Jul 31, 2011

The fraud of "equal sacrifice"


[NOBAMA]..   The fraud of "equal sacrifice"

Not having had a TV for 5 years is a blessing.  For Obama's speech, I did not have to look into the face of my President as he lied, nor listen to even more lies from House Speaker Boehner.  

Instead, I got the full impact by downloading transcripts soon after, and studied them carefully at my leisure, highlighting their false statements.  There was little white paper left. Both speeches were political frauds at every level.

There is NO Economic Crisis regarding the Debt Ceiling.  This false Crisis was manufactured in order to drive a hole thru the Middle Class of America from which it shall not recover.  Wall $treet Banksters intend that Americans shall be in debt to them now and forevermore, Amen.  DINO Republican President Obama is their tool to accomplish their goal, by pretending this invented Crisis demands it.  Every time Obama said he wanted a "balanced approach", he lied.

Take $100 from someone living on Social Security that they paid for, then balance the effect by taking a million from a multi-millionaire.  Even then, the rich won't feel the loss.

And Boehner's Cut, Cap & Balance is better know as Slash, Choke & Whack.

The "debate" in Washington about the Federal Deficit was rigged in advance. Everyone is supposed to take as Gospel that massive cuts must be made to Federal Safety Net programs that benefit working people of the Middle and Lower Classes.  Working people did not cause this, nor cause either of our 2 Economic Depressions.  But a massive transfer of wealth to our wealthiest Americans did. 

Most guilty are Congressional "Party of the People" Democrats who are selling out the Middle Class, as rapidly as possible.  Obama is holding the majority of Americans hostage while he meets his obligation to repay the Casino Bankers and Out-of-Control Corporations who put him in the White House to serve them.

Swept into the Presidency on the belief that he was the next FDR, Obama has been steadfastly proving that he is a Republican, not a Democrat.  No Democrat would touch Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other Safety Net programs to justify raising an ersatz Debt Ceiling.  Only a Republican would do this.  Wall $treet could not finish the job under Bush, so they hired Obama to do it.

Obama and the novice freshman tea party majority in the House are using an orchestrated Crisis to create false conditions for an unprecedented attack on the living standards and rights of working people of America.  Make no mistake about it.  This is a Class War, started by the rich 30 years ago, to dismantle the New Deal guarantees made to all Americans, which served us for a half century, keeping in check the excessive wealth that collapsed the Economy during the Great Depression.

There is NO benefit to ordinary Americans outlined anywhere in these 2 speeches.  There is NO connection between raising the Debt Ceiling and cutting Social Programs.  The Debt Ceiling was raised 18 times by Reagan, 7 times by GwB, 10 times in the past 10 years.  And no one was hurt by doing it.

So why is this fraud harming so many?  The former Republican Party became the tea party Conservatives, and Obama was drug to the right by his financial Masters, and became a Republican.  No Democratic Party is represented in the current White House.  Bush's financial engineers still run our economy.

The 2 parties in power represent the American Financial Aristocracy, on the rise since Reagan's Presidency was used to deregulate our Government for Wall $treet's benefit, and more under every President since, defeating Clinton's attempt to bring the excesses of the Healthcare Mafia under control.

The wealth, income and power hoarded by this obscenely corrupt Aristocracy has been built by systematically destroying the Middle Class in America, and blaming it on anything but the real causes:  more Wars for profit of the rich, less Taxes for the rich, and endless Deregulation of Corporations which are robbing America blind, shipping jobs overseas as rapidly as possible.

Obama delivered a speech intended to con Americans, using FEAR, the standard weapon of Rethuglicans.  He hinted at not sending out Social Security checks to frighten seniors, when Obama knows there are several easy solutions to avoid this fake "Crisis" -- without involving a gridlocked Congress -- which he neglected to mention.  

Obama refuses to face this corrupt Attack which demands his adamant protection for Americans.  Instead, he sees it as an opportunity to dismantle FDR's Safety Net, the wet dream of the Wealth Aristocracy, using his false "balanced approach."

Obama's speech was a profound lie, calculated to fool and mislead the American people.  This is no FDR Democrat.  Obama proved beyond any doubt that he is a Wall $treet Republican.

Somehow in his trickle-down mind, Obama thought he could con the American people into supporting spending cuts to social programs which are NOT the problem, driving millions more toward poverty, while leaving the gargantuan riches of the Wealth Aristocracy untouched, financing the deficit fix on the backs of those he is robbing.

Boehner was expected to lie to his tea party base.  But virtually every sentence in Republican Obama's 15-minute address was also a lie.

There is NO "equal sacrifice" proposed.

So what did Obama's 'fireside chat' accomplish?  It was the grease applied to Americans' backsides for the Republican screw job that is about to be delivered to them.



Disaster Warning on 'Gang of Six'

By Sen. Bernie Sanders, Reader Supported News  20 July 11
Disaster Warning: 'Gang of Six' deal sacrifices Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid to GOP madness.

he latest idea to emerge in negotiations over a deficit-reduction package came from a group of senators that calls itself the Gang of Six. The proposal would be a disaster, Sen. Bernie Sanders warned. "The plan would result in devastating cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and many other programs that are of vital importance to working families in this country. Meanwhile, tax rates would be lowered for the wealthiest people and the largest, most profitable corporations."

"This is an approach that should be rejected by the American people. At a time when the rich are becoming richer and corporate profits are soaring, at least half of any deficit-reduction package must come from upper income people and profitable corporations. We must also take a hard look at military spending, which has tripled since 1997."

Summary of the "Gang of Six Plan"

Provides Major Tax Cuts to the Wealthy and Large Corporations.

  • The Gang of Six plan reduces the top marginal income tax rate for the wealthiest Americans and most profitable corporations from 35 percent to as low as 23 percent (about 34 percent lower than the top tax rates under Bush).

