Thursday, June 26, 2008

The War on Children

One of the core beliefs shared by most of us conspiracy types is a firm conviction that the TERROR!! Threat is either a complete fabrication or, at the very least, hugely exaggerated. The objective of the people doing the exaggeration being to impose totalitarian control over the rest of us and make a few bob along the way

It’s been done countless times in the past and the only real difference today is the scale of what is being attempted

We Loons differ from more mainstream dissidents (sic.) in that we believe that this is being done deliberately and not merely an unfortunate and unplanned consequence of impersonal, stochastic forces


Believing what we do, we must also believe in the inevitable incremental expansion of what constitutes terrorism and who qualifies as being a potential terrorist.


So, no surprises for us paranoid mentalists then on reading bullshit like this being spouted by senior British policemen…


Blond, white schoolboy is al-Qa'eda extremist, say police


"...The white child we are working with has been downloading jihadist beheading videos ... He is not a Muslim. He is not driven by ideology - he is too young to spell the word. But he is being influenced and intoxicated by the imagery and appeal of jihadist ... violence."


“...We know that there is a latent sense of grievance in the minds of many young people which, in the right conditions, can lead to the desire for violent expression..."

“...The al-Qa’eda brand of violent extremism continues to spread like a virus infecting young minds...”


'Just Do it!!'
The Al Qaeda 'brand' - franchise applications from 12 year olds now accepted



If terrorism can be described as coercing civilian populations through the use of fear then the most successful practitioners of terrorism in this country; the people who are getting 24/7 airtime and who have been successful in bringing about a more repressive government, are most definitely not the ones with the beards


These guys are very shortly going to have find something else to hate us for


But I’m not saying anything new here –
something has just appeared on Alex Jones’ site on the subject of Aryan Terror Children and the even more credible Conspiraloon Alliance has also just published a post

No, I’m just looking for an excuse to paste a link to my favourite three minutes from Cabaret – it chilled me when I first saw it as a kid and it still gives me the willies today…


Now that's what I call Islamo-Fascism!!
- Al Qaeda-recruited Aryan mini-pops in action


whilst on the subject of Cabaret it’s an interesting exercise to ponder upon what are the modern day equivalents of the
1930s German cabarets which the Nazis closed down or censored shortly after they took power. I’m thinking of the Internet obviously and it’s a little scary to think just how effectively other channels of dissident expression have been locked down or could be locked down at the drop of a hat

-

edit:


and whilst on the general subject of kids, conspiracy theorists, possible psyops and non-Muslim Muslim dodginess, this peculiar story has a strange whiff about it and might be worth keeping an eye on...


Missing Mum in Muslim disguise

"CCTV footage of a missing mum and her five young children show her attempt to disguise her appearance in Muslim dress..."

"...The second show her walking through Kings Cross in London later the same day, at 6.20pm, wearing a white flowing robe and headscarf..."

"...It shows a high degree of planning and a great deal of effort to evade being identified, which further raises my concerns about her emotional well-being and the safety of her children..."

"...She is thought to have little or no money and no family connections in the London area. Officers believe she may be being sheltered by an organisation"


???

.

38 comments:

Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said...

Agree that the idea is daft, espcially feel that we live in a time where demonising children is running alongside demonising Arabs.

But I just wish that rather than passing the actions off as 'extremeism' the finger can be pointed at the Islam (and all the other religions) backward viewpoints as a source of trouble.

Stef said...

I'm not religious myself and no fan of extremism of most kinds but I don't think for a moment that religion is the underlying cause of what's going on in the world

The 'religion is the cause of all wars' meme is a very useful tool for distracting people who see themselves as being of the Secular Left from what really is the motivation for most, if not all, wars - elitist theft

You can go as far back as the Crusades and beyond and even they were about plunder and colonisation

Religion is used as an excuse, sure enough, and some saps believe it but loot is the name of the game for the interests which promote the wars

(the line that the occupation of Afghanistan was at least in part about women's rights and not about oil, drugs and central asian bases came from the same school of misdirection)

If you could abolish all organised religion tomorrow the people behind the wars would just find another excuse/ pretext to sell their wars to the masses - tribalism/ racism being, I suspect, top of the list

Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said...

