Truth News Australia

Subscribe to TNRA
Subscribe to TNRA

Archives 2010/04

Chemtrails: a closer look

April 29, 2010, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

30 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 22

chemtrails

In tonight's show we start with some breaking news in relation to climate change and internet censorship, with the announcement that the government has back-flipped in both of these policy areas. We interpret this as a victory for the grass roots truth and justice movements!

In part 2 we return to a perplexing subject which has generated a great deal of discussion at truthnews.com.au.

What are those white trails in the sky? Is it a government conspiracy? Are they poisoning us? Is it geo-engineering? Is it weather modification? Or is it just harmless water vapour?

John Bursill, aircraft engineer, returns to TNRA to grapple with these questions.

For those who are chemtrail "believers" this show may be a disappointment. Our research has not come up with any tangible evidence that this is anything other than a natural phenomenon caused by factors such as air temperature and humidity. We also note that those who promote the chemtrail theory have been unable to get any experts on side with their ideas, and they also fail to produce evidence (other than photos of contrails) to support their claims. We note that measuring the amount of barium in a water supply tells is nothing about where that barium came from, and the use of such measurements as evidence is scientifically worthless.

If you disagree with our findings please present your evidence in a rational, scientific manner and we will give it our attention!

Thanks for listening (:

Related Links

Censorship, sadism and doublethink

April 25, 2010, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

27 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 1

Categories: [ Censorship, Fireside chat ]









A scene from Pasolini's Salo

A scene from Pasolini's Salo



A scene from Pasolini's Salo

A photo from Abu Ghraib



TNRA announces a new series, the fireside chats, for the winter season.

Our chats, conducted in studio in a relaxed atmosphere, are designed to encourage reflection and thinking outside the box.

Tonight I welcome friend and raconteur Lawrence Mcdonnell to a discussion on the true role of censorship within our society, with special attention to the recently re-classified Pasolini film "Salo", and the literary works of the Marquis De Sade.

There is a bitter irony in that, on the one hand we are bombarded with images of terror and abuse via the sanctioned mass media, while at the same time the government reserves the right to block our access to images of terror and abuse.  What then is the real purpose of censorship? What is the new morality?

Find out in tonight's fireside chat.

Related Links

Schapelle Corby: drug courier or political prisoner?

April 22, 2010, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

24 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 17

Schapelle Corby Schapelle Corby is currently serving a 20-year sentence for the importation of 4.2 kg of cannabis into Bali, Indonesia. Her conviction was based entirely on the prima facie evidence of marijuana in her luggage, and despite numerous requests by her defence team, no forensic evidence was ever produced linking Schapelle to the marijuana found in her backpack. Neither has Schapelle ever been linked to a drug distribution network. The judge who convicted her never returned a "not-guilty" verdict in 500 cases.

At the time of her arrest there was a great deal of diplomatic tension between Australia and Indonesia. The Australian government was pressuring Indonesia to arrest Abu Bakar Bashir, who was believed at the time to be behind the 2002 Bali bombing. Indonesia was not compliant, and many Indonesians felt that Australia was interfering in their affairs once again as they had during the East Timor crisis a few years earlier. After Schapelle's arrest the diplomatic row escalated and there were fears that brooding resentment on both sides could lead to violence.

Something had to be done.

Schapelle said from the beginning the drugs were not hers, and for six months the Australian people and even high level government representatives were right behind her, but then a funny thing happened. Suddenly the major news networks began running stories filled with innuendo and journalistic spin, hinting that Schapelle might be guilty after all. The first of these damaging stories was released one week before her final court hearing in Bali, and carried the unsubstantiated rumour that Australian hydroponic dope was commonly sold in Bali under the name "Aussie Gold". In between her conviction and final appeal scurrilous rumours about Schapelle and her family were circulated in every newspaper and TV channel in the country, including the tax-payer funded ABC. None of these rumours has ever been proven, and indeed the High Court found that Channel Seven had defamed the character of Schapelles' sister Mercedes.

Since her final appeal was rejected Schapelle's mental state has deteriorated. She is now in a state where she needs constant medical care. Her government and the Australian people have turned their backs.

What will you do?

Tonight we welcome Schapelle Corby's uncle Shun Hatton back to the show for the latest news on the case. If you would like to help Schapelle please visit www.freeschapelle.com.au.

NOTE: At the beginning of the show we announced an interview with futurist Jacques Fresco which did not take place. TNRA apologises for any inconvenience caused.

Related Links

Steel framed house survives the ravages of an extreme bushfire without any deformation

18 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

http://www.smh.com.au/national/singed-but-safe...html

NICKY PHILLIPS | April 17, 2010

Steel framed house on fire

IT TOOK less than a minute for this new house to be engulfed by flames. Luckily no one was too upset to see it burn.

The house, built almost entirely of steel, was being tested to see if it could survive a bushfire and, although it is now a little singed, it passed.

Not only was it still standing, if it had been occupied there was a good chance the people inside would have survived, the CSIRO scientist and test leader Justin Leonard said.

The test house, designed and built by the National Association of Steel Framed Houses with the CSIRO, had most features of a domestic house.

Mr Leonard and his team, aided by the Rural Fire Service at Mogo on the south coast, mimicked the conditions of a bushfire in the test. First the house was subject to radiant heat from gas burners placed metres away for more than half an hour, imitating a bushfire's approach.

Gradually the intensity of the gas burners grew until the house was engulfed in flames three metres high for nearly two minutes.

According to Mr Leonard, the test house underwent an "extreme" bushfire scenario. "The duration of the flame immersion was longer than a bushfire could possibly dish up," he said.

At its peak, the temperature of the fire would have been more than 1000 degrees.

The full effect of the fire on the house still needs to be assessed, but the researchers believe the design could be an affordable option for construction in bushfire-prone areas.

During the "Black Saturday" bushfires in Victoria in February last year more than 2000 homes were destroyed by fire.

