[Update: 24hrs later, submitted comment has not been published. Any unjustified censorship (i.e. of anything non-libellous, etc.) is un- & anti-free-speech, un- & anti-democratic, un- & anti-we the people, un- & anti-humanitarian. The AusBC is all those & worse; they take our tax-$s under totally false pretences = the AusBC perpetrators of such offences are criminal frauds. Worse again, the AusBC is here acting to prevent the truth being said about I/J/Z-plex criminals, making the AusBC themselves accessories to vicious crimes.]
In response to:
APM:
02 Jan 2014 12:12:25pm
I don't fall for the trick of differentiating between the Israeli government and Jews. Presumably these policies are based on the democratic wishes of most Jews. Therefore BDS is really racism thinly disguised.
The following was submitted:
{Note on Z-democracy - since they harp on it, the entire I/J/Z-plex stands charged as responsible for Z-criminality; IF they were truly democratic (AND had the humanitarian impulse) THEN some J-majority could stop the crimes. None does; hence all members of the I/J/Z-plex are either perpetrators (their heirs, successors, descendents&ilk), accessories, apologists or even just 'idle' bystanders benefiting from the Z-crimes[§] = *all* are more or less guilty. The only ones who can escape guilt are any *active* dissidents.
[§]Premeditated ethnic-cleansing of an entire 'Mandate Territory' (a trust designed to protect natives' inalienable rights; totally violated) using genocidal methods. Proof:
1.Herzl, expropriation
2.Balfour, no consult
3.Jabotinsky, colonise by force
4.Ben-Gurion: "we are the attackers and the Arabs ... own the land"
5.UNGA181: "an area ... shall be evacuated"
6.Meir, $US50mio for guns & bombs for Plan Dalet&Co
7.When immigrants (=aliens) attack natives, it's not civil war but Nuremberg-class crime
8.Z-terrorism, down to today; highest-tech vs besieged natives
9.US-support & vetoes, also down to today
0.Z-hasbarah = 'loose with the truth' = designed to deceive
This quick summary is a) fully substantiable = true and b) should be known to all - IF not THEN blame the 'news-gatekeepers' = MSM+PFBCs.}
Post-submit comment: APM writes "I don't fall for the trick" and then "BDS is really racism" - which are both hasbarah-style deceptions. In plain text; Israel is an un-remedied crime-scene, *anyone* who favours such wicked crimes make themselves criminal via the accessory-mechanism. BTW, the people who call themselves Jews are, to the best of my research, hardly a race. Calling for BDS, performing BDS, are actions directed against vicious crimes – crimes the so-called 'international community' (mostly rogue-regimes & their quisling patsies) tolerates. Not most people in general, and not me in particular.
PS Here is a 32-word minimal situation descriptor:
Herzl zionist Balfour declaration Jabotinsky Iron Wall colonise force perpetual war Ben-Gurion we are attackers [they] own land ethnic cleansing improper dispossession illegal squatting Nuremberg-class crime; Zs say SORRY! revest recompense reparations
My suggested solution is similar to UNGA194:
11. Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible;
Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;
Me: The world owes justice to the hapless Palestinians; time to restore it in full.
2013-09-14
antiwar censor-robot active - grrr!
Some keywords (hence the XXXs below) trigger the shunting of comment-input onto the 'moderation' queue; IF we knew THEN we could possibly avoid this annoyance. Of course, it's their right...
Update, 14Sep 08:51: Unfortunately, I overlooked "the Jews decided" in a Clarence quote, which triggered the antiwar censor-bot. But then some IMHO (un)democratic criminal person killed = deleted my input. You may read it for yourself and decide:
Input (to antiwar Raimondo We Beat the War Party - For now ... (re Clarence - aletheia exchange)):
The prime-crime (land/property theft by mass-murdering violence = ethnic cleansing by genocidal methods) is visible to all who look, as illustrated in the #-points above, along with means, motive, and opportunity etc.. Anyone is welcome to challenge anything with this advice: aletheia is dedicated to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and that truth to be exposed. I do my best.
Reviewing critical points:
From a book written in 1895-6, “The XXX-ish question persists wherever XXXs live in appreciable numbers. Wherever it does not exist, it is brought in together with XXX-ish immigrants.”
