Joe Turner: Do we have plans to invade the Middle East?

Ed Higgins: Are you crazy?

Joe Turner: Am l?

Ed Higgins: Look, Turner ...

Joe Turner: Do we have plans?

Ed Higgins: No, absolutely not.  We have games, that’s all.  We play games ... what if?  How many men?  What would it take?  Is there a cheaper way to destabilize a regime?  That’s what we’re paid to do.

Joe Turner: Walk on ... go on.  So Atwood just took the games too seriously.  He was really going to do it, wasn’t he? 

Ed Higgins: A renegade operation.  Atwood knew 54/12 would never authorize it, not with the heat on the company.

Joe Turner: What if there hadn’t been any heat?  Suppose I hadn’t stumbled on their plan?  Say nobody had.

Ed Higgins: Different ballgame.  Fact is, there was nothing wrong with the plan.  No, the plan was all right.  The plan would’ve worked.

Joe Turner: Boy, what is it with you people?  You think not getting caught in a lie is the same thing as telling the truth?

Ed Higgins: No.  It’s simple economics.  Today it’s oil, right?  In 10 or 25 years food ... plutonium.  And maybe even sooner.  What do you think the people are going to want us to do then?

Joe Turner: Ask them

Ed Higgins: Now now. Then.  Ask them when they’re running out.  Ask them when there’s no heat and they’re cold.  Ask them when their engines stop.  Ask them when people who have never known hunger start going hungry.  Want to know something?  They won’t want us to ask them.  They’ll want us to get it for them.

Joe Turner: Boy, have you found a home.

This exchange between a renegade CIA employee, Joe Turner, and a senior agent named Ed Higgins is the denouement of the 1975 film, Three Days of the Condor.  Robert Redford played Turner - essentially an academic whose function was to analyse the content of novels in search of ideas and material of interest to his masters.  Cliff Robertson played Higgins, someone Turner is forced to trust until he learns that he can trust no one.

The film-script was based on James Grady’s 1974 novel, Six Days of the Condor.

Plainly, the background to Grady’s book was the oil crisis of the preceding year.  The crisis was triggered by the 20 days of fighting of the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, which began on 6th October.  On the 16th, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), which had been in open dispute over prices with its main Western consumers, took action to cut production and end the era of cheap oil.  The following day, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries, with Egypt and Syria, announced a cessation of oil shipments to nations supporting Israel.

In point of fact, Western governments reacted to the crisis in a number of measured ways, the common purpose of which was to reduce dependence on OPEC.  There was never any outward sign of preparations for an American or Western invasion in support of Israel and secure oil.  The Israeli’s won in the air, on the battlefields and at sea, and achieved a stunning and complete but costly victory.  It was a victory for the industrial West, too.

The Arab appetite for war was over for the forseeable future.  The Camp David accords followed, at some considerable diplomatic distance.  To his personal cost, Anwar Sadat committed Egypt to peace with the Israelis.  On 6 October 1981, at Egypt’s annual parade marking the start of the war, Sadat was assassinated by Khalid Islambouli, a member of Egyptian Islamic Jihad (which, incidentally, merged with Al-Qaeda in 2001).

READ MORE...

UPDATE: A record shattering $4.2 million was raised online on the 5th of November, one year in advance of the results being known of the November 4, 2008 election fraud.  This money was raised—not by the Ron Paul organization—but by his grassroots supporters with the only support from the Ron Paul organization being Ron Paul’s acknowledgment of the thisnovember5th.com’s grassroots initiative in one speech.  In the movie referenced by “The 5th of November”, “V for Vendetta”, the initial November 5th event is meant to invite the oppressed populous to rise up against the tyranny at the next November 5th.

Has anyone else written about the potential for reality mirroring the movie next November 5th when the electoral fraud of November 4, 2008 is put before the world?

