment being informative enough to give an introduction to the subject. Credits to the original material are provided to allow for follow-on research.

Have a watch. Laugh at the parts you find incredible, think about the parts that ring true in the light of recent global developments. Perhaps the speakers don’t draw all the right conclusions or are a little hysterical in places but can you really say the circumstances being described are not real? Can you say those circumstances are not with us today?

It may have been possible to brush this material off very easily a decade ago, but the world has changed and is starting to look at least similar to the picture being painted in this film. Coincidence?

“Wake Up Call” is not a New World Order for Dummies guide. It’s a vehicle to encourage you to take a look at the world from a different perspective to the one being forced on you each day by the mainstream media. Watching it won’t hurt you, you don’t have to switch off at the first clip that doesn’t appeal – just wind forward. There’s something in there for everyone.

Watch through to the end to be rewarded by a great sequence taken from the animal kingdom. The clip tells us clearly that even the meek, if they cooperate, can conquer the mightiest predator. It gives us a hope that eventually, we will find our way.

911 Facts and Fiction

I thought not, because speculation isn’t evidence and the ability to disprove one thing does not automatically prove an alternative. This is the fundamental mistake being made by the “truth” movement and this is why the official story of 911 remains in force today.

Now let me be clear, in all likelihood 911 actually was an inside job. There, I’ve said it. But that’s just my opinion based on what I’ve read or heard or watched. I can’t prove it. And if I can’t prove it then why should I expect anyone to believe my claim? If I claim my opinion is fact but don’t have the proof to demonstrate it, then isn’t it valid if I’m subsequently labelled a “conspiracy theorist?” That’s all I have, a theory about a conspiracy. You can either buy my theory or walk away from it.

If you accept my theory on faith and then pass it to another person who does the same, after a while you have a movement based on faith. It’s not based on facts, is it? Just a belief in the opinion of the person who originally devised the theory. So we now have a conspiracy theory movement. But still we are no closer to the truth of things.

Now imagine people come along and legitimately challenge this movement and instead of admitting we have no facts and our theory is really just speculation, we decide to become entrenched in our belief and build a stack of opinion on top of our theory, or worse misapply facts taken out of context or even create phoney or fanciful disinformation to support our argument. Imagine we engage a number of experts in fields related to our theory and hold their qualifications out as a substitute for our lack of facts.

This is simply not an acceptable way in which to proceed. We start with a shaky premiss, draw an unsustainable conclusion and then compound this error by throwing whatever other fuel we can onto the argument even if it is unrelated or taken out of context. This is a fraud and this is primarily what the “truth” movement is engaged in today.

How can I be so sure of this? It’s simple really. Most of the key information that would allow us to discover what really occurred on 911, beyond that which we witnessed directly, has either not been released to the public or is simply unavailable. Do we know, for a fact, that demolition charges were set in the twin towers? Where are the witnesses to prove this? If we don’t have those witnesses or some other conclusive proof then the demolition theory remains just that, a theory. A theory of a conspiracy. A conspiracy theory.

If we persist in formulating conspiracy theories and presenting them to the public then the establishment will continue to gleefully seize on this strategic blunder and use it to effectively neutralise the facts of 911 that they find inconvenient and would prefer not to discuss. Give the establishment talk of laser beams from space and mini-nuclear devices and they’ll take that all the way for a touchdown.

The issue of 911 has become incredibly complicated. I’m not sure how many theories or variations on themes are in circulation now. It must be sweet music to the government’s ears. Because even if one of these theories is correct not all of them can be true. Now that’s a fact. So how do so many theories spring up? And why? What could the motive be for creating a theory which is not supported by facts and then pushing it out to the public as the truth?

Money, would be one motive. It can’t be disputed that several well known “truthers” continue to do rather well financially from 911. Books, speeches, videos, T-shirts, you name it. A few newcomers to the conspiracy scene have made a name for themselves and are now ingrained in the history of 911.

There are others who appear to have a more genuine motive and seemingly would like to discover the truth, even if it doesn’t fit with pre-conceived notions of good guys and evil baddies. You uncover truth when it is hidden by applying reason and logic and by focusing on facts rather than making wild speculation. And by doing your homework, putting in the legwork, verifying the sources, cross referencing the data. Boring and time consuming and less prone to produce immediate headlines but this is the minimum requirement.

Once you have disqualified the profiteers and weeded out those who are well intentioned but work in the realms of theory rather than fact, what do you have left? Not much really, but a few constructive venues for debate remain open. Find them for yourself if you are genuinely interested in getting involved in an extremely complex and diverse investigation.