Observation: Wherever they go, they *cause* an hostile reaction. It's only natural, that they might seek relief. On the principal of 'prevention is preferred to cure,' one might expect relief to be sought somewhere *without* neighbours to vex, but no such cleverness. By 1905, the 'final destination' was chosen, but note: *Not* a 'land without people.' The vexing followed as night follows day (the natives were not only restless, but driven to rioting), the XXXs sought assistance by lobbying the British (lobbying = coercing, threatening, bribing etc., see Mafia-methods); result = the Balfour sell-out, 1917. That was obviously insufficient for Jabotinsky, ~1923: “only active retaliation would deter ... only ... armed force would ensure ...” = perpetual war (Sounds like Obama/Kerry; plus ça change). This was admitted and consolidated by Ben-Gurion(1936-39): “We ... are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending ... [they] own the land ...” Then add Plan Dalet/massacres (continuing sporadically to this day), and the rest is history.
Now, to JJJihad's «steal all "Judea and Samaria"» etc., which Clarence 1st *rewrote* as «It defies reason to claim "the Jews decided" everything. It flies in the face of the facts» and to prove that was no accident, Clarence then *reiterated* it as «i.e. that a small, scattered ethnic minority should be blamed for deciding the course of world events». Clarence demonstrates an active, if erring, imagination (and possibly megalomaniacal tendencies).
Given that neither of Clarence's rewrites were what JJJihad wrote, consider "straw man," "red herring" and "non sequitur" etc.. Clarence deploys fallacies along with bad words and attacks the messenger = "ad homiminem," another fallacy. This is not a surprise. Of course criminals lie, to do otherwise would be to self-convict. Note that along with lying, criminals are generally considered outcasts, and IMHO differ from normal, law abiding citizens so much, as to be considered ill (i.e. psychopaths). As the prime-crime is blindingly obvious (after circumventing the lie-cloud attempted disguise), so apologists must also lie, dissemble, obfuscate and generally attempt to deceive. Say "Hello," Clarence.
Briefly, to Clarence's own 'reason-defying' claim, consider that the ME countries on the WC7in5 list are all considered to be Z-enemies AND the US is working through that list, PLUS the US considers itself 'Lord of all creation,' THEN accusing Zs of "deciding the course of world events" is not at all far-fetched, even quite possible. The alternate thesis, that the US and Zs are only *coincidentally* on the same destructive, murdering for spoil (one soil, the other oil) path is disproven by the USS Liberty incident - where Zs mass-murdered US citizens with impunity, in the outrageous attempt to sink a US warship. The USS Liberty incident shows which is the tail and which the dog (recall Mafia-methods = coercing, threatening, bribing etc., add killing). But nevertheless, *the* substantial issue here is not who may run the world (or what a bad job they're doing), but the un-remedied Z-crime-scene; an entity illegally squatting on improperly alienated land has *no* legitimacy (and never did), and nothing the Zs do and/or their apologists say has any legitimacy either. Oh, and not so BTW, nobody may claim the right to defend stolen land/property; another deception bites the dust.
=====
0
aletheia · less than 1 minute ago
Your comment must be approved by the site admins before it will appear publicly.
grrr! 10:59.
Update: 1hr later; comment-count up by one, but comment still not there...
Update, 14Sep 08:51: Unfortunately, I overlooked "the Jews decided" in a Clarence quote, which triggered the antiwar censor-bot. But then some IMHO (un)democratic criminal person killed = deleted my input. You may read it for yourself and decide:
Input (to antiwar Raimondo We Beat the War Party - For now ... (re Clarence - aletheia exchange)):
The prime-crime (land/property theft by mass-murdering violence = ethnic cleansing by genocidal methods) is visible to all who look, as illustrated in the #-points above, along with means, motive, and opportunity etc.. Anyone is welcome to challenge anything with this advice: aletheia is dedicated to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and that truth to be exposed. I do my best.
Reviewing critical points:
From a book written in 1895-6, “The XXX-ish question persists wherever XXXs live in appreciable numbers. Wherever it does not exist, it is brought in together with XXX-ish immigrants.”