I disagree, religion is a major problem, not only in the repression on various peoples and the drive behind various atrocities and disputes; it is also a device that holds back humanity in all fields of knowledge and expression.

All you are doing is replacing religion with the idea that people do everything for money and land, whereas religion holds together and justifies those ideas in the first place.

I think you're confusing too many issues here with your mention of Afghanistan, I'm not saying that was about improving women's rights considering that the US, via it's religious dogma, represses women; it was clearly about oil but the action that prompted it all was an act of religious violence.

I think you under estimate the foe that is organised religion and in this dream world where it is disbanded, of course bad things would still happen but I think that people would not carry out such actions on a grand scale because religion deprives them of a key motivational factor.

Many people believe that a holy land awaits them as a reward for actions in this life, stange as that may seem it is a powerful incentive.

You're also forgetting the damage that religion does to reason and humanity standing on its own two feet, rather than relying on a 'father figure' to look after it.

Take away the religion justification and I think you'd be surprised at the effect, but the chance of humanity growing up and out of religion seems slim.

Stef said...

It's also worth emphasising that the speech I mentioned/ linked to at the start of the post is quite explicit in its implication that the white jihadists of tomorrow won't be motivated by religion but 'a latent sense of grievance' - which opens the field up for all sorts of folk being locked up for a few months on unspecified charges, subject to juryless trial and convicted on anonymous testimony just down the line a little bit

Stef said...

Ooo-er, this has the potential to be a very protracted exchange

And much as I love protracted exchanges today's not a good day

I'm not discounting the negative aspects of organised religion - it is as imperfect as any other human institution

but, there again, a lot of what passes for contemporary science has a religious air about it and Mao managed to knock off a few tens of millions, the Nazis a few more and eugeniscists wielded their scalpels and syringes without having any priests telling them to

and I'm also hard put to think of any major conflict over the last few centuries which had religion as its core motivation as opposed to theft/ tribalism

Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said...

Agree that the best thing would no doubt be to agree to disagree as it will just lead to filling up your blog with comment tit-for-tat so I promise not to leave another one on this matter so as to avoid that happening.

Regarding the 'latent sense of grievance', I doubt very much whether that will overtake religion as an a driver for violence.

Communism and Hitler's National Socialism were religions in all but name and no one carried out their actions in the name of 'atheism' but rather in the name of their Godhead.

The current conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Lebanon, Northern Ireland, the list goes on, are all religious wars, religion is tribalism at it's very worse; religion fuels the difference. Remove it and I think we'd see a better world, not perfect by any means but better.

I'll leave it at that I promise you!

Stef said...

Fair dos but I just can't walk away without (please forgive me) pointing out...

Northern Ireland/ Israel are legacy colonial conflicts - the religion is just a marker to separate natives from colonists and their descendants

Iraq and Afghanistan are straight occupations and tribalist shit stirring exercises - just the most recent installments in a succession of occupations of those countries

If you're going to use the term 'religion' in a more loose sense to describe the human capacity to believe bullshit and commit hateful acts in the name of that bullshit then I can go along with that a long way

but that would then encompass a whole lot of stuff outside of what is commonly understood to be religion - and would actually exclude the better parts of what is commonly understood to be religion

as for the 'latent sense of grievance' overtaking religion as being a driver for violence well, no, I don't think it will - what I do think is that it will start to catch up with religion in being used as an excuse to crack down on people

with only a couple of million Muslims in the country you've got come up with a wider definition of what constitutes a potential Terror Bastard so you can get your money's worth out of all that lovely new anti-terror infrastructure you've put into place

The Antagonist said...

Stef, you must be having an off day....

DHG said:

All you are doing is replacing religion with the idea that people do everything for money and land, whereas religion holds together and justifies those ideas in the first place.


Spot on. Nothing to do with greed.

- The Irish were just aggrieved because the King's lot had a different god. The fact that the king had stolen a load of land from beneath their feet had nothing to do with anything.

