Watch the video, my comments are below. (hat tip: bizbuzz)
Been reading about the North American Union for awhile, and the new currency the “Amero”, it’s been on television, on Lou Dobbs and elsewhere. And, as the dollar slides into oblivion, it seems more and more plausible, and the appearance of a dastardly plan seems more and more obvious at first glance. But, there are other things to consider. If it uses fear to motivate, then beware.
First of all, I have strong opinions on unified conspiracy theories, which the video proffers. It assumes that there is a group of rich people sitting in a room, who are connected in some way, who share holiday meals together or go to the same church or to the same club, who are all colluding towards a “one world government” and doing all these things behind the scenes to end our lives of liberty, control us all and keep us happy with reruns of American Idol and truck loads of Twinkies. And, it doesn’t work like that. It’s more about social movements and media than about conspiring in groups.
Endeavors such as the NAU function like a movement, a mob of like minded people who are working towards common goals, in this case the creation of a unified finacial system. (Whether you agree with the concept of a unified world financial system or not is up for debate.) It works more like how people decide all at once to start using the internet, or go to YouTube. One person to one person and on and on. Like a mob. That’s how the one world government thing is working. Like a focused flash mob. Because that is how media and the transference of ideas works, and the NAU is an idea, while it isn’t being promoted via the mass media, is still a form of media, an idea, that is conveyed from person to person, and has a genesis that goes back to World War 1. It is primarily a financial movement, not a political one. The two are intertwined by their incestuous relationship, there is no doubt. Which is a very important distinction. The banking movement has always been more of a mob than a group of white guys sitting in a room smoking Cubans and having sex with underage homeless teens while carving up the roles of the workers and deciding how to spend the workers pensions.
Look at how the EU went down over the course of three decades. It was a movement, but it was primarily financial. It was all about establishing the Euro in member countries.. And, where was all the totalitarianism that the unified conspiracy theorists predicted would occur when the EU was instituted? Where is it? Did the constitutions of nations fall because of it? Did the people of Europe lose their liberties because of the establishment of the EU? No. They didn’t.
The NAU, like the EU, is essentially solidifying financial arrangements that already exist anyway. It’s making them official and sanctioned by a government, in this case one it creates itself, which gives it the ability to establish legal sovereignty and thus protection under certain international laws.
But, the ratification of new constitutions which would override established constitutions and thereby scuttle the rights of the people is not something easily done. Look at what happened with the attempted ratification of the EU constitution. It failed because so many nations felt it infringed (either too liberal or too conservatively) upon their national sovereignty and constitutional independence and the rights of the people. Another mob arose to confront the first mob. And, they did battle. It’s a form of democracy, open source, and sometimes unruly.
The video above dives into the paranoid fantasy that there is a group of privileged people in a dark smoky room that has decided to scuttle the US constitution and bill of rights (which is being hammered at by the Bush Administration anyway) and it’s a done deal. And, the reality is: like what occurred in the EU, the scuttling of the US Constitution is an event that would require more than the establishment of the NAU and a new currency. It’s tacit fear mongering in the video. It’s propaganda meant to use fear as it’s primary tool of conversion of thought. It’s a media virus meant to scare.
Fear is a powerful force used to propel emotional reactions in favor of intellectual ideas. Fear alters the media landscape in ways that aren’t apparent to those who watch media without a critical eye. Fear fosters an emotional response first and foremost and that means that any real consideration of the issues involved – from the presentation of the propaganda (what’s it’s primary motivation? are the facts correct? is it presented in a logical manner or a fallacious manner?) to the discussion and debate of the ideas within- is left forgotten in the dust of the initial emotional reaction. That’s the primary function of propaganda. To disrupt the thoughtful consideration and discussion of ideas and media and replace it with an emotional response that squelches discussion and consideration.
From this view point, the primary movement that is afoot in the world today is a corporate financed right wing Christian based extremist movement that wants to establish an American Empire.
The primary mistake in the video that I see is that it attempts to connect this movement to the One World Government one, as if they are one and the same, and that is incorrect. They are two movements that are vehemently opposed to each other on a number of fronts but work together out of necessity.