Observation: Wherever they go, they *cause* an hostile reaction. It's only natural, that they might seek relief. On the principal of 'prevention is preferred to cure,' one might expect relief to be sought somewhere *without* neighbours to vex, but no such cleverness. By 1905, the 'final destination' was chosen, but note: *Not* a 'land without people.' The vexing followed as night follows day (the natives were not only restless, but driven to rioting), the XXXs sought assistance by lobbying the British (lobbying = coercing, threatening, bribing etc., see Mafia-methods); result = the Balfour sell-out, 1917. That was obviously insufficient for Jabotinsky, ~1923: “only active retaliation would deter ... only ... armed force would ensure ...” = perpetual war (Sounds like Obama/Kerry; plus ça change). This was admitted and consolidated by Ben-Gurion(1936-39): “We ... are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending ... [they] own the land ...” Then add Plan Dalet/massacres (continuing sporadically to this day), and the rest is history.
Now, to JJJihad's «steal all "Judea and Samaria"» etc., which Clarence 1st *rewrote* as «It defies reason to claim "the Jews decided" everything. It flies in the face of the facts» and to prove that was no accident, Clarence then *reiterated* it as «i.e. that a small, scattered ethnic minority should be blamed for deciding the course of world events». Clarence demonstrates an active, if erring, imagination (and possibly megalomaniacal tendencies).
Given that neither of Clarence's rewrites were what JJJihad wrote, consider "straw man," "red herring" and "non sequitur" etc.. Clarence deploys fallacies along with bad words and attacks the messenger = "ad homiminem," another fallacy. This is not a surprise. Of course criminals lie, to do otherwise would be to self-convict. Note that along with lying, criminals are generally considered outcasts, and IMHO differ from normal, law abiding citizens so much, as to be considered ill (i.e. psychopaths). As the prime-crime is blindingly obvious (after circumventing the lie-cloud attempted disguise), so apologists must also lie, dissemble, obfuscate and generally attempt to deceive. Say "Hello," Clarence.
Briefly, to Clarence's own 'reason-defying' claim, consider that the ME countries on the WC7in5 list are all considered to be Z-enemies AND the US is working through that list, PLUS the US considers itself 'Lord of all creation,' THEN accusing Zs of "deciding the course of world events" is not at all far-fetched, even quite possible. The alternate thesis, that the US and Zs are only *coincidentally* on the same destructive, murdering for spoil (one soil, the other oil) path is disproven by the USS Liberty incident - where Zs mass-murdered US citizens with impunity, in the outrageous attempt to sink a US warship. The USS Liberty incident shows which is the tail and which the dog (recall Mafia-methods = coercing, threatening, bribing etc., add killing). But nevertheless, *the* substantial issue here is not who may run the world (or what a bad job they're doing), but the un-remedied Z-crime-scene; an entity illegally squatting on improperly alienated land has *no* legitimacy (and never did), and nothing the Zs do and/or their apologists say has any legitimacy either. Oh, and not so BTW, nobody may claim the right to defend stolen land/property; another deception bites the dust.
=====
0
aletheia · less than 1 minute ago
Your comment must be approved by the site admins before it will appear publicly.
grrr! 10:59.
Update: 1hr later; comment-count up by one, but comment still not there...
2013-09-12
a change to the idiot Abbott
might mean emboldened censors
or just the same old bigoted tax thieves
Silly me; tried again, censored again, here my input:
@Tom Switzer: "American credibility and prestige"
I made these notes as I read the article:
Obama sound-snips sounded weak and unconvincing
arab spring fomented ?% by NED, went violent ?% by CIA
no right to call for regime change
no right to call "red line" - sets false-flag bait
no 'smoking gun' on CW attack, *most likely* US-baited false-flag
the offer noCW=noSA (Syria gives up their Chemical Weapons, and US won't bomb them back to the Stone Age) publicised by Kerry's 'blunder'
"Moscow’s interest" vs. Zs' (Golan Heights; m4s++) + US' (WC7in5)
"ineffectiveness:"
{Kerry: We won't attack ... if you do this impossible thing.
Syria: Oh, We'll do it.
Russia: They'll do it.
UN: They'll do it.
Kerry: S**t!}
"strict self-defence?" No, + UNSC *correctly* stalemated
US' true (criminal) motive = 'help' Zs steal more land; the road to Tehran goes through Damascus.
arms/$s from KSA + Qatar, jihadis from outside, many Libyan Al-Q
*not* US business; MYOB!
The mission?
see Iraq, see Libya, see Stone Age
prolong and exacerbate it?