  • Instead of reforming the Alternative Minimum Tax, it abolishes it altogether providing a major tax cut for the wealthiest Americans.

  • It reduces the deficit by about $3.7 trillion over 10 years, while providing a net tax cut of $1.5 trillion that will mainly go to the wealthiest Americans and most profitable corporations.

  • In other words, 100 percent of the deficit reduction achieved by the Gang of Six plan is through spending cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, education, child care, Head Start, LIHEAP, the environment, and other programs that the sick, the elderly, the children, and working families need.

  • Any tax revenue that is raised by closing tax loopholes for large corporations must be used to lower tax rates.

  • Revenue raisers cannot be used to increase spending at all. Revenue raisers can only be used to lower tax rates or reduce the deficit.

Reduces the Deficit on the Backs of the Elderly, the Children, the Sick, and Working Families.

  • It imposes undefined spending caps to be in effect until at least 2015 that could only be raised by 67 votes in the Senate.

Immediately Reduces Cost of Living Adjustments for Social Security Benefits.

  • Even though Social Security recipients haven't gotten a COLA for 2 straight years, the Gang of Six believes that the formula for calculating COLAs is too generous.

  • Under their plan, they would ensure that seniors never get a fair COLA by shifting to the Chained-CPI which would significantly understate inflation for seniors.

  • Under the Gang of Six plan, ten years from now the typical 75-year-old will see their Social Security benefits cut by $560 a year, and the average 85-year-old will see a cut of $1,000 a year.

Slashes Medicare.

  • Cuts Medicare by at least $298 billion over 10 years.

Holds Deficit Reduction Hostage to Cutting Social Security Benefits.

  • If the Gang of Six deficit reduction plan receives 60 votes, it will not be sent to the House until and unless the Senate also adopts a plan to reform Social Security so that it is solvent for the next 75 years.

  • If 60 Senators don't vote to approve an undefined 75-year Social Security solvency bill, the deficit reduction plan dies, even if 60 Senators voted to approve it.

  • Social Security is solvent for the next 25 years. No other government program can make that claim.


A personal observation from having lived thru it:

Once we had a progressive tax code, which served to protect us ordinary folk from criminal excesses caused by obscene accumulations of wealth among those who did not have the wisdom to use it well.

The more you earned, the larger was your fair share paid back to this Great Nation which allowed you to accumulate your wealth, which went as high as 90%.  I grew up with this notion, and it seemed sufficiently fair to me.  If Uncle Sam allowed me to earn a lot, I owed a lot back.

Until the Global meltdown in 2008, which soon took out my 30-year small business, and now forces me to live in poverty on Social Security, I had not noticed, nor had reason to notice, that the filthy rich were rigging the game to pay less and less in taxes, so that now, those who caused the Global Economy to collapse, such as the Derivative & Hedge Fund criminals, pay the leastest on the mostest. 

I had no reason to notice, because I was taught, and I trusted, that my Government had been organized to protect me from criminals.  Which, it had been.  But the criminals kept sneaking thru the cracks and kidnapping the lawmakers.  And what had been built for half a century as a defense to protect me, was stolen, leaving empty shell laws, designed to make rich people richer at the expense of the rest of us.

And now, in this first decade of the 21st century, criminals in Congress are focused on stealing more from me, you, and our working friends of the Middle Class, to make the filthy rich filthier.  Rethugs want the richest to be taxed at 24%, or 15%, or for Corporations, not at all.

All of this is to make them richer, which makes them more dangerous to democracy.

Yes, excessive wealth is an absolute danger to any democracy.

How did the America Dream of my youth get turned on its head while I quietly went about doing my simple task, making folks happy by teaching them how to make thing of glass?

In the package which criminals in the current Congress are demanding for their greed-driven Masters, they want their wealth taxed even less, so they can abscond with more of what they steal here in America, moving more of it off-shore to avoid more taxes.  

Where and when was it ever written that anyone had a right to be a billionaire on a planet with too many people for its finite resources?  How much is a fair share of an ever limited pot?

If it were up to me, I'd balance the budget by taxing everything over a million dollars at 100%.   You get the glory of earning it, but in fairness to the rest of us who make your wealth possible, you do not get to keep it.

And Corporations?  They are legal fictions invented by the Government to serve the Government by providing good employment to people and to pay taxes, and therefore have no right to avoid taxation (like GE having a hundred tax-avoidance attorneys and accountants, all tax deductible).  Nor should legal fictions have any right to influence any vote anywhere at any time.

In a democracy, or Democratic Republic as the Baggers insist on saying, only live human beings can vote, and therefore, only they should be able to contribute money to any Candidate.  No legal fictions allowed.

Sounds more like one person, one vote to me.  

And the first step to accomplish this is to remove a Republican masquerading as a Democrat.



Recent Activity:


This is follow up to Israel Shamir's Analysis of Breivik's Ideas...


This is follow up to Israel Shamir's Analysis of Breivik's Ideas; the first part can be found on 

The Friday 22 Massacre

Part Two. Breivik Sees Red

By Israel Shamir


Breivik hated Reds even more than Muslims. The Pakis should be deported, but the Commies – shot as traitors, he wrote in his 2083. He fumed against communism like Hitler in Mein Kampf, but Hitler had better reasons. Hitler competed against the Communists for the hearts of German workers, AND Hitler competed against the softies within the national-socialist movement in Germany, who (notably the brothers Strasser) were prepared to deal with communists.

A long time has passed since then. Communism won in the titanic struggle of 1945, but suffered a huge setback in 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Consequently, anticommunism has lost its meaning since at least 1991, but probably even earlier. Today, it could possibly mobilise a few old-timers in Washington DC, but maybe not even them.


