Still Abusing Detainees At Bagram.

Marc Ambinder confirms that there is a secret facility at Bagram run by the Pentagon's Defense Counterintelligence and Human Intelligence Center where detainees are subject to abusive interrogation techniques, under "secret authorization" from the Obama administration to ignore the executive order the President signed last year:

However, under secret authorization, the DIA interrogators use methods detailed in an appendix to the Field Manual, Appendix M, which spells out "restricted" interrogation techniques.

Under certain circumstances, interrogators can deprive prisoners of sleep (four hours at a time, for up to 30 days), to confuse their senses, and to keep them separate from the rest of the prison population. The Red Cross is now notified if the captives are kept at the facility for longer than two weeks.

When interrogators are using Appendix M measures, the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, Gen. James Clapper (Ret.) is the man on the hook. Detainees designated as prisoners of war cannot be subjected to Appendix M measures.

The administration says that the Red Cross is given access to detainees and that they are not abused, but this is false on its face, in two ways. The BBC has previously reported that as many as nine detainees have reported being subject to abuse at Bagram's "black jail."

The second is that the use of sleep deprivation is torture. As former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin wrote of his time in the custody of the KGB:

In the head of the interrogated prisoner, a haze begins to form. His spirit is wearied to death, his legs are unsteady, and he has one sole desire: to sleep... Anyone who has experienced this desire knows that not even hunger and thirst are comparable with it.

Reducing people's minds to mush also has the downside of making it difficult for them to answer questions coherently.

Let's also not let "confuse the senses" slip by. This is possibly a euphemism for sensory deprivation, which can be among the most excruciating forms of torture imaginable. Here's an excerpt from an account on early experimentation with sensory deprivation that Hilzoy flagged last year:

Dr Donald O. Hebb at McGill University found that he could induce a state akin to psychosis in a subject within 48 hours. Now, what had the doctor done? Hypnosis, electroshock, LSD, drugs? No. None of the above. All Dr Hebb did was take student volunteers at McGill University where he was head of Psychology, put them in comfortable airconditioned cubicles and put goggles, gloves and ear muffs on them. In 24 hours the hallucinations started. In 48 hours they suffered a complete breakdown.

II don't know if this is what "confuse the senses" means in the context of Bagram, but it's worth more looking into.

Whatever credibility the Obama administration had remaining on the subject of breaking continuity with the Bush administration on issues of human rights is fast eroding. The irony is that the torture wing of the Republican Party will both feel vindicated and argue that the Obama administration represents a radical departure from the policies of the last administration.

-- A. Serwer

Posted by Adam Serwer on May 14, 2010 10:39 AM

Fines for refusing to take part in ABS health survey

By Sue Dunlevy From: The Daily Telegraph May 19, 2010 12:08AM

People face fines if they fail to provide information on their health and lifestyle to ABS researchers Source: Supplied

• Fines for refusing to answer
• Up to 50,000 people face fines
• ABS says participation is compulsory

UP TO 50,000 people face a fine of $110 a day if they refuse to divulge information on their health and lifestyle to Australian Bureau of Statistics researchers.

The Australian Health Survey announced in last week's Budget will be the most comprehensive research on the health of Australians ever undertaken and will be jointly funded by the National Heart Foundation.

But the 50,000 people chosen to take part will be compelled to do so.

Participants will be weighed and measured and will be asked to give a blood and urine sample.

They will also be asked detailed questions on what they drink and eat and their physical activity.

The ABS said participation "is ultimately compulsory for those chosen by random sampling to ensure the survey accurately represents the Australian population as a whole".

However, participants would only be compelled to answer questions. Providing a blood and urine sample and weighing in would be voluntary.

While it would seek co-operation of those selected, the ABS said it had the power to direct unwilling respondents to provide information.

"If a participant was directed in writing and continued to refuse to comply, they may be prosecuted under the Census and Statistics Act 1905 and a fine may be imposed," a spokesman for the ABS said.

"A fine of up to $110 per day may be imposed until such time as the information is supplied."

Australian Medical Association president Dr Andrew Pesce said the survey would provide valuable information for designing preventative health policies.

"I can't imagine the Government has any intention of prosecuting people who don't co-operate," he said.

National Heart Foundation chief Lyn Roberts said she understood the survey would be conducted in a similar way to the ABS's National Health Survey.

"The difference is a voluntary component allowing participants to provide biomedical data which will allow policy-makers to use verified data on their health for the first time rather than self-reported data, which we know . . . can be unreliable."

POLICE STATE 4

---

Kagan Involved In 9/11 Cover Up
Supreme Court Nominee Helped Obama Shut Down 9/11 Families Lawsuits

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, May 12th, 2010

In addition to the attacks on free speech, detainee rights and the close connections to Goldman Sachs, another noteworthy black mark on the record of Elena Kagan, the president's nominee to the Supreme Court, is that she played a significant part in killing off the efforts of 9/11 victims' families to bring lawsuits against members of the Saudi Royal family for financial links to the conspiracy.

Last year, thousands of family members filed suits claiming that Saudi Arabia and four of its princes actively aided in financing the terrorist attacks through front groups posing as charities.

The New York Times ran a report in June highlighting how documents uncovered by lawyers for the 9/11 families “provide new evidence of extensive financial support for Al Qaeda and other extremist groups by members of the Saudi royal family.”

The documents consisted of “several hundred thousand pages of investigative material” assembled by the 9/11 families, according to the report.

The families also pointed to a 28-page, classified section of the 2003 joint congressional inquiry into 9/11 that deals with the Saudi role in the attacks.

Had the cases been heard, the exposure given to the Saudi connection would have undoubtedly opened the flood gates for more suppressed evidence surrounding the attacks to emerge.

"The revelations would undoubtedly shatter the official explanations of the September 11 attacks and point to complicity on the part of US intelligence and security agencies." writer Barry Grey noted at the time in his excellent piece on the government's effort to shut down the lawsuits.

"Given its longstanding and intimate ties to the Saudi royal family and Saudi intelligence, it is not possible to believe that the CIA would have been unaware of Saudi support for Al Qaeda and at least some of the 19 hijackers, 15 of whom were Saudi nationals, as they were preparing to carry out the attacks on New York and Washington." Grey wrote.

Enter Elena Kagan.

In her previous role at the Justice Department as Obama's Solicitor General, she declared that “that the princes are immune from petitioners’ claims” owing to “the potentially significant foreign relations consequences of subjecting another sovereign state to suit.”

Kagan effectively protected the oil rich Saudi monarchy in seeking to halt further legal action to hold it liable for the attacks.

The move just happened to come less than a week before Obama was scheduled to meet and bow before Saudi King Abdullah as part of his "rebuilding" trip to the Middle East.

More than 6000 9/11 family members denounced the move as an "apparent effort to appease a sometime ally" in a public statement.

Less than a month later, The Supreme Court ruled that it would not allow any of the lawsuits to go ahead, agreeing that the Saudi princes should be protected by sovereign immunity - a concept that seems to have no bearing on CIA drone delivered missiles raining down on Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Following the debacle, Senators Arlen Specter and Lindsey Graham introduced legislation to allow US citizens to sue foreign governments if there is evidence they may be supporting terrorist activity. Spector said of Kagan "She wants to coddle the Saudis".

The Saudi 9/11 Connection

Senator Bob Graham, who sat on the 9/11 Commission, has also charged that Saudi involvement in the attacks has been covered up.

As we have previously reported, US authorities, including the FBI, allowed the entire Bin Laden family to fly out of the US, and back to Saudi Arabia, in the days after 9/11, without questioning any of them.

Furthermore, agency documents later revealed that the FBI were aware that Osama Bin Laden himself may have personally chartered one of the flights. They subsequently redacted his name from the records in order “to protect privacy interests.”

The documents provide clear proof that the FBI was protecting the Bin Laden while the rest of the world was being told that he had masterminded the biggest terror attack in history. The FBI then attempted to cover up this fact.

The same documents revealed that the Bureau did not consider a single Saudi national nor any of the Bin Laden family worthy of investigative value.

The protection of Bin Laden by federal authorities has been ongoing since BEFORE 9/11 when agents were told to "back off the Bin Laden family" in order to protect business interests that the Bush family had with the Bin Ladens and other Saudi nationals.

The FBI asserts that no one on the planes that left had any terrorist links, yet documents (specifically FBI document 199I WF213589) uncovered back in November 2001 prove this to be a falsehood.

The Obama administration is now continuing the exact same long running policy as the Bush administration by obediently backing the Saudi monarchy and keeping secret this vital information on 9/11.

TUCKER TRUMPS TRILATS

By James P. Tucker, Jr.

DUBLIN, Ireland—Trilateral Commission (TC) members, angry over their failure to establish a world government and the economic crisis they generated, called for war with Iran when they gathered behind closed doors here in Dublin, Ireland May 7-10.

War plans were revealed by Mikhail Slobodovsici, a chief adviser to the Russian leadership, when he strolled off the grounds of the Four Seasons resort, where TC had hunkered down behind armed guards and locked doors. He thought he was talking to a TC colleague when speaking with Alan Keenan, who operates the web siteWeAreChange.org.

“We are deciding the future of the world,” Slobodovsici said. “We need a world government,” he said, but, referring to Iran, said “we need to get rid of them.”

Clearly, it was a TC war call. Many of the TC’s billionaires and millionaires are heavily invested in manufacturing, and wars produce huge profits.

Suddenly, Slobodovsici noticed that Keenan’s nametag was different from the TC label and said: “I can’t talk—we operate under Chatham House rules.”

Slobodovsici was ordered by the TC to order more apologies for the slaughter of an estimated 30 to 60 million inhabitants of the old Soviet Union by dictator Josef Stalin. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin had abjectly apologized on the anniversary of the Katyn Forest execution of 20,000 Polish soldiers. Putin admitted that the massacre was conducted by the Soviets, not by Germans, which the Communists had claimed for half a century. Nevertheless, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev apologized again the next day (May 9), denouncing Soviet citizens for tolerating the slaughter, saying they were fully aware of the bloodletting.

Never have the illustrious members of the TC been so depressed.

“It gets worse every year, not better,” one said. “Why do we even bother to meet anymore?”

“We can’t simply give up and quit,” another responded. “Bilderberg expects us to have a plan outlined.”

Much of their distress is due to the failure to establish a world government. In the 1990s, both TC and Bilderberg confidently predicted they would obtain a world government by the year 2000. A decade later, their goal is even further away. This they blame on detested “nationalists,” who oppose surrendering sovereignty to international bodies.

Bilderberg will meet June 4 to June 7 in Sitges, Spain, a resort city about 20 miles from Barcelona to make final decisions on what to impose upon the world.

Bilderberg will seal off the entire grounds of the Dolce Resort with armed guards and private security. Bilderberg is composed of about 120 international financiers, heads of state from Europe and high officials of the White House, and the secretaries of the State and Commerce departments, among others.

The TC is the junior varsity, with slightly more than 300 participants. Bilderberg, the senior group in the wannabe secret world government, has slightly more than 100. The two groups have an interlocking leadership and common goal of a world government under their control.

Still, the TC attracts heads of state and other high officials in Europe and international financiers, including David Rockefeller and members of the Rothschild family. High officials of the Obama administration from the White House and departments of Treasury, State and Commerce will attend.

TC boys are upset they were unable to exploit the economic crisis they helped generate by creating a world “treasury department” under the UN. They blame “rising nationalism” and ask “how those people knew about this,” according to witnesses inside the TC hotel. Still, the TC is charging ahead. In a commentary based on interviews with (or dictated by) TC leaders, economist Richard Douthwaite wrote May 7 in The Irish Times:

Economic growth cannot increase incomes reliably and quickly enough to deliver the desired result. The only possible remedy is inflation. This could be engineered by having the European Central Bank create money out of nothing to give all the euro zone countries to spend. . . . Another irrational obstacle is the feeling that money cannot be created out of nothing. . . .

In this column, Douthwaite calls for Europe’s central bank to turn on the printing presses in the same way the privately owned and controlled Federal Reserve Bank has been flooding its cronies in the United States with dollars.

According to banking regulations in Europe, the European Central Bank is limited in how many euros it can release into the money supply through a 2-percent cap on inflation. Douthwaite, however, would like to see this hobble taken off the bankers.

In the United States, the Federal Reserve has been handing out free money to its member banks by lowering the discount rate to near zero. In Europe, Douthwaite writes, “this could be engineered by having the European Central Bank create money out of nothing to give to all the euro zone countries to spend.”

The result, he notes, would be inflation, because more money would be in circulation for governments to pay their bills. But he doesn’t see that as a bad thing.

However, as Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) notes, the problem with inflation is that it hurts the working class because it acts like an indirect tax.

“Simply put, printing money to pay for federal spending dilutes the value of the dollar, which causes higher prices for goods and services,” says Paul. “Savers and those living on fixed or low incomes are hardest hit as the cost of living rises. Low- and middle-income families suffer the most as they struggle to make ends meet while wealth is literally transferred from the middle class to the wealthy.”

The phony money idea was embraced by Gary Jenkins of Evolution Securities. He said the EU Central Bank may begin to print more money to dig itself out. “If we approach the brink, it may just be the only viable option left,” Jenkins said. “Only the ECB can print euros to save the system.”

For now, Jean-Claude Trichet, the president of the European Central Bank, denies that he will be turning on the printing presses. Trichet appears to be in the minority here, and pressure on the part of the globalists may eventually force him to increase inflation in an effort to stave off the inevitable collapse of the EU.

Ireland’s prime minister, Brian Cowen, was invited to make a welcoming address at the TC confab, then get out. This is routine with TC and Bilderberg: The head of the host country speaks, then leaves. But Cowen resented being banished, so he deliberately appeared 35 minutes late—and TC boys are unaccustomed to being kept waiting.

Paul Volker, chairman of President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board and a past Fed chairman, expressed his anger with hostile questions. Cowen had tried to distance Ireland’s economy from that of Greece and other EU countries that are under attack for the economic crisis.

Volker told Cowen that while he had been “historically . . . very much attracted to the euro,” it was now “challenged.” Volker said: “You face some very difficult decisions here, but the general question of having an independent central bank, the common interest rate, the common currency . . . I’m just curious, in your mind, as to whether that does raise questions on the general governing structures of Europe.

“You’re not in favor of more centralization, as I understand it, although other people are, but what does this crisis mean for how Europe moves ahead?” Volker asked.

Cowen conceded that the euro faced problems with its credibility. He said EU finance ministers would be reviewing “present arrangements” in the months ahead to see how they could be improved “in a way that would add credibility to the currency and in a way that would meet with wide popular agreement.”

In other action, the TC plans to:

Raise gas costs in the United States. Europeans now pay $10 a gallon, Americans about $3. The TCers say Americans must pay $7.

Oil is being produced at only 81 percent of capacity to increase demand and, thus, prices. Many of the members were born to oil wealth.

They celebrate the healthcare legislation, which they believe will dramatically increase costs and reduce services. It is European style, and Obama is their boy. They look forward to the day when Americans pay at least 50 percent of their income in federal taxes, as is prevalent in Europe.

AFP editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the “elite” media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg Group. Tucker is the author of Jim Tucker’s Bilderberg Diary: One Man’s 25-Year Battle to Shine the Light on the World Shadow Government.Bound in an attractive full-color softcover and containing 272 pages—loaded with photos, many never published before—the book recounts Tucker’s experiences over the last quarter century at Bilderberg meetings. $25 from AFP. No charge for S&H in U.S.

Kagan: ‘Disappear’ Free Speech If The Government Deems It Offensive

Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet.com ^{[1] Tuesday, May 11, 2010}

President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is perfect in every way – perfect that is if you think the role of the highest judicial body in the United States is to ban free speech, indefinitely detain Americans without trial, resurrect command and control socialism, while urinating on everything the Constitution stands for.

We already discovered Kagan’s penchant for treating Americans as guilty until proven innocent, or in fact just plain guilty without even the chance to be proven innocent, when she was quoted as saying ^[2], “That someone suspected of helping finance Al Qaeda should be subject to battlefield law — indefinite detention without a trial — even if he were captured in a place like the Philippines rather than a physical battle zone.”

So under that definition, if you send money to a charity later linked with some nebulous terrorist group then you are financing Al-Qaeda and could be thrown in Gitmo or some other CIA black site never to be seen again. And this is the woman being forwarded to sit on a body that is supposed to safeguard civil liberties? That would be like hiring Charles Manson to coach the high school basketball team.

But it gets worse. Now we learn that Kagan thinks certain expressions of free speech should be ‘disappeared’ if the government deems them to be offensive. On the surface that’s any opinion on racial, sexuality or gender issues, but since criticizing Obama is now deemed racist ^[3], where will it all end?

In a 1993 University of Chicago Law review article, Kagan wrote, “I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation.” (emphasis mine).

(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)

^[4]

“In a 1996 paper, “Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine,” Kagan argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government,” reports World Net Daily ^[5].

Kagan also argued as recently as September that corporations shouldn’t be allowed to engage in free speech, and that the government can censor things like newspaper editorials, as well as the political opinions of radio talk show hosts or television reporters.

Chief Justice John Roberts blasted Kagan’s argument at the time, reports Newsmax ^[6].

“The government urges us in this case to uphold a direct prohibition on political speech. It asks us to embrace a theory of the First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of television and radio broadcasts, but of pamphlets, posters, the Internet, and virtually any other medium that corporations and unions might find useful in expressing their views on matters of public concern,” he wrote.

Kagan’s standpoint on free speech, that it is subject to regulation and definition by the government, has no place in America, completely violates the fundamental premise of the First Amendment, that even unpopular speech should be protected, and would be better suited for countries like Iran, Zimbabwe or North Korea.

Little surprise therefore when we learn that in her undergraduate thesis at Princeton, Kagan lamented the decline of socialism ^[7] in the U.S. as “sad” for those who still hope to “change America.”

If Kagan is approved she is going to find an eager ally in White House information czar Cass Sunstein, who in a January 2008 white paper entitled “Conspiracy Theories,” ^[8] called for the government to tax and outright censor political viewpoints it deemed unsavory.

---

Article printed from Prison Planet.com: http://www.prisonplanet.com

URL to article: http://www.prisonplanet.com/kagan-disappear-free-speech-if-the-government-deems-it-offensive.html

URLs in this post:

[1] Prison Planet.com: http://www.prisnplanet.com

[2] she was quoted as saying: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/us/politics/18policy.html

[3] criticizing Obama is now deemed racist: http://www.prisonplanet.com../msnbc-host-calling-obama-socialist-is-code-for-n-word.html

[4] Image: http://infowars-shop.stores.yahoo.net/inemnewwoord.html

[5] reports World Net Daily: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=152305

[6] reports Newsmax: http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Kagan-Argued-Political-Pamphlets/2010/05/11/id/358676

[7] Kagan lamented the decline of socialism: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=152133

[8] who in a January 2008 white paper entitled “Conspiracy Theories,”: http://www.prisonplanet.com../obama-information-czar-calls-for-banning-free-speech.html

EUROPEAN COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: EU NEEDS TO USE CRISIS FOR GREATER POWER

Renowned financial commentator denounces "fiscal fascism"

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Friday, May 14th, 2010

Several more autocratic international voices have added their weight behind proposals to vastly empower the EU with greater authority to govern over nation states in Europe, in the wake of the sovereign debt crisis. Meanwhile, one leading commentator has described the move as "fiscal fascism".

Proposals tabled yesterday by the European Commission, the legislative arm of the EU, would greatly diminish the ability of nation states to set their own fiscal policies, in favour of a move toward a centralized european treasury.

"There is still a long way to go. We have opened the gate. Now we have yet to go through it," said Ulrike Guerot, an analyst at the European Council on Foreign Relations think-tank.

"The crisis has shown us we need to animate moves toward closer political union as well as monetary union and we need a quantitative jump." Guerot added in comments to Reuters.

"The EU has used crises in the past to make that kind of jump and this is what is needed now." the German researcher concluded.

"This could be the fuel injection needed to put Europe on course toward closer political and economic union, the goal that drove its founding fathers and leaders a generation ago such as Germany's Helmut Kohl, France's Francois Mitterrand and former European Commission President Jacques Delors." notes Reuters writer Timothy Heritage.

The European CFR is a vehemently pro-EU outfit made up of hundreds of influential corporate and political figures, perhaps most notably including George Soros. It was initiated three years ago primarily to push for an expanded role for the EU as a global superpower. Inevitably, the group is consistently vocal when it comes to the question of greater political integration in Europe.

The European CFR is not related to the U.S. CFR, however support for mass centralization in Europe is shared. On the prospect of a central European treasury, CFR Senior Fellow Marc Levinson notes:

"Countries cannot have it both ways. Either they're in the eurozone or they're out. If they're in, they have no control over their monetary policies, period. If they want to leave, fine, but then they will probably have to leave the EU as well, and to remain out of the EU and the eurozone for a very long time. And leaving the eurozone, by itself, will solve none of their economic problems."

Other voices echoing support for sweeping integration measures include Hans Martens, chief executive of the European Policy Center think-tank in Brussels, who notes "This is the last chance to still be relevant in the world... It's clear to everyone that Europe is becoming marginalized."

"Europe faces a critical choice between greater integration and disintegration," Simon Tilford, chief economist at the Center for European Reform think-tank, also wrote this week.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker and Former U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow have also advocated the move toward a fiscal union.

“Will economic and financial distress finally be resolved by looking toward more integration in a closely integrated Europe, politically as well as economically?” said Volcker. “I do have my hopes, as a believer in the euro.”

“For the euro to be able to survive long term, fiscal consolidation of some kind -- tax policy consolidation, fiscal policy consolidation -- is probably necessary,” Snow said.

As we outlined in our report yesterday, in addition to opening up supervision of countries' national budgets to the EU, the proposals also call for the creation of a European Monetary Fund or EMF - a permanent bailout mechanism.

The new rules will apply to Britain and Denmark, even though those countries are not part of the existing European Monetary Union and have retained their own national currencies.

London Telegraph international business editor, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard has penned an empassioned piece in today's newspaper in which he describes the move toward a federalized union in Europe as "fiscal fascism", comparing it to "the Gold Bloc fallacy of Continental Europe from 1931 to 1936, the policy that led to Bruning’s destruction of Weimar."

"Just when you thought the EU could not go any further down the road towards authoritarian excess, it gets worse." Evans-Pritchard writes.

"Fonctionnaires and EU finance ministers will pass judgement on the British (or Dutch, or Danish, or French) budgets before the elected bodies of these ancient and sovereign nations have seen the proposals. Did we not we not fight the English Civil War and kill a king over such a prerogative?" he continues.

"Yet again we are discovering the trick played on our democracies by Europe’s insiders when they charged ahead with EMU, brushing aside warnings by their own staff economists that monetary union was unworkable without fiscal union." Evans-Pritchard notes, adding that the European elites behind the EU single currency knew that it would eventually lead to a crisis they could use to "force sovereign parliaments to submit to demands that they would never otherwise accept."

"The enterprise has become illegitimate – it is starting to exhibit the reflexes of tyranny." Evans-Pritchard concludes.

UK ECONOMY MAY BE ALLOWED TO CRASH AND BURN LIKE US BANKING GIANT

---

UK Economy May Be Allowed To Crash And Burn Like US Banking Giant
Analysts, Economists: Britain May Become Lehman To Greece's Bear Stearns

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Tuesday, May 11th, 2010

Leading financial analysts and economists have warned that Britain may crash and burn following the European bailout of Greece, comparing the situation to that of Lehman Brothers following the rescue of Bear Stearns in 2008.

“The big question I am asking myself is whether Greece is Bear Stearns” Anthony Fry, senior managing director at Evercore Partners, told CNBC.

“What I really fear is that if Greece is Bear Stearns then the UK is Lehman Brothers.” Fry, who previously worked for Lehman added.

While other economists disagree, indicating that the UK can and will continue to devalue and print money, Fry believes the country's huge deficit puts it firmly at risk.

“I can’t believe (the UK) can avoid trouble," he said. "The current coalition talks are like arguing over a birthday cake.” Fry said, alluding to the ongoing negotiations between the political parties following the indecisive election last week.

“Once they decide how much of the cake they get they realize no one bothered to bake the cake.” Fry added.

“My big fear is that after (Chancellor of the Exchequer) Alistair Darling refused to support the EU/IMF/ECB bailout of the euro zone bond market, the euro zone may stand by and do nothing when the UK gets into trouble,” he said.

Fry's warning is particularly pertinent following comments by senior French policymaker Jean-Pierre Jouyet, who today indicated that Britain will be punished for refusing to fully sign up to the trillion dollar bailout of the eurozone, despite pledging €60bn in taxpayer funds.

“The English are very certainly going to be targeted given the political difficulties they have. Help yourself and heaven will help you. If you don’t want to show solidarity to the eurozone, then let’s see what happens to the United Kingdom,” the head of the French markets regulator told Europe 1 radio.

Anthony Fry added that he expects to see a strengthening of the Euro through consolidation and centralization of fiscal policy in Europe, echoing comments made yesterday by other leading bankers and economists.

“Talk of the euro breaking up is nonsense," Fry said. "What we will get is tighter fiscal cooperation. If Germany is lending money to Spain it will demand tough measures on spending.”

NEW UK GOVERNMENT TO BE INFESTED WITH BANKERS

One in ten new MPs has background in international banking

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Tuesday, May 11th, 2010

No matter which parties eventually form a coalition to govern in the UK following last week's general election, one thing is for certain - the House of Commons will be infested with bankers.

A report by the PR group The Madano Partnership, highlighted today in the London Telegraph outlines the fact that the number of MPs with a financial services background has increased two fold over the past thirteen years.

One in 10 new MPs have come from a career in investment banking, fund management, or other areas associated with the financial sector, according to the report.

The roll call of MPs includes three former directors of Barclays Bank, a former managing director of JP Morgan, and a former mergers and acquisitions banker at Goldman Sachs.

Former investment bankers and economists at Deutsche Bank, Barings, Warburg, and the previously bailed out Lloyds TSB also hold seats.

Conservative MP Jacob Rees Mogg also previously held management positions at Rothschild and Lloyd George Management in London.

With the impending push to radically reform the banking industry, these are the heavy hitters likely to be in the driving seat when it comes to forming economic policy and tabling financial legislation.

With friends like these ...

Facebook has 59 million users - and 2 million new ones join each week. But you won't catch Tom Hodgkinson volunteering his personal information - not now that he knows the politics of the people behind the social networking site

Tom Hodgkinson The Guardian, Monday 14 January 2008

The following correction was printed in the Guardian's Corrections and clarifications column, Wednesday January 16 2008

The US intelligence community's enthusiasm for hi-tech innovation after 9/11 and the creation of In-Q-Tel, its venture capital fund, in 1999 were anachronistically linked in the article below. Since 9/11 happened in 2001 it could not have led to the setting up of In-Q-Tel two years earlier.

---

I despise Facebook. This enormously successful American business describes itself as "a social utility that connects you with the people around you". But hang on. Why on God's earth would I need a computer to connect with the people around me? Why should my relationships be mediated through the imagination of a bunch of supergeeks in California? What was wrong with the pub?

And does Facebook really connect people? Doesn't it rather disconnect us, since instead of doing something enjoyable such as talking and eating and dancing and drinking with my friends, I am merely sending them little ungrammatical notes and amusing photos in cyberspace, while chained to my desk? A friend of mine recently told me that he had spent a Saturday night at home alone on Facebook, drinking at his desk. What a gloomy image. Far from connecting us, Facebook actually isolates us at our workstations.

Facebook appeals to a kind of vanity and self-importance in us, too. If I put up a flattering picture of myself with a list of my favourite things, I can construct an artificial representation of who I am in order to get sex or approval. ("I like Facebook," said another friend. "I got a shag out of it.") It also encourages a disturbing competitivness around friendship: it seems that with friends today, quality counts for nothing and quantity is king. The more friends you have, the better you are. You are "popular", in the sense much loved in American high schools. Witness the cover line on Dennis Publishing's new Facebook magazine: "How To Double Your Friends List."

It seems, though, that I am very much alone in my hostility. At the time of writing Facebook claims 59 million active users, including 7 million in the UK, Facebook's third-biggest customer after the US and Canada. That's 59 million suckers, all of whom have volunteered their ID card information and consumer preferences to an American business they know nothing about. Right now, 2 million new people join each week. At the present rate of growth, Facebook will have more than 200 million active users by this time next year. And I would predict that, if anything, its rate of growth will accelerate over the coming months. As its spokesman Chris Hughes says: "It's embedded itself to an extent where it's hard to get rid of."

All of the above would have been enough to make me reject Facebook for ever. But there are more reasons to hate it. Many more.

Facebook is a well-funded project, and the people behind the funding, a group of Silicon Valley venture capitalists, have a clearly thought out ideology that they are hoping to spread around the world. Facebook is one manifestation of this ideology. Like PayPal before it, it is a social experiment, an expression of a particular kind of neoconservative libertarianism. On Facebook, you can be free to be who you want to be, as long as you don't mind being bombarded by adverts for the world's biggest brands. As with PayPal, national boundaries are a thing of the past.

Although the project was initially conceived by media cover star Mark Zuckerberg, the real face behind Facebook is the 40-year-old Silicon Valley venture capitalist and futurist philosopher Peter Thiel. There are only three board members on Facebook, and they are Thiel, Zuckerberg and a third investor called Jim Breyer from a venture capital firm called Accel Partners (more on him later). Thiel invested $500,000 in Facebook when Harvard students Zuckerberg, Chris Hughes and Dustin Moskowitz went to meet him in San Francisco in June 2004, soon after they had launched the site. Thiel now reportedly owns 7% of Facebook, which, at Facebook's current valuation of $15bn, would be worth more than $1bn. There is much debate on who exactly were the original co-founders of Facebook, but whoever they were, Zuckerberg is the only one left on the board, although Hughes and Moskowitz still work for the company.

Thiel is widely regarded in Silicon Valley and in the US venture capital scene as a libertarian genius. He is the co-founder and CEO of the virtual banking system PayPal, which he sold to Ebay for $1.5bn, taking $55m for himself. He also runs a £3bn hedge fund called Clarium Capital Management and a venture capital fund called Founders Fund. Bloomberg Markets magazine recently called him "one of the most successful hedge fund managers in the country". He has made money by betting on rising oil prices and by correctly predicting that the dollar would weaken. He and his absurdly wealthy Silicon Valley mates have recently been labelled "The PayPal Mafia" by Fortune magazine, whose reporter also observed that Thiel has a uniformed butler and a $500,000 McLaren supercar. Thiel is also a chess master and intensely competitive. He has been known to sweep the chessmen off the table in a fury when losing. And he does not apologise for this hyper-competitveness, saying: "Show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser."

But Thiel is more than just a clever and avaricious capitalist. He is a futurist philosopher and neocon activist. A philosophy graduate from Stanford, in 1998 he co-wrote a book called The Diversity Myth, which is a detailed attack on liberalism and the multiculturalist ideology that dominated Stanford. He claimed that the "multiculture" led to a lessening of individual freedoms. While a student at Stanford, Thiel founded a rightwing journal, still up and running, called The Stanford Review - motto: Fiat Lux ("Let there be light"). Thiel is a member of TheVanguard.Org, an internet-based neoconservative pressure group that was set up to attack MoveOn.org, a liberal pressure group that works on the web. Thiel calls himself "way libertarian".

TheVanguard is run by one Rod D Martin, a philosopher-capitalist whom Thiel greatly admires. On the site, Thiel says: "Rod is one of our nation's leading minds in the creation of new and needed ideas for public policy. He possesses a more complete understanding of America than most executives have of their own businesses."

This little taster from their website will give you an idea of their vision for the world: "TheVanguard.Org is an online community of Americans who believe in conservative values, the free market and limited government as the best means to bring hope and ever-increasing opportunity to everyone, especially the poorest among us." Their aim is to promote policies that will "reshape America and the globe". TheVanguard describes its politics as "Reaganite/Thatcherite". The chairman's message says: "Today we'll teach MoveOn [the liberal website], Hillary and the leftwing media some lessons they never imagined."