~21Aug, new arms = 400 tonnes, perhaps 1000+, all to 'rebels'
Obama has been all over the place
"all over the place" = US rhetoric; see 'digestive-tract accident'
Prestige and credibility?
no US-attack (supreme international crime), no risk &/ embarrassment
UK&/US have coveted ME oil continuously since pre-WW1
one of the biggest problems is: "Say one thing, do another."
they try to disguise their true intentions with lofty principles, latest R2P,
.. but secretly pursue resources by force - as if it's not obvious?
secrecy is a mortal enemy of democracy
no more attacks, no more killing (to steal), no more war!
===== definitions added:
m4s++ = mass-murder for spoil, soil, oil
WC7in5 = Wesley Clark leaking Pentagon intentions: 'US to take out 7 countries in 5 years.'
In full:
Wesley Clark: «About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon ... "This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran."»
-=*end of submit*=-
Comments: What I write is a mix of truth = substantiable fact, and valid opinion based on same. If any are offended, it is most likely that such are part of some problem = are somehow negatively involved with some criminality which I happen to be condemning at the time. At any crime-scene, there are one or more perpetrators, possibly accessories, possibly apologists active, and any bystanders who, if they see the crime in progress and do nothing ('duty to assist victims'), are part of the group of more or less guilty participants. The only ones who may claim the moral high-ground are those who actively attempt to stop crime, and/or bring the guilty to justice.
AusBC censors refusing to publish valid commentary make themselves part of the guilty group.
PFBCs = publicly-financed broadcasters, like the AusBC.
It is the AusBC's task to fully and fairly inform the electorate; any deviation from that amounts to treachery, not to mention fraud + theft = taking taxpayers' $s under false pretences.
@Tom Switzer: "American credibility and prestige"
I made these notes as I read the article:
Obama sound-snips sounded weak and unconvincing
arab spring fomented ?% by NED, went violent ?% by CIA
no right to call for regime change
no right to call "red line" - sets false-flag bait
no 'smoking gun' on CW attack, *most likely* US-baited false-flag
the offer noCW=noSA (Syria gives up their Chemical Weapons, and US won't bomb them back to the Stone Age) publicised by Kerry's 'blunder'
"Moscow’s interest" vs. Zs' (Golan Heights; m4s++) + US' (WC7in5)
"ineffectiveness:"
{Kerry: We won't attack ... if you do this impossible thing.
Syria: Oh, We'll do it.
Russia: They'll do it.
UN: They'll do it.
Kerry: S**t!}
"strict self-defence?" No, + UNSC *correctly* stalemated
US' true (criminal) motive = 'help' Zs steal more land; the road to Tehran goes through Damascus.
arms/$s from KSA + Qatar, jihadis from outside, many Libyan Al-Q
*not* US business; MYOB!
The mission?
see Iraq, see Libya, see Stone Age
prolong and exacerbate it?
~21Aug, new arms = 400 tonnes, perhaps 1000+, all to 'rebels'
Obama has been all over the place
"all over the place" = US rhetoric; see 'digestive-tract accident'
Prestige and credibility?
no US-attack (supreme international crime), no risk &/ embarrassment
UK&/US have coveted ME oil continuously since pre-WW1
one of the biggest problems is: "Say one thing, do another."
they try to disguise their true intentions with lofty principles, latest R2P,
.. but secretly pursue resources by force - as if it's not obvious?
secrecy is a mortal enemy of democracy
no more attacks, no more killing (to steal), no more war!
===== definitions added:
m4s++ = mass-murder for spoil, soil, oil
WC7in5 = Wesley Clark leaking Pentagon intentions: 'US to take out 7 countries in 5 years.'
In full:
Wesley Clark: «About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon ... "This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran."»
-=*end of submit*=-
Comments: What I write is a mix of truth = substantiable fact, and valid opinion based on same. If any are offended, it is most likely that such are part of some problem = are somehow negatively involved with some criminality which I happen to be condemning at the time. At any crime-scene, there are one or more perpetrators, possibly accessories, possibly apologists active, and any bystanders who, if they see the crime in progress and do nothing ('duty to assist victims'), are part of the group of more or less guilty participants. The only ones who may claim the moral high-ground are those who actively attempt to stop crime, and/or bring the guilty to justice.
AusBC censors refusing to publish valid commentary make themselves part of the guilty group.
PFBCs = publicly-financed broadcasters, like the AusBC.