It is with great astonishment we witnesses of Communism's defeat read in 2083 that Communism was victorious:


"The US but especially W. Europe lost the Cold War due to the fact that we didn't persecute the Marxists after WW2. If we had executed each and every Marxist and banned Marxist doctrines (not only the economical aspects but the cultural as well – internationalism, extreme feminism, extreme egalitarianism, anti-elitism, anti-nationalism) we would not be in the current situation. Instead, our traitorous and weak minded post-WW2 leaders allowed the Marxists to gradually infiltrate many aspects of society after WW2, especially our universities and the media (see the beginning of book 1 for a complete overview of how this happened). The first ML pioneers (Marxist-Leninists) were allowed to indoctrinate the '68 generation, those who run things today."


Breivik arrives at the unexpected conclusion that both the EU and the US are, in our present age, "socialist" or even "communist" states, "EUSSR and USSR" organised in accordance with Marx's teachings. I did not know that Karl Marx envisaged a society with hundreds of billionaires and millions of paupers. One would have to be mad to describe the contemporary US and EU as "communist dictatorships" – these societies are extremely inegalitarian -- workers are on the bottom, while the super-wealthy have an ostentatious lifestyle unheard of even in Medici's Florence.


The reason for this unexpected conclusion is that Breivik intentionally confuses Marxism-Leninism as the ruling ideology of the Soviet Union and Maoist China, with the neo-Marxist western ideology of Fromm and Adorno, Marcuse and Lukacs. With all due respect, the Cold War was NOT a war with them, but a war against the USSR and its allies, a war with its geopolitical as well as ideological components. Western neo-Marxists were rather the allies of the Capitalist West in that war, and their contribution to the fall of the Eastern citadel of Communism was enormous, as they successfully undermined the Russian elites' belief in their own ideology.


Though Breivik quarrels with the Western Marxists, he finds it convenient to connect them with the Gulag and with alleged mass murders in the USSR. This is dishonest: the Western neo-Marxists were against Stalin, and they called their Eastern brethren "Stalinists", at least since the short-sighted Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin in 1956.


Khrushchev, a crypto-Trotskyite, frogmarched the Communists through an unnecessary and unpopular de-Stalinisation instead of letting bygones be bygones. Nowadays President Medvedev is talking again about de-Stalinisation; probably this talk will prevent his re-election. The people of Russia have differing views about Stalin, but the vast majority were and are against de-Stalinisation, for to them it symbolises the breakdown of the national masculine heroic paradigm.


Breivik accuses the Communists of supporting "extreme feminism". This is odd. Joseph Stalin was the ultimate symbol of masculinity: the great Yugoslav director Dushan Makkaveev depicted him in his Mysteries of the Organism in priapic form. De-Stalinisation can be viewed as an attempt to unman the Father-figure of the Communist world. Again, Breivik's ridiculous claim can be explained by his desire to gather all the Reds into one big heap: from grim NKVD commissars to California sociologists to the Norwegian teenagers he shot. He learned this nasty trick from his Neocon teachers: they paint every nationalist by the same brush as Adolf Hitler.


We reject it out of hand: not every traditionalist and nationalist is a Breivik or a Hitler; the Communists take differing positions on tradition, with Eastern Stalinists being quite conservative, traditional and mildly nationalist, while Western neo-Marxists rejected the bourgeois nationalism which caused two world wars.


Breivik stresses the Communist origins of the Frankfurt school's founders, of Theodor Adorno and Georg Lukács – but the neocons, too, were red-diaper babies or even active Trots before switching sides. Gramsci indeed dreamed of cultural hegemony as the means of arriving at socialism. He thought that a new "Communist man" might be created before any political revolution. However, Gramsci was mistaken. This theory of Gramsci was used to preach a reformist, non-revolutionary way, avoiding a violent takeover of banks and factories. The idea was played up by the Euro-Communists and, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, disappeared with the Euro-Communist parties.


Lenin was right, and Gramsci was wrong: you have to take away from the capitalists both their chequebooks and their factories, their weapons and their newspapers, their parliament and their government, otherwise they will turn every agenda of yours to their benefit. The Frankfurt school and other Western neo-Marxists stood by the West in the Cold War.


The Western neo-Marxists behaved like the proverbial man who searched for a lost coin under the lamppost. Though he knew he had lost the coin elsewhere, there was more light under the lamppost. They did not know how to interact with workers, and so preferred to work with minorities, students, feminists. It was easier, but led nowhere, as we now see. The workers of Spain and Greece rose up last month, but the neo-Marxists were nowhere to be found. They did not lead this real popular revolt, as they were only used to their toy revolutions in the field of semantics.


The neo-Marxists gave up on revolution, gave up on socialism, gave up on the workers, and instead preferred to work "so no future Holocaust would be possible". Kevin McDonald, from California State University, wrote that they choose to follow their Jewish agenda rather than the Communist one. Breivik had not read McDonald the Terrible, or at least never referred to him, being such a good pupil of Jewish pundits. KMD's explanation was forbidden to him. He just intoned that what these men did IS communism. Actually, many texts in 2083 are old anti-Jewish screeds with find/replace Jews by Marxists.


Regretfully Breivik was wrong: the communists did not win. We did not move even one step closer to communism by promoting gay marriages and multiculturalism. Fighting against Christianity and family does not help, either. All these steps were appropriated and used by Capital and against workers. Actually, the objectives of socialist revolution and "no more Holocausts at any cost" are mutually exclusive. For the first objective, we need brave and daring men, for the second, all men must be unmanned, for real men are unpredictable.


The proof that Breivik speaks nonsense (even in his own terms) can be found in his2083, where he rates European states according to their acceptance of what he calls "cultural Marxism". Not surprisingly, Russia and other countries of the Communist block are the freest from this dogma, while Germany, Sweden and Norway are the most subservient. Indeed, destructive western neo-Marxist theories were never popular in the East, where capitalism was dismantled in the real sense and there was no need for a make-believe pseudo-communist ideology to paper over a capitalist economy.