The video assumes that when David Rockefeller (who is a member of the banking establishment) tells Aaron Russo about an “event” that will occur (9/11) that Rockefeller knew this because of his involvement in the banking “one world government” movement. And, that assumption is erroneous. It’s incorrect. Like many people, Rockefeller was aware of the extremist movement that had been ballooning under the surface – of right wing corporate based pro-war, pro-American Empire movement. Hardcore extremist believers in the privatization of the military forces of the USA and it’s allies, who wished to solidify their power and economic reach by the creation of a situation that is irreversible, one that creates the inevitable need for the US and it’s corporate military personal to be in the Middle East for the foreseeable future. A permanent private corporate military presence in the Middle East to replace the lost US military bases which were abandoned in Saudi Arabia due to internal pressures within that totalitarian regime. (Not to mention the fact that the Saudi Arabian oil reserves are nearing the end of their long term usefulness.)
Does the banking and one world government stand to gain from the establishment of a permanent US presence in the Middle East? Of course. Money creates strange bedfellows to be sure.
Think for a moment what type of reaction would occur in the USA – on the left and the right – if the NAU were established and it was even perceived – whether it was true or not- that the establishment of the NAU would scuttle and US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Can you imagine the popular uproar?
The assumption that this information is being kept under raps in order to foment a totalitarian regime is a bit over the top. Like most things of this nature, the press is asked to not react and not assist information until it is more documented and understood. The same thing was done in the establishment of the EU.
Informed citizens around the world understood in the early 80’s that the EU was going to be established. It wasn’t an issue that was widely understood or seen in the media worldwide until the early 90’s. Was there a conspiracy there to take away the rights of Europeans and control their lives? Doesn’t appear to be does it?
It’s easy to see conspiracy in emotional contexts based in fear. What we don’t know can hurt us. At least in our minds.
The real issue here is how much control do we want banks to have in our world? Is the creation of economic unions in our best interests?
And, as far as liberties are concerned: As long as we remain vigilant and fight for what we believe in, and stay informed and aware, our rights should remain secure.
Any and all affronts to our rights will be met and challenged. That much is clear.
This is what is affectionately called “getting rhetorically thrown under the bus”:
News of the immunity deal caught State Department officials in Washington off guard.
“If anyone gave such immunity it was done so without consulting senior leadership at State,” a senior State Department official initially told ABC News.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack would not comment directly on the immunity given to the security guards, but said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is determined to hold anybody guilty of wrongdoing accountable.
“Secretary Rice’s attitude is that if there are individuals who broke rules, laws or regulations they must be held to account,” McCormack told reporters. “Every action that she has taken during the course of the aftermath of this incident has been consistent with that approach.”
Given that the Bush Administration’s practice of “holding people accountable” for laws broken thus far consists of blaming the messenger and giving lip service to the problem whilst cutting off the lawbreaker from free refills of Diet Pepsi at the CPAC BBQ, it isn’t totally untrue. It’s all about nuance.
Even a good fiction writer couldn’t come up with stuff this good:
“We’re near the end of the year, and there really isn’t much to show for it,” Bush told reporters following a meeting with House GOP leaders.
“The House of Representatives has wasted valuable time on a constant stream of investigations, and the Senate has wasted valuable time on an endless series of failed votes to pull our troops out of Iraq,” the president said.
Dick Armey, the House Republican majority leader when Bush took office (and no more a shrinking violet than DeLay), told me a story that captures the exquisite pettiness of most members of Congress and the arrogance that made Bush and Rove so inept at handling them. “For all the years he was president,” Armey told me, “Bill Clinton and I had a little thing we’d do where every time I went to the White House, I would take the little name tag they give you and pass it to the president, who, without saying a word, would sign and date it. Bill Clinton and I didn’t like each other. He said I was his least-favorite member of Congress. But he knew that when I left his office, the first schoolkid I came across would be given that card, and some kid who had come to Washington with his mama would go home with the president’s autograph. I think Clinton thought it was a nice thing to do for some kid, and he was happy to do it.” Armey said that when he went to his first meeting in the White House with President Bush, he explained the tradition with Clinton and asked the president if he would care to continue it. “Bush refused to sign the card. Rove, who was sitting across the table, said, ‘It would probably wind up on eBay,’” Armey continued. “Do I give a damn? No. But can you imagine refusing a simple request like that with an insult? It’s stupid. From the point of view of your own self-interest, it’s stupid. I was from Texas, and I was the majority leader. If my expectations of civility and collegiality were disappointed, what do you think it was like for the rest of the congressmen they dealt with? The Bush White House was tone-deaf to the normal courtesies of the office.” [...]