It is the AusBC's task to fully and fairly inform the electorate; any deviation from that amounts to treachery, not to mention fraud + theft = taking taxpayers' $s under false pretences.
2011-06-15
suppressing information
like failing to index a blog
is also un- & anti-democratic
.. censored inputs ...
.. indicate systemic bias ...
.. and may lead to poster radicalisation
-=*=-
[update, 17Jun'11, update, 19Jun'11.]
A funny thing happened after recently submitting what I regard as a *fair* comment and having it censored; my corresponding blog-report here has so far not been indexed; I don't suppose we really have to wonder why?
"This happened once before
when I came to your door
No reply
They said it wasn't you
but I saw you peep through
your window"
- democracy's the loser...
Censored inputs indicate systemic bias and may lead to poster radicalisation.
-=*end*=-
PS It's not all inputs that are censored (just one would be too many), but what is censored indicates the (erring!) ideology of the censors. That AusBC is tax-payer supported and they dare to un- & anti-democratically censor anything is proof of their corruption and treachery both.
-=*=-
Update, 17Jun'11; Progress. From the google cache @ appr 07:30, this post and the preceding 'message' post have now been indexed, but the home-page cache is still old = down-level. If one wonders how they do that, I'd say 'bad fingers.'
It can be proven that I submitted a comment (I keep the receipts), and that indexing was interfered with. The question only becomes: Whose bad fingers?
[«back»]
-=*=-
Update, 19Jun'11; Progress? Not much, if any; still some down-level indexing. This article is deliberately duplicated, partly as a test.
A bit of nontrivia: Consider auto-da-fé[1], then heretic[2], a thesaurus entry for which is listed below[3]. If we dump all the supernatural implications (as totally invalid), the issue then is truth vs. lies. I advocate for truth & justice; in that frame it is the liars (commission/omission) who are the heretics, aka recusants (recalls Marxisant. Haw!) Also not just by-the-way, 'belief' is what people do in the absence of evidence; hence on principle I am *not* a believer.
Interfering with free-speech is a crime against democracy, and invalidates the perpetrator-platform.
-=*=-
Ref(s):
[1] auto-da-fé n. (pl. autos-da-fé) 1 hist. ceremonial judgement of heretics by the Spanish Inquisition. 2 public burning of heretics. [Portuguese, = act of the faith] [POD]
[2] heretic n. 1 person believing in or practising religious heresy. 2 holder of an unorthodox opinion. heretical adj.[ibid.]
[3] ›noun
he was condemned as a heretic and executed at the stake
DISSIDENT, dissenter, nonconformist, unorthodox thinker, heterodox thinker, apostate, freethinker, iconoclast, schismatic, renegade; sceptic, agnostic, atheist, non-believer, unbeliever, idolater, idolatress, pagan, heathen; separatist, sectarian, revisionist; rare tergiversator, recreant, recusant, nullifidian; archaic paynim.
-opposite(s): CONFORMIST; BELIEVER. [New Oxford Thesaurus of English]
[«back»]
2011-06-11
message to unleashed moderators and commenters
.. censorship is ...
.. un- & anti-democratic ...
.. censors are democracy-criminals
-=*=-
Free speech is an essential part of democracy; only so may we exchange facts and opinions - obvious.
Censorship - of fair comment - happens far too often on unleashed; just once is already damnable. So, message to unleashed moderators: Kindly stop censoring fair comment.
Message to unleashed commenters: IF you post a fair comment to unleashed AND it is censored, THEN you may post your comment here as a comment; if I judge it as 'fair comment' then I will publish it.
A good collection of censored comments may expose the bias of the censoring moderators, and provide evidence to support more serious actions, see below.
(*Unfair* comment would be abuse, extreme ad-homs or silly language, it's just common sense and no one needs it.)
.. specific requirements and recommendations regarding comments to Unleashed:
"Comments which the ABC considers to be abusive, defamatory, discriminatory or off-topic, or otherwise unlawful, will not be published."
[abc/thedrum]
Comments based on, and/or responding to already published comments should be allowed, also with some tolerance - that'd only be fair = normal democratic conversation.
In any case, a good next step against unfair AusBC censorship is to take complaint(s) to your local Federal MP.
Another possible next step would be the appropriate ombudsman or state-sponsored legal aid.
All fair comment welcome here - trolls needn't bother.
PS Copies of comments posted to unleashed, never to be seen again = censored, submitted here as a comment should include a) the post-point, b) the unl-thread "name" or number, and c) the approximate comment posting-time.
i.e. Re: Unbeliever@09Jun'11,3:15:56pm on "Prohibiting the use of nuclear weapons," censored comment posted 10Jun'11,3:51am.
2011-06-10
censorious AusBC unleashed moderators should be gaoled - if not worse - tumbrels!
Two comments submitted to "Prohibiting the use of nuclear weapons," neither published. GRRR!
1. Re: Unbeliever@09Jun'11,3:15:56pm
{The A-bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, instantly killing x (the 'lucky' victims) and leading to the lingering death of y, altogether about ¼mio dead, is a study in complexity.
«Even in the event of a US mainland invasion, the highest projected casualty estimates for US forces were not "over a million" like Stimson and Truman later claimed, but between 30,000 and 50,000 [3]. More importantly, prior to August 1945 Truman and his advisers had considered it possible that the war would end without either the atomic bombs or a mainland invasion by US forces [4].»
A well-entrenched propaganda technique is to deploy a deception so shocking that it causes wide-spread stupefaction; see the exaggerated estimate [3], then ¼mio horribly dead Japanese appears comparatively 'worth it.' Further, there's the contradiction [4] - the 'official narrative' fails as multiply, deliberately deceptive.
The 'unconditional' demand was a psy-op to *delay* surrender until the bombs were ready; proof = Hirohito continued as emperor.
What the US did get was otherwise unobtainable data on U-235 and Pu-239 bombs on 'live' civilian targets, simultaneously 'sending a message' illustrating their brutality, especially to Russia. Similar messaging techniques occur along the Deir Yassin through Cast Lead time-line.}
2. Re: Anon@08Jun'11,5:36:52pm
{One of two possible reasons may explain assertions contradicting historical fact, namely ignorance or malice.
[Van Crevel]
«"We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets of our air force."»
[Golda Meir]
«At a point I interrupted her to say: “Prime Minister, I want to be sure I understand what you’re saying... You are saying that if ever Israel was in danger of being defeated on the battlefield, it would be prepared to take the region and even the whole world down with it?”
Without the shortest of pauses for reflection, ... Golda replied, “Yes, that’s exactly what I am saying.”»
One assumes that only enemies are to be targeted, making the entire world - which currently includes Israel, classified as 'enemy.'
In 'normal' criminal justice, the threat of assault is usually considered equivalent to the assault itself, and making threats as blackmail = coercion & intimidation, etc..
The "Samson Option" = greatest 'suicide-bomber' threat possible, ever.}
2011-05-19
submitted to unl,2715898 on 19May'11, ~12:30am; not published
People who kill other people in cold blood are psychopaths, either by nature ("My mother made me a ...") or by nurture (military training, say).
Someone *may* have hijacked aircraft (the FBI admitted having no proof on ObL, and passports fluttering out of *that* devastation don't pass the 'giggle-test'), but ObL&Co did *not* 'do' 9/11 - unless they had an invitation & free access - to pre-load the *3* WTC towers with high-explosives&detonator-systems. Proof: Find a few clear videos, *watch closely* - and then think a bit.
War is immoral (mostly murdering theft); 'legal' is a corrupt construct.
Our so-called 'democracies' are complete sham; two of many proofs: 1) dumbed-down and lied-to sheople cannot make 'informed' votes & 2) bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic; US, UK & Aus changed from tweedle-dumb to tweedle-dumber but the wars continue. What we actually have are tyrannies-by-stealth, camouflaged by the corrupt&venal MSM.
Laws made amongst 'consenting tyrannies' have no valid application vis-à-vis us, we the sheople; only just law may earn respect.
Since the 'ruling élites' are stand-alone-tyrants like the spoiled-brat sovereigns of old (nothing élite about criminality), if they wish to steal others' resources, they should keep the killing strictly amongst themselves, and leave us, we the sheople, to get on with enjoying life - instead of being lied to, scared shitless, and sent off to wars-for-spoil to personally be killed, or to mass-slaughter 100s of 1000s of innocent 'collaterals.'
Without some clear thinking leading to effective action and soon, our so-called 'ruling elites' will f**k-up our life-supporting ecosphere - and that ain't too flash.
Comment added for this article: AusBC censorship of fair comment proves that they're in it up to their quivering bottom-lips.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)