Here’s a fact for you. If you look at all the criticisms of the truth movement I make above, the same criticisms can be applied to the establishment. Aren’t they pushing their very own conspiracy theory? Have you seen any compelling evidence to suggest their theory is less speculative than any other? Have you been convinced by their theory based on the power of officialdom’s say-so rather than the hard facts?

Osama bin Laden did it! Oh really, based on what facts? A dubiously translated video? The fires caused the collapse of the towers! Is that right? Based on what, an extremely questionable report by NIST? Are you absolutely sure the establishment has presented a solid case for their version of the truth? If so, it should be a simple enough task for you to find that case, somewhere, presented clearly and in its entirety. Go and have a look and good luck.

You might think one of the greatest crimes in history would have been thoroughly investigated and the findings could explain beyond reasonable doubt what happened on 911. But almost the reverse has occurred.

The official investigation is now mired in controversy, subject to criticism not just by the truth movement but by members of its own panel.

NIST’s various reports don’t stand up to even the most basic scrutiny and have been subject to reluctant revision following exposure of flaws in their scientific analysis – flaws so basic that even a high school teacher can highlight the problems (see the video below).

Government has been notable more for its obstruction of the investigative procedure and has spent far more of its time and resources rolling out legislation that curtails the very liberties it supposedly seeks to preserve in the face of terrorism.

Financial anomalies such as strong indicators of insider knowledge of the attacks have been brushed under the media rug.

The official conspiracy theory has as many holes as any speculative masterpiece set out by the truth movement. If you don’t believe me, go and verify this fact for yourself.

So how we will finally discover the real details of 911? Not by crafting grand theories that can never be supported by the facts, but by challenging the alleged facts set out by the establishment and examining the conspiracy theory it is attempting to sell. If this theory can be proven to be faulty we revert to a position of not knowing what happened on 911. And at that point it becomes justifiable to demand a better, more thorough and more open inquiry. But attempting to demand this based on ill-supported theory understandably gets us nowhere.

For as long as we meet one flawed theory with an avalanche of competing speculation we’ll continue to run around in circles, the perpetrators will continue to walk free, the commercially motivated “truthers” will continue to rake in the dollars and the truth will remain beyond our grasp.

The facts of this matter tell a story and they will lead us to a conspiracy that is not based in theory but demonstrable by proof. Certainly there are people who would prefer we don’t go down this route and they’ll throw every possible roadblock in our path. So we need to decide, why are we seeking the truth? For revenge? To be famous? To ensure that justice is done and the events of 911 can never occur again?

And if we can get that motive straight and then chase the facts for all we are worth, the truth may come of it.

In Britain today, provided we measure up to the establishment’s idea of what constitutes an obedient citizen and agree that our privacy is state property, we are granted civil liberties.

New Labour, first under the war criminal Tony Blair and more recently under the banksters’ puppet Gordon Brown, has worked diligently since 1997 to overturn the basic freedoms we have enjoyed for centuries.

Our complacency and the cynical exploitation of events on September 11th, 2001 and July 7th, 2005 have encouraged authoritarians and their bureaucrats to introduce thousands of new laws, sweeping police powers and unprecedented government interference in our daily lives. These laws are allegedly designed to deter terrorism but are increasingly deployed against law abiding citizens who have attempted to exercise their right to protest.

The police state that is the inevitable product of this avalanche of draconian legislation is now openly on display. The Big Brother nightmare that Orwell warned against in 1948 might have taken two decades longer to materialise than he predicted but it has undeniably arrived.

From grandmothers falling prey to police (who have long abandoned their duty to protect the community) through to millions of CCTV cameras that spy on our every movement, to courts that can imprison without charge or trial, New Labour has constructed a society where protest has been transformed into serious organised crime, the concept of privacy has been converted into an act of concealment and innocence is rejected as a legal defence.

The sobering documentary, “Taking Liberties”, examines the impact of Blair’s regime on our country and reminds us it has always been the citizen that has fought for and won civil rights. And it is always the citizen that must stand up and protest when government comes to take those rights away.

There must be moments when every person of genuine conscience despairs as they stand up to protect the rights of their fellow citizens. Why must they stand alone? Why does the majority sit on its hands, often hurling abuse at those who make personal sacrifices to properly defend society? Please watch the following documentary and if you are a person that has long remained silent as our liberty drains away, have a thought for whose interests are best served by your inaction. Yours? Do you think?

In a free fraud zone you can steal anything you like. Channel4′s Dispatches investigates Iraq’s missing billions.

I’m off on my hols right now so I’ve scheduled for each day a video I’ve found interesting. Hope you do too.

The Power of Nightmares. How the politicians reinvented themselves by preying on your darkest fears.

I’m off on my hols right now so I’ve scheduled for each day a video I’ve found interesting. Hope you do too.