The joys of running amok

It's all John's fault. I should have known better than to take his recommendation that we visit Craig Murray's blog. Craig Murray is really something. He was once ambassador to Uzbekistan and was rather good at it except for one small shortcoming. He called things as he saw them. Well that's him fucked. You won't get very far in the Foreign Service doing foolish things like that. Time to find a new career, sure enough. But it's all there on his blog and you can have a read. It's brilliant and Murray has instantly shot into my list of 'People Who Aren't Bullshit'. As John pointed out, Murray's suppressed book about English mercenaries in Sierra Leone, "The Catholic Orangemen of Togo and Other Conflicts I Have Known" is there in pdf form as a free download. I look forward to reading it


But never mind that. What with Murray having a blog, wondering at the world, and not being bullshit, it wasn't long before the usual suspects were piling in and giving him a hard time for the unspeakable crime of anti-Semitism! Not that he'd said anything anti-Semitic of course. It was some other fellow in his comments section who was the guilty party. As we all know too well, it didn't matter that what the fellow had said was true, nor that he'd failed to mention Jews and had in fact referred solely to 'zionists'. Anti-Semitism is the universal Wonder-Tool of accusations. It's whatever the accuser wants it to be and demands not only that you not do it, but that you must stop everyone else doing it too. The charge of anti-Semitism is basically a demand that one kowtow and otherwise concede the rightness of everything the accuser says.

I searched for an analogy just now and the ever-useful Nazi Germany popped into my head. Anyone in Nazi Germany who didn't object to the Nazis was guilty of being a Nazi. Except for the Zionists of course who were tremendous admirers of the National Socialist ideals of racial purity. No really, they said so, and even struck a commemorative medal with a swastika on one side and a star of David on the other. Racists of the world unite!


Best we pretend that that never happened and we all just carry on. In which case you need to know that the rule with all things Jewish is that one only has two choices: sing their praises, or be guilty of anti-Semitism. Take your pick.

Anyway, there I was in amongst a crowd of people, half of whom were attempting to have a rational discussion about an idiotic subject. As I learnt from hard experience, if the topic is idiotic to begin with, the only answer is to be the most idiotic person in the room. If I can make myself laugh then it's all good. And if anyone else has a giggle, so much the better. The following are my comments -

---

Oh dear, it's just like the bad old days on indymedia. Nazihunter is that really you? By his endless ad hominems ye shall know him.

I'm reminded by this debate of the school debating club. There, the greatest sin was to have the whole thing end up as a definitions debate. This being due to the fact that no debate could take place since no one would be able to agree on what it was we were talking about. Which is bad if the point is to have a debate. But it's good if the point is to kill the debate and just turn the whole thing into a pointless shit-slinging blatherfest. And since the Zionists could never win any debate on facts, it's blatherfest here we come. Every time. Always the same.

But why don't we do the definitions thing anyway? It passes the time. Mr Bronstein above is perfectly correct. Pretty much the whole Levant qualifies as Semitic. And, (with the irony running rampant) the only people of the Levant who aren't Semitic are the Ashkenazi Johnny-come-lately's all of whom came originally from Khazaria in the Caucasus (by way of Russia, Poland, Germany etc). Which is to say, they're Caucasian. Oh alright, arguably they're Turkic since that's where they started out. But either way they're no more Semitic than I am.

So - Between a Palestinian shooting one of his Caucasian Ashkenazi occupiers, and an Ashkenazi lobbing white phosphorus into the Gazan concentration camp (Biggest in the world! Bigger even than the Warsaw Ghetto!), where does the anti-Semitism lay?

So - Between the Ashkenazi authorities of the 50's who dragged Sephardim kids (and only Sephardim kids) out of school on the pretext of ringworm and blasted them with insane doses of radiation, (no really, google 'israel ringworm scandal'), and the adult Sephardim survivors who had lots of uncomplimentary things to say about the refusal of the Israeli government to compensate for, or even acknowledge, what was done to them, who was the anti-Semite?

So - Between the Ashkenazi Israeli government failing to pay the Ashkenazi Holocaust survivors in Israel any of the monies put into various Israeli banks by Germany as compensation, and the survivors who, sick of their penury and of being ignored for decades, complained that the Holocaust survivors in Germany were treated better than they were and shame on the Israeli government, who was the most anti-Semitic?

First correct answer gets a free ticket to Gaza. And for the runner up - two free tickets! Good luck!

-

PS. If anyone wants to get huffy and accuse me of anti-Semitism I offer the following perfectly valid reasons -
1 - I didn't do it and no such thing happened. (Just quietly, they probably did it themselves. They do that doncha know)
2 - I didn't do it, but they were shooting at me so I had no choice.
3 - I did do it but since the UN failed to tell me otherwise I had to shell that building with forty civilians in it.
4 - Well not that building. I was actually shelling another building where they most certainly were shooting at me (and I defy anyone to prove otherwise) and it was all a big accident.
5 - Anyway, I'm the victim and as the aggrieved party I can do no wrong. And besides, as a Caucasian, I assert my right to reject all criticism of me as anti-Semitism.