Unlike most houses, the test house minimised to use of elements that could be combustible. Its frame, walls, floor and roof cavities were all made of steel. The thermal insulation and the plaster walls and ceiling acted as another fire-proof barrier.

"All the layers work together as a system to protect the occupants," Mr Leonard said.

While people are not encouraged to stay in their house during a bushfire, Mr Leonard said if people did not get sufficient warning it could become unsafe for them to leave their property.

"We're testing the house's ability to create a safe place of refuge during the time you'd be forced inside the house if you were unlucky enough to be there."

Mr Leonard said the flame test would help the researchers explain to builders how they should construct houses to make them "inherently robust" for bushfires.

The virtue of selfishness

April 15, 2010, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

16 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 4

the virtue of selfishness

In tonight's show we try to encourage you to be more selfish.

Why? Because it's through selfishness that great things can be accomplished, such as the overthrow of tyranny, the vanquishing of superstition and cultish beliefs, and the improvement of the quality of life of the average person.

The libertarian philosophy starts with the premise that people are inherently good, and it follows that their selfish actions will in turn work for the betterment of humanity. This is in stark contrast to the cult of environmentalism, which is bent on suppressing our innate instincts in order to "save the planet".

Selfishness, we suggest, is the key to innovation, creativity, and prosperity. It is by following our selfish desires that we will be motivated to stand up against the war mongers and the oligarchs who want to keep us all enslaved.

Also in tonight's show we welcome engineer John Bursill, who brings us the latest news from the 9/11 truth movement.

As usual we cover a variety of breaking news stories. Please enjoy!

Related Links:

Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s ‘Radio National’ does Hit Piece on 9/11 Truth Advocates

16 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20100414044822427

April 13, 2010
By John Bursill, Engineer, 9/11 Truth Advocate and Researcher
911Truth.org

On April 12th, 2010 ABC Radio National's "Counterpoint" host Michael Duffy decided to weigh in on the truth of the 9/11 events. In this clearly biased and ludicrous attack on those who would question the still unexplained events of September 11, 2001, Duffy demonstrated he has done little research into the matter. Seemingly, he has decided research is neither warranted nor required to make wild assumptions about and apply derogatory labels to 9/11 researchers and their questions.

» DOWNLOAD AUDIO

Michael Duffy In this short and emotive hit piece Duffy uses an excerpt from a recent lecture given by Clive Williams, Adjunct Professor at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University (ANU), to provide the spin. Professor Williams lays out an overview of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories as part of his lecture called "Terrorism Conspiracy Theories and the 1978 Sydney Hilton bombings, Lockerbie, 9/11 and the London 7/7 bombings". This lecture will be played in full on Radio National's "Big Ideas" on Sunday 18th April at 5pm and is available in podcast at the ABC. In this excerpt Williams skims over the evidence of an alternate "conspiracy", citing the predictable "straw man" arguments and loose journalistic attempts to look at the evidence, using the Discovery Channel's laughable documentary, "9/11: Science and Conspiracy" as a reference. Ironically, Williams uses these absurdities ignorantly in his attempt to debunk the experts who are actually qualified to comment on such matters, and -- surprise, surprise -- he also conveniently forgets to mention them. In a desperate attempt to make sense of his "reality", Williams rolls out the blind academics' favourite proof that 9/11 was just as we were told -- yes, it's the argument that the government is, without doubt, just too damn incompetent to pull off such a complicated plan! Unfortunately, this so-called educator misses the irony in the stark "official reality" that 19 poorly trained and ill-equipped Arab hijackers did pull it off!

Duffy introduces this crude attempt at journalism as follows:

"Just who was responsible for the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington? Was it Osama Bin Laden or are there other contenders? Perhaps it was rogue government agents operating with the tacit support of an equally shadowy group of industrialists. Or maybe it was revenge-seeking aliens who escaped from area 51."

For readers who wish to listen to Duffy's Counterpoint piece, "Terrorism and Conspiracy Theories", it can be found here: www.abc.net.au/rn/counterpoint/stories/2010/2870592.htm

The fact that no criminal investigation of this mass murder has ever been carried out and those murdered included ten Australians is apparently of no consequence to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, as they continue to fail to report on the real 9/11 investigative news. I and many thousands of other Australians continue to wonder why we have not heard from our taxpayer-funded news service about the discovery of nanothermite in the dust by a team of international scientists, or about the demands of more than one thousand Architecture and Engineering Professionals for a new investigation into the building collapses. It is now clearly proven for those who care to look that without added energy from explosives, the three building collapses on 9/11 defy both logic and Newton's Laws of Motion. To the great shame of "our" ABC, its viewers and listeners are without a clue of this fact based on what their so-called journalists have produced to date.

A case can now be clearly made that the ABC is failing in its fiduciary duty to the Australian public and is actively supporting the cover-up of the events of 9/11. This is amply demonstrated with this simple listing of some of the important events they have failed to report on in Australia:

  • The attendance of Councillor Yukihisa Fujita, Director of the Japanese Parliamentary Committee for Foreign Affairs and Defence, to a conference in March 2008 in Sydney where he spoke questioning the 9/11 events and their use as a pretext to war
  • Lectures made by Senior Architecture Lecturer Dr David Leifer at Sydney University, demonstrating the official version of the Towers' Collapse provably false in 2008 and in 2009
  • The discovery of an explosive incendiary nanothermite in the dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe in 2009, by a team of international scientists including Australian Doctor of Chemistry, Frank Legge (see www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM)
  • The recent milestone of "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" reaching 1,000 professional members including 40 Structural Engineers, one being an Australian Building Inspector, Paul Mason (see www.AE911Truth.org)

It is probably most disturbing for us who care, however, that the ABC has never reported to the Australian public that the 9/11 victims' families are demanding a new investigation and have broad support by the majority of the world's population in questioning the official 9/11 "conspiracy theory". Please, Mr Duffy and Mr Williams -- please think again and consider that maybe it is you that are in need of a "reality check"?