- The Palestinians are just aggrieved because Israel's god is different. The fact that 90% of the land beneath their feet has been stolen and that their homeland has been turned into an internment camp has nothing to do with anything.

- America is in Iraq because they have a different god. Land, oil, gas and other natural resources are nothing to do with anything.

- Britain and America are in Afghanistan because their god is different. Land, oil, gas and other natural resources, like the ever more plentiful opium crop, are nothing to do with anything.

The 'latent sense of grievance' meme is little more than that. A meme. You're right that it won't overtake religion as a primary driver of terrorism but that was never its objective.

Hyping the fear of religion-inspired terrorism hangs on the 'evil ideology' meme which itself requires for deeply held religious beliefs and practices to be in operation if it is to have any credibility. In the current paradigm the 'evil ideology' that suits the demands of Western imperialist propaganda purposes is, obviously, Islam.

The 'latent sense of grievance', in stark contrast to an 'evil ideology', is then attributable to absolutely anyone, irrespective of religion, race, colour, creed, height, hair colour, weight, eye-colour, shoe size, etc, the list is endless, anything will do.

There-in lies the rub of the issue. Everyone has a 'latent sense of grievance (ever read newspaper letters pages or blogs?) about something or other (pay, mortgage, rent, council tax, food, water, electricity, gas and oil prices, etc). Fabricating such grievances, after producing private profit, is the thing that capitalism is second best at and therefore it will be a trifling matter for the State to produce 'evidence' of a 'latent sense of grievance' against anyone they so choose.

Stef said...

Stef, you must be having an off day....

big time

Stef said...

one of the big problems with discussing this subject is that there are a lot of religious dicks

you've got 60million+ plus US Christian Zionists, for example, who've been brainwashed into thinking that Jesus will come back and take them somewhere nice once they've sent over enough cluster bombs to the Holy Land to finish the work in progress - forget the fact that Jesus would have been crucified rather than shed innocent blood, these people are religious and they are dupes who've been suckered into supporting violence and theft

The Antagonist said...

.... and some of them probably support Arsenal, own a Celine Dion CD, watch Coronation Street and drink lager and so on.

Is it lager, Coronation Street, Celine Dion, Arsenal, religion, or is it the brainwashing which, by-the-by, appears to work equally well on secular folk as it does religious dicks?

Stef said...

which, by-the-by, appears to work equally well on secular folk as it does religious dicks?

of course, the fact that the most prolific suicide bombers are actually the secularist Tamil Tigers does piss in the chips of anyone advocating that that sort of behaviour is the preserve of people driven by religious faith

I'm thinking specifically of Archbishop Richard the Big Dick Dawkins here...

Religion's misguided missiles

come to think of it, why would a religious suicide bomber be considered more scary or fiendish than a smart bomb controlled by an atheist slurping on a cola and sitting safely in a control room anyway?

paul said...

I don't think the unabomber was very religious

Stef said...

nice beard though

nondualthreesome said...

The religion/looting 'dialogue' sits upon a simple commonality - Belief. With out Belief both approaches wouldn't be possible.

Isn't this the problem?

Someone suggested the possibility of humans evolving past the 'religious phase', but as Steff hints, they would have to do this in science too...

'Belief is everything'

Tom said...

If someone commits mass slaughter, the first thing I want to know is where did he go to church? Isn't that the most important question?

Besides, if you want to ban religious belief, where do you start? The worst thing will be if they manage to unite all the religious nutters, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Stef said...

Someone suggested the possibility of humans evolving past the 'religious phase', but as Steff hints, they would have to do this in science too...

/ raids 70s cinema for the umpteenth time

Anonymous said...

The premise that terrorism is primarily religiously motivated is itself highly questionable. It would be more accurate to say that religion informs their values, but is hardly what radicalizes them and inspires them to violence. That's strictly reactionary behavior. Reaction to what, you ask?

http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=689

Are we really supposed to believe that terrorists go to all that trouble, all alone, *purely* for some supposedly arbitrary religious dogma? These people are human beings, not animals or demons.