-

PPS Actually Ehud Olmert told me to say it. I was in the middle of a speech in Philadelphia and he called me mid-speech and of course I quit whatever I was doing and rushed over and he told me to tell Condoleeza Rice to tell the UN that it's not true that Zionists run America. So clearly Zionists do not run America or any other thing. And anyone who says otherwise like whoever it was that said, "The Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." are obviously anti-Semites. Oh now I remember, it was Ariel Sharon. Bloody anti-Semite!

Jonathon Livingston Stinkbug

Is there a purpose to life? Hmm... has anyone ever asked that question before? Maybe I'm the first, ha ha. And then there's stinkbugs. I wonder if a stinkbug ever asks this question? I shall call this curious fellow Jonathon Livingstone Stinkbug.


Are we familiar with stinkbugs? For those who groove on the Linnaean system they are family Pentatomidae, order Heteroptera. There's at least 5,000 different species and they're found on every continent on the planet. Their means of surviving environmental depredations, or more specifically predators, is very successful. They nail a predator with a really foul smelling liquid and otherwise taste like shit. Whilst I've never eaten one, I've smelt them and they're nasty. The smart money gives them a wide berth.

I saw a perfect demonstration of this when I was out on the balcony talking to my local grey butcherbird. I do all the talking sure enough, but he sings me a song and it's fair deal all round. And there we were when a big fat stinkbug landed less than a metre from the both of us. Both our heads turned and I waited for the coming inevitable violence. Nothing doing. He knew precisely what sort of bug it was and went straight back to the very important question of whether I had a bit of ham for him or not.

I knew not to touch the stinkbug because back when I was six or so, some other six year old said something along the lines of 'Don't touch it! It's a stinkbug!' Humans are clever like that. They can tell each other things. Butcherbirds don't have that facility. The only way any butcherbird learnt not to eat a stinkbug was by eating one and learning the hard way.

To hell with the butcherbird

Forget the butcherbird now, there's something extraordinary going on here. Stinkbugs are spectacular survivors and none of them are within cooee of extinction. But their mechanism of survival is arse-about. They don't ensure their own survival so much as they ensure each other's. The only way a butcherbird learns to leave them alone is because a stinkbug gave his life.

So, for our heteroptera philosopher, Jonathon Livingstone Stinkbug, between the two questions of, 'What is the purpose of life?', and 'What is the purpose of death?', one is a no-brainer (which is just as well since they are bugs of little brain). For our Jonathon, the purpose of death is to ensure life. Not for himself of course, but for every other stinkbug. And weirdly enough, in answering the latter question he goes some way in answering the former.

Obviously I'm drawing parallels here. Parallels with humans, natch. And if we're talking about humans we have to address the question of choice. Stinkbugs don't have a choice. And we do. Sure enough, we make choices all the time. Social Darwinists choose to emulate the predators of the world. As I've discussed before, that says less about Darwin than it does about them being self-serving motherfuckers. But it is what it is, and the human world is full of predators and the predated.

The occasional spook aside, if you're reading this blog it's my melancholy duty to inform you that you belong to the latter group. You are the predated. But happily Darwin says that there is more than one way of dealing with predators. Mostly we choose to emulate those creatures that run with a herd. We let the predators take the weakest whilst muttering, 'There but for the grace of God go I.' Or to put it another way, 'Please God let them eat somebody else, not me.'


Frankly this is piss-weak. It's not so much a thought, as a non-thought, the product of a brain seized by fear. As has been discussed in the comments section here recently, any herd that runs from predators could, if they chose to, stomp the shit out of them. But only if they stopped and thought about it, if they weren't possessed of fear, and crucially, if they acted in concert.

The predators know this of course and have ensured that the possibility of people acting in concert is nigh on impossible. The means of mass communication are subsequently in their hands. No voices of resistance or of organisation will be permitted. And yet here we are on the net, talking freely. But the net is purposely designed to be a cacophony. It's as precisely flooded with crap as the mainstream media is - millions and millions of people on facebook blathering about Paris Hilton and her foo-foo dog. But still, the potential is there and this is enough to warrant its destruction. Right this minute Australia's very own Senator Stephen Conroy is doing his damnedest to shut it down. It's all for our own safety, of course.

To hell with the herd

Let's not obsess on herds and the possibility, or lack thereof, of the herd acting in concert. I have no doubt that such resistance will take place. To a certain extent it already is. Not forgetting of course, that history is replete with such movements being co-opted and led by agents of the predators. The French Revolution, the Bolshevik revolution, Eastern Europe's various colour-coded revolutions, all run by the usual suspects and all designed to ensure that no harm comes to the top predators. As ever, the wolves lead the sheep in throwing down their shepherds. Three cheers - free at last!

Back to the stinkbugs now. They emphatically do not act in concert. Numbers ain't their bag. Their whole strategy functions on the sacrifice of fearless individuals. Certainly, they do not choose to be fearless. Their weeny grain-of-sand brains aren't up to it. But that's not the point. Our brains are up to it. We can choose. And we can be that fearless.

How might this plucky individual embody the strategy of Jonathon Livingstone Stinkbug? How might one, as a singleton, stick in the collective craw of the predators of the world? To be honest, actions such as this are quite common. We need merely look to the suicide bomber.