When Bush revived immigration reform this past spring and let it be known that Rove would not take part in the negotiations, the president seemed to have belatedly grasped a basic truth about congressional relations that Armey summed up for me like this: “You can’t call her ugly all year and expect her to go to the prom with you.”
So, am going to be posting some oldies but goodies from the Jakeneck days. Things that are still important after a few years. Here’s one about an American citizen who suffered from mental illness who was gunned down by Marshall’s for creating a scene on an airplane. It’s important to remember the level of fear that was fostered and supported by many American’s in the months after 9/11. I was particularly shocked by the reactions of many of my fellow Neckers who actually supported the deadly force used on this man. Fucking amazing. Of course, if it was them or a family member, I’m sure they would be singing a different tune.
The archival post:
I feel so safe
This is what we have become… wintess the pathological dehumanizing of another human being…
When “agitated passenger” Rigoberto Alpizar was shot for wearing a backpack and attempting to disembark a plane, while also reportedly saying “I have a bomb!” with his wife trailing behind him yelling “he’s not well, he’s got a disorder!” a good number of blogsphere pundits from the right side of the aisle immediately thought it was proper for the Air Marshall’s to shoot the man. Dead.
For what it’s worth, jihadists seldom announce their intentions to detonate an explosive, so let’s not jump to conclusions.
Common sense actually. And, truth be told, Jeff’s statement is at the crux of this tragedy.
But, the right just loves their terror, even if it’s NOT REALLY terror, it just looks like terror, or at least, the kind of terror they lust for: We are safer when we kill anybody who COULD have been a terrorist. I feel safe when they kill people.
This is how they think. Fear in play.
The fraidy cat over at Stop the ACLU is honest about his fraidy catness:
Another mistake, but who can blame the Marshall for his response? I think he did exactly the right thing, and it makes me feel safer that we have such rapid responders. (emphasis added) I wonder if the lefties will try to make a bad guy out of this man?
To the latter: No. But, if it turns out that the man, who had a name, Rigoberto Alpizar, didn’t say “I have a bomb.” someone has some explain’ to do. To the former: Think about this for a minute. This peanut brain admits the killing is a mistake, yet says he feels safer. They are killing innocent people, but I feel safer because, well, they do it so well! And so fast! Thank you rapid responders! Have a cookie!
The meat mass with eyes over at Sister Toldjah cuts right to the point:
The person claiming to have had the bomb is indeed dead. The air marshal in this instance did the right thing. Let’s hope we don’t start seeing the usual suspects call for an ‘investigation’ into this to find out whether or not the air marshal erred when all the man was doing was his job.
Don’t wants no pesky facts gettin’ in my war on terror soup! Kill them bastids. Even the innocent crazy bastids who we thought were terrorists but are just crazy bastids! Them ‘usual suspects better not put no information in my soup.
John Hawkins of Right Wing News was particularly cold and predictably boneheaded:
Assuming everything in this initial report is accurate, it sounds like a tragic, but righteous shooting by the air marshal.
Ah yes, a morally improper use of the word “righteious“, followed by the all important “caveat” soon followed by dipshit analysis:
In fact, since we’re talking about a man with a backpack, claiming to have a bomb, on a plane full of passengers, the Air Marshals would have been completely justified in killing him before he even had time to get off the plane. But, perhaps they figured he was moving away from the plane and it was better to get him away from the passengers, rather than risk an accidental detonation near those civilians.
No, it doesn’t work that way. As it went down, “figuring” it is better to let a bomb toting terrorist move away from a plane doesn’t even enter the equation.
Rigoberto Alpizar was running down the aisle and running out of the plane. The Marshall’s were pretty much thinking “Holy shit!” and everything after that is a fog with a loaded gun pointing the way. But, John’s 20/20 hindsight analysis is fun to poke a stick at anyway. Let’s continue with the carnival of the dipshit:
As far as his wife saying he was bipolar goes, you simply can’t take her word for it. For all the air marshals knew, she could be Chechen Black Widow trying to trick the marshals into getting closer to him or trying to distract them while he got the bomb ready.
Well, you know, some of us of a more cynical bent would like to think that this is true, but alas, a man is dead, and what do you know! NO BOMB. So, theory number 2 is just a pile of lint in the corner. But, again, it’s fun to watch such bad ideas grow whiskers.