Now, if one wished to make an excuse for the ABC, that perhaps they have not been made aware of these "realities", I will list what I personally know they have received from the Australian public to date:

  1. Thousands of e-mails have been sent including links to documents and information about the truth of 9/11
  2. Hundreds of complaints have been made to our ABC about a lack of coverage of evidence showing the official 9/11 story is false; many of those have gone all the way to the Board
  3. Many press releases have been sent to them about events questioning 9/11 within Australia and the rest of the world, like the recent "Hard Evidence Tour" (see www.thehardevidence.com)
  4. Many invitations have been given to meet and discuss evidence with academics and researchers questioning 9/11
  5. On no fewer than four separate occasions protests have been held at the ABC's Head Office and studios in Sydney where documents and DVDs have been hand-delivered to staff and journalists over many hours. At one recent protest American Architect Richard Gage, AIA, founder of www.AE911Truth.org, made himself available for interview in person, but alas, the ABC could not even send a junior reporter to investigate.

Unfortunately for us, the harsh reality of the ABC's failure to report the news about 9/11 explosive evidence is that the victims' families continue to suffer without closure and without justice, while wars in their name continue without any clear justification other than the official myth of 9/11.

Mr. Duffy and Mr. Williams, I will remind you, Sirs, that without truth there can be no justice and without justice there will never be peace on this Earth. Shame on you and the ABC. You are a disgrace to this great nation and to the field of journalism!

--END--

Complaints may be made to the ABC here: www.abc.net.au/contact/complain.htm

[Photo source: (Sourcewatch.org])

Vaccines: prophylaxis or anaphylaxis?

April 8, 2010, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

09 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 1

Vaccines: prophylaxis or anaphylaxis?
(n) anaphylaxis (hypersensitivity reaction to the ingestion or injection of a substance (a protein or drug) resulting from prior contact with a substance)
(n) prophylaxis (the prevention of disease)

If you're wondering about the definitions above, all is explained in tonight's show, which features an extended interview with Bronwyn Hancock, director of the Vaccination Information Service. Bronwyn has worked closely with Dr. Viera Scheibner, a leading researcher in the anti-vaccination field who has been writing and giving lectures on the subject matter of vaccines and vaccinations since her retirement from the Department of Mineral Resources, New South Wales, Australia in 1987.

From the Vaccination Information Service website:
Vaccination Information Service will inform you primarily about the key fundamentals, indeed critical flaws, of vaccination (or "immunisation") that apply to every type of vaccine.

In summary... “Immunizations” do not immunize! They do the exact opposite

The term “immunization” (US, Canada) or "immunisation" (UK, Australia, NZ), often substituted for the term "vaccination", is false and should not be used in place of  "vaccination", because it is well documented in medical research that vaccination, the direct injection of foreign proteins and other toxic material (particularly known immune-sensitising poisons such as mercury and aluminium compounds, formaldehyde and phenol) sensitises, meaning makes the recipient more, not less, susceptible, i.e. more easily affected, by what he/she encounters in the future.

Please be aware that this is a highly politically charged topic, and you are likely to find biased and defamatory statements about anti-vaccine campaigners in prominent journals and websites. The wikipedia entry for Viera Scheibner is a prime example.

I hope you enjoy the discussion.

Related Links:

COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of an internet forum

06 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2165967/posts

There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a ‘uncontrolled forum.’

Technique #1 - ‘FORUM SLIDING’

If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by ‘forum sliding.’ In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to ‘age.’ Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a ‘forum slide.’ The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a ‘forum slide’ and ‘flush’ the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then ‘replying’ to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting ‘slides’ down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.

Technique #2 - ‘CONSENSUS CRACKING’

A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at *********) is ‘consensus cracking.’ To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger ‘evidence’ or disinformation in your favour is slowly ‘seeded in.’ Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely be dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then ‘abort’ the consensus cracking by initiating a ‘forum slide.’

Technique #3 - ‘TOPIC DILUTION’

Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a ‘RESOURCE BURN.’ By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a ‘gossip mode.’ In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to ‘drive in the wedge.’ By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.

Technique #4 - ‘INFORMATION COLLECTION’

Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment an ‘I show you mine so show me yours’ posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your ‘favorite weapon’ and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favorite ‘technique of operation.’ From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.

Technique #5 - ‘ANGER TROLLING’

Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing their powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to ‘stage’ a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to ‘lead’ the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you ‘do not care what the authorities think!!’ inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.

Technique #6 - ‘GAINING FULL CONTROL’

It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavorable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the ‘ultimate victory’ as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a ‘honey pot’ gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.

CONCLUSION

Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precedence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share them with HQ.

Free speech activists hit the streets of Sydney’s CBD

04 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B95a8UHHugk

On 1st April 2010 a coalition of free speech activists took to the streets of Sydney's CBD to protest the impending "Mandatory" ISP Filter which has been likened to repressive censorship regimes in China, Iran and North Korea.

Truth News Radio Australia was there to track the progess and report on the gagged protesters as they wound their way through Sydney's busy streets during rush hour.

The protest was also reported by itnews.com.au:
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/171145,photos-sydney-protesters-gag-on-internet-filter-plan.aspx

Find out more about the ISP filter and other important issues that affect your life at:
http://www.truthnews.com.au

Find out what you can do to help at:
http://openinternet.com.au
http://gagthefilter.com

TNRA Exclusive: Free speech activists hit the streets of Sydney’s CBD!

03 April 2010 | Permalink | comments: 1

Categories: [ Censorship, ISP Filter, Law ]

On 1st April 2010 a coalition of free speech activists took to the streets of Sydney's CBD to protest the impending "Mandatory" ISP Filter which has been likened to repressive censorship regimes in China, Iran and North Korea.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B95a8UHHugk

Truth News Radio Australia was there to track the progess and report on the gagged protesters as they wound their way through Sydney's busy streets during rush hour.