Suicide bombers sacrifice themselves in order to kill their oppressors. But suicide bombing has the precise opposite effect of that intended. As ever, the depiction of an event trumps its reality. With the bloc-media owning the rights to the meaning of a suicide bombing, they will achieve nothing useful, will enable the sowing of further seeds of fear and hatred, and most importantly will allow the bloc-media to portray the oppressed people (which the suicide bomber was ostensibly trying to help) as murderous madmen who deserve death. Everytime a suicide bomber does that thing, the motherfuckers clap in delight.

To hell with suicide bombing

What's needed is something unimpeachable, something that cannot be portrayed by the silken media voice of the predator as an excuse for more predation. Since it's me talking here, there is only a single thing that cannot be slurred, twisted, or impeached. And that thing, sure enough, is selflessness. If there's nothing in it for the person sacrificing himself, and no harm comes to others, how might that person's actions be misrepresented? Certainly the bloc-media will try but it will be a sure case of shit uphill. People know selflessness when they see it.

Has anyone heard of Norman Morrison? How about Thích Quảng Đức? No? Their names don't ring a bell? Funny that. In spite of their being two of the most extraordinary men in history they're almost perfectly absent from the media. It's not for no reason that the media ignores them. For mine, when the media ignores a subject it's a clue as to what they fear. The media voice of the predators would no more tell you about these men and what they did, than Achilles would say, 'Hey, did I tell you about my heel?!'


Somehow I doubt that either of these men were inspired by a stinkbug. But regardless, that's effectively what they did. They jammed themselves in the craw of the predator and ruined his fucking day. And yep, they did this by setting themselves on fire and being burnt alive. Are you recoiling in horror? Precisely, that's the whole idea. But over-the-top shock value aside, no one was harmed but themselves. The message was unambiguous and as loud as could be. Certainly they blew the minds of the punters but I expect they also blew the minds of the predators. True full-tilterama selflessness taken to the nth degree in this fashion is a real mindfuck.

To hell - with details

As usual, the devil is in the details. Let's skip the selflessness. This is actually the biggest hurdle but for the sake of the exercise, we're just going to take it as read. Beyond that first biggie, if the message and the means of delivering it aren't considered, all will be for nought. Like I said in a piece, Bloody Sunday, over at the cinema blog - If a monk burns in a plaza and no one sees, will it have done any good? (Actually, may I recommend that people read that piece? Sure it's a film review but it's not really a film review so much as a discussion of non-violent resistance, and the crucial aspect of it that the bloc-media unsurprisingly would prefer went unacknowledged).

Let's tackle our first question - Who are we aiming our action at? Our two heroes above were looking to shame the US military. And hats off to that. But we here are a little bit beyond that. The military is merely a servant. We want the masters. We want the bankers.


Here in Oz, the Reserve Bank of Australia is smack dab in the middle of Martin Place, which is smack dab in the middle of Sydney's CBD. Apart from the wee hours of the morning, Martin Place rarely has less than a hundred people in it. Most of the time there are thousands there, with more handicams and mobile phones than you could poke a police baton at. Perfect.

Okay, so it's filmed, uploaded to youtube, forced into the media with everyone seeing it. And?
'Man! Some guy burned himself alive in Martin Place!'
'Why?'
'Beats Me!'

Worthless. You may as well have slathered yourself with guacamole and sung the Yah Di Buckety song. (Well, if you're going to be meaningless, you may as well be funny). If you don't want to be meaningless, you need a message that makes sense and a place it can be seen. Welcome to the internet. The internet is a big place sure enough but people could be directed by way of a thousand flyers scattered about with a url printed on it. Nothing else, just that. After all, you don't want to give the game away early. And later, after the TV crews arrive and bail up the ashen faced witnesses, they'll stare into the camera and say, 'I don't know man, it seems the answer is on this piece of paper. It says...'

---

Okay I admit it. I've taken huge dapartures from the simple brainless method of the Stinkbug. But the fundamental principle is right there and the aim is unchanged. It's still a simple act of selflessness for the sake of others. And when the politicians get on the telly (with their sad faces on) and say, 'We don't want anyone copying this individual' you'll know they're scared. Something just got stuck in their craw.

Buy Nothing Day? Bank Nothing Day!

When I had an income I used to buy Adbusters magazine. Adbusters is a good magazine, albeit in a oxymoronic fashion. They're anti-corporate, anti-consumerist, and are the chief proponents of 'Buy Nothing Day'. Me, I took this sentiment to heart and made every day Buy Nothing Day, Adbusters included. Do they still exist Adbusters? You'd have to wonder about a product that urges you not to buy any products, theirs included. Perhaps they should have called it 'Buy Nothing Except This Magazine Day', ha ha. But then Adbusters never did have a sense of humour.

Self contradictions aside, their broad point was perfectly valid. Corporations are soulless inhuman entities that will only ever view people in terms of dollars. In many ways, they're just the old company-store gag writ large, and with a marketing division. Fuck the lot of them. If somebody took corporations out the back and shot them, I'd bring the beers.