OTOH, the US military complex has been so successful at radicalizing muslims that they will probably end up hating us unequivocally anyway, making this argument somewhat obsolete. Mission accomplished indeed.

Anonymous said...

Watson, pass me my Turkish slipper will you? I need to think.

Mmmm. Spyblog says that someone called Tony Gosling was arrested. Apparently his arrest was in connection with a police search for a woman called Natalie Bracht and her five daughters who are running away from something. Googling hints at Mossad connections to a synangogue in Newcastle amongst other things.

I'm sure the conspiraloons can find out more.

Anonymous said...

How many ciabatti's can you eat until the NWO makes you vomit?

Anonymous said...

Tony Gosling is 110%shill, that's just cover PR.

"John Reid" said...

ehm....the sun's going down here!

Anonymous said...

Religion is the best seam to work in dividing people yet invented, and is thus the number 1 method used by the rich and the powerful to maintain their control. If the ordinary people ever managed to get their shit together and realise they're actually all in the same boat suddenly the curtain will fall and the collective gaze of the world would be cast upon the tiny group of elitists who have been stealing from us since the dawn of man. And that simply will not do. Engineered divisions are the common theme throughout history - whether its ethnic, political, religious or whatever bullshit reason to stop people uniting in popular movements and taking back what belongs to them.

Anonymous said...

"Religion is the best seam to work in dividing people yet invented, and is thus the number 1 method used by the rich and the powerful to maintain their control. If the ordinary people ever managed to get their shit together and realise they're actually all in the same boat suddenly the curtain will fall and the collective gaze of the world would be cast upon the tiny group of elitists who have been stealing from us since the dawn of man."

I would say that, that is not true. Look at the UK and hooligans/loutish behavior for instance. Whether you're a religious zealot, or a nihilist, you can still be sucker. Really now, I dont think people in the UK in general are any more clued in, due to lack of religion than any southern hick.

Anonymous said...

Nice blog Stef,
Made your acquaintance at Lord Patels I do believe.Just bookmarked you.

Anonymous said...

The war on terror.The attacks of Sept11th.The Muslim threat.The July 7th bombings.Al Quaeda etc etc etc adnauseum are all, without exception, a load of shite.Anyone who believes any of that crap is full of it and ought to be beheaded for public saftey reasons and there heads stuck on a pole as a warning to all those who fall for state sponsored terrorism.

(gee I feel a lot better after that)

Stef said...

re. Natalie Bracht and Tony Gosling

If you listen to Bracht's interview with Gosling it is a very strange testimony and I personally don't know what to make of it - much of what Bracht has to say fits in with material from other sources but all the best disinfo is 95% fact 5% poop

The fact that Tony Gosling is involved doesn't add to my confidence

Whatever his intentions are, good or bad, he has been a leading figure a UK 9/11 Truth Forum which has acted as a handy source of wannabee Messiahs and Holocaust Deniers for the BBC Production team working on a forthcoming Conspiracy Files mockumentary on 7/7 'conspiracy theories'

and whilst I'm on the subject of sincere 7/7 researchers being brought into disrepute, an anonymous new blog appeared recently smearing the media's leading 7/7 survivor - which no doubt 'proves' yet again that 7/7 sceptics are heartless, neo nazi ghouls

there is much distractive 7/7 keyboard monkery taking place at the moment - one can only guess why

Anonymous said...

Rachel North is well dodgy guv.

Rachel hangs out at Blairwatch(another bunch of dodgy fuckers.

Daniel Obachike seems an honest kinda bloke.

http://www.blogger.com/profile/16645858468586214667

Anonymous said...

That Rachel North smear blog is very amateurish isn't it?

I think you're right Stef, it's the old technique of delibertly muddying the waters so nobody knows what to believe anymore and any movements that are genuinely looking for the truth collapse in suspicion and confusion.