The protest was also reported by itnews.com.au.

Find out what you can do to help at:
http://openinternet.com.au
http://gagthefilter.com
Listen Live

Recent Comments

Global March against chemtrails. April 25 2015

http://globalmarchagainstchemtrailsandgeoengineering.com/index.html

By
A
Harvad
Professor
-

“Solar Geoengineering is the idea that you could in principle reduce the rate or climate change or reverse it by making the earth more reflective, by reflecting away more sunlight, for example by putting reflective particles “AEROSOL POLLUTION” if you like in the upper atmosphere” - Dr. David Keith Dr. David Keith is a Gordon McKay Professor of Applied Physics, School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS) and Professor of Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2-Wh6rsCygo

By htyeje on 2015 04 18 - 10:31:43
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

fenton feckwit
https://www.facebook.com/100004043585401/videos/652432164901564/

By srthjh on 2015 04 18 - 10:25:44
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

fenton says a plane hit the pentagon… well dopshit.. wheres the bloody plane then?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTJehfQkuyE

your lies are so simple to disprove

By lygfoytf on 2015 04 16 - 12:49:37
From the entry 'David Chandler weighs in on 9/11 Pentagon questions'.

Great analysis! I think Pilger was right when he said the mainstream media have “sold their souls to the devil…” I sometimes wonder why they even bother going to Uni to learn “journalism” when all they do is reiterate whatever they are told. They’d learn more by watching the antics of a cocky in a cage. 

I’ve affixed an article I wrote some time ago, entitled “Why I’m not a Marxist” ...you may find it of interest or you may not. I know its not “on topic,” but I think, broadly speaking, it is. Feel free to scrub it if you like. Its an attempt by me to define my position as a libertarian anarchist, in relation to Marxism. Which I think is extremely important. Any opposition to Marxism or the left, these days is often construed as reactionary, but as we both know, in terms of libertarianism, that is definitely not the case. I think its up to us to expose the underbelly of Marxist thought and action, and to show what a fascist, racist, reactionary ideology it really is. In the following article I’ve attempted to do that. Don’t know if I’ve been successful, but I guess its a start…

Why I’m Not A Marxist
                                 
                              (A libertarian anarchist perspective)
                                       
Mass Murder Et Cetera      

Marxism is a theoretical system created by Karl Marx and others, in which all of society, all economics and all politics are combined into a perfect, classless, government-less system based on common ownership of all economic means of production. In pursuit of this preposterous ideal, Marx and Engels wrote the Manifesto to inspire violent revolution everywhere: The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of bourgeois supremacy and conquest of political power by the proletariat.  The Manifesto of the Communist Party (first published on February 21, 1848). Marxist theory requires an intermediary stage of socialism called the dictatorship of (not by) the proletariat (the working class): Every provisional state setup after a revolution requires a dictatorship, and an energetic dictatorship at that (Part 11).

Built into this theory and demonstrated by history is an attitude of intolerance for the other - the hallmark of all totalitarian thinking and action - be they class, culture, race, political party or individual, who may be opposed to or disagree with Communist Party methodology on the road to Utopia - which is the raison d’être of the whole movement, an end which justifies the means, no matter how cruel and murderous. In the Rheinische Zeitung (May 19, 1849) Marx wrote: We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror. Some years later, Leon Trotsky, one of the primary architects of the Russian revolution wrote in the same spirit: Repression for the attainment of economic ends is a necessary weapon of the socialist dictatorship. L. Trotsky. Terrorism and Communism: A Reply to Karl Kautsky (New Park Publications, 1975).

Several dictatorships and three centuries later, the question needs to be asked: what benefits have these dictatorships bestowed on humanity? The fact is, they have produced nothing but misery, the loss of individual and collective freedom, genocide and mass murder. To date, well over 110 million, mostly working-class men, women and children have been butchered by these regimes. Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism (The Black Book of Communism) 1997). Stephen Wheatcroft. The Scale and Nature of German and Soviet Repression and Mass Killings, 1930–45. Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 48, No. 8 (Dec., 1996).

As R.J. Rummel, Harvard professor emeritus of political science and Nobel Peace Prize finalist, observed: The irony is that in practice, even after decades of total control, Marxism did not improve the lot of the average person, but usually made living conditions worse than before the revolution. It is not by chance that the world’s greatest famines have happened within the Soviet Union (about 5 million dead from 1921-23 and 7 million from 1932-3, including 2 million outside Ukraine) and communist China (about 30 million dead from 1959-61). Overall, in the last century almost 55 million people died in various Marxist famines and associated epidemics - a little over 10 million of them were intentionally starved to death, and the rest died as an unintended result of Marxist collectivization and agricultural policies.R.J.Rummel. Death by Government. (New Brunswick.N.J. Transaction Publishers 1994). Rummel’s primary concern is democide: his word for politically and ethnically motivated mass murder by governments. His other principle books are: China’s Bloody Century: Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1900 (1991), in which he calculates the lives lost in 20th Century China and Lethal Politics : Soviet Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1917 (1990).

Marxism And Corporate Capitalism:

As most Marxist inspired revolutions have demonstrated, the dictatorships that follow have never been in the hands of the proletariat, but rather, military and corporate elites and the educated off-springs of the upper-bourgeoisie, which, in the case of Marxism, started with Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky. Marx was born into a wealthy family in Trier, what is today known as the Rhineland-Palatinate. Engels was born in Wupperal, the eldest son of a wealthy cotton manufacturer. Lenin’s father, Ilya, was elevated into the nobility for his work in the government bureaucracy. Trotsky was the son of an extremely wealthy kulak family who were an integral part of the rural bourgeois nobility. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. First published Tuesday 26 August 2003.