As for the West, 1968 was not, as Breivik says, V-day for Marxism, but the beginning of a turn towards the Iron Heel. Our freedoms peaked just after the long-gone year of 1968. 1968 was a turning point in America. In 1968, the richest Americans contributed 90% of their income to the state, while now they pay less than 30% (never mind that they do not pay even that much by cleverly exploiting tax shelters, exempt funds and other tricks). It was in 1968 that the American worker's minimum pay peaked in real terms. Looking back, 1968 was the moment in history when mankind was nearest to the stars.


As children of the defeated '68 revolution, we were free to love, smoke, think and act. We could travel and fly without being stripped at the airport, and our booze was not confiscated. We could make love and smoke in cafés. Since then, it has been downhill all the way: smoking has been banned, free thought has been incarcerated by Political Correctness, and political action has been reduced to joining a Facebook group.


In the US, as Noam Chomsky has told me, the U-turn coincided with the teachers' strike in New York which reminded the Jews that their narrow interests are not necessarily best served by progressive and revolutionary tactics. Accordingly, the revolutionary ideologists of '68 acquiesced in pacifying the masses, and the chances for a new holocaust or even loss of influence were indeed minimised.


The masculinity of the Left receded, too. Support of dubious gender politics and retreat from the class struggle changed the Left. While the Left had always pushed for equality between the sexes, this equality leaned rather towards the masculine pole: whether it was a worker building the barricade, sailors storming the Winter Palace, cigar-smoking barbudos of Castro, they were all manly symbols of the Left. During the epic confrontation of the first half of 20th century, the Red Guards were not more feminine than the Stormtroopers, and Ernst Thaelmann was not less masculine than Ernst Roehm.


The present misbalance of male/female factors in the developed world was caused by technological developments (man's physical strength is less needed), by ideological shift and by capitalists' desire to maximise profit by employing women. As a result, men are frustrated. Their old traditional role of providers is over; their jobs went away to China, fighting is done by drones. Breivik's massacre bears the mark of a frustrated and marginalized Norwegian man.


Breivik felt his manhood threatened by "television, where nearly every major offering has a female 'power figure' and the plots and characters emphasize the inferiority of the male and superiority of the female… by government-mandated employment preferences and practices that benefit women and use 'sexual harassment' charges to keep men in line, [by] colleges where women's gender studies proliferate and 'affirmative action' is applied in admissions and employment."


Yes, the killer is a psychotic man whose vision is hardly adequate, but his point should be considered. Even his hatred towards Muslim immigrants could be traced to the threat to his manhood presented by virile, unencumbered-by-fear-of-harassment-charges Southerners successfully competing for the charms of the Nordic girls. This massacre and its possible follow-ups might well have been averted if this European man did not feel his manhood threatened in so many ways.


The massacre is a sign that the Yin/Yang balance of Europe is severely biased; it should be restored and this urgent task can't be delayed – this is an important lesson of the Friday 22 massacre.

Edited by Ken Freeland 




Fun stuff to read, tell and watch:

Now FREE to watch all 91 minutes: "Defamation," from Israeli filmmaker Yoav Shamir. LINK:

Some of His Best Friends Are Jewish: The Saga of a Holocaust Revisionist By Nathaniel Popper. Link: Israeli lawyer has filed a class-action lawsuit against former President Jimmy Carter, seeking $5 million in damages because his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" allegedly defamed Israel. Link:

"...when you have laws against questioning the Holocaust narrative, you are screaming at the other person to stop thinking!!!" ---Mike Santomauro. *Anthony Lawson's Holocaust Video "were the Germans so stupid"... Link:

An anti-Semite condemns people for being Jews, I am not an anti-Semite.--Mike Santomauro. Link:

Start reading DEBATING THE HOLOCAUST in under a minute:


Mike Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367

Recent Activity:


Jul 30, 2011

The Real Housewives of Wall Street


The Real Housewives of Wall Street

By: Admin
Why is the Federal Reserve forking over $220 million in bailout money to the wives of two Morgan Stanley bigwigs?
by: Matt Taibbi
America has two national budgets, one official, one unofficial. The official budget is public record and hotly debated: Money comes in as taxes and goes out as jet fighters, DEA agents, wheat subsidies and Medicare, plus pensions and bennies for that great untamed socialist menace called a unionized public-sector workforce that Republicans are always complaining about. According to popular legend, we're broke and in so much debt that 40 years from now our granddaughters will still be hooking on weekends to pay the medical bills of this year's retirees from the IRS, the SEC and the Department of Energy.

Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?

Most Americans know about that budget. What they don't know is that there is another budget of roughly equal heft, traditionally maintained in complete secrecy. After the financial crash of 2008, it grew to monstrous dimensions, as the government attempted to unfreeze the credit markets by handing out trillions to banks and hedge funds. And thanks to a whole galaxy of obscure, acronym-laden bailout programs, it eventually rivaled the "official" budget in size — a huge...

Recent Activity:


'' Piltdown Man Found in a Gas Chamber ''


Begin forwarded message:

Date: July 30, 2011 5:59:59 PM EDT
Subject: [jacobandesau] '' Piltdown Man Found in a Gas Chamber ''