But corporations aren't intrinsically wicked. There's no reason a corporation couldn't be as good as their marketing says they are. Conceivably they could make good and useful products that make the world a better place; they could make all their staff into shareholders and pay them a decent wage; they could also pay decent prices for any raw materials purchased in the third world; they could... hell I could go on and on describing some fantasy corporation that will never exist. Not in this world. If such a creature did exist, the other corporations would have to kill it if for no other reason than it makes them look bad.

Daydreaming aside, the point I'm getting at is that corporations are not intrinsically wicked in the way that (apropos the last piece) banks are. By banks I mean the banks that we're all forced to use, those based on a system of usury. Usury is their operating system and every aspect of them is built on it. On top of usury's intrinsic wickedness, there's also its undeniable no-future pyramid scam idiocy. Truth be known the former is derived from the latter. It's like how pork is considered wicked on account of its propensity, if stored without refrigeration, to kill people.

So if we object to corporations and can withdraw our custom by way of a Buy Nothing Day, why can't we do the same for banks? Why can't we have a Bank Nothing Day? Well, I'll tell you, because it's actually very simple. It's because this option is a non-option. Or to put it another way, an abject impossibility. When it comes to banks, you can either use them or you can fuck off and die. Banks, which should be merely just another service provider, ain't. They are utterly singular. They are the only service provider that your own government demands you must be a customer of.


Take me for example. I actually did this. I took all my money out of the bank, shut down my accounts, and cut up my credit cards. If you wanted to tell me I'm nuts, I'm not going to argue with you. Hell, I'll agree, I am nuts. It all seemed like a good idea at the time what with me imagining that I'd be spending the rest of my life in a Zen temple. But that didn't work out and here I am back in the white man's world, a mad bastard who refuses to go back to the bank.

Mind you, it's all very well for me, what with being single with no kids. People who do have kids don't have this option open to them. But that's somewhat short-sighted - I don't actually have this option open to me either. My life is precisely as impossible as yours would be. Not having a bank account bars me from just about everything. Working, or more exactly working legally, is impossible. Not only are there very few employers willing to pay cash but the only way to deal with the tax department is via a bank account. Likewise no government monies can be paid or received without a bank account. I have several reasons for refusing to take the government's money but not least amongst them is the fact that they demand I be a bank customer.

It's not just things monetary that one is barred from. I cannot get a driver's license either because I don't have enough ID's. One needs three pieces of identification to get a driver's license and the one that I'm missing is a bank account. They've got it stitched up these fucking banks don't they? My own government acts as their stand-over man insisting I give them my money.

So what's to be done? Apart from following me into oblivion? There's Islamic banking, sure. Good luck with that one. Can a punter walk into an Islamic bank and open an account? Not where I live. What of those non-money exchange systems that one hears of people in country areas using? They have various names - hours, echoes, etc. These are a perfectly brilliant idea and are the living embodiment of non-usurious money. Invariably there is no 'money' as such. They are often merely a 'credit' in a public central register. If one works an hour (say, mowing Mrs. Farquhar's lawn) one is credited with an 'hour'. It's debt free and functions on a simple labour-equals-credit basis. The richest person in town, rather than being an object of envy, would be admired by all on account of the fact that he/she has done the most for the most people.


Otherwise, perhaps people could get together and just make their own bank. Is there any reason why this can't be done? Find a building, renovate it with a big fuck-off safe, and declare yourselves a no-interest, 100% reserve, non-fractional bank. Hell, run it on Islamic principles. The appeal to customers is that unlike every other bank, it cannot collapse and will never have a bank run. The sales pitch to new customers would function as a quick lesson in the history of banking.

Mind you, it occurs to me that the regular bullshit cartel banks would view such a creature as the anti-christ and would do whatever it took to kill it. Perhaps it would be best to keep it low-key, very low-key. Before I ran off to the Zen monastery, I attempted to talk all of my friends into quitting the city and running off to the country to form some variation of commune (not that I care for the word). I failed obviously but had that succeeded a simple let's-keep-it-to-ourselves version of the above private bank would have made a lot of sense. It would have been a variation of 'keeping your money under the bed' albeit with some crazy big bed with a dozen families in it. Don't worry, it's just a metaphor. Actually it would just be a well-hidden safe in which everyone kept their money, and all administered by, I don't know, several senior trustworthy people. Individuals could know how much money they had, and otherwise keep an eye on things, by checking a public computer kept in the lavanderia/meeting house. Well that was my plan anyway. (BTW - the name of this place, had it come off, would have been selflessness. Sigh)

The key to each of the above is people acting in concert. The word 'commonwealth' just popped into my head. It's been abused to the point of death now, but in principle it's a worthy idea. It's meaning now, as in 'The Commonwealth of Australia', is so far departed from its roots that it's laughable. The state owns it, and the state, such as it is, belongs to the bankers. The bankers, sure enough, don't view the word 'common' as meaning 'shared'. They view it as meaning 'of, or belonging to, serfs'. And for them, the punchline to the 'commonwealth' gag is 'all flows to us', ha ha. Well, fuck them. We can steal it back. But only if we can act in concert. Easier said than done, sure enough. The success of the banks and their corporate whores in turning Western society into an atomised, centrifugal collection of self-obsessed greedheads has been almost total.

Without any mechanism by which we can act in concert, we're fucked. We're just a bunch of John Connors hoping we don't fall afoul of Arnie or any of the other terminators. Well not quite. John Connor didn't have the internet (Hollywood hates the internet, doncha know). We have it, but what does that mean? We can communicate sure, but can we act in concert? Nup. We don't have the numbers to do anything global. We could do something if we were local, but we ain't. Never mind, we've found a quiet corner and we can all swap ideas. So enough of me and mine, you tell me yours. Buy Nothing Day is a doddle. How do we do Bank Nothing Day? Over to you...

Islamic banking, Jewish banking, and a medley of mixed metaphors

In the current discussion of all things economic, there's been one aspect of it all that I've been keeping an eye out for, so far without much luck. But the odd piece pops up. Here's an article out of AP that's one of the few that I've found - Crisis widens appeal of Islamic finance.

Before we get into the big stuff let's just tear the article apart. It seems pretty innocuous doesn't it? It says nice things about Islamic banking. Sure enough, it's not what's in the article that is the problem. It's what's not in it. And what's not in it is the word 'usury'. Likewise, 'interest' gets a single blink-and-you-miss-it mention, and only in a sentence that's as fine an example of ambiguity as you'd find in an English textbook. The next sentence is perfectly idiotic. "[Islamic banking's limitations] rule out some of the products that got Western finance into so much trouble such as subprime mortgages, collateralized debt obligations or credit default swaps". Some of the products? God spare me! Is that the best this fellow do? Me to him - 'Wake up dickhead! It doesn't have interest! Can you grasp the significance of this?' Somebody slap that hack. Hard.

This piece (like every other MSM piece, sure) is not so much designed to enlighten readers but to befuddle them. Those not familiar with the topic would come away thinking that Islamic banking is some religious variation of 'not quite the thing'. It finishes, just as we'd expect, with a defence of 'conventional' banking. God forbid we should call 'conventional' banking what it is - Jewish banking.

Honestly, isn't that a fair description? In fact, what we now refer to as Islamic banking used to be Christian banking. Christians, like Muslims, used to consider usury, and the charging of interest, to be a sin. Apparently the Reformation somehow put paid to that. From a state of complete ignorance, I ask the question - How did that happen? Did any historian ever write a book looking at the Reformation from the point of view of Christianity's 180° turn on usury? Or if they did, did any publisher put it into print? Or if they did, did the media pick it up, run with it, and enter it into the vernacular? Ha ha ha, we're not a million miles away from a Dyson vacuum cleaner commercial with its three-tiered filter system ensuring no dirt gets through to ruin Jewish banking's otherwise spotless house.


But to hell with vacuum cleaners. I'm going to call 'conventional' banking what it is - Jewish banking. It's their gig, they invented it, and they've held the reins ever since. It started with the goldsmiths and it never changed. And now it rules the world. Three cheers. Sure enough, those chosen by God would have us view everything they do as an act of that self same God. Jewish banking is to be viewed as being as inevitable as the sunrise. In much the same way that no one will ever say, 'What's to be done about that sun coming up every morning?', same-same usury, credit, and interest. No discussion of the essential nature of money, banking, and how it all works (or doesn't work), is to be permitted. Certainly not in any way that will lead to enlightenment. Befuddlement is the key. If the whole world were scratching their collective head with only those who run the gag getting it, then all is as it should be. Or so say the bankers (sotto voce, of course).

Jewish banking, such as it is, is actually a pyramid scam, not so very far removed from what we've been told Bernard Madoff did. (Speaking of which, remember those pyramid scams that bankrupted Eastern Europe after the collapse of the Soviet Union? Did we ever hear who ran those, or where the money went? No? Gosh, I wonder who it was.) Anyway, under Jewish banking, with all money as debt, eventually a point must be arrived at where there's more debt than there is actual real world stuff to pay for it all. Really the insanity of this arrangement is obvious. Take Indonesia. They owe so much to the IMF that the debt can never be paid. Not without the Indonesians moving out and handing the whole country, lock stock and oil barrel, over to their creditors. Not that that would work of course. Best they all just stay on as debt peons. And so it is for the world. Eventually we must come to a point where everything in the world, us included, belongs to the bankers.

Are we at that point yet? Looks like it doesn't it? The pyramid scam has hit its endpoint. Now comes the chaotic crossover period where the priests of banking declare themselves god-kings of the new world order. But mucky stuff happens in periods of chaos. Our media supplied rose-tinted glasses slip. The three-tiered filter can't quite suck up all the dirt. People look about. Islamic banking eh? Sure enough, nobody needed it when the pyramid scam was raging. This thing would go on forever! Fuck shank's pony! Everyone get on the gravy train!


Ha ha ha. Now the train has derailed. We all look to the conductor. 'Don't worry, stay in your seats. Everything's being sorted out.' he says. But out the window we see an old iron horse, like some thing from the dimly remembered past. It chugs away - weedy-puff, weedy-puff - barely faster than walking speed. It can no more derail than Ayer's Rock could just fall over. It's the Islamic Banking steam engine. What if we got off this stupid Jewish banking streamliner and got on the old reliable? And that's the thing. We could all get on it. And with perfectly dry eyes we would watch as the nightmare wreckage of the Jewish dream machine slowly recedes into the unlamented past.