In his scholarly work, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, (1981 by Arlington House Publishers, New Rochelle, New York) Professor Anthony Sutton demonstrates conclusively how pervasive not only banking support was for the Russian revolution, but also corporate industrial support. He observed that:

...both the extreme right and the extreme left of the conventional political spectrum are absolutely collectivist. The national socialist (for example, the fascist) and the international socialist (for example, the communist) both recommend totalitarian politico-economic systems based on naked, unfettered political power and individual coercion. Both systems require monopoly control of society. While monopoly control of industries was once the objective of J. P. Morgan and J. D. Rockefeller, by the late nineteenth century the inner sanctums of Wall Street understood that the most efficient way to gain an unchallenged monopoly was to “go political” and make society go to work for the monopolists — under the name of the public good and the public interest. This strategy was detailed in 1906 by Frederick C. Howe in his “Confessions of a Monopolist”. Howe, by the way, is a figure in the story of the Bolshevik Revolution…” (Chapter 1).

And also:

Consequently, one barrier to mature understanding of recent history is the notion that all capitalists are the bitter and unswerving enemies of all Marxists and socialists. This erroneous idea originated with Karl Marx and was undoubtedly useful to his purposes. In fact, the idea is nonsense. There has been a continuing, albeit concealed, alliance between international political capitalists and international revolutionary socialists — to their mutual benefit. This alliance has gone unobserved largely because historians — with a few notable exceptions — have an unconscious Marxian bias and are thus locked into the impossibility of any such alliance existing. The open-minded reader should bear two clues in mind: monopoly capitalists are the bitter enemies of laissez-faire entrepreneurs; and, given the weaknesses of socialist central planning, the totalitarian socialist state is a perfect captive market for monopoly capitalists, if an alliance can be made with the socialist powerbrokers (Chapter IV).

After the Bolsheviks seized power, the International Barnsdale Corporation and Standard Oil got drilling rights; Stuart, James and Cook, Inc. reorganized the coal mines; General Electric sold them electrical equipment; and other major firms like Westinghouse Dupont and RCA also aided the Communists. (Chapter VIII and IX). Add to this list The American International Corporation, Chase National Bank, Equitable Trust Company, National City Bank, Sinclair Consolidated Oil Co., White Engineering Co., (Appendix 1) and we have some idea of the scope and measure of support. Sutton’s book is chock-a-block with primary source documentation including reports, letters and newspaper accounts of the period. The extent of corporate capitalist support for the Marxists is examined in detail in his three volume epic work: Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development , Stanford, Calif. Hoover Institution, 1968, 1971, 1973. See also his National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union (New York: Arlington House, 1973).
Trotsky:

In Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution, Sutton highlights the role played by Leon Trotsky in securing finance and industrial support for the revolution, and how his mission was assisted every step of the way by men in the highest echelons of bourgeois governments and business, including the president of the United States:

Trotsky traveled from New York to Petrograd on a passport supplied by the intervention of Woodrow Wilson, and with the declared intention to “carry forward” the revolution. The British government was the immediate source of Trotsky’s release from Canadian custody in April 1917, but there may well have been “pressures.” Lincoln Steffens, an American Communist, acted as a link between Wilson and Charles R. Crane and between Crane and Trotsky. Further, while Crane had no official position, his son Richard was confidential assistant to Secretary of State Robert Lansing, and Crane senior was provided with prompt and detailed reports on the progress of the Bolshevik Revolution. Moreover, Ambassador William Dodd (U.S. Ambassador to Germany in the Hitler era) said that Crane had an active role in the Kerensky phase of the revolution; the Steffens letters confirm that Crane saw the Kerensky phase as only one step in a continuing revolution. The interesting point, however, is not so much the communication among dissimilar persons like Crane, Steffens, Trotsky, and Woodrow Wilson as the existence of at least a measure of agreement on the procedure to be followed — that is, the Provisional Government was seen as “provisional,” and the “re-revolution” was to follow. (Chapter 1 and 11).

Anti-Semitism:

Sutton also demonstrates, how, contrary to the mindless claims made by anti-Semites and conspiracy theorists, the Russian revolution was not a Jewish conspiracy. He offers proof by naming the CEOs and individuals on the boards of major banks and corporations during the time when massive injections of gold and technology had been secured by Trotsky (Appendix 1). He writes: The persistence with which the Jewish-conspiracy myth has been pushed suggests that it may well be a deliberate device to divert attention from the real issues and the real causes. The evidence provided in this book suggests that the New York bankers who were also Jewish had relatively minor roles in supporting the Bolsheviks, while the New York bankers who were also Gentiles (Morgan, Rockefeller, Thompson) had major roles. What better way to divert attention from the real operators than by the medieval bogeyman of anti-Semitism? (Appendix 11).

Marxism, Utopia and Monotheism:

In the history of political and religious thought, Marxism and the utopianistic ideal upon which it is based, long predates the rise of the so-called communist movement of the late nineteenth century. In The Republic, Plato’s plan was also totalitarian: fully controlled lives void of individuality, with no more rights, only duties, the state being everything, the individual, nothing. In his book Open Society and its Enemies, (Volume 1: The Spell of Plato, Princeton University Press, Fifth Edition) Popper singled out Plato’s state as a utopia which was argued by Plato to be the destiny of all humankind. In particular, Popper thought Plato’s envisioned state had totalitarian features as it advocated a government not elected by its citizens.