I had an intyeresting exchange with the librarian at my local library:
      A few years ago I asked the librarian why Wilkomirski's '' Fragments of Memories '' was still in the library's Holocaust collection when it had been revealed as a fraud. Her response was, '' says who '' to which I said the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. Still she didn't seem to believe me so I went home and downloaded the relevant articles as well as one written by Mark Weber, I gave her copies and she said she would look into the matter.
    This past Thursday while in the same library I looked up '' Fragments '' again and found it to be listed as a novel. I then call another  librarian over and told her of my past experience and asked her about the new classification. Her response was that the description of the book did in fact mention that it was a hoax. But why was it now being classified as a novel....surely the author did not write it as a novel, he claimed it was the truth. The librarian gave me a puzzled look whereupon I asked if it was customary policy in the library establishment to simply reclassify revealed hoaxes as '' novels ''. Still she didn't get my point so I brought up " Piltdown Man '' .      I told her that for years '' Piltdown Man '' was part of the scientific literature until he was shown to be a hoax...were the bogus historical writings dealing with this fraud then reclassified as novels? She now seemed to get my point.
    Then I told her that there are more than eighty thousand titles that deal with the Holocaust and it seems that this library has bought every one of them...and if they haven't could she name a few that they hadn't purchased. I was now on a roll ! I said when the librarian board meets to discuss a new purchase and one member for example suggests  Shlomo Goldstein's memoir of his experience in seven death camps and the fifteen attempts to exterminate him,  does  anyone say '' Nah...we already have a memoir of someone who was in eleven death camps and survived twenty two attempts to gas him ....has something like this ever happened ?...could she mention a single title dealing with the Holocaust that has been rejected. I know you do have meetings and publications do get rejected...I've been trying for years to get the library to have The Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs placed on the shelves ''. Her response was that I should attend the upcoming meeting of the library board and bring these issues up. I told her I would .   joe

Recent Activity:


new essay by petras - The Norwegian Massacre - Organized Political Terrorism - please confirm receipt


Organized Political Terrorism:  The Norwegian Massacre, the State , the Media and Israel

James Petras

July 2011

“So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionist,s against all cultural Marxists/Multiculturalists”.  Anders Behring Breivik’s Manifesto

“. . . two more cells exist in my organization”. . . Ander Behring Breivik in police custody   (Reuters 7/25/11)


            The July 22, 2011, bombing of the office of the Norwegian Prime Minister, Labor Party Jen Stoltenberg, which killed 8 civilians, and the subsequent political assassination of 68 unarmed activists of the Labor Party Youth on Utoeya Island, just 20 minutes from Oslo, by militant neo-fascist Christian-Zionists, raises fundamental questions about the growing links between the legal Far-Right, the ‘mainstream media’, the Norwegian police, Israel and rightwing terrorism.

 The Mass Media and the Rise of Rightwing Terrorism:

            The leading English language newspapers, The New York Times (NYT), the Washington Post (WP), the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) and the Financial Times  (FT), as well as President Obama, blamed “Islamic extremists”, upon the first police reports of the killings, publishing a series of incendiary (and false) headlines and reports, labeling the event as ‘Norway’s 9-11’,in terms, which echoed the ideological motivation and justifications cited by the Norwegian Christian-Zionist political assassin, Anders Behring Breivik himself,.  The July 23/24 front page of the Financial Times (of London), read “Islamist extremism fears:  Worst Europe strike since 2005”.  Obama immediately cited the terrorist attack in Norway to further justify his overseas wars against Muslim countries.  The FT, NYT, WP and WSJ trotted out their self-styled “experts” who debated over which Arab/Islamic leaders or movements were responsible – despite Norwegian press reports of ‘the arrest of a Nordic man in police uniform’.

                Clearly, the US mass media and political elite were eager to use the bombing and assassinations to justify ongoing overseas imperial wars, ignoring the burgeoning domestic extremist rightwing organizations and violent individuals who are the outgrowth of official Islamophobic hate propaganda. 

When Anders Breivik, a known neo-fascist extremist, handed his weapons over to Norwegian police without resistance and claimed credit for the bombing and massacre, the second phase of the official cover-up took place:  He was immediately described as “a lone wolf assassin”, who “acted alone” (BBC July 24, 2011) or as mentally deranged, downplaying his political networks, his American, European and Israeli ideological mentors and commitments, which led to his acts of terrorism.  Even more outrageous, the media and officials ignored the fact that this complex, multiphase terrorist attack was beyond the capacity of one ‘deranged’ person. 

            Anders Behring Breivik had been a dues-paying member of a Far-Right political party, The Progress Party and a collaborator and contributor to an overtly neo-Nazi web site.  He frequently focused his hatred on the ruling Labor Party for its relative tolerance of immigrants.  He despised immigrants especially, Muslims, and was an ardent Christian-Zionist supporter of Israeli repression and terror against the Palestinian people.  His criminal action was political in essence and embedded in a much wider political network

The political elite and media have scrambled to deny the overlapping links between ‘legal’ ideological Islamophobes, like the American Zionists Daniel Pipes, David Horowitz, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, the Dutch far-right Party of Freedom led by the hate-monger Geert Wilders and their counterparts in the Norwegian Progress Party who rail against the “Muslim threat”. The “direct action” terrorists take their cues from electoral parties, like the Progress Party, who recruit and indoctrinate activists, like Behring Breivik, who then leave the ‘electoral road’ to carry out their bloody carnage, allowing the ‘respectable’ hate-mongers to hypocritically condemn him… after the outrage.

The Lone Assassin:  A Fascist Superman Travels Faster than a Speeding Bullet

Versus the Police Moving Slower than an Arthritic Turtle:


            The case for the “lone wolf terrorist” defies credence. It is a tissue of lies used to cover up state complicity, intelligence malfeasance, and the sharp right-turn in the domestic and foreign policies of NATO countries. 

There is no basis to accept Breivik’s initial claim that he acted alone for several outstanding reasons:  First, the car bomb, which devastated downtown Oslo, was a highly complex weapon requiring expertise and coordination – the kind available to state or intelligence services, like the Mossad, which specialize in devastating car bombs.  Amateurs, like Breivik, with no training in explosives, usually blow themselves up or lack the skill required to connect the electronic timing devices or remote detonators (like the unsuccessful ‘shoe’, ‘underpants’ and ‘Times Square’ bombers have proved) .  Secondly, the details of (a) moving the bomb, (b) obtaining (stealing) a vehicle, (c) placing the device at the strategic site, (d) successfully detonating it  and (e) then gowning up in an elaborate special police uniform with an arsenal of hundreds of rounds of ammunition and driving off in another vehicle to Utoeya Island, (f) waiting patiently while armed to the teeth for a ferry boat, g) crossing with other passengers in his police uniform, (h) rounding up the Labor youth activists and commencing the massacre of scores of unarmed youth and finally (i) finishing off the wounded and hunting for those trying to hide or swim away  - is not the activity of a lone zealot.  Even the combination of Superman, Einstein and a world class marksman could not perform those tasks.