Politicians are the most dreadful cowards.  Fear of the fascist left runs through them like Matron’s senna pods through the eponymous 19th Century schoolboy, and with roughly the same effect.  But there are times when a fear even greater than that seizes their tender hearts.  It has to do with their jobs, and with the electorate - in this present case, the electorate of a country that has passed judgement on over 60 governments since the end of World War Two.

Italy to deport 100 Romanians after robbery

Opposition to immigration in Italy was brought to a crescendo today after a woman died after being robbed and left in a ditch by a Romanian immigrant.

Giovanna Reggiani, 47, died last night after being attacked late on Tuesday night while walking home in the dark from a railway station in a Rome suburb.

Her assailant had beaten her face into an unrecognisable pulp with a stone before leaving her for dead, police said. She lapsed into a coma and last night her life support system was disconnected after no brain activity was registered on the hospital monitors.

Nicolae Mailat, 24, who came to Italy from Transylvania four months ago, was arrested in a set of makeshift shacks on the banks of the Tiber after police were alerted by a Romanian woman who saw him covered in blood.

Mr Mailat, a Roma gypsy, admitted robbing Ms Reggiani but denied raping her, police said.

... However, police said he had deep scratches along his arms from where Mrs Reggiani had tried to defend herself.

The horrific attack enraged Italians, who blame Romanian immigrants for a wave of crime since the country joined the European Union in January.

“We will never let this happen again,” said Romano Prodi, the Italian prime minister, as he called an emergency cabinet meeting.

“We will never let this happen again.”  An unguarded and pregnant statement.

The darkest of all politician’s fears, the one that rips out their wagging, anti-racist tongues, scorches their neo-liberal excuses and leaves them staring at moral extinction, is the fear that the great immigration scam has come home to roost.  It’s almost as if they know it must one day.  They live with the guilt.

As Prodi says, “We will never let this happen again.”  But he let it happen til now.

READ MORE...

Infectobesity is obesity caused by infectious disease. 

Obesity has skyrocketed in the last 20 years along with other mystery diseases such as autism.  (This cannot be attributed merely to age related obesity as the populations ages since it is known that boomers had vastly higher rates of obesity at the same stage of life than did the silent generation (those born in the 1930s).)

Infectobesity is yet another area where horizontal transmission within high population density ethnic groups may have evolved virulent pathogens to which those ethnic groups are more immune than the ethnic groups with which they compete for resources in the age of mass migration.

One of the more insidious aspects of obesity as virulent phenotype is that it can reduce cognitive function.  The mechanisms are varied.  To quote Deborah Gustafson, PhD, of Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Göteborg, Sweden and also the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee:

Obesity is related to ischemia, hypertension, and cerebrovascular and cardiovascular diseases. These conditions contribute to an unhealthy vascular system, and therefore, to a higher dementia risk.  Obesity may also increase the secretion of cortisol, which could lead to atrophy.

  Moreover, glucose metabolism directly affects cognitive function since it is the brain’s fuel, and there is evidence that some viruses known to cause obesity also cause insulin sensitivity, resulting in fat cells eating glucose that should be available for brain function.

Most insidious of all is that infectobesity, as with all stealth infections, can be horizontally transmitted by ambulatory vectors.

PS: This brings to mind yet another question to ask those tolerant of H-1b visas such as Ron Paul:

If it is discovered that advocates of the H-1b visa program managed to overcome the objections of the majority of the population to said program only to subject that population to vicious diseases such as autism, obesity and most vicious of all, cognitive decline, how do you propose to indemnify the population subjected, without their consent, to your experiment in human ecology?

“The white majority has rights, damn you.”

That’s my short response to all the activists in academia who are guiding the process of white annihilation, physical and moral.  We know the nature of these creatures, and their politics.  We know their terms: if we do not accept to self-annihilate as “supremacists”, as “the privileged”, as “oppressors” but, instead and simply as the people of the West, insist upon our free life, our nature, our rights, our interests, then, automatically, these “educators”, these human dross, label us “haters”.  They allow no resting place to us.  The venomous, reptilian energy of these people knows no stop, nor anything but the prosecution of its own special hatreds (pdf):-

Definitions and Descriptions of Racism

WHITE SUPREMACY: White supremacy is an historically based, institutionally perpetuated system of oppression of continents, nations and peoples of colour by white peoples and nations of the European continent; for the purpose of maintaining and defending a system of wealth, power and privilege.

WHITE (as in “white people”): The term white, referring to people, was created by Virginia slaveowners and colonial rulers in the 17th century.  It replaced terms like Christian and Englishman (sic) to distinguish European colonists from Africans and indigenous peoples.  European colonial powers established White as a legal concept after Bacon’s rebellion in 1676 during which indentured servants of European and African descent had united against the colonial elite.  The legal basis of white separated the servant class on the basis of skin color and continental origin.  The creation of “white” meant giving privileges to some, while denying them to others with the justification of biological and social inferiority.

WHITE PRIVILEGE: A privilege is a right, favour, advantage, immunity specially granted to one individual or group. and withheld from another

White privilege is an historically based, institutionally perpetuated system of: (1) preferential prejudice for or treatment for white people based solely on the colour of their skin color and/or ancestral origin from Europe; and (2) exemption from racial and/or national oppression based on skin colour and/or ancestral origin from Africa, Asia, the Americas and the Arab world.

And two pages on, to put the knife in:-

A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system.  The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.  By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination.

REVERSE RACISM: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give ‘preferential treatment’ to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as ‘reverse racism.’

A NON-RACIST: A non-term. The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called “blaming the victim”). Responsibility for perpetuating and legitimizing a racist system rests both on those who actively maintain it, and on those who refuse to challenge it. Silence is consent.

And on page 8, to close every escape route:-

READ MORE...

Tom Sunic has asked me to post his latest piece, which he describes as “very neutral”, and which appeared originally at David Duke’s site yesterday.

GW

Jews happen to enjoy a privileged place in the Western world, with their entire past portrayed as a story of suffering at the hands of their non-Jewish enemy. There are tons of well documented books on the psychology of Judaism, which also examine the genesis of the concept of anti-Semitism and its multiple verbal distortions in daily political discourse. The word “anti-Semitism,” unlike words “anticommunism,” or “antifascism,” does not reflect political beliefs or critical views of the Jews. This term is exclusively used as a lexical label to depict a person’s grave mental illness. As a perceived medical or judicial illness, anti-Semitism must never be debated; an anti-Semitic patient must not be a partner in scholarly duels; his sick views must not be the subject of academic inquiry and counter-inquiry. As an element of medical pathology, anti-Semitism must only by treated by doctors, preferably by Jewish psychoanalysts, or legally, by a prosecutor in court.

The word “anti-Semite” will likely be studied one day as a telling example of distorted political discourse, i.e. as a signifier for somebody who advocates the reign of demonology. “Many world-known Jewish authors, haunted by the either real or surreal specter of anti-Semitism, consider it a sickness, which enables them to avoid any form of introspection.” 1 How does one dare critically talk about the predominance of the Jews in America without running the risk of social opprobrium, or, as in Europe, of landing into jail? While it is a common place for the vast number of white Euro- Americans to crack jokes in private about Arabs, Mexicans, Africans, or for that matter deride their fellow Gentile citizens, without looking over their shoulder, a critical comment about the strong influence of Jews in America, even when that comment is founded on empirical facts, is viewed as a grave insult to Jews.2 If a serious European and American scholar or a politician ventures into this forbidden field, his gesture is interpreted as a sign of an agent provocateur, or worse, as a sign of somebody who decided to write his obituary. Such a schizophrenic climate of self-censorship in the West will sooner or later lead to dramatic consequences for both Jews and Gentiles. The lack of healthy dialogue can last for a century or so, but feigned conviviality between Euro-American Gentiles and Jews cannot last forever and remained based on distorted perceptions of the Other and how this Other should behave. Mendacity carries the germ of a civil war. The entire Western history, particularly since World War II, has abundantly proven that distorted self-perceptions, as well as the romanticized perception of the “Other,” if based on negative wishful thinking, lead to war and chaos. Eventually, both Jews and Euro-American Gentiles will be pitted into an ugly clash from which there will be no escape this time.

READ MORE...

It has come to my attention that Ziopedia’s editor has sent out a link to an article arguing that Ron Paul is a CIA asset who serves as controlled opposition.  Reading over the linked article there is only one substantive argument:

“He only voted no, when it had no effect on the passing of the bill. He even voted in favour of the critical hate bill…”

No bill number is given.

I found the only plausible bill to be HR 1592, for which the roll call was:

Yeas 237
Nays 180
Not Voting 16 (including Ron Paul)

Ron Paul did miss that vote, but it had no effect on the outcome whatsoever since the Yeas beat the Nays by an amount greater than the number Not Voting.

Moreover, it is rather strange to expect that Ron Paul, the “CIA Spook”, would deliberately avoid a vote of “No” when not only would his vote would have no impact on the outcome but when he came out with the following public statement about the bill:

Unconstitutional Legislation Threatens Freedoms

May 7, 2007

Last week, the House of Representatives acted with disdain for the Constitution and individual liberty by passing HR 1592, a bill creating new federal programs to combat so-called “hate crimes.” The legislation defines a hate crime as an act of violence committed against an individual because of the victim’s race, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Federal hate crime laws violate the Tenth Amendment’s limitations on federal power.  Hate crime laws may also violate the First Amendment guaranteed freedom of speech and religion by criminalizing speech federal bureaucrats define as “hateful.”...

Devon, that English county of idyllic villages, haunting sea-cliffs and wild, empty moorland, might not seem at first to be a cauldron of white racism (is there any other kind?).  But that’s all wrong.  We racist whites simply lack the insightful wisdom and beautiful souls of those good men and women of the Rural Racism Project, south-west.

Soon after the publication of the Inquiry report into the death of Stephen Lawrence, the Monitoring Group began to receive an almost daily torrent of calls from black and ethnic minority people living in rural areas. The experience of the callers was similar. They had been subject to racist abuse on a daily basis, sometimes for many years, and despite reporting their suffering they had received no support from anyone. It was almost as if the needs of the BME population in these rural had been abandoned.

...  The Rural Racism Project, based in Plymouth, aims to pioneer a range of specialist services to meet the needs of those living in predominately rural areas who are distressed or are suffering because they have been victims of racial violence, abuse, or harassment within their local community. The project will be used to provide and deliver a unique, innovative and radical region-wide programme of ‘racist incident victim support services’ for individuals, families and isolated community groups situated within the geographical counties of Cornwall, Devon, Dorset and Somerset, including those districts administered by single unitary authorities.

The Project is based in Plymouth and covers the areas of Cornwall, Devon, Somerset and Dorset.

And this ... is what ... they do:-

‘Racism’ protests over the high street hanging black mannequins

A chain of fashion stores has been accused of racism over a window display of black mannequins hanging from the ceiling.  Branches of All Saints are featuring headless dummies, with chains attached to the neck, dangling with their feet a few inches off the floor.

Police arrived at one branch, in Exeter, to investigate claims that the display was offensive and the Rural Racism Project says it has been “inundated” with complaints calling for it to be removed.

Spokesman John McKenzie said: “These disturbing displays are reminiscent of the Ku Klux Klan and the lynching of black people in America.  The chains used to hang the mannequins also bring to mind slavery and some of the complainants have commented on this.  The overall effect is extremely ominous.

“It is unacceptable and we have received many calls from both black and white people who find it offensive.  But the retailer’s attitude has been that the stores are all making a profit, therefore it cannot be offending too many people.”

A spokesman for All Saints confirmed that the display was used at 28 of its 29 stores nationwide.

She added: “The models are not black – they are grey.

Well, quite.  Or as John Cleese once said, “This is an ex-parrot .”