In More’s Utopia (Ringwood, Victoria: Penguin Books, 1965), he describes a communist city-state governed by reason: In Utopia, where every man has a right to everything, they all know that if care is taken to keep the public stores full, no private man can want anything; for among them there is no unequal distribution, so that no man is poor, none in necessity; and though no man has anything, yet they are all rich; what can make a man so rich as to lead a serene and cheerful life, free from anxieties. Reasonably speaking, this statement is idealistic to the point of naivety! In The Undiscovered Self: (Chapter IV. Mentor Book, 1958) Jung presents us with a more sober, realistic view: In the power of the many there lies the power to snatch wish-fulfillments by force; sweetest of all, however, is that gentle and painless slipping back into the kingdoms of childhood, into the paradise of parental care, into happy-go-luckyness and irresponsibility. All the thinking and looking after are done from the top; to all the questions there is an answer; and for all needs the necessary provision is made. The infantile dream state of the mass man is so unrealistic, that he never thinks to ask - who is paying for this paradise?

In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (Second Edition, 2008) Mangel wrote that ...the term communism spread rapidly so that Karl Marx could entitle one of his first political articles of 16 October 1842, Der Kommunismus und die Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung. He noted that communism was already an international movement, manifesting itself in Britain and Germany besides France, and traced its origin to Plato.  He could have mentioned ancient Jewish sects and early Christian monasteries too. The first attempts to arrive at a communist society leaving aside early, medieval and more modern Christian communities. Whilst in Socialism In Historical Christianity: VI Communism and Religion. Books\For Libraries Press. New York, 1972). Lewis, Polanyi and Kitchin observed: It was left to Marx to complete the process of restating the sentimental religious ideal of Christianity in the West in the form of a practical materialistic humanism. Thus, the Marxist sociology which forms the essential background to the special economic theories of modern communism is the end product of an historical process in which the essential human content of Christianity is maintained through a change of form. Or as Engels, one of the cofounders of 19th century Marxism noted: le Christianisme c’est le Communisme! ( The New Moral World: The Progress of Social Reform On the Continent. Pt. 1: France (3rd Series, Nos. 19 and 21, Nov. 4 and 18, 1843. Transcribed in 2000 for Marxists.org by Andy Blunden).

But it was Nietzsche, more than any other philosopher, who clearly grasped the inward nature of Marxism, (preparing the ground for writers such as Orwell, Huxley and Arendt) describing it as: The visionary younger brother of an almost decrepit despotism, whose heir it wants to be; thus its efforts are reactionary in the deepest sense. For it desires an abundance of executive power, as only despotism has ever had; indeed, it outdoes everything in the past by striving for the downright destruction of the individual, who it sees as an unauthorized luxury of nature, and who it intends to improve into a useful organ of the community… Therefore, it secretly prepares for reigns of terror, and drives the word justice like a nail into the heads of the half-educated masses, to rob them completely of their reason. (Menschliches, Allzumenschliches: Justice vs. Power. German Publication. Translation H. Zimmern, Published 1909-1913. Aphorism 473 ) He understood the spirit of communism was in fact the old Christian ideal dressed up in new clothes which most freethinkers in the West falsely claimed to have rejected: Who among us would be a freethinker if not for the Church? It’s the church which offends us, not its poison…Apart from the Church, we too, like its poison. (Zur Genealogie der Moral: First Essay, Aphorism ix. Doubleday Anchor Books. New York 1956).

What Nietzsche succeeded in demonstrating, perhaps more than any other philosopher, is that Marxism is a product and outgrowth of a tradition which is monotheistic (a belief in the existence of only one god) and tied to the conviction that there is only one truth (Nietzsche’s poison), a truth single and unique, which postulates the idea of a single authority. The birth of Christianity, as Ehrman noted, brought with it an intolerance for the other: No one, that is, thought it was contradictory, or even problematic, to worship Jupiter and Venus and Mars and others of the great gods, along with local gods of your city and the lesser divine beings who looked over your crops, your daily affairs, your wife in childbirth, your daughter in sickness, and your son in his love life. Multiplicity bred respect and, for the most part, plurality bred tolerance. No one had the sense that if they were right to worship their gods by the means appropriate to them, you were therefore wrong to worship your gods. But then came Christianity. (D.Ehrman. Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture & the Faiths We Never Knew. Oxford University Press, 2005).

Thus were joined the conditions necessary to justify an absolute intolerance, directed against those who, not holding to the truth, have fallen into error - an error which is absolute, and against which, if need be, every form of constraint, exclusion and barbarism may be used. A belief that one holds a monopoly on truth, opens the door to inquisitions, show trials and massacres: occurrences, as history has demonstrated, over and over, common to the practitioners of applied Christianity - and Marxism. The roots of monotheism and monotheistic thinking and intolerance can be found in the Bible.

The Ten Commandments are often cited by religious Jews and Christians as the moral rock upon which their faith is built. But the First and Second Commandments have nothing whatsoever to do with morality, but are merely subserviant propaganda devises designed to illicit fear and obedience: Thou shalt have no other gods before me (Exodus 20:1-3) and the Second: You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I The Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate Me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love Me and keep My Commandments (Exodus 20:4-6 RSV). And was it not god in the Bible who set the example by unleashing a deluge on a humanity that did not repair its wrongs against him and abide by his law? Did not David engage in mass murder when he lived with the king of the Philistines, Achish? (1. Samuel 27:9) And Moses organize the extermination of the Midianite people? (Numbers 31:7) And Joshua massacre the Anakims? (Joshua 11:12, 21:22) In your goodness destroy my enemies says Jeremiah to Jehovah (Pslams 138: 19). In Deuteronomy we read: but of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy god doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth. (20:16)

But the massacres sanctioned and blessed by the church, from the Inquisition to the Conquistadors, pale into insignificance against massacres perpetrated by Marxist regimes against their own populations and anyone else who opposed the methodology of their bloody march towards utopia. To quote Professor Rummel again: The Khmer Rouge – (Cambodian communists) who ruled Cambodia for four years – provide insight into why Marxists believed it necessary and moral to massacre so many of their fellow humans. Their Marxism was married to absolute power. They believed without a shred of doubt that they knew the truth, that they would bring about the greatest human welfare and happiness, and that to realize this utopia, they had to mercilessly tear down the old feudal or capitalist order and Buddhist culture, and then totally rebuild a communist society. Nothing could be allowed to stand in the way of this achievement. Government – the Communist Party – was above any law. All other institutions, religions, cultural norms, traditions and sentiments were expendable. R.J.Rummel. Death by Government.