Just like JFK and 9/11.

lwtc247 said...

daniel (26 June 2008 14:55)

I think your falling foul of the common error. You are attributing the distortions and manipulation of religion as 'religion'. I agree the corruptions of religion are top heavy, but you should draw the proper distinction in your discomfort about what you call religion.

"it is also a device that holds back humanity in all fields of knowledge and expression." - That is plainly false. Science flourished when religion wasn't hijacked by selfish material interests. Pluralism thrived in part thanks to those who understood the vauses of religion. Theists marvel at science, such as myself, because we get to see and appreciate the beautiful way in which physical and natural systems have been created and interact. To me formulation of these systems by mathematics is as beautiful as looking at the most picturesque scenery.

I believe there were/are those who either saw, or stumbled across the idea that religion could be manipulated, which could lend longevity of certain individuals and elitist ideas. It is when religion was distorted in that fashion that science suffered because science being innocent and free of prejudice, could disprove those distortions. Even to this day, theists reject scientific frauds such as hijacked Darwinism. If of course you believe in hijacked Darwinism, of course you will think religion attacks science.

You also forget there are millions of God believing scientists - probably more God believing scientists all over the world, than there are disbelievers or agnostics, but there are those that think - wrongly - that scientists are white, live in the west and don't believe in God.

"religion holds together and justifies those ideas in the first place." - that is totally false. I don't know what religion you've been studying but I respectfully advise you to expand your horizons somewhat.

" I'm not saying that was about improving women's rights - Well that was a main line of attack pushed forward by those who did physically invade Afghanistan.

Organized religion is flawed, in the sense the grime masks the shared values of love and respect the vast majority of the planet believe in. And divine scripture provides the best way to implement those shared ideas of harmony.

"stange as that may seem" it is only strange to you because you reject it. It is perfectly ok with me because I have accepted what I believe as Gods word that such a post-life status exists.

I don't think atheistic societies have offered milk and honey - which if you study some cults like Baghwan Osho, Imperial Japan, Khmer rouge and others might hint. As people will simply listen to the ideas of a man/leader instead and then a minority of people will manipulate/distort that for their own ends.

The 'sense of grievance' is a hugely powerful motivation in certain but infrequent cases - such as when Palestinians wrongly conduct suicide operations wrongly killing innocents. They do so because they are desperate and cannot take the immense oppression any more.

I think it's indisputable the source of oppression is overwhelmingly economically driven - yes, that sometimes involves people who appear to be identified with the implementation of religion, but most seem irreligious.

Anonymous said...

@Daniel,
Religion is for spiritual children.
Mysticism is for Spiritual adolescents.
Philosophy(in its pure sense)is for Spiritual Elders.

Scientists may have developed intellects but many are unbalanced.

The great scientists will one day become Philosophers.

Religion has its origins in truth but is nowadays a scam second to none.Anyone who believes otherwise is a self deceived fool.

Shahid said...

Religion is not a problem.

Cunts are the problem.

Shahid said...

Oh and what Ant said.

Elmer Quigley Gooseburger said...

Slightly off topic, but Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha oh fuck me LOL.

:-)

Anonymous said...

http://www.ruebritannia.co.uk/images/0010_hate_mugabe-ogram.jpg

Anonymous said...

and whilst I'm on the subject of sincere 7/7 researchers being brought into disrepute, an anonymous new blog appeared recently smearing the media's leading 7/7 survivor - which no doubt 'proves' yet again that 7/7 sceptics are heartless, neo nazi ghouls

it was set up by disgruntled stalker Felicity Lowde (who recently appealed and lost her 4th conviction for harassment s2)

She's now trying to drum up support and comments from the conspiraloonery community.

Anonymous said...

Natalie Bracht

Two more stories:

1) From the Northumberland Gazette, Natalie's father (John Brown) says that his past isn't what Natalie describes.

2) From the Guardian, Natalie's ex-husband (Dietrich Bracht) has also discredited Natalie's account.

3) The account of how she arrived in the UK hasn't been discredited, yet (Hull to Sunderland to lam). Nor her knowledge of obscure figures (eg local Rabbis etc) in the North East.

ziz said...

Curiouser and curiouser