And that's what it's all about. The means of our peonage is the Jewish banking system's control of money and debt. The only way this works is if we have no choice, ie. it's a monopoly. Anyone with an alternative must be destroyed. The only substantial alternative to Jewish usury is Islamic non-usury. Remember - Jewish usury and banking is precisely the vehicle (I'll argue the only vehicle) by which the ultimate ambition, subjugation of the whole world, can be achieved. Everything else comes second. Everything else is servant to this ne plus ultra mechanism. Neither war, nor religion, nor culture could achieve this. Each of them is limited. None of them can achieve the strategic endpoint of world domination. They can only serve as tactical responses to threats to the usury strategy.

Soapbox time now - Everything that's going on between us, the subjects of Jewish banking, and the people of the Islamic banking alternative is about the sanctity of usury. Everything. Don't think small. Think big. Thinking big now, how about this - the founding of Israel was not an end in itself. It too is merely a tactical ploy in the long term strategic effort of having the entire world being owned by the banking families. Israel is merely a cancer expressly planted in the geographic heart of the lands that do not pay fealty to Jewish banking. In the Middle East. Where the Muslims are. And do the Rothschilds and their pals actually live there? No? Um, okay. Is that not significant?

Way back when, like a century ago, various other countries were being mooted as potential homes for Zion. These were just lobbed up as smokescreen. Israel was never intended to be a safe home for Jews. It was always intended to be a mad little hornet's nest that would ensure war with its neighbours. The religiously deluded, expendable Jews in Israel are there to be used up and thrown away by the banking families in their campaign of dominance by usury. Forget platitudes and homilies. Whatever Israel claims to be on about, it will never achieve it. It will never be a safe haven. It will never be a regularly functioning country. It has no future that makes any sense.


The impossibility of Israel only makes sense if we view it as, I don't know, how about a parachute regiment dropped behind enemy lines? Their mission is (truth be known) to blow up some Islamic banks. Everything else is bullshit designed to convince the regiment to go on a mission from which they cannot be saved. And what? We're going to tell them that? Hardly. 'Men of the paratroop regiment! Take that terrain and make an eternal home for paratroopers the world over! The future is yours!' The strategists back in their villas on the shores of Lago di Como (who'd no more live in Israel than eat their own shit) know how to inspire their men.

And they know how to inspire us. We've been sold that fucking mission statement too. (Am I alone in hating that expression? When I hear the words 'mission statement' I reach for my gun, ha ha.) And we bought it. Israel something or other, terrorism, bullshit, bullshit, the economy, governments, fucking hell, let's riot and set fire to cars! We shake our fists at whomever.

Meanwhile, down at the Islamic bank, Mr Anouar "I don't think conventional banks are dirty, bad, or money obsessed" Hassoune is diligently, and honestly, totting up the figures with no idea that it's all about him. He's it.

Merry Xmas, Ha Ha

And as we run into Xmas, isn't there lots of neat stuff happening at the moment? An untouchable, Bernard Maddox, falls. Where might his money have gone? Could be anywhere, says James Petras, of a fellow he acknowledged a few paras earlier as a zionist. In fact, says Petras, for destroying the upper class, Maddox is a hero and deserves to be sent to Israel. No really! He actually said that.

Otherwise I can't help thinking of Zim Shipping moving out of the WTC a fortnight before its collapse. Who'll give me odds that we soon see our Bernard swanning about in Tel Aviv? Along with those Jewish billionaires he 'defrauded'. If I said that the Rothschilds are giving everyone their take-it-or-leave-it marching orders, would the argument fall at the first hurdle?

The wars in the Middle East are as much about destroying the US military as they are about destroying the Middle East. And the Rothschild's Fed is destroying the US economy. So why don't we just say it? The US is in the process of being destroyed. Or let's put it this way - If the US was being destroyed by the Rothschilds (say), wouldn't the penultimate act be to destroy the wealth of the American ruling class and spirit away the assets of the Jewish Billionaires? It works for me.

Anything else going on? Assorted cables were cut in the Middle East. Again! One cable sure. Two, a mind-buggering coincidence. Three, a flat out impossibility. Last time it was actually eight cables, believe it or not. This time let's see if this current number of three doesn't climb. Me, I'm still convinced that this cable cutting is big. Dry runs are one thing but eventually it'll be the real deal. Is this it? Well, yours truly, great sage and equal of heaven, seems to have misplaced his hindsight spectacles. I'll find them eventually, and get back to you.

Otherwise Canada's Harper pulled a swifty, crushed a no confidence motion, and is now ruling without parliament until the New Year. Wow, that sounds drastic doesn't it? In Europe, Greece has dissolved into riots with the question being, when does Europe follow? Israel is set to invade Gaza. All they need is the right international distraction. Actually Israel has lots of war plans. They're just itching to have Lebanon, Syria, and Iran all 'Get Some!' Netanyahu is exactly the kind of guy who'd climb in a chopper just for the joy of machine gunning running peasants. 'Get Some!'


But I'm being premature surely - they'd never pull anything over Xmas. Xmas is sacrosanct ...really? To whom? Try to picture an attack on Xmas day. Can you imagine that? How about the Rothschilds? Might they imagine it? I don't see why not. They're imaginative people. Perhaps the most imaginative who ever lived.

One thing's for sure, if anything happens on Xmas day we'll know that this is it. A monster false flag on Xmas itself would count as a 'fuck-you' so huge that it could mean only one thing - the time is now and the New World Order is upon us. A Xmas day attack would be the spit-on-the-crucifix that makes all the other crucifix-spitting look like a ho-hum daily event in Palestine.

There'll be no questions about this in the media of course. They will be the fear-and-anger sound system that goes to eleven. If you ask them why not just make it go to ten - or any other thing - they will just look at you blankly. They will have us all know the rightness of bombing, killing and otherwise inflicting misery and suffering upon whomever. Muslims I expect. Muslims revere Jesus as much as Christians do, but never mind. That will be spun somehow - spun so that we in the West will be so angry that we'll get all-kinds-of-Old-Testament on... Hell! You tell us! We're good!

A Xmas day attack will be the end of as-we-know-it. The plans of the CFR, the Bilderbergers, and their Rothschild sponsors do not call for more of the same. The plans call for more-for-them and less-for-us. The population must be thinned. The pretence of democracy will be over. The death-and-mayhem chaos must be total. Many, many will have to die. From this chaos will rise the Rothschild's lovely one world thingy. We will have peace, love and understanding - with lovely Rothschilds uber alles. 'Oh, thank God, peace at last.'

But that's only if they blow shit up on Xmas day. If nothing blows up, ignore everything I just wrote. What was I thinking of? Madness. Just forget the whole idea and have a lovely Xmas. And you can look forward to the New Year safe in the knowledge that you've at least another year of freedom. So! Merry Xmas! I hope you and your families enjoy a day of love and laughter. And me, I'm off to the beach for the traditional Xmas day surf.


PS. If this is it, and the internet ceases to function and we never meet again, can I just say how nice it was to have met you all! It was all absolutely brilliant.

Lots of love, nobody, ha ha.

Muntadhar al Zaidi منتظر الزيدي - Man Of The Decade

For fearlessly speaking the naked truth by way of two lustily thrown shoes; for his whisker-close accuracy; for gallantry above and beyond the rock hard certainty of his torture; for the succinct, spot-on beauty of his prose; for showing that there is such a thing as a journalist who isn't a whore; and for getting it so marvellously right with an idea whose time was long past due, there's nothing for it but to declare Muntadhar al Zaidi, not just man of the year, but Man Of The Decade.


Seriously folks. Who can remember the last time we saw a single individual get it so exactly right? And let's not quibble over the fact that he missed. Given the now-or-never situation he was in, he got in two cracking throws. Not forgetting that what's truly great about this, what sets it apart, it that this is just the beginning. There will be plenty more shoes shied at plenty more heads in the days to come. Muntadhar al Zaidi will go down in history as that greatest of things, the fellow who came up with an idea so simple, and so obvious, that everyone else then fell about wondering how come they never thought of it.


And shoe throwing eh? There's a subtle genius in this. For instance, how do you guard against it? Make everyone take their shoes off? Really? As security precautions go, it sounds like the kind of final-straw that could break a fascist camel's back. And what did his protest cost? Half of bugger all? Oh all right, maybe you have shoes that cost a hundred dollars. But seriously, bounce one of those suckers off John Bolton's head (just for starters you understand) and it's money well spent. The other beauty of this is that it's beyond the control of all those bullshit gate-keeping protest movements. These being the movements that are currently busy ensuring the protests starting to sweep Europe are just what the NWO doctor ordered (more on this soon).


Muntadhar al Zaidi - I salute you! You've single-handedly restored the pride of the people of Iraq, the Arabic speaking people, and Muslims everywhere. We in the West can only look on in admiration. May God bring you peace, prosperity, and health.

Open Letter to the Villains of the World

Att - Messrs. Vladimir Putin, Hu Jintao, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, Hassan Nasrallah, Fidel Castro, et al,

Dear Sirs,

The Western bloc-media has declared you the villains of the world. You know as well as I do that none of you, nor your countries, nor your people, will ever get a break in the Western media. The entire media sings from the same song-sheet with a simple message. Each of you is a variation of Orwell's Emmanuel Goldstein. Collectively you are those whom we must hate.

To be honest, I don't know where your heads are at precisely. But I'm assuming that you understand how the world works. I'm assuming that you're perfectly aware that the Reserve Banks of the world are privately owned and what this means. Tie this power to the undeniable bloc nature of the media and its refusal to acknowledge this power, and it's no great feat of logic to arrive at the conclusion that the media is, in essence, a machine to cloud our minds to the nature of our subjugation.