In the name of one truth and the equality of all men before God, Christian missionaries - backed up by the bible and loaded guns - went out and wanted to baptise the inferior races making them into the sons of Abraham. And if their propaganda failed, they sent in the soldiers. The monotheistic ideology of Marxism does not proceed any differently, as it exports, in the name of some absolute truth, a set of universal laws (dialectical materialism). This Marxian interpretation of reality views matter as the sole subject of change and all change as the product of a constant conflict between opposites arising from the internal contradictions inherent in all events, ideas, and movements, to which it claims the whole of human history, in fact, the universe, is bound and that it is only a matter of time before humanity is converted to this truth, by argument, propaganda - or repression and violence.

The Machine Requires a Maker:

The missionaries of the past believed they were bringing realization of the one true God and the promise of his kingdom, to the natives. The Marxists bring the same promise in the form of some abstract, utopianistic dreamtime, for which they have been and are prepared to go to any length. Apart from the goal of Marxism being metaphysical, the way forward, dialectical materialism (its methodology) is also metaphysical and mechanistic (machine-like).

Materialism in enlightenment thought was inherently mechanistic. It followed from the metaphor that the universe might be this gigantic machine and that its inner affairs - like those of a machine - follow a determined path. Machines are deterministic simply because we make them to be so. When we press a button, we expect the machine to function in a certain predictable way. Similarly, to Newton, the Universe was this machine and the one that had pressed the initial button was God. This monotheistic philosophical blunder existed since the inception of the kind of materialism Marx was raised with and is implicit in the underlying assumptions of Marxist doctrine.

But such ontological assumptions are pure apriorism. They demand someone to step outside the world and take a peek at it. But we cannot step outside the world, both physically and/or linguistically, so every ontological assumption is synthetic a priori and thus nonsense. Ontological assumptions are not something that can be proven true or false. In this realm you can say anything. Its like arguing about the existence of God - and requires someone to step outside the world to make such a judgement. So, when one is talking in these ontological terms he or she is not saying anything.  Arguments about the existence or non-existence of God, or arguments about everything being material or immaterial, about invisible pink unicorns - are completely nonsensical. Second, the only way the metaphor of a corpuscular, mechanical universe would work (which is more or less what Marx’s materialism is - matter is determined by other matter ad infinitum) like a machine is if there was a God. Because if the universe is this orderly machine, rationally architectured for a certain purpose, then it MUST have been determined by a Mind.

Equality, The Other, One’s Self and the End of History:

In Marxist/totalitarian thinking, the other (the enemy, the bourgeoisie or whatever) are perceived as objects - abstractions which consciousness must interpret, or instrumentalize, working from data from an inanimate, subjective source (the doctrine). This leads to the interpretation of the other through a projection of one’s self - through the group or party one may belong to - which usually leads to the desire to eliminate everything that does not conform to the projection. The other is considered, most superficially, despite their genius, benevolence, individuality, compassion, loyalty, family, race, culture and so on, as a class - an evil driven by base intent, against which the good (the party, the doctrine) are mercilessly opposed. Only when all men are materially and culturally equal the propaganda goes, will humankind be free, happy and secure. This tendency of going through one’s self to interpret others is all the more absurd, when we consider that it makes impossible not only an understanding of the other but of one’s self, especially when we consider that one can only be fully conscious of ones own identity/class/religion/culture by contrasting it with the variation found everywhere outside it. We need the other in order to know how we are different from them. Rejection of the other is also a rejection of the process which allows self-building and self-transformation by a positive interaction with them.

This is why, in Marxist thinking, races and cultures amount to nothing - or are simply means to an end (e.g their support for ethnic minorities) – which are in real terms seen as impediments that stand in the way of the revolution and its goal, which, today, amounts to a one world government ruled by a military-industrial technocracy, where the mixing of races and cultures would be encouraged, and adherence to cultural norms discouraged, and in many cases, punishable by imprisonment and/or death. It is at this stage that the racist nature of Marxism becomes evident, in that it would destroy the particularities of cultures and races - and that these particularities must be destroyed if humankind is to achieve the ideal of cultural, social, political and economic equality, which again, in real terms, can and only begin, be maintained and end, in a red-fascist, totalitarian state, beyond which, as history has demonstrated, their can be no dialectical evolution leading to utopia, only repression, bloodshed and mass murder.

If one begins with a sufficient degree of ignorance of others, then one’s God, beliefs, doctrine, law, class, tribe will be the only true one - the only observable point of reference. And this is why monotheistic doctrines such as Marxism, at the same time as leading to a negation of the identity of others, also gives rise - in those who put them forward – to ignorance or unawareness of their own particular identity, one simply belongs to the party, to the class, to the state, to the struggle. Refusal to recognise the other, goes along with what would follow from such recognition: the evolution of peoples, tribes, nations and individuals, instead of which we have been given by the Abrahamic religions and their heir, Marxism, a narrow-minded, antiquated, fairy-tale theory proclaiming the end of history and the ushering in of utopia, the kingdom of heaven or whatever, which postulates the leveling effects of temporal and spatial homogeneity and an end of the movement of things set off by humankind’s diversity, a kind of obsession with purity that can be polluted by inferior elements; an obsession which sees impurity as a violation of the natural order, conformity to which is a condition of salvation.

Stagnation And Economic Irrationality:

In the old Soviet Union and in all communist countries, where the dictatorship owned/owns everything what sets in is not a zest for life and the future, but stagnation. As William Boyes Michael Melvin, Professor of Economics and a Dean’s Council Distinguished Scholar pointed out in Microeconomics (The Rights of Ownership). Seventh Edition. Houghton and Mifflin, 2008): If no one owns something no one takes care of it. Also it’s private property rights that count not public property rights. Incentive is the operative word here: In the former Soviet Union the government owned virtually everything. No one had an incentive to take care of anything. As a result, housing was decrepit and dingy, industries were inefficient and run down and the standard of living was very low…(Chapter 3).

In ideal terms, even after the state has withered away, how would such a society function, in terms of trade, manufacturing, distribution and government? When one considers these questions, the irrationality of the Marxist utopia is apparent. For example, how could there be any trade in goods if everybody owned everything, equally? Who would produce these goods? Who would sell them? Would they be given away? Who would decide who has what, and why? If a family required a bed or a house, would it be there for them to take? How would the concept of value be applied? How would the laws of society be framed? To quote Jung again: the infantile dream state of the mass man is so unrealistic, that he never thinks to ask - who is paying for this paradise?

The Brave New World (Marxism and the Corporate State):

Modern Marxists, unlike their classical predecessors, live in a different world. A world where capitalism hasn’t been superceded by socialism, where all the communist revolutions, have, in real time, failed, and failed spectacularly; where capitalism, not communism, has, if you like, dialectically progressed, from free enterprise to corporate, with the power to influence governments of both left and right-wing persuasions, between which today, there is little diference.

The reason for communist China’s success in both the commercial and industrial world, has little to do with Marxism and almost everything to do with corporate capitalism, which the Chinese party machine have embraced whilst still maintaining a stranglehold over the majority of its population, with little regard for human rights, democracy and freedom.

This is an extremely important development which illustrates that capitalism can function in cohabitation with the state and the party, an arrangement, thanks to Trotsky’s efforts, which first manifest prior to the Bolshevik Revolution and made the victory of such a revolution possible. As Huxley wrote in his Brave New World: The state or government of Brave New World is a mixture, a synthesis of capitalism and communism. Today, this is happening not only in China, but in the West, where the suppression of freedom, total survellance, higher taxes, extensive welfare and co-operation between government and corporate capitalist institutions (public-private partnerships) are at unpreidented levels and increasing, along with the steady erosion of democratic principles and forms of government. This development has brought with it a means whereby the political, military, media, bureaucratic and corporate elites - now have the technology, control the organs of propaganda and know how to stay in power, indefinitely. But that’s another story…

Opposed to this kind of monotheistic thinking, is an open, clear awareness of the diversity of humankind and the relativity of norms found in different groups/cultures/belief systems. The great thing about western democracy, and why, with all its dreadful faults, it has produced the greatest advances in human creativity and knowledge, are because the diversity of humankind and individuals was considered self-evident.

Yes, all men are considered equal, but not in the crass, ignorant ways depicted by monotheistic religions and ideologies, but equal in their rights as human beings, to grow and develop in a free society with others, regardless of their culture, race or creed - ideas all antithetical to Marxism, in theory and practice. If humankind is to survive, evolve and confront the very great problems it faces, it must do so in the spirit of democracy and freedom. If our leaders, in their wisdom, do away with democracy, freedom will follow, as history has demonstrated, like night follows day. If this is what they are planning, they do so at their own peril, and the peril of us all…


Eugene Donnini (2015)

 

 

By Eugene Donnini on 2015 04 16 - 11:51:54
From the entry 'The myth of metadata'.

with absolutely zero credible evidence to support his case, fenton tells anyone who will listen that a plane hit the pentagon. why anyone would chose to believe a word this pathetic liar says is beyond me.

By kityufityf on 2015 04 16 - 10:38:26
From the entry 'David Chandler weighs in on 9/11 Pentagon questions'.

Trust the truth for a nation all the best now citizens.

By OZE on 2015 04 15 - 16:41:47
From the entry 'Interview: Craig Isherwood of the CEC'.

Travesti Ankara Travestileri Travesti Zuhal Hosdere Ayranci Ankara TravestileriTravesti Ankara Travestileri Travesti Zuhal Hosdere Ayranci Ankara TravestileriTravesti Ankara Travestileri Travesti Zuhal Hosdere Ayranci Ankara Travestileri

By Ankara Travestileri on 2015 04 15 - 08:52:36
From the entry '911oz Policies'.

Travesti Ankara Travestileri Travesti Zuhal Hosdere Ayranci Ankara TravestileriTravesti Ankara Travestileri Travesti Zuhal Hosdere Ayranci Ankara TravestileriTravesti Ankara Travestileri Travesti Zuhal Hosdere Ayranci Ankara Travestileri

By Ankara Travestileri on 2015 04 15 - 08:51:33
From the entry 'A heart to heart talk with Fair Dinkum Leon'.

While rockets from Gaza aren’t failnlg close to CNN offices in Haifa, they will kill a Jew, Christian or Moslem just as dead.I’m personally outraged that the stagnant main streaming press ignores the fact that those killed by the rockets, especially the Israelis, are indeed martyred by these princes of Allah.  I’ll guess that Tehran, perversely, loves the non-Mohammedan world so much that they are willing to martyr us all so that we all may enjoy the 70 virgins… the poor murdering schmucks on the other hand.

By Betty on 2015 04 12 - 16:42:32
From the entry 'Israel's act of piracy is examined and condemned'.

AI fost macar acolo ? Lasa tu ce a distrus Ceasca , ca macar el a cotrusnit foarte multe , mai multe cladire istorice au fost distruse in noua democratie dar nimeni nu zice nimic de ele .Acuma si pelesul , castelul bran si o sumedenie de conace si palate de patrimoniu nici macar nu mai tin de stat , ci au fost retrocedate , cu toate ca au fost pastrate cu fonduri publice .

By Dalal on 2015 04 12 - 14:16:38
From the entry 'David Chandler weighs in on 9/11 Pentagon questions'.

Categories