So, Thiel's politics are not in doubt. What about his philosophy? I listened to a podcast of an address Thiel gave about his ideas for the future. His philosophy, briefly, is this: since the 17th century, certain enlightened thinkers have been taking the world away from the old-fashioned nature-bound life, and here he quotes Thomas Hobbes' famous characterisation of life as "nasty, brutish and short", and towards a new virtual world where we have conquered nature. Value now exists in imaginary things. Thiel says that PayPal was motivated by this belief: that you can find value not in real manufactured objects, but in the relations between human beings. PayPal was a way of moving money around the world with no restriction. Bloomberg Markets puts it like this: "For Thiel, PayPal was all about freedom: it would enable people to skirt currency controls and move money around the globe."

Clearly, Facebook is another uber-capitalist experiment: can you make money out of friendship? Can you create communities free of national boundaries - and then sell Coca-Cola to them? Facebook is profoundly uncreative. It makes nothing at all. It simply mediates in relationships that were happening anyway.

Photo: Tim Boyle/Getty

Thiel's philosophical mentor is one René Girard of Stanford University, proponent of a theory of human behaviour called mimetic desire. Girard reckons that people are essentially sheep-like and will copy one another without much reflection. The theory would also seem to be proved correct in the case of Thiel's virtual worlds: the desired object is irrelevant; all you need to know is that human beings will tend to move in flocks. Hence financial bubbles. Hence the enormous popularity of Facebook. Girard is a regular at Thiel's intellectual soirees. What you don't hear about in Thiel's philosophy, by the way, are old-fashioned real-world concepts such as art, beauty, love, pleasure and truth.

The internet is immensely appealing to neocons such as Thiel because it promises a certain sort of freedom in human relations and in business, freedom from pesky national laws, national boundaries and suchlike. The internet opens up a world of free trade and laissez-faire expansion. Thiel also seems to approve of offshore tax havens, and claims that 40% of the world's wealth resides in places such as Vanuatu, the Cayman Islands, Monaco and Barbados. I think it's fair to say that Thiel, like Rupert Murdoch, is against tax. He also likes the globalisation of digital culture because it makes the banking overlords hard to attack: "You can't have a workers' revolution to take over a bank if the bank is in Vanuatu," he says.

If life in the past was nasty, brutish and short, then in the future Thiel wants to make it much longer, and to this end he has also invested in a firm that is exploring life-extension technologies. He has pledged £3.5m to a Cambridge-based gerontologist called Aubrey de Grey, who is searching for the key to immortality. Thiel is also on the board of advisers of something called the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence. From its fantastical website, the following: "The Singularity is the technological creation of smarter-than-human intelligence. There are several technologies ... heading in this direction ... Artificial Intelligence ... direct brain-computer interfaces ... genetic engineering ... different technologies which, if they reached a threshold level of sophistication, would enable the creation of smarter-than-human intelligence."

So by his own admission, Thiel is trying to destroy the real world, which he also calls "nature", and install a virtual world in its place, and it is in this context that we must view the rise of Facebook. Facebook is a deliberate experiment in global manipulation, and Thiel is a bright young thing in the neoconservative pantheon, with a penchant for far-out techno-utopian fantasies. Not someone I want to help get any richer.

The third board member of Facebook is Jim Breyer. He is a partner in the venture capital firm Accel Partners, who put $12.7m into Facebook in April 2005. On the board of such US giants as Wal-Mart and Marvel Entertainment, he is also a former chairman of the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA). Now these are the people who are really making things happen in America, because they invest in the new young talent, the Zuckerbergs and the like. Facebook's most recent round of funding was led by a company called Greylock Venture Capital, who put in the sum of $27.5m. One of Greylock's senior partners is called Howard Cox, another former chairman of the NVCA, who is also on the board of In-Q-Tel. What's In-Q-Tel? Well, believe it or not (and check out their website), this is the venture-capital wing of the CIA. After 9/11, the US intelligence community became so excited by the possibilities of new technology and the innovations being made in the private sector, that in 1999 they set up their own venture capital fund, In-Q-Tel, which "identifies and partners with companies developing cutting-edge technologies to help deliver these solutions to the Central Intelligence Agency and the broader US Intelligence Community (IC) to further their missions".

The US defence department and the CIA love technology because it makes spying easier. "We need to find new ways to deter new adversaries," defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in 2003. "We need to make the leap into the information age, which is the critical foundation of our transformation efforts." In-Q-Tel's first chairman was Gilman Louie, who served on the board of the NVCA with Breyer. Another key figure in the In-Q-Tel team is Anita K Jones, former director of defence research and engineering for the US department of defence, and - with Breyer - board member of BBN Technologies. When she left the US department of defence, Senator Chuck Robb paid her the following tribute: "She brought the technology and operational military communities together to design detailed plans to sustain US dominance on the battlefield into the next century."

Now even if you don't buy the idea that Facebook is some kind of extension of the American imperialist programme crossed with a massive information-gathering tool, there is no way of denying that as a business, it is pure mega-genius. Some net nerds have suggsted that its $15bn valuation is excessive, but I would argue that if anything that is too modest. Its scale really is dizzying, and the potential for growth is virtually limitless. "We want everyone to be able to use Facebook," says the impersonal voice of Big Brother on the website. I'll bet they do. It is Facebook's enormous potential that led Microsoft to buy 1.6% for $240m. A recent rumour says that Asian investor Lee Ka-Shing, said to be the ninth richest man in the world, has bought 0.4% of Facebook for $60m.

The creators of the site need do very little bar fiddle with the programme. In the main, they simply sit back and watch as millions of Facebook addicts voluntarily upload their ID details, photographs and lists of their favourite consumer objects. Once in receipt of this vast database of human beings, Facebook then simply has to sell the information back to advertisers, or, as Zuckerberg puts it in a recent blog post, "to try to help people share information with their friends about things they do on the web". And indeed, this is precisely what's happening. On November 6 last year, Facebook announced that 12 global brands had climbed on board. They included Coca-Cola, Blockbuster, Verizon, Sony Pictures and Condé Nast. All trained in marketing bullshit of the highest order, their representatives made excited comments along the following lines:

"With Facebook Ads, our brands can become a part of the way users communicate and interact on Facebook," said Carol Kruse, vice president, global interactive marketing, the Coca-Cola Company.

"We view this as an innovative way to cultivate relationships with millions of Facebook users by enabling them to interact with Blockbuster in convenient, relevant and entertaining ways," said Jim Keyes, Blockbuster chairman and CEO. "This is beyond creating advertising impressions. This is about Blockbuster participating in the community of the consumer so that, in return, consumers feel motivated to share the benefits of our brand with their friends."

"Share" is Facebookspeak for "advertise". Sign up to Facebook and you become a free walking, talking advert for Blockbuster or Coke, extolling the virtues of these brands to your friends. We are seeing the commodification of human relationships, the extraction of capitalistic value from friendships.

Now, by comparision with Facebook, newspapers, for example, begin to look hopelessly outdated as a business model. A newspaper sells advertising space to businesses looking to sell stuff to their readers. But the system is far less sophisticated than Facebook for two reasons. One is that newspapers have to put up with the irksome expense of paying journalists to provide the content. Facebook gets its content for free. The other is that Facebook can target advertising with far greater precision than a newspaper. Admit on Facebook that your favourite film is This Is Spinal Tap, and when a Spinal Tap-esque movie comes out, you can be sure that they'll be sending ads your way.

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg (Photo: Paul Sakuma/AP)

It's true that Facebook recently got into hot water with its Beacon advertising programme. Users were notified that one of their friends had made a purchase at certain online shops; 46,000 users felt that this level of advertising was intrusive, and signed a petition called "Facebook! Stop invading my privacy!" to say so. Zuckerberg apologised on his company blog. He has written that they have now changed the system from "opt-out" to "opt-in". But I suspect that this little rebellion about being so ruthlessly commodified will soon be forgotten: after all, there was a national outcry by the civil liberties movement when the idea of a police force was mooted in the UK in the mid 19th century.

Futhermore, have you Facebook users ever actually read the privacy policy? It tells you that you don't have much privacy. Facebook pretends to be about freedom, but isn't it really more like an ideologically motivated virtual totalitarian regime with a population that will very soon exceed the UK's? Thiel and the rest have created their own country, a country of consumers.

Now, you may, like Thiel and the other new masters of the cyberverse, find this social experiment tremendously exciting. Here at last is the Enlightenment state longed for since the Puritans of the 17th century sailed away to North America, a world where everyone is free to express themselves as they please, according to who is watching. National boundaries are a thing of the past and everyone cavorts together in freewheeling virtual space. Nature has been conquered through man's boundless ingenuity. Yes, and you may decide to send genius investor Thiel all your money, and certainly you'll be waiting impatiently for the public flotation of the unstoppable Facebook.

Or you might reflect that you don't really want to be part of this heavily-funded programme to create an arid global virtual republic, where your own self and your relationships with your friends are converted into commodites on sale to giant global brands. You may decide that you don't want to be part of this takeover bid for the world.

For my own part, I am going to retreat from the whole thing, remain as unplugged as possible, and spend the time I save by not going on Facebook doing something useful, such as reading books. Why would I want to waste my time on Facebook when I still haven't read Keats' Endymion? And when there are seeds to be sown in my own back yard? I don't want to retreat from nature, I want to reconnect with it. Damn air-conditioning! And if I want to connect with the people around me, I will revert to an old piece of technology. It's free, it's easy and it delivers a uniquely individual experience in sharing information: it's called talking.

Facebook's privacy policy

Just for fun, try substituting the words 'Big Brother' whenever you read the word 'Facebook'

1 We will advertise at you

"When you use Facebook, you may set up your personal profile, form relationships, send messages, perform searches and queries, form groups, set up events, add applications, and transmit information through various channels. We collect this information so that we can provide you the service and offer personalised features."

2 You can't delete anything

"When you update information, we usually keep a backup copy of the prior version for a reasonable period of time to enable reversion to the prior version of that information."

3 Anyone can glance at your intimate confessions

"... we cannot and do not guarantee that user content you post on the site will not be viewed by unauthorised persons. We are not responsible for circumvention of any privacy settings or security measures contained on the site. You understand and acknowledge that, even after removal, copies of user content may remain viewable in cached and archived pages or if other users have copied or stored your user content."

4 Our marketing profile of you will be unbeatable

"Facebook may also collect information about you from other sources, such as newspapers, blogs, instant messaging services, and other users of the Facebook service through the operation of the service (eg, photo tags) in order to provide you with more useful information and a more personalised experience."

5 Opting out doesn't mean opting out

"Facebook reserves the right to send you notices about your account even if you opt out of all voluntary email notifications."

6 The CIA may look at the stuff when they feel like it

"By using Facebook, you are consenting to have your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States ... We may be required to disclose user information pursuant to lawful requests, such as subpoenas or court orders, or in compliance with applicable laws. We do not reveal information until we have a good faith belief that an information request by law enforcement or private litigants meets applicable legal standards. Additionally, we may share account or other information when we believe it is necessary to comply with law, to protect our interests or property, to prevent fraud or other illegal activity perpetrated through the Facebook service or using the Facebook name, or to prevent imminent bodily harm. This may include sharing information with other companies, lawyers, agents or government agencies."

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010

GOOGLE ADMITS COLLECTING WI-FI DATA THROUGH STREET VIEW CARS

German request for data audit reveals the web giant 'accidentally' stored payload information from open networks

Jemima Kiss The Guardian, Saturday 15 May 2010

A Google mapping car in of Bedminster, UK

A Google mapping car with which the web giant admits accidentally collecting wifi data. Photograph: Ben Birchall/PA

Google has been accidentally gathering extracts of personal web activity from domestic wifi networks through the Street View cars it has used since 2007, it said last night.

It was discovered as a result of a data audit demanded by Germany's data protection authority, and is likely to inflame critics of Google concerned about the web giant's use of private data.

As well as systematically photographing streets and gathering 3D images of cities and towns around the world, Google's Street View cars are fitted with antennas that scan local wifi networks and use the data for its location services.

In a post on its European Public Policy blog on 27 April, Google stated that although it does gather wifi network names (SSIDs) and identifiers (Mac addresses) for devices like network routers, it does not gather "payload" data passed through those wifi networks.

But yesterday Google blogged that the audit had prompted it to "re-examine everything we have been collecting" and admitted its mistake.

"It is now clear that we have been mistakenly collecting samples of payload data from open wifi networks, even though we never used that data in any Google products."

Google said it amounted to 600GB, equivalent to a consumer hard drive, but that this data consisted only of fragments of activity from open wifi networks. Password-protected web services, such as banking or secure HTTP addresses, would not have been included, and neither would data from password-protected wireless networks.

Google blamed the mistake on a piece of legacy code from an experimental project that had been re-used to programme equipment on the Street View cars, and said it will ask a third party to oversee deletion of the data and its procedures.

"As soon as we became aware of this problem, we grounded our Street View cars and segregated the data on our network, which we then disconnected to make it inaccessible. We want to delete this data as soon as possible, and are currently reaching out to regulators in the relevant countries about how to quickly dispose of it."

Google said the discovery highlighted the vulnerability of data in open wifi networks. It has previously said other companies, including Skyhook and Microsoft, already scan wifi networks and gather information in this way.

The Google Street View feature in Google Maps, introduced in 2007, now displays street-level images from cities in nine countries, including 21 in the UK.

But it has faced regular concerns about privacy, which started in Britain on the day of the launch after users found images of a man throwing up in the street and another leaving a sex shop. In April last year, residents in Broughton barricaded roads to stop the Street View car entering the village, saying it would encourage crime and was an invasion of privacy.

Google is struggling with stricter privacy laws in Germany, where it has yet to launch the service, and Switzerland where it was introduced in August. Despite a flood of demands from the European Union, including wiping its Street View images after six months instead of 12, Google has said it remains committed to Street View in Europe. It said reports that it would stop mapping streets in any more EU countries are inaccurate.
* guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010

Willie Lynch letter: The Making of a Slave
By FinalCall.com News | Last updated: May 22, 2009 - 12:45:37 PM

This speech was delivered by Willie Lynch on the bank of the James River in the colony of Virginia in 1712. Lynch was a British slave owner in the West Indies. He was invited to the colony of Virginia in 1712 to teach his methods to slave owners there. The term “lynching” is derived from his last name.
[beginning of the Willie Lynch Letter]
Greetings,
Gentlemen. I greet you here on the bank of the James River in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and twelve. First, I shall thank you, the gentlemen of the Colony of Virginia, for bringing me here. I am here to help you solve some of your problems with slaves. Your invitation reached me on my modest plantation in the West Indies, where I have experimented with some of the newest, and still the oldest, methods for control of slaves. Ancient Rome would envy us if my program is implemented. As our boat sailed south on the James River, named for our illustrious King, whose version of the Bible we cherish, I saw enough to know that your problem is not unique. While Rome used cords of wood as crosses for standing human bodies along its highways in great numbers, you are here using the tree and the rope on occasions. I caught the whiff of a dead slave hanging from a tree, a couple miles back. You are not only losing valuable stock by hangings, you are having uprisings, slaves are running away, your crops are sometimes left in the fields too long for maximum profit, you suffer occasional fires, your animals are killed. Gentlemen, you know what your problems are; I do not need to elaborate. I am not here to enumerate your problems, I am here to introduce you to a method of solving them. In my bag here, I HAVE A FULL PROOF METHOD FOR CONTROLLING YOUR BLACK SLAVES. I guarantee every one of you that, if installed correctly, IT WILL CONTROL THE SLAVES FOR AT LEAST 300 HUNDREDS YEARS. My method is simple. Any member of your family or your overseer can use it. I HAVE OUTLINED A NUMBER OF DIFFERENCES AMONG THE SLAVES; AND I TAKE THESE DIFFERENCES AND MAKE THEM BIGGER. I USE FEAR, DISTRUST AND ENVY FOR CONTROL PURPOSES. These methods have worked on my modest plantation in the West Indies and it will work throughout the South. Take this simple little list of differences and think about them. On top of my list is “AGE,” but it’s there only because it starts with an “a.” The second is “COLOR” or shade. There is INTELLIGENCE, SIZE, SEX, SIZES OF PLANTATIONS, STATUS on plantations, ATTITUDE of owners, whether the slaves live in the valley, on a hill, East, West, North, South, have fine hair, course hair, or is tall or short. Now that you have a list of differences, I shall give you an outline of action, but before that, I shall assure you that DISTRUST IS STRONGER THAN TRUST AND ENVY STRONGER THAN ADULATION, RESPECT OR ADMIRATION. The Black slaves after receiving this indoctrination shall carry on and will become self-refueling and self-generating for HUNDREDS of years, maybe THOUSANDS. Don’t forget, you must pitch the OLD black male vs. the YOUNG black male, and the YOUNG black male against the OLD black male. You must use the DARK skin slaves vs. the LIGHT skin slaves, and the LIGHT skin slaves vs. the DARK skin slaves. You must use the FEMALE vs. the MALE, and the MALE vs. the FEMALE. You must also have white servants and overseers [who] distrust all Blacks. But it is NECESSARY THAT YOUR SLAVES TRUST AND DEPEND ON US. THEY MUST LOVE, RESPECT AND TRUST ONLY US. Gentlemen, these kits are your keys to control. Use them. Have your wives and children use them, never miss an opportunity. IF USED INTENSELY FOR ONE YEAR, THE SLAVES THEMSELVES WILL REMAIN PERPETUALLY DISTRUSTFUL. Thank you gentlemen.”

LET’S MAKE A SLAVE

It was the interest and business of slave holders to study human nature, and the slave nature in particular, with a view to practical results. I and many of them attained astonishing proficiency in this direction. They had to deal not with earth, wood and stone, but with men and, by every regard, they had for their own safety and prosperity they needed to know the material on which they were to work, conscious of the injustice and wrong they were every hour perpetuating and knowing what they themselves would do. Were they the victims of such wrongs? They were constantly looking for the first signs of the dreaded retribution. They watched therefore with skilled and practiced eyes, and learned to read with great accuracy, the state of mind and heart of the slave, through his sable face. Unusual sobriety, apparent abstractions, sullenness and indifference indeed, any mood out of the common was afforded ground for suspicion and inquiry. Frederick Douglas LET’S MAKE A SLAVE is a study of the scientific process of man-breaking and slave-making. It describes the rationale and results of the Anglo Saxons’ ideas and methods of insuring the master/slave relationship. LET’S MAKE A SLAVE “The Original and Development of a Social Being Called ‘The Negro.’” Let us make a slave. What do we need? First of all, we need a black nigger man, a pregnant nigger woman and her baby nigger boy. Second, we will use the same basic principle that we use in breaking a horse, combined with some more sustaining factors. What we do with horses is that we break them from one form of life to another; that is, we reduce them from their natural state in nature. Whereas nature provides them with the natural capacity to take care of their offspring, we break that natural string of independence from them and thereby create a dependency status, so that we may be able to get from them useful production for our business and pleasure.

CARDINAL PRINCIPLES FOR MAKING A NEGRO

For fear that our future generations may not understand the principles of breaking both of the beast together, the nigger and the horse. We understand that short range planning economics results in periodic economic chaos; so that to avoid turmoil in the economy, it requires us to have breadth and depth in long range comprehensive planning, articulating both skill sharp perceptions. We lay down the following principles for long range comprehensive economic planning. Both horse and niggers [are] no good to the economy in the wild or natural state. Both must be BROKEN and TIED together for orderly production. For orderly future, special and particular attention must be paid to the FEMALE and the YOUNGEST offspring. Both must be CROSSBRED to produce a variety and division of labor. Both must be taught to respond to a peculiar new LANGUAGE. Psychological and physical instruction of CONTAINMENT must be created for both. We hold the six cardinal principles as truth to be self-evident, based upon following the discourse concerning the economics of breaking and tying the horse and the nigger together, all inclusive of the six principles laid down above. NOTE: Neither principle alone will suffice for good economics. All principles must be employed for orderly good of the nation. Accordingly, both a wild horse and a wild or natur[al] nigger is dangerous even if captured, for they will have the tendency to seek their customary freedom and, in doing so, might kill you in your sleep. You cannot rest. They sleep while you are awake, and are awake while you are asleep. They are DANGEROUS near the family house and it requires too much labor to watch them away from the house. Above all, you cannot get them to work in this natural state. Hence, both the horse and the nigger must be broken; that is breaking them from one form of mental life to another. KEEP THE BODY, TAKE THE MIND! In other words, break the will to resist. Now the breaking process is the same for both the horse and the nigger, only slightly varying in degrees. But, as we said before, there is an art in long range economic planning. YOU MUST KEEP YOUR EYE AND THOUGHTS ON THE FEMALE and the OFFSPRING of the horse and the nigger. A brief discourse in offspring development will shed light on the key to sound economic principles. Pay little attention to the generation of original breaking, but CONCENTRATE ON FUTURE GENERATION. Therefore, if you break the FEMALE mother, she will BREAK the offspring in its early years of development; and when the offspring is old enough to work, she will deliver it up to you, for her normal female protective tendencies will have been lost in the original breaking process. For example, take the case of the wild stud horse, a female horse and an already infant horse and compare the breaking process with two captured nigger males in their natural state, a pregnant nigger woman with her infant offspring. Take the stud horse, break him for limited containment. Completely break the female horse until she becomes very gentle, whereas you or anybody can ride her in her comfort. Breed the mare and the stud until you have the desired offspring. Then, you can turn the stud to freedom until you need him again. Train the female horse whereby she will eat out of your hand, and she will in turn train the infant horse to eat out of your hand, also. When it comes to breaking the uncivilized nigger, use the same process, but vary the degree and step up the pressure, so as to do a complete reversal of the mind. Take the meanest and most restless nigger, strip him of his clothes in front of the remaining male niggers, the female, and the nigger infant, tar and feather him, tie each leg to a different horse faced in opposite directions, set him afire and beat both horses to pull him apart in front of the remaining niggers. The next step is to take a bullwhip and beat the remaining nigger males to the point of death, in front of the female and the infant. Don’t kill him, but PUT THE FEAR OF GOD IN HIM, for he can be useful for future breeding.

THE BREAKING PROCESS OF THE AFRICAN WOMAN

Take the female and run a series of tests on her to see if she will submit to your desires willingly. Test her in every way, because she is the most important factor for good economics. If she shows any sign of resistance in submitting completely to your will, do not hesitate to use the bullwhip on her to extract that last bit of [b----] out of her. Take care not to kill her, for in doing so, you spoil good economics. When in complete submission, she will train her offsprings in the early years to submit to labor when they become of age. Understanding is the best thing. Therefore, we shall go deeper into this area of the subject matter concerning what we have produced here in this breaking process of the female nigger. We have reversed the relationship; in her natural uncivilized state, she would have a strong dependency on the uncivilized nigger male, and she would have a limited protective tendency toward her independent male offspring and would raise male offsprings to be dependent like her. Nature had provided for this type of balance. We reversed nature by burning and pulling a civilized nigger apart and bullwhipping the other to the point of death, all in her presence. By her being left alone, unprotected, with the MALE IMAGE DESTROYED, the ordeal caused her to move from her psychologically dependent state to a frozen, independent state. In this frozen, psychological state of independence, she will raise her MALE and female offspring in reversed roles. For FEAR of the young male’s life, she will psychologically train him to be MENTALLY WEAK and DEPENDENT, but PHYSICALLY STRONG. Because she has become psychologically independent, she will train her FEMALE offsprings to be psychologically independent. What have you got? You’ve got the nigger WOMAN OUT FRONT AND THE nigger MAN BEHIND AND SCARED. This is a perfect situation of sound sleep and economics. Before the breaking process, we had to be alertly on guard at all times. Now, we can sleep soundly, for out of frozen fear his woman stands guard for us. He cannot get past her early slave-molding process. He is a good tool, now ready to be tied to the horse at a tender age. By the time a nigger boy reaches the age of sixteen, he is soundly broken in and ready for a long life of sound and efficient work and the reproduction of a unit of good labor force. Continually through the breaking of uncivilized savage niggers, by throwing the nigger female savage into a frozen psychological state of independence, by killing the protective male image, and by creating a submissive dependent mind of the nigger male slave, we have created an orbiting cycle that turns on its own axis forever, unless a phenomenon occurs and re-shifts the position of the male and female slaves. We show what we mean by example. Take the case of the two economic slave units and examine them close.

THE NEGRO MARRIAGE

We breed two nigger males with two nigger females. Then, we take the nigger male away from them and keep them moving and working. Say one nigger female bears a nigger female and the other bears a nigger male; both nigger females—being without influence of the nigger male image, frozen with a independent psychology—will raise their offspring into reverse positions. The one with the female offspring will teach her to be like herself, independent and negotiable (we negotiate with her, through her, by her, negotiates her at will). The one with the nigger male offspring, she being frozen subconscious fear for his life, will raise him to be mentally dependent and weak, but physically strong; in other words, body over mind. Now, in a few years when these two offsprings become fertile for early reproduction, we will mate and breed them and continue the cycle. That is good, sound and long range comprehensive planning.

WARNING: POSSIBLE INTERLOPING NEGATIVES

Earlier, we talked about the non-economic good of the horse and the nigger in their wild or natural state; we talked out the principle of breaking and tying them together for orderly production. Furthermore, we talked about paying particular attention to the female savage and her offspring for orderly future planning, then more recently we stated that, by reversing the positions of the male and female savages, we created an orbiting cycle that turns on its own axis forever unless a phenomenon occurred and reshifts positions of the male and female savages. Our experts warned us about the possibility of this phenomenon occurring, for they say that the mind has a strong drive to correct and re-correct itself over a period of time if it can touch some substantial original historical base; and they advised us that the best way to deal with the phenomenon is to shave off the brute’s mental history and create a multiplicity of phenomena of illusions, so that each illusion will twirl in its own orbit, something similar to floating balls in a vacuum. This creation of multiplicity of phenomena of illusions entails the principle of crossbreeding the nigger and the horse as we stated above, the purpose of which is to create a diversified division of labor; thereby creating different levels of labor and different values of illusion at each connecting level of labor. The results of which is the severance of the points of original beginnings for each sphere illusion. Since we feel that the subject matter may get more complicated as we proceed in laying down our economic plan concerning the purpose, reason and effect of crossbreeding horses and niggers, we shall lay down the following definition terms for future generations. Orbiting cycle means a thing turning in a given path. Axis means upon which or around which a body turns. Phenomenon means something beyond ordinary conception and inspires awe and wonder. Multiplicity means a great number. Means a globe. Crossbreeding a horse means taking a horse and breeding it with an ass and you get a dumb, backward, ass long-headed mule that is not reproductive nor productive by itself. Crossbreeding niggers mean taking so many drops of good white blood and putting them into as many nigger women as possible, varying the drops by the various tone that you want, and then letting them breed with each other until another circle of color appears as you desire. What this means is this: Put the niggers and the horse in a breeding pot, mix some asses and some good white blood and what do you get? You got a multiplicity of colors of ass backward, unusual niggers, running, tied to backward ass long-headed mules, the one productive of itself, the other sterile. (The one constant, the other dying, we keep the nigger constant for we may replace the mules for another tool) both mule and nigger tied to each other, neither knowing where the other came from and neither productive for itself, nor without each other.

CONTROLLED LANGUAGE

Crossbreeding completed, for further severance from their original beginning, WE MUST COMPLETELY ANNIHILATE THE MOTHER TONGUE of both the new nigger and the new mule, and institute a new language that involves the new life’s work of both. You know language is a peculiar institution. It leads to the heart of a people. The more a foreigner knows about the language of another country the more he is able to move through all levels of that society. Therefore, if the foreigner is an enemy of the country, to the extent that he knows the body of the language, to that extent is the country vulnerable to attack or invasion of a foreign culture. For example, if you take a slave, if you teach him all about your language, he will know all your secrets, and he is then no more a slave, for you can’t fool him any longer, and BEING A FOOL IS ONE OF THE BASIC INGREDIENTS OF ANY INCIDENTS TO THE MAINTENANCE OF THE SLAVERY SYSTEM. For example, if you told a slave that he must perform in getting out “our crops” and he knows the language well, he would know that “our crops” didn’t mean “our crops” and the slavery system would break down, for he would relate on the basis of what “our crops” really meant. So you have to be careful in setting up the new language; for the slaves would soon be in your house, talking to you as “man to man” and that is death to our economic system. In addition, the definitions of words or terms are only a minute part of the process. Values are created and transported by communication through the body of the language. A total society has many interconnected value systems. All the values in the society have bridges of language to connect them for orderly working in the society. But for these language bridges, these many value systems would sharply clash and cause internal strife or civil war, the degree of the conflict being determined by the magnitude of the issues or relative opposing strength in whatever form. For example, if you put a slave in a hog pen and train him to live there and incorporate in him to value it as a way of life completely, the biggest problem you would have out of him is that he would worry you about provisions to keep the hog pen clean, or the same hog pen and make a slip and incorporate something in his language whereby he comes to value a house more than he does his hog pen, you got a problem. He will soon be in your house.Additional Note: “Henty Berry, speaking in the Virginia House of Delegates in 1832, described the situation as it existed in many parts of the South at this time: “We have, as far as possible, closed every avenue by which light may enter their (the slaves) minds. If we could extinguish the capacity to see the light, our work would be complete; they would then be on a level with the beasts of the field and we should be safe. I am not certain that we would not do it, if we could find out the process and that on the plea of necessity.” From Brown America, The story of a New Race by Edwin R. Embree. 1931 The Viking Press.

Iran wants US nukes dismantled

Press TV
May 4, 2010

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the United States should dismantle its nuclear bases around the world as a step to create a nuke-free world.

“Nuclear weapons stationed in military bases in the US and those in its allied countries such as Germany, Italy, Japan and the Netherlands must be dismantled,” President Ahmadinejad said in an address before the 2010 Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) at the UN headquarters in New York on Monday.

“Those who used nuclear weapons for the first time in history are the most detested and disgraceful people in the world,” he said, adding that nuclear arms are “the most disgusting and shameful kind of weapons in the world.”

The United Sates, despite being a signatory to the NPT, is the “main suspect” responsible for the stockpiling, spread and the threatening of other nations with nuclear weapons, the Iranian president said.

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Ahmadinejad noted that “possessing nuclear weapons is nothing to be proud of,” while criticizing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for adopting a double standard toward nuclear-armed countries and those seeking nuclear energy.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon opened the review conference, held every five years to strengthen the non-proliferation regime, at the UN headquarters.

Ahmadinejad, who is the only head of state attending the summit, said world powers should set a deadline to create a nuke-free world, calling on the UN to rebrand the NPT as the “Disarmament NPT.”

The Iranian president, who described as “hazardous” the production and stockpiling of nuclear weapons by world powers, criticized the United Nations for its inability to establish sustainable security for the world against nuclear weapons.

He stressed that nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation have not materialized, saying that the US should be blamed for the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

World powers, he said, should live up to their obligations under the NPT.

Ahmadinejad also provided a comprehensive resolution to strengthen the non-proliferation treaty:

- Nuclear disarmament should be put at the core of the NPT mandate through “transparent binding and effective mechanisms.”

- The establishment of an independent, international group to fully materialize Article 6 of the NPT; including planning and supervising nuclear disarmament and preventing proliferation.

“All these nuclear weapons should be eliminated within a timetable set by this group.”

- The introduction of legally binding, comprehensive security guarantees, without discrimination or preconditions until the achievement of full nuclear disarmament by nuclear-armed states.

- The immediate termination of all types of research, development or improvement of nuclear weapons and their related facilities.

- The adoption of a legally binding instrument on the full prohibition of production, stockpiling and improvement proliferation, maintaining and use of nuclear weapons.

- The suspension of membership in the IAEA board of governors for states that use or threaten to use nuclear weapons.

“The presence of such members has allowed the agency to deviate from conducting its authorized missions.”

- The secession of all kinds of nuclear cooperation with non-signatories of the NPT and the adoption of effective punitive measures against all those states which continue to cooperate with such non-member states.

- Considering any threat to use nuclear weapons or any attack on peaceful nuclear facilities as a breach of international law.

- Immediate and unconditional implementation of the resolution adopted by the 1995 Review Conference on the establishment of a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East.

- Collective effort to reform the structure of the (UN) Security Council as its current structure mainly serves the interests of nuclear weapons states.