Effectively we are all participate in a mad charade, an idiotic drunken parlour game, wherein the perpetual topic-du-jour is that old chestnut 'What's to be done?' To obey the rules of the game we must discuss this topic in every way possible but we must never mention the chief protagonists, which is to say, international banking. The entire perverse system of monetary policy, and control of the means of exchange, must be dealt with, not as a human contrivance subject to alteration, but as an act of God that may not be questioned.


I notice that you all play within the parlour game rules. And some of you do quite well occasionally. Mr Putin has had some interesting footage showing him staring down a tiger and displaying his martial arts ability. Hats off. But between these minor efforts (which, trust me, the media did its best to spin as vaguely comedic, or undignified, or otherwise as 'not quite the thing') and, say, the watertight depiction of Russia as the ogre of Ossetia, it's small potatoes. But all of you receive the same thing.


In China, never mind the tirelessness of Hu Jintao throwing himself amongst the people struck homeless in that earthquake, nor the millions of servicemen and women he then mobilised into a fearless hands-on disaster relief (which the American government could watch as a 'How to' if the welfare of their citizens was worth tuppence to them), the Western media barely batted an eyelid. Besides, their reporters were far too busy looking for Chinese citizens unhappy with their government. And they found them, sure enough, one after another. (Well, shit, eh? Like this is difficult - Pick a country, any country). With this as the perpetual template, unsurprisingly we in the West will only ever know of the Chinese as villains. And when the bankers move against China (à la David Sassoon and his opium wars) we in the deluded West will righteously cheer its destruction. And geez, you can hardly blame us - all we know is what we are told.


Perhaps you have your fingers crossed. Just like Tariq Aziz. He was the Iraqi Foreign Minister in the run up to the invasion of Iraq. It didn't matter how much he kowtowed and did as he was ordered (always scrupulously obeying the rules of the parlour game). His handing over of the complete 40,000 pages detailing the weapons programme and allowing the CIA-infested weapons inspectors to wander all over his sovereign nation was never going to make a lick of difference to Iraq's inevitable bombing. And that's the lot of anyone who plays within the rules of the parlour game. You will always be on the back foot. It's not your game and if you stay within it, you will lose. And lose big. Destruction-of-your-nation big. I'm sure you get it.

In any conflict, whoever follows the agenda set by their opponent will always be on the back foot, always reduced to defensive tactics. It stands to reason. The only way to 'win' (exactly the wrong word but let's carry on) is to seize the initiative. And the only way to do this is to Call The Game. The game isn't hidden from public view for no reason. Nor does its veiled nature add some minor degree of utility to the whole caper. This veil of delusion is the single crucial function by which the enterprise succeeds or fails. Pull away that veil and start a global public discussion on the true nature of reserve banking (and the role the media plays as its handmaiden) and the bankers (and their media monkeys) will be forced into unfamiliar territory. I expect that even wrongfooted like this they will still be formidable opponents. But at least you'll have them on the back foot.


So. Rather than stand in front of the UN and call George Bush the devil, or mouth generalities about peace amongst men of good will, why not call the game? I'm not going to say that this is easy. Packing the history of international banking and control of the world's money supply into fifteen minutes is no easy task. But it can be done. Hell, if you want a hand, for an absurdly modest fee I'm your man. The comment section is below, and world leaders are perfectly welcome, ha ha.


But forget me, I'm nobody. This will be your gig. In English 'your' can be singular and plural. Take it here as the plural. Acting in concert will be vital. Each of you must reinforce the others and put out a consistent, coordinated and coherent message. And the beauty of it is that all you will have to do is: tell the truth; not waste time on red-herrings; and stick to your guns. The last part of this will not be easy. God knows that in this bullshit world there's nothing braver than the man who tells the truth. And we all know how powerful those who control the money supply are. They whacked Kennedy and got away with it. And they can whack you too. But only if you're a singleton. Act in concert and the possibility of your silencing becomes ever more unlikely.

But if you stay silent, stay isolated, one way or another they're going to whack you anyway. You and your whole nation. The bloc-media hasn't invested all this time and capital painting each of you as the enemy for nothing. They don't do this lightly. They do this because they are the part of the machine that is going to destroy you. How about this - the media is the laser that paints the target so that the bomb knows where to go. The bomb is us, sure enough. Make no mistake, you are lit up by that laser.

Forget living in the shadows. The media-laser loves it there. The media doesn't just light things up, they actually render in the shadow also. In fact, this rendering of shadow is their primary purpose. If anything they're better at that than casting light. The only strategy for dealing with this mastery of darkness is to flood the whole place with the broad daylight of truth.

It's easy and it's hard. But the time is now, you're the men for the job, and no job was more worth doing. You know this is true.

I have a dream. I dream that you're not the servants of the bankers. I dream that you're possessed of intellect, of free will, and of big balls. I dream that you're men whose place in history will be that reserved for those who usher in an era. An era free from delusion. An era of peace and prosperity. A second Enlightenment, perhaps. It's not impossible. And all things being equal, why wouldn't you pick this dream? Who but a slave would follow someone else's dream of warfare, starvation, misery and suffering? Are you not masters of which dreams you choose? If you are serious, bold, act in concert, and stay true, this false dream, this nightmare, is yours to smash. You will be your own masters and earn the thanks of a world freed of delusion and subjugation. That's my dream. What's yours?