            The media and NATO leaders must view the public as passive morons to expect them to believe that Anders Behring Breivik “acted alone”.  He is willing to take a 20 year prison sentence if it means, as he maintains, that their collective action is the spark that ignites his comrades and advances the agenda of the violent and legal far rightwing parties.  Facing a Norwegian judge on July 25, he publically declared the existence of “two more cells in my organization”.  According to witness testimony on Utoeya Island shots from two distinct weapons were heard from different directions during the massacre.  The police say they are… “investigating”.  Needless to say the police have found nothing; instead they put on a “show” to cover their inaction by raiding two houses far from the massacre and quickly released the suspects.

            The most serious political implication of the terrorist action, however, is the conspicuous complicity of top police officials.  The police took 90 minutes to arrive at Utoeya Island, located less than 20 kilometers from Oslo, 12 minutes by helicopter and 25 to 30 minutes by car and boat.  The delay allowed the right wing assassins to use up the ammunition, maximizing the death toll of young, anti-fascist activists and devastating the Labor youth movement.  The police chief, Sveinung Sponheim, made the feeblest excuse and cover-up, claiming “problems with transport”.  Sponheim argued that a helicopter “wasn’t on standby” and they “could not find a boat” (Associated Press, July 24, 2011).  Yet a helicopter was available; it managed to fly to Utoeya and film the ongoing slaughter, and over half of Norwegians, a seafaring people for millennia, own or have access to a boat.  A police force, faced with what the Prime Minister calls the ‘worst atrocity since the Nazi occupation’, moving at the pace of an arthritic turtle to rescue youth activists, raises the suspicion of some level of complicity.  The obvious question arises as to the degree to which the ideology of right wing extremism – neo-fascism – has penetrated the police and security forces, especially the upper echelons?  This level of “inactivity” raises more questions than it answers.  What it suggests is that the Social Democrats only control part of the Government – the legislative, while the neo-fascists influence the state apparatus

The plain fact is that the police did not save a single life.  When they finally arrived, Anders Behring Breivik had run out of ammunition and surrendered turning himself over to the police.  The police literally did not fire a single shot; they did not even have to hunt or capture the assassin. An almost choreographed scenario:  Hundreds wounded, 68 unarmed, peaceful activists killed and the Labor youth movement decimated.

            The police can claim “crime solved” while the mass media prattles about a “lone assassin”.  The far right has a “martyr” to mask a further advance in their anti-Muslim, pro Israel crusade. (It is reminiscent of the celebrated Israeli-American fascist mass murderer, Dr. Baruch Goldstein, who slaughtered dozens of unarmed Palestinian men and boys at prayer in 1994).

Only two days before the political murders, the head of the Labor Party Youth Movement, Eskil Pederson, gave an interview to the Dagbladet, Norway’s second largest tabloid, in which he announced a “unilateral economic embargo of Israel from the Norwegian side” (Gilad Atzmon, July 24, 2011).

            The fact of the matter is that the Norwegian military has no problem promptly dispatching 500 troops to Afghanistan, half way around the world and providing six Norwegian Air Force jets and pilots to bomb and terrorize Libya.  And yet they can’t find a helicopter or a row boat to transport their police a couple hundred yards to stop a domestic right wing terrorist – whose murderous rampage was being described second by second by the terrorized young victims on their cell phones to their frantic parents?

The Imperial Roots of Domestic Fascism:  Conclusion

            Clearly, the decisions of Norway and other Scandinavian nations to participate in the US imperial crusades against Muslim and especially Arab people in the Middle East have aroused and energized the neo-fascist right.  They now want to “bring the war home”; they want Norway to go further, to ‘cleanse the nation’ by expelling Muslims.  They want to “send a message” to the Labor Party:  Either it must accept a full neo-fascist pro-Israeli agenda or expect more massacres, more elected fascists, more followers of Anders Behring Breivik.

                The “Progress Party” is now the second largest political party in Norway.  If a “conservative” coalition defeats Labor, neo-fascists will probably sit in the Government.  Who knows, after a few years of good behavior, they might find an excuse to commute their ex-comrades sentence . . . or proclaim him mentally rehabilitated and freed. 

Clearly what is needed is the immediate withdrawal of all troops from imperial wars and a systematic, coherent and organized fight against domestic right-wing terrorists and their intellectual godparents, in America, Israel and Europe.  Labor youth must go press on with their demand that the Labor Government, under Prime Minister Jen Stoltenberg, recognize the nation of Palestine and implement a total boycott of Israeli goods and services.  A national and international political-educational campaign must be organized to expose the links between respectable electoral fascists and violent terrorists.  The Labor Youth martyrs of Utoeya Island should be cherished and their ideals taught in all the schools.  Their far-right enemies and supporters whether overt, covert or directly complicit, should be exposed and condemned.  The best weapon against the renewed neo-fascist onslaught is a political and educational offensive, taking up the anti-fascist, anti-Quisling (Norway’s notorious Nazi collaborator) fighting traditions of their grandparents’ era.  It’s not too late – if the Labor Party, the Norwegian trade unions and the anti-fascist youth act now before the flood of resurgent fascism.