It’s a terrible thing for an innocent man to be gunned down like that in front of his wife, but unfortunately, mentally ill or not, he brought it on himself. You run around an airplane claiming to have a bomb in front of armed air marshals, you’re just asking to get killed as surely as if you jumped in front of an oncoming train.
The possible mentally ill guy brought it on himself? Hmmm. Interesting. So, if it turns out that the guy was bipolar and his meds were a bit outdated or he just didn’t digest it well that day that he brought it on himself.
See, what John is saying here is: This is the best we can do. Too bad. He wasn’t a terrorist, but he COULD have been a terrorist, so it was better to kill the innocent to protect the innocent. Just in case. You never know. And, to top it off, he’s blaming the victim!
What a crock. But, wait, it gets better!
My sincere condolences go out to the Alpizar family, but it sounds like the air marshal who killed him did the right thing.
Great. I’m really sorry they killed your husband/brother, but you just can’t be crazy like that an not expect to get shot fives times.
What a nice guy!
The sheer lack of respect for a once living person, Rigoberto Alpizar, the lack of waiting to comment on the story until more information was available, is just so fucking typical.
What a pasty assed coward. Hawkins is essentially condoning the killing of possibly innocent people in the pursuit of phantom security. It’s all part of their nonsense: “If we shoot people who MIGHT be terrorists, we are safer.”
And, of course, those of us who actually wait for such stories to unfold because we know that media manipulation always works from the front back… Knew that there was definitely more to this story. And, of course, there comes this today:
At least one passenger aboard American Airlines Flight 924 maintains the federal air marshals were a little too quick on the draw when they shot and killed Rigoberto Alpizar as he frantically attempted to run off the airplane shortly before take-off.
“I don’t think they needed to use deadly force with the guy,” says John McAlhany, a 44-year-old construction worker from Sebastian, Fla. “He was getting off the plane.” McAlhany also maintains that Alpizar never mentioned having a bomb.
“I never heard the word ‘bomb’ on the plane,” McAlhany told TIME in a telephone interview. “I never heard the word bomb until the FBI asked me did you hear the word bomb. That is ridiculous.” Even the authorities didn’t come out and say bomb, McAlhany says. “They asked, ‘Did you hear anything about the b-word?’” he says. “That’s what they called it.”
When the incident began McAlhany was in seat 24C, in the middle of the plane. “[Alpizar] was in the back,” McAlhany says, “a few seats from the back bathroom. He sat down.” Then, McAlhany says, “I heard an argument with his wife. He was saying ‘I have to get off the plane.’ She said, ‘Calm down.’”
Alpizar took off running down the aisle, with his wife close behind him. “She was running behind him saying, ‘He’s sick. He’s sick. He’s ill. He’s got a disorder,” McAlhany recalls. “I don’t know if she said bipolar disorder [as one witness has alleged]. She was trying to explain to the marshals that he was ill. He just wanted to get off the plane.”
So, there is a first hand account that Rigoberto Alpizar did not say he had a bomb. I expect there will be many more. And, the FBI questioning thing is a red flag. Call me crazy, but if Rigoberto Alpizar was yelling “I’ve got a bomb!”, and it’s understood, and the Feds all agree, the Feds don’t go around asking the witnesses “Did the guy say the ‘b-word’?” They say “tell me what he said.” or something like that. Obviously, there was some doubt as to whether the “b-word” was used at all.
Who knows. In that quck of an instant, backpack = bomb. Crazy man carrying backpack = bomb + terrorist. At least on a very primal level. But, we all deserve better.
Obviously, training is not sufficient, for the reaction was over the top for the situaion. And, um, I hate to point this out, but something went wrong, an innocent man is dead.
If gets even better:
McAlhany says he tried to see what was happening just in case he needed to take evasive action. “I wanted to make sure if anything was coming toward me and they were killing passengers I would have a chance to break somebody’s neck,” he says. “I was looking through the seats because I wanted to see what was coming.
“I was on the phone with my brother. Somebody came down the aisle and put a shotgun to the back of my head and said put your hands on the seat in front of you. I got my cell phone karate chopped out of my hand. Then I realized it was an official.”
These Air Marshall’s are working on Autopilot. No real analystical thinking is going on at all. It’s an obvious fuck up and an indictment of the security measures implimented by DHS, a point almost magically proven by the following PR style spin statement by DHS which left me speechless:
“This incident demonstrates the critical role that air marshals play in aviation security today,” said Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke.
If killing an innocent man is an example of the “critical role” of air marshall’s, we’re all doomed.
So, it’s obvious that the site has changed a bit. Am looking to make it more integrated with the work I’m doing and the people I’m working with, which will be become much more clear as the days move on. Patience and keep coming back. It’s gonna get interesting.
There will be a featured video and social integration with Facebook, Twitter et al.
Classic Laurie Anderson song, riffing on the William Burroughs quote. (And, the Terrence McKenna idea that mushrooms came from outer space and helped to foster language, religion and general growth in early humans.)
Language Is A Virus
ParadiseIs exactly likeWhere you are right nowOnly much muchBetter.
I saw this guy on the trainAnd he seemed to gave gotten stuckIn one of those abstract trances.And he was going: "Ugh...Ugh...Ugh..."
And Fred said:"I think he's in some kind of pain.I think it's a pain cry."And I said: "Pain cry?Then language is a virus."
Language! It's a virus!Language! It's a virus!
Well I was talking to a friendAnd I was saying:I wanted you.And I was looking for you.But I couldn't find you. I couldn't find you.And he said: Hey!Are you talking to me?Or are you just practicingFor one of those performances of yours?Huh?
Language! It's a virus!Language! It's a virus!
He said: I had to write that letter to your mother.And I had to tell the judge that it was you.And I had to sell the car and go to Florida.Because that's just my way of saying (It's a charm.)That I love you. And I (It's a job.)Had to call you at the crack of dawn (Why?)And list the times that I've been wrong.Cause that's just my way of sayingThat I'm sorry. (It's a job.)
Language! It's a virus!Language! It's a virus!
ParadiseIs exactly likeWhere you are right nowOnly much much (It's a shipwreck,)Better. (It's a job.)
You know? I don't believe there's sucha thing as TV. I mean -They just keep showing youThe same pictures over and over.And when they talk they just make soundsThat more or less synch upWith their lips.That's what I think!
Language! It's a virus!Language! It's a virus!Language! It's a virus!
Well I dreamed there was an islandThat rose up from the sea.And everybody on the islandWas somebody from TV.And there was a beautiful viewBut nobody could see.Cause everybody on the islandWas saying: Look at me! Look at me! Look at me! Look at me!
Because they all lived on an islandThat rose up from the sea.And everybody on the islandWas somebody from TV.And there was a beautiful viewBut nobody could see.Cause everybody on the islandWas saying: Look at me! Look at me! Look at me! Look at me! Look at me! Why?
Paradise is exactly likeWhere you are right nowOnly much much better.
Which leads one to wonder: Does she have a book to sell? Why. Yes. She. Does. How convenient! (Go to Amazon and look it up, I’m not linking to her hate filled nonsense here.)
Since when did it become standard issue to spout racist rhetoric to sell a book? Just wonderin’.
been listening to Travis for a number of years. One of my favs. Turn.
I want to see what people saw I want to feel like I felt before I want to see the kingdom come I want to feel forever young I want to sing To sing my song I want to live in a world where I belong I want to live I will survive
And I believe that it won’t be very long If we turn, turn, turn, turn, turn Then we might learn So where’s the stars? Up in the sky And what’s the moon? A big balloon We’ll never know unless we grow There’s so much world outside the door I want to sing To sing my song I want to live in a world where I’ll be strong I want to live I will survive And I believe that it won’t be very long If we turn, turn, turn, turn And if we turn, turn, turn, turn Then we might learn Turn, turn, turn, turn Turn, turn, turn And if we turn, turn, turn, turn Then we might learn Learn to turn
And, no one seemed to notice that acclaimed Iraqi blogger Riverbend of Baghdad Burning announced that she and her family were leaving Iraq for reasons she is best suited to explain.
After all that has gone down stateside in the past month – the surge is working, the surge isn’t working – the reality of what is going on “over there” says it all.
And, does anyone remember Afghanistan? It’s up against the wall..
Yet, there are those who want the US to attack Iran. (Well, what it comes down to is they are not going to be the ones in danger now are they? No. They. Are. Not.)
From Oxford American, an interesting article on the making of Dylan’s seminal Blonde on Blonde album in 1966. And, here’s a clip from No Direction Home of Dylan singing “Visions of Johanna”. Simply amazing.
Where am I?
You are currently viewing the archives for October, 2007 at buzz twang.