Recent Activity:


Mahler's "Democracy" Bombshell


From: James Damon <>

Date: Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:02 PM
Subject: Mahler's "Democracy" Bombshell

Horst Mahler „Splitterbomben"
Horst Mahler's "Bombshells"

Nr. 001/05: Demokratie und einiges mehr
No. 1/05: Democracy and Some Other Things

Translated by J M Damon

The original is posted on several sites including

The increasing political repression in Germany, combined with that country's insistence on human rights in China and elsewhere, has renewed interest in the case of Horst Mahler.
Following is a translation of one of his revelatory articles called "Bombshells" that moved the "Federal Republic" to impose a prison sentence of 13 years on the 74 year old dissident attorney.

"BOMBSHELL" 001/05

The greatest success of the Reich's enemies lies in their having so disoriented and deranged the Germans with their satanic brainwashing (called "UMERZIEHUNG" OR "re-education - also known as "de-education"), that they are completely incapable of defending themselves.
The Germans have reached the point where they believe their enemies' most fantastical and culturally devastating lies.
They perceive their greatest virtue, loyalty to Volk and Fatherland, as depraved fatuousness.
In short, they see themselves through the eyes of their worst enemies.

And yet, nobody ever asked the Germans if they wanted to be "liberated from National Socialism and militarism."
They did, after all, remain loyal to Adolf Hitler to the bitter end.
Has any nation in modern times exhibited a greater willingness for sacrifice or struggled more valiantly against "liberation" – fought to the last cartridge -- than the German Reich?

Was it Count Coudenhove-Kalergi who in 1925 expressed the essence of democracy in the following words?
[Footnote 1]
"Nowadays, Democracy is nothing more than a facade for plutocracy.
Because the nations no longer tolerate naked plutocracy, their masters allow them nominal power, while retaining factual power in the hands of the plutocrats.
In republican as well as monarchical democracies the statesmen are but puppets and the capitalists are their string-pullers.
The capitalists dictate national policy guidelines and control the electorate by manufacturing public opinion, controlling the ministers through their financial and social connections." (ADEL, p. 31)

Pope Benedict XVI expressed similar views while he was still Cardinal Ratzinger.
He wrote the following in 1988:
"The conviction that democracy is not the best form of freedom is common and growing; the Marxist critique cannot simply be ignored.
How free are elections, really?
To what extent do a few power wielders manipulate public opinion through advertising, which is capital?
Isn't there an oligarchy that decides what is "modern" and "progressive" and what the citizens are supposed to think?
The cruelty of this oligarchy, including its willingness to carry out public executions, is sufficiently known.
Whoever stands in its way is 'an enemy of Freedom' since he is 'hindering the free expression of opinion.'
And what about the 'expression of the people's will' in the committees of 'democratic representation?'
Who can still believe that the common good is the determining factor for the oligarchy?
Who can still have doubts about the power of the interests whose dirty hands grow ever more obvious?
And furthermore: is the system of majority vs. minority really a 'free' system?
Aren't the myriad interest groups more powerful than official political representation?
In this confusion of powers, the problem of ungovernability comes ever more ominously to the surface.
The mutual, opposing determination to have one's way is blocking the freedom of all."

For additional clarification we should also consider
Noam Chomsky's analysis of the kind of government the power elite calls "Democracy" in order to mislead simple souls.
In the following analysis, Noam Chomsky clarifies the true nature of contemporary "Democracy."
At the beginning of the Third Millennium he wrote:
"Let us examine the teachings that are said to form the basis for modern forms of political democracy.
These are to be found in an important handbook of the Public Relations industry bearing the descriptive title 'Propaganda.'
Its author, Edward Bernays, a nephew of Sigmund Freud, contributed greatly to the development of wartime propaganda and went on to become a leading personality in the field of commercial propaganda or advertising.
{Through subliminal transference of the drive for sex and status to cigarette smoking, he caused millions of cancer deaths.}
[Footnote 3]
At the very beginning Bernays remarks: 'The deliberate and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.
To carry out this essential task the intelligent minorities must make use of propaganda continuously and systematically, because they alone understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses and can pull the wires that control the public mind.
Therefore our society has consented to permit free competition for organization by leadership and propaganda, another case of consent without consent.
Propaganda provides the leadership with a mechanism to mold the mind of the masses so that they will throw their newly gained strength in the desired direction.
The leadership can regiment the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments the bodies of its soldiers.
This process of engineering consent is the very essence of the democratic process.
Bernays wrote that the 'Consensus for Organization' belongs to the 'essence of the democratic process' shortly before he was honored by the American Psychological Association for his contributions, in 1949."
[Footnote 4]; also online at <]

With few words and unsurpassed precision, the PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION have reduced universal sufferage, Democracy's "holiest of holies," to its essence:
"In order to achieve this goal [world Jewish domination], we must introduce universal suffrage beforehand, without distinctions of class and wealth.
Then the masses of people will decide everything; and since it [universal suffrage] is controlled by us [through the media: HM] we will achieve through it the absolute majority, which we could never achieve if only the educated and possessing classes had the vote."
[Footnote 5]

In examining the world situation since the Jews invented universal suffrage we note that results everywhere have closely followed the predictions contained in the Protocols.
The world does not realize the significance of the Zionist Press in establishing the present tyranny of deception!
In the 20th Century the Christian churches were deprived of their role as mentors of Western conscientiousness.
They were deposed by Mass Media, the principal power of modern times.
In their persistent and secretive campaign of conquest the plutocrats have taken over the media, with the result that today they determine the Weltanschauung of the West.
Egotism now provides the central perspective.
 God and the Commonwealth have been displaced, and truth has been replaced by profitability.
Our cunning secret rulers have discovered that nearly everyone can be made to believe almost anything if the rulers suggest that "everyone believes it."
The result is that most people believe whatever benefits the plutocrats, since the plutocrats constantly suggest that everyone believes that whatever is good for the plutocrats is good for all mankind!
This technology of Consciousness Control provides the basis for the tyranny of terror that supports the Great Deception.
Under this tyranny there are two deadly sins: doubting the "Value of Freedom" and questioning "Holocaust."

In order to protect themselves from empirical truth, the plutocrats avail themselves of verbal cudgels such as "conspiracy theorist," "anti Semite," "self-hater" (in case the doubter is Jewish), "racists," "Nazi,"  "Holocaust Denier" etc. which are calculated to crush the will of the independent thinker.
The Enlightenment principle that ideas should be evaluated on the basis of whether they are true or false, supported by empirical evidence, has apparently been forgotten.
The interest of the plutocrats has become the standard for evaluating every intellectual opinion and spiritual consideration.
Under cover of the euphemism "re-education," a totalitarian thought police has been imposed on Germany.
It has no counterpart in all history.
(Footnote 6)

In the so-called "Federal Republic of Germany" there is no such thing as independent journalism.
There are no independent foundations dedicated to researching contemporary history, no independent courts capable of conducting debate on the subject of the German Reich with the object of establishing historical truth.
There are no independent publishers of lexicons, no schoolbooks oriented around historical fact, no freedom of expression, and no free and independent political parties.

The intellectual enslavement of Germany is unmistakable in Section 130 of the Penal Code.
Section 130 is strongly reminiscent of the repressive laws of National Socialism, and the position of the "courts" that apply it against citizens of the Reich is clearly precarious.
In the courtrooms of the Federal Republic of Germany-OMF, empirical truth is clearly suppressed by the official lies of our enemies.
[OMF = "Organizational Form of a Modality of Foreign Rule," the descriptive term for the occupation government of Germany that was created by Prof. Carlo Schmidt, the author of the Federal Republic's Basic Law, in order to avoid the term "puppet government"].

Despite everything, let us be of good cheer.
We have no reason to doubt that the truth will ultimately prevail - for the simple reason that it exists and is accessible to those who seek it.
Lies cannot prevail once the truth is known!

30 August 2005



 [1] Coudenhove-Kalergi, son of the Austrian ambassador in Japan and his Japanese wife, was a visionary.
He developed the idea of a united "Pan Europe" and proposed that Europe unite in a political and economic association.
In 1924 he founded the Paneuropean Union, the oldest European unification movement.
Its membership included Albert Einstein, Thomas Mann and Konrad Adenauer.
Thus Count Coudenhove-Kalerge was a prophet and mastermind of the "European Idea," self-image and identity.
In contrast to present day European Union, however Kalergi saw Europe primarily as an economic and political entity, a counterweight to the USA, Russia and Asia.
The principal aspects of Kalergi's concept of Europe were freedom, peace, prosperity and culture.
Present day Europe has adopted the self-image that Kalergi advocated immediately following World War I.
Kalergi called upon France and Germany to set aside their differences and concentrate instead on what they had in common.
In his view the Scandinavian countries should take the initiative and attempt to act as go-between in the rest of Europe.
However, Kalergi's ideas were quickly forgotten when World War II broke out.
During the Third Reich, the concept of a pan European Union was suppressed.
In 1938 he immigrated first to Switzerland and finally to the USA, where he became a professor of history at New York University.

Coudenhove-Kalergi remained true to his ideals until his death in 1972, and was pleased and optimistic about developments in Europe following World War II.
He was particularly enthusiastic about Winston Churchill's 1947 speech, which adopted the central points of his program.
On 18 May 1950 he received the first international Charlemagne Prize awarded by the city of Aachen for outstanding contributions to European unification.
In June 1950 he presented his concept for a European flag to the European Council.
 However, his proposal was disapproved on account of Turkey's opposition to the red cross in the middle of the flag.
In August 1955 he suggested that Beethoven's scoring of Schiller's "Ode to Joy" be adopted as the official European anthem.
In 1972 this became the official hymn of the European Council and in 1985 of the European Union.
Following Coudenhove-Kalergi's death in 1972, his longtime Vice President Otto von Habsburg became President of the International Paneuropean Union.
When Winston Churchill was awarded the Charlemagne Prize in 1955, Coudenhove Kalergi received the GROßKREUZ DES BUNDESVERDIENSTORDENS, the highest decoration of the Federal Republic.

[2]  Cardinal Ratzinger „Freiheit und Wahrheit" in Jürgen Schwab, Otto Scrinzi, Über  die Revolution von 1848 Aula-Verlag, Graz 1998

[3]  Edward Bernays is included among the thousand most important persons of all time.  See also <>

[4] Excerpt from Noam Chomsky  „Profit over People – Neoliberalismus und globale Weltordnung", Europa Verlag, 2001, pp. 54-.

[5] Protocols of the Elders of Zion, 10th Sitting, Wallstein Publishing House, ISBN 3-89244-191-x, p. 60

[6] Caspar von Schrenck-Notzing, „Charakterwäsche – Die Politik der amerikanischen Umerziehung in Deutschland", Ullstein Verlag, Berlin 1996, pp. 118 - 143


The translator is a "Germanophilic Germanist" who attempts to make noteworthy German articles accessible to Germanophiles who do not read German.

Here's freedom to him who would speak,
Here's freedom to him who would write;
For there's none ever feared that the truth should be heard,
Save him whom the truth would indict!
ROBERT BURNS (1759–96)


Fun stuff to read, tell and watch:

FREE to watch all 91 minutes: "Defamation," from Israeli filmmaker Yoav Shamir. LINK:

Some of His Best Friends Are Jewish: The Saga of a Holocaust Revisionist By Nathaniel Popper. Link: Israeli lawyer has filed a class-action lawsuit against former President Jimmy Carter, seeking $5 million in damages because his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" allegedly defamed Israel. Link:

"...when you have laws against questioning the Holocaust narrative, you are screaming at the other person to stop thinking!!!" ---Mike Santomauro. *Anthony Lawson's Holocaust Video "were the Germans so stupid"... Link:

An anti-Semite condemns people for being Jews, I am not an anti-Semite.--Mike Santomauro. Link:

Mike Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367

Recent Activity: