Translate

Wednesday, April 10, 2013





The Recent Death of the Iron Lady is sad as all deaths are to any nation with pride in its Leadership.  I honor her memory even though I personally did not know her.

However, I was involved in the Reagan Administration on both the INTEL side and the policy planning staff regarding key events that happened during Thatcher's leadership.  I have to smile when I read how British Historians in retrospect take great pride in the fact that Mrs Thatcher ordered the attack on the Argentine Falkland Islands.  This territory was little more than a group of rocky islands and military installations that were no threat to anyone other than the incompetent Junta Generals who occupied them.  But the islands were in dispute and England cherished some forlorn desire to re-occupy them for the sake of national pride!   So Maggie (no strategist she, unlike Winston Churchill) decided in one of her temperamental, irrational moments to commit the entire British armada to re-acquiring the Falklands.  In the beginning this was a military joke but it turned into a tragedy when the British government decided to declare victory at all costs.   Exocet missiles provided by who else??? yes, by the Israelis to the Argentine navy created quite a disproportionate amount of damage to the British navy.
The end result:  Regardless of cost, manpower lost, and the complete absurdity of the undertaking of this war- the Iron Lady became a heroine in her own country!  Sound familiar, do we see a pattern here?
At the time, my perspective and that of others who worked in both military and civilian INTEL groups found this exercise of power to be irresponsible, irrational and embarrassing.   But as good British allies, the USG provided incredible intelligence to the British Armada that allowed the pathetic Junta regime to be defeated BUT at GREAT COST to BOTH SIDES.  
The only senior official foolish and non-plussed enough to take credit for this foolhardy British undertaking was Sec Def Caspar Weinberger.  He was so eager to help Maggie so he could get one of those medals from the Brits (The order of merit, most distinguished order of saint blah, blah…more scrambled eggs, chest candy, boy scout honor badges)…what humans will do for a decorative medallion is amazing!  CW had no strategic sense (unlike Robert Gates, whom I admire).  Weinberger was simply an anglophile and a sycophant.  Enough said about the Falkland Folly.
On to the other serious accolade Maggie received in her eulogies, that she helped Reagan take down the Soviet Union.  Allow me to set these historians straight, as you know, I helped prepare the architectural plans for Regime Change at the RAND Corporation in Santa Monica, California.  Although Reagan voraciously ate up the accolades for the regime change in the Soviet Union- the real credit (in the history blogs) should go to James Baker and Bush Sr.  These two men are the real heroes of regime change.  Along side were many CIA analysts and operatives and of course, Brent Scrowcroft who was Bush Sr right hand man and brilliant military strategist.   These individuals were the key operatives who implemented the strategy for the Reagan/Gorbachev summit (For which I prepared a fact sheet broken down to: 1. opening moves, 2. middle game gamut 3. end game).  Believe me, neither Schultz, Reagan or Maggie could understand this outline of strategic and tactical maneuvering that I created in the psyops between Gorbachev (formidable intellect and warm person) and Reagan the Borax Soap spokesperson.
Rest assured that when history catches up to the real accomplishments of Regime Change in the Soviet Union, the names of Schultz, Reagan and Thatcher will fade away.  The truth of these deeds is that they are accomplished by individuals who work behind the scenes and refuse to write about their exploits.  William Casey was one of these men and he directed the CIA when it was a formidable operation.  But Maggie was no wall flower, and she made certain that her non-legacy was cemented in the BBC version of House of Cards, brilliant!  And then there was Miramax's tribute that defined her as a demented old woman.  A most fitting tribute to her judgement in foreign affairs.  Deaths of heads of state create unbearable, absurd myth making but sometimes, someone just has to come along and reality test the truth.  Cheerio!

70 comments:

  1. it is not really related to this article, but it's important:

    I believe Texe Marrs is right on the global plan.

    Triad of Evil—The Secret Plan of Rothschild, Zionist Jews, American Traitors, and Chinese Communists to Overthrow America
    http://www.texemarrs.com/092010/triad_of_evil.htm

    China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
    http://blog.wilsoncombat.com/paul-howe/2nd-amendment-and-the-kool-aid-drinkers-by-paul-howe/

    Such democide has been far more prevalent than people have believed, even several times greater than the number killed in all of this century's wars. Just consider that alone 61,911,000 people were murdered by the Soviet Union, 38,702,000 by the Chinese communists, 10,214,000 by the Chinese Nationalists, 17,000,000 by the German Nazis, and 5,890,000 by the Japanese militarists during World War II.
    http://www.mega.nu/ampp/rummel/note2.htm

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, Michael, but you have been bamboozled by the British. They invented anti-Communism. :Communism" is what is known as a red herring that the British dragged across the trail to throw you off the scent. The entity plotting to overthrow America is and always was the British Empire, starting with the Revolutionary War, right on up to the present day. The Empire has plotted to re-conquer us and make us its colony again and in today it has almost entirely succeeded, but for a few who still remember what an American is and are still fighting. Lord Rothchild? He's a Johnny-come-lately. Who made him a "Lord"? He would be nothing without the British monarchy. Zionism? Another British invention, an artificial construction, serving British purposes, that bamboozled a lot of Jews who now find themselves in a precarious position. But they are beginning to wake up. Zionism will not last much longer. Chinese Communists? You gotta be kidding. There are no such things any more. But there has historically been a British fifth column among us since the Revolutionary war. Their policy of divide and conquer led to the Civil War. They supported the Confederacy in that war. They wanted the United States to be a society of plantation owners and slaves, backward and
      not industrialized, they way they like all their colonies - and they have succeeded in their de-industrialization policy at the present time. The only thing we manufacture anymore are weapons, and we also supply the mercenaries to carry out the Empire's policies. That's all we are good for to them. The rest of us can starve or live in misery.

      Delete
    2. Tony Wicher wrote: "Sorry, Michael, but you have been bamboozled by the British. They invented anti-Communism. :Communism" is what is known as a red herring that the British dragged across the trail to throw you off the scent. The entity plotting to overthrow America is and always was the British Empire, starting with the Revolutionary War, right on up to the present day."

      Has there been a British faction that entertained world domination? Yes, one doesn't have to look too far to find it.

      But there are other factions of men, also, scheming for domination.

      (Don't be a LaRouche groupy. I listen to Tarpley's weekly broadcast, but his biases & prejudices get in the way of his scholarly abilities. His mannic support for open borders is wrong. He wants to help the working man, in that I believe he is sincere, but he assumes the government can dictate much higher wage levels at the lower end of the spectrum, and when that kills jobs, he'll dictate job creation -- it's a slippery slope Tarpley is on -- that is wrong. Tarpley's position, open borders, will severly hurt the working man. Tarpley is a former LaRouche insider.)

      Communism is not a British doing. For that you have to look elsewhere. Sure, there have been many British communists, but those people were "bamboozled" or where part of the Communist Conspiracy at the upper levels.

      Communism was not a red herring, it was real and was destructive to humanity (It is typical that people on the left deny Communism is a danger because, otherwise, their ideology comes uncomfortably too close to Communism, itself. That is likely where Tarpley, himself, stands.

      A central bank can either be destructive or constructive depending on who controls the bank and the money creating power, and who gets the central bank loans.

      This is where Tarpley still clings to RaLouche historical analysis. Based on my research, the First Bank of the United States was a mixed bag. In pure theory, Hamiltonian ideas are good, but in practice, the First Bank of the United States was a Crony Capitalist piggy bank, which was perverted to benefit mostly private interests, who controlled the bank. A large percentage (nobody knows exactly what percentage) were British. Why? Because Britain was the largest source of private capital in the world.

      Thus, the bank's charter was not renewed in 1811 and the War of 1812 broke out.

      (Cont.)

      Delete
    3. (Cont.)

      The ability to create money was apparently not well understood (or perhaps, not trusted based on rapid inflation durring the Revolutionary War -- even though paper script had been successful in pre-revolutionary America per Benjamen Franklin, according to Franklin, it was Britain's Currency Act, outlawing American script, that was instrumental in causing the American Revolution) in the United States at that time in history. Money was not created by the First Bank of the United States. It was limited by gold & silver availability and injections of pre-existing capital -- again, Britain had the most capital.

      There is copious evidence that Communism was a Talmudic conspiracy (as opposed to a Jewish conspiracy) and it was seperate from British ambitions for world domination, although, again, each faction used the other, for their own purposes.

      Typically, each faction thought that at the end of the day, they would out-fox the other faction, and their exclusive aspirations would win out.

      Tony Wicher, again, it depends who controls the bank -- public or private -- and who gets the benefits from the ability to 'loan out (accruing interst)' or 'spend in (without accruing interest)' the money into the economy.

      In that regard, Tarpley is right, but his historical claims about Andrew Jackson and the First and Second Bank of the United States are wrong.

      Both the First and Second Bank of the United States were private banks which had been chartered by the U. S. Congress.

      It was Lincoln who grasped the idea (an idea others originated) that the government could create money with no interest and 'spend it' into the economy or loan it at reasonable rates where, if there was interest, it accrued to the U. S. government and not private bankers, although, private bankers could accrue interest as a secondary institution, not the originating bank of issue (money out of thin air).

      Tony Wicher, you must grasp these concepts before you will correctly understand the history and present issues regarding banking.

      British interests in world domination and Talmudic interests in world domination overlap, but are not identical. Communism is a manifestation of the Talmudic faction's scheme for world domination.

      (** Very important to note, only a small percentage of people of Jewish origin know or understand this conspiracy. Probably, less than 5% have any knowledge of it. So, again, the vast majority of Jews are totally innocent, just trying to live their lives as best they can. Actually, there have been many Jews who reject this tribal, Talmudic scheme and have done tremendous work to expose it for others to see and understand -- their loyalty is to humanity and truth, their compassion is universal, not directed and restricted to a single tribe. We, as promoters of humanity, must welcome all, and receive all, even those who wake-up at the eleventh hour of the day.

      It is never too late to wake-up and repent.)

      Delete
  2. Mrs Thatcher will not be missed by the many millions of working class of great Britain! Such is her legacy that people partied at the news of her death and there had even been a song released (and flying up the charts) titled "ding dong the wicked witch is dead" during her time at the top she stopped free milk for schoolchildren, the difference of having and not having a breakfast, smashed the coal industry, smashed shipbuilding, smashed the automotive industry, smashed the railway building of rolling stock, obliterated our steel industry, the list goes on and on! Particularly heart rendering was the miners who bravely went on strike for a year, not only was the coal production smashed but whole communities fractured and are still paying the price today with these communities suffering with no employment high crime and drug addiction! I could go on and on and on! Then there was her statesmanship!! Oh how she watched a democratically voted member of Parliament die on a hunger strike (bobby sands) along with others through her lack of real statesmanship in refusing to recognize these Irish Republican prisoners as having political status, so in effect more people died needlessly through her pig headed stubbornness when in fact a peace process should of been initiated earlier! Then we have the Falklands war and her brilliant move of sinking the belgrano which was in fact outside the combat zone and sailing AWAY from the area(interesting to learn the Exocet missiles were from Israel) this great leader was a friend of gen Pinochet she recognized pol pot as a legitimate leader when the millions were slain and labelled Mandela a terrorist(as the doc says terrorists become leaders) this is the woman who stated"no such thing as society only individuals" under her tenure imports outweighed exports and " financial services went from 3% to around 40% then she sold off all the national services such as gas electric water, railways etc sect lining the pockets of her friends and her people and let's not forget her dreaded poll tax which led to riots. In short she done more harm to British manufacturing than the German bombers!! And as a final insult we the taxpayer are paying £8 million to give her a funeral!! So her multi millionaire arsehole of a son doesn't pay a penny!!! And let me tell you what an arsehole he is! He should be rotting in an African jail with the partner he ratted on when trying to organize a coup in equatorial new Guinea in think! (This man got lost in the Sahara competing in a car rally) but what do we Brits do?? That's right we give him a knighthood!!! (Yes what is it with these medals?) Anyway I hope this clarifies matters over the iron lady!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Well said! Baroness Thatcher was the most faithful servant of Her Majesty the Queen and the greatest enemy of the English people. Yet the English seem to enjoy groveling before a class that despises them.

      Delete
    3. del stead, your points about Thatcher smashing industries is noted.

      Manical devotion to so-called "free trade", in industrialized countries with high wages for working men, which is the foundation for a strong middle class, will destroy the working class and, ultimately, the middle class, as well.

      In fact, in post World War Two America, large segments of working class Americans entered the middle class (a detached, two-car garage, house in the suburbs with a lawn, backyard, and disposable income for entertainment & leisure with each the husband & wife having a car with a television and high fidelity stereo in the living room and money to raise a family in comfort).

      Where does the profits from the "efficiency" brought about by so-called "free trade" accrue?

      To the top 1%. The transnational bankers and the top management of transnational corporations.

      -- For the working man in the industrial countries, either he loses his job or lowers his wage and he gets a minimum of baubles from foreign producers via his near minimum wage job or welfare transfer payments.

      -- Those who are patriots and want to keep work in-country (patriotic businessmen), are wiped out by labor & tax arbitrage specialists (the transnational corporations), who have no loyality to their people or country... these must be exposed and mocked & ridiculed.

      Lets' face it, those bent on domination want to build up their enity, whether it be country or private organization, and want to destroy all the other countries or private organizations who are rivals (or potential rivals) or obstacles to their domination.

      That's why John D. Rockefeller said that "competition is a sin".

      Oh, by the way, Tony Wicher, do you really believe America's economy, politics, media, academia, and culture are controlled by the British Monarchy? Where's the evience for that?

      Is there some other enity or group which comes much closer to fitting that description?

      Think about it.

      Tony Wicher, open borders is the inverse of outsourcing & offshoring... where you can't offshore or outsource, you insource cheap labor. Both are so-called "free trade" tactics. And since "free trade" is British, you already admitted such, open borders is also a British tactic. But Tarpley turns-out to support an explicitly British Monarchy tactic.

      Tony Wicher, I ask you to study the issue independently from Tarpley, I suggest you will find Tarpley is terribly misguided and wrong on promoting open borders and amnesty.

      Amnesty is not the friend of the American citizen working man.

      Amnesty is a Thatcherite, Britsh Monarchy free-trade, program, which Webster Tarpley explicitly supports.

      Where does that leave Tarpley?

      Delete
    4. Tarpley takes a lot of contradictory positions not because there's paradox at work in his brain but because he can't reconcile opposing values.

      His mind is a hog-pog of convuluted and irreconcilable impulses. He loves Lincoln because he "realized the necessity of destroying the brutal social system built on slavery," and praises FDR for "realizing the necessity of destroying the brutal Nazi state...."

      And yet he also claims that Britain, France and the US made war on Germany merely to prevent it from reaching economic parity. He also believes the "City of London" and it's handpuppet British intelligence is the unseen force behind every modern conflict [but apparently not the US civil war?].

      He reminds me a lot of Dr.P in this thinking processes. He's not consistent.

      Delete
    5. Tarpley reached an absurd level of nonesense when he showed up in Libya extolling the progress of the Kadaffi government.

      He doesn't have a mind big enough to grasp that Kadaffi didn't have to be virtuous in order for the forces against him to be odeous.

      He has the mind of a child. He can't grasp paradox or irony. Everything is a melodrama of good vs. evil, right vs. wrong.

      Delete
  3. d.s.-Thank you for your contribution! Pretty much sums it up.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Andrew Breitbart
    Aaron Schwartz
    Philip Marshall
    Joe Arpaio
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/12/suspicious-package-containing-explosive-material-sent-to-arizona-sheriff-arpaio/

    "As Americans, we are witnessing the systematic dismantling of our country by the incremental erosion of our liberties and rights by methods that are shaking the very foundations upon which this country was founded. We’ve seen this before, as history is filled with examples of our current predicament; but somehow, today, things seem different to those who are paying attention. In many ways, things are indeed different, yet it is fitting to cite what was written long ago: “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.”

    Today’s headlines proclaim that those of us who cherish the rights bestowed upon us by our Creator are now considered to be terrorists. This is the result of the cancer of moral and cultural degradation that we have allowed to take root in the very soil stained with the blood of our forefathers. The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children. What are we going to tell our children and grandchildren about what we’ve done to stop the metastasis of tyranny?...

    Sixty-eight years ago, Dietrich Bonhoeffer died not only for his faith, but to illustrate that we must not be silent in the face of tyranny. If not for our own sakes, let us summon that same courage for the sake of our children and their children. After all, the ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children."

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/54423

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Patriarch,

      I question whether Hagman understands the economic basis of the "indissoluble union" that originally constituted the United States. It was the organization of the economy that created this union. The essential sovereignty of the United States or any other country is economic sovereignty. Without economic sovereignty political sovereignty is a sham. A nation that cannot control its own currency and credit is a colony. To be a nation capable of resisting the British Empire over the long run by building a powerful industrial economy, the states had to be unified by a common currency, controlled at the federal level. This control was exercised by a national bank, the First National Bank of the United States. The charter of the Bank was to provide credit for agricultural and industrial development of the nation. Free trade and laissez-faire economics are quintessentially British principles for maximum exploitation of labor, not economic growth. The principles of the true American system of economics, the Hamiltonian credit system, have been forgotten.

      Delete
    2. CONGRESS just voted to enrich themselves economically and surreptitiously by overturning the STOCK ACT (Insider Training)
      http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/04/senate-guts-stock-act.html

      Delete
    3. Well, the corrupt Democratic Senate voted for it. Let's see how the corrupt Republican house does. Right now my attention is focused on passing HR 129 to restore Glass-Steagall and stop the bank robbery, and HR 36 to have a senate select committee to investigate Benghazi. It currently has 99 cosponsors, all Republican. I am trying to get Democrats who are finally waking up to what a phony Obama is, a CIA insert, a lackey of the Wall Street/City of London banker cabal and join with Republicans to dump this bum. We only have three Republican cosponsors out of 53 for HR 129. We need help from Republicans on that one. Maybe under conditions of imminent collapse, our legislators will start to
      wake up and forget about enriching themselves and getting elected and start thinking about saving the country. Miracles can happen! Contact your legislators today!

      Delete
    4. Here is audio of "Larry Klaypool" (West Wing) explaining how America is DYING and how we have been DEFRAUDED with OBAMA GRAFT:

      "We are living in a dictatorship. Obama is WORSE than King George III; we are in worse shape than 1776 when the Colonies were rich and the issue was only taxation...now we have someone who trying to subvert all the tenets of the Founding Fathers and he started with DEFRAUDING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE..."

      Part I:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JIYSfgNGzE

      Listen from 9 minute to the end.

      Part II:
      http://www.1330weby.com/media/com_podcastmanager/FreedomFriday/2013/4-12/Segment4.mp3

      Delete
  5. Well Dr. Pieczenik you're reading of the Falkland Islands war in the spring of 1982 is all wrong.

    At that time the British navy was largely configured for anti-submarine warfare but there was still ample force projection abilities given the puny challenge at hand. Yes Thatcher was warned by a few nay-sayers that the fleet could meet disaster, but the principles involved were grave and therefore Thatcher and others made a calculated gamble to re-take the islands.

    The gravity of the situation was the forceful and abject hummiliation the Falkland islanders were subject to at the hands of the Argentine military, who forced them out of their homes at gunpoint and made them lie on the ground, etc...all typical of the sadistic, raping, machismo asshole nature of the "Argentine military" which wasn't "incompetent" as you wrongly state, but was simply SADISTIC.

    The exocet missiles did little damage. What happened was that a single British submarine torpedoed and sank an Argentine heavy cruiser, the Belgarno, which caused the Argentine navy (the chief arm which engaged in torture during the dirty war) to withdraw completely. With the torturing Argentine navy cowardly at home the Falklands were easy pickings for the British SAS, paras and Commandos, which made minc-meat out of the abandoned Argentine conscripts.

    While the British fleet was en route to the far side of the world our friend Vernon Walters, a lover of the Argentine military, tried desperately to persuade the recalcitrant Argentines to withdraw or negotiate. They told him to fuck off.

    Yes 1982 in the Reagan administration was a heady time. That's when they were lying about the Marxists in Nicaragua and El Salvador and claiming that the government soldiers of El Salvador who raped and murdered American nuns were really communist guerillas.

    Ronald Reagan and all who worked with him in those days were DEPRAVED.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thatcher did both good and ill for Britain, as she was a true zealout and forged ahead with her free market dogma in any and all situations.

    On balance she did more good than harm, and the excesses of market capitalism under which Britain has sufferred are less horendous than those of the socialism under which the British sufferred prior to her ascendancy.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The dark side of Thatcher could be seen in her blind devotion to the butcher Chilean Pinochet, who she admired and defended all their lives. She was a great buddy of the Chilean torturer and rapist, and enjoyed many countless hours in his company discussing the evils of Marxism.

    As for her much vaunted contribution towards the demise of the USSR...

    That's rubbish. Britain was a puny former great power in the 1980s and the Soviets didn't give a shit what the Brits thought about anything.

    Also...

    She totally caved to the Chinese when they wanted Hong Kong back. So much for the backbone of this thoroughly unpleasant shop-keeper's daughter and zealous right-wing nutball, Mrs. Thatcher (and her ridiculous husband).

    ReplyDelete
  8. My hat's off to her though for her correct labeling of Nelson Mandela and the ANC as mere terrorists.

    The ANC are murderous, corrupt, torturing assholes just like all other native peoples in Africa, and they've totally destroyed the country and it's government.

    The whites of South Africa should never have given in, and at this point have no choice but to take back the country by force and re-institute aparthide.

    Long live Aparthide South Africa!

    Death to Mandela and the negroes of South Africa!

    btw...

    South Africa was peopled by non-negro hotentots, sans, and others until these peaceful peoples were brutally conquered by savage, warlike negro tribes such as the Zulu, which used to carve up their captives with knives and eat their flesh in front of them, or impaling them on stakes and cutting off their genital and raping their women and children...typical negro behaviors.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I wish to amend my statement that "all native people in Africa" are malevolent.

    There are several non-negro natives of Africa which are benign, such as the Sans people from which all other races on earth are derived.

    Also the Hotentots and others are noble, peaceful natives of Africa.

    Only the negros, for whatever reason, have proven themselves to be totally corrupt, savage, violent, brutal, malicious, incapable of civilization, empathy, formulation of any code of fair conduct, etc., or even a written language or material culture such as building a bridge, etc...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Welcome back! The fact you mention Reagan and his depraved staff points more to what you are trying to undermine rather than your "knowledge" of thatchers Britain though a decent attempt at playing devils advocate it falls short on many fronts along with the grand finale of death to the negroes ect ect which to be fair to you its a remark in which you wholeheartedly persist! I think I stated earlier very well all that was bad about the iron lady but I haven't read any real counter argument but maybe that's because your conducting what is a thinly veiled attempt at character assassination regarding Dr p?? Now I'm not about to argue or enter a schoolboy juvenile "cyber" tête et tête but come on let's keep these posts to the general point! Take it from one who knows(ME) working class Britain is still suffering the huge ramifications of her policy! Yes people did prosper but as you know only to well its the too few that have too much and well you know the rest!! Though I think I may detect a slight hint that you would approve of her saying there is no such thing as society just the individual, that is where differ very greatly

      Delete
    2. I said she was a zealot. I also said there were harms to her policies.

      However the pluses of her policies outweighed the negatives.

      At the time she came in Britain's economy was in a shambles. Unemployment was sky-high because government owned most of the large industries and there was huge inefficiencies and uncompetitiveness. Management at places like British Leyland didn't know or care about quality or cost. Everyone was indifferent, and the unions were only interested in taking whatever fat share of anything they could get without any compromise whatsoever.

      The privatization of the major industries and breaking the stranglhold of labor forced industries to compete. Employment increased, and so did wages in many categories of jobs. I was there in the 1980s and I saw the ways in which some gained while others lost.

      The ones that lost were obsolete and uncompetitive industries, and those villages and towns never recovered. The same thing happened here in Detroit and the "rust belt," but that allowed other regions to flourish.

      I do agree however that she went to far in such things as capital flows, banking deregulatons, etc. I also oppose her free trade policies as much as I do that of American politicians. All the industrial states should maintain mercantilist policies or they'll simply export their manufacturing jobs, which is what happened, and even a labor government at that time would have done the same.

      Delete
    3. Not to put too fine a point on it but labor in most industrial countries has continued to suffer, but this is from free trade and the loss of traditional manufacturing jobs. As stated any Labor government would have done the same.

      What I didn't like about Thatcher was her humorlessness and her zealous attitude. I despise sanctimonious people on the right who have adopted the free market as a religion rather than a philosophy, and she was the worst example of a zealous far-right humorless, angry person. That's why it's so outrageous that she was cozy with monsters like Pinochet, because that completely undercuts the "moral" high-ground her kind of sanctimonious idiot stakes out.

      Delete
    4. And I would agree that yes maybe reform was required but not the slaughter of total industry! And yes great point regarding British Leyland MIT!

      Delete
    5. My hat's off to her when it comes to the Falklands. She had a lot of opposition to her quick decision to act. She acted because the Islanders were led at gunpoint from their homes, lined up on the roads outside their homes, and made to lie down in the road like so many dogs.

      The Argentine military were sadistic thugs of the worst kind, and they deserved to be killed. As for the conscripts who were also killed they should have immigrated or something. They're totally responsible for what they did. They got what they deserved.

      As for the murderous black majority of south Africa who's now persecuting the white and colored [south Asian] minorities....

      They'll get what's coming to them too just as the black majority of Zimbebwe will have a rude awakening also.

      Delete
    6. MIT,

      I'll say this for you: a lot of people think like you, but you are one of the few with the balls to say it in public. Are you an Imperial Wizard or something?

      Delete
    7. My extremely dim view of negros is entirely a product of my personal experiences and observations of them as a group. I had a long and hard road of bitter tears in reaching this horrible state.

      The sad truth is that negros are incapable of empathy and have a different range of motivation and temperament than individuals of all other racial groups. They are incapable of cooperation, are ruthlessly cruel and brutal.

      However they are only slightly less intelligent than anyone else.

      I'm not a member of the KKK however I do understand them and agree with their general principles.

      Delete
    8. It's a horrible thing to label an entire race of people morally inferior but I have no choice.

      The only way that social progress can be made is to recognize the terrible truth and then act accordingly.

      The first stage is to point out the simple facts, which are in opposition to received truth and myths. The media, film and television industries are of course the chief purveyors of these myths. Hollywood distortions such as in "Django" or "Lincoln" are obvious, as these products don't comport with any historical facts.

      People have to simply refer to the facts.

      Facts are hard to accept when they lead to appalling conclusions, but we have no choice.

      We have to accept the appalling truth, and this involves re-considering the heretofore negative images of racists such as the KKK and others.

      The media images that all racists are knuckle-dragging sadists is very far from the reality.

      Racist are more than likely to be humble, gentle people who are appalled by the brutality they witness from blacks.

      Delete
  10. At the time, I was a fan of Thatcher because I was a Reagan supporter, but then again, I got a limited view of what was going on because there was no internet and so information was controlled by the major media, who, even though leftist, gave Thatcher the benefit of the doubt, or was it because her main backer was Victor Rothchild (Thatcher had five Jewish cabinet mininsters in her government out of 20 with Jews being less than one percent of the population and Thatcher was a big supporter of Israel, and Rothchild ended up being an important unoffical adviser to Thatcher), who had influence in the U. S. media.

    No surprise, then, that Thatcher was a committed globalist and so-called "free-trader" (at the time I was a so-called "free trader" [I have since rejected that position] and I didn't even know what globalism was at the time).

    I agree with MITmichael that her rule was, on the whole, more positive than negative for the reasons stated by MITmichael.

    But to put it another way, but for the over-reach by the unions and the weak management because there was little profit incentive, there would have been no Thatcher.

    Thatcher only came to power because the Socialists, both in the government and in the unions, screwed-up royal, hmmm...

    So, del stead, the unionists and their government backers brought it down on their own heads.

    The British People, at the time, were thoroughly Socialist, but became totally disgusted with what the unions and their government lackeys had done to Britain in more ways than just the shitty economy.

    del stead, have you seen the movie, "The Full Monte"?

    It paints a picture of 70's Britain being full of despair & malaise. Men were so desperate that they were willing to expose the full monte, as it were, if that could bring in some brass.

    The movie ends up positive (as I remember it, it's been years since I saw the movie) because through the men's struggle to get their performance right, they found renewed confidence in themselves.

    I wasn't there, and, as stated above, I had limited information, but it does seem that Thatcher did restore pride to Britain. That's a good thing.

    That's the thing with Socialism, it takes competition away.

    Man needs competition.

    Man needs struggle to achieve the best that he can become.

    Without it, Man has a tendency to loose his sense of purpose and he tends to drift. Isn't that what happened in Britain in the 1970's?

    Man needs purpose to his life.

    This movie, in a decidedly back-handed way, shows men regaining purpose to their lives, which they had, theretofore, lost.

    But it does seem that Britain over-corrected and the economy became overly reliant on financialization.

    Finance is not labor intensive. Finance, as an industry, does not provide enough jobs for the everyday working man.

    Brits are fighters, but, as I understand it, Brits had lost that fighting spirit, which had been the basis of their world empire (yes, it was exploitative and cruel to the local populations, that's why the Brits ended up having a number of their colonies revolt (including mine :-) ).

    Ireland revolted, and gained its independence, in part, because the Brits treated them like a bunch of shit, so many times (see Irish Potato Famine).

    The Brits really know how to look down their noses at people. The British upper-crust is snobby to say the least.

    So, to conclude, Thatcher was a mixed bag, or was she just a red-headed hag :-)

    Thatcher certainly lived up to the reputation red-heads have for being firery and passionate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some really interesting points by both anaconda and MIT, your right about her then ministerial cabinet being disproportionately represented by what I'd term ad Zionists! But I won't share at all the view she was more positive than negative but you have a strong point regarding union rule at the time no doubt about that and that clearly like everything had and has to evolve but to disintegrate whole industries because honest hard working people had the nerve to ask for better conditions and pay?? Agreed the unions in some cases went overboard but thatcher hated the working class and the poor!! I'm in agreement competition is good but we ain't competing in nothing now that's for sure! And boy did we pay the price for it! We now have low wages poor jobs along with high gas and electric and petrol and food items then there is the so called boom years where people were encouraged to spend spend spend on the old fantastic plastic (credit cards etc)! House prices flying through the roof and then through lack of work losing that same house that probably fell victim to negative equity! All part of thatchers vision . You mention man losing a sense of purpose well look no further than the rivers Tyne,tees,Clyde,Mersey,wear ect and you will still find that lost sense of purpose! And that sense of lost employment to accompany it!! Interesting the point you make about the film "the full Monty" entertaining but not quite on the mark! There isn't many men of the heavy industries who'd make great strippers!! Please YouTube a television series called"boys from the black stuff" for a far more truthful look at Thatcher's britain!! Your Irish heritage should also remind you of her total stubbornness to deal with the Republican cause which was a just cause but Thatcher true to form had no time for that tax haven they call Belfast! Same as she had no time for anyone apart from her own "people" I'd certainly concur that some of the English do know how to look down there noses but that's like me saying every American wears a cowboy hat so its an absurdity, true there are people who will mourn the loss of the iron lady but that is the upper class, captains of industry, and the people who strive for acceptance in a system that sneers at them! Please don't forget to look at "boys from the black stuff"!!!

      Delete
  11. I think we should also remember that the so called prosperity under Thatcher was more to do with the north sea oil boom rather than her policy!(oil was discovered around the Falkland islands around 74) and as for union power look at Germany and its strong unions as well as a regulated economy!! Good standard of living world leaders in hi-tec production!!! Has a capital surplus!!!! And that was by rejecting the thatcher/Reagan economic policy

    ReplyDelete
  12. This rupturing of the working class in Britain since 1979 has been mirrored everywhere where free trade has decimated local industries.

    The sad state of workers in the UK is mirrored in the U.S. and many other places as well.

    The unions which Thatcher savaged would have collapsed anyway in the face of cheap foreign imports.

    Just as the "Reagan revolution" is highy exaggerated in it's purported effects so is the "Thatcher revolution."

    The damage to working people and the middle class would have happened anyway as Labor and the Democrats both ushered in free trade policies.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This damage to the UK and the US is structual and permanent.

    There is no evidence that the US is emerging from it's recession.

    Yes construction and home building will recover, but there will never be a return to anything like full employment.

    The spending which has been assisting the unemployed and underemployed is unsustainable.

    By the end of the Obama's second term it will be evident that there are no solutions.

    In four years there will be a major crisis.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The US is now almost the largest oil producer in the world once again, and is importing less oil than it has in dacades....

    And yet even with all this the US economy and trade deficts are in shabbles.

    Can you imagine what it would be like with oil at these prices and without all this new domestic production?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Don't believe Fox News claims that Food Stamps have soared because sinister government and corporations are looting the system.

    The reason why the numbers have doubled in five years is because more people are in poverty.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The problem with the British trade unions are the same problem we have with the Democrats in the U.S. today...

    THEY WON'T CONSIDER COMPROMISE NO MATTER HOW DIRE IT'S NEEDED.

    The U.S. must reduce Social Security benefits. It must happen.

    There are several ways to decrease benefits without harming the truely needy.

    The age or "voluntary" retirement can be increased, benefits can be tied to income, taxed differently, or the increases in inflation can be adjusted.

    But he Democrats won't consider anything...

    No matter how little harm would be incurred by these cuts or how much damage will happen if they aren't implimented.

    The Democrats say, "No."

    That's outrageous.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is the MIT Michael I love to read!!!

      Delete
    2. It's ridiculous that anyone can begin drawing retirement benefits at at 62! That's a joke.

      No one needs to retire at age 62.

      Delete
    3. Compromise yes! That's the key! Yes we have to evolve

      Delete
    4. Wrong again, MIT! Try working in one of Thatcher's coal mines until you're 62. You would be lucky to make it that far, much less enjoy your retirement. Or maybe you figure people who work in coal mines don't need to live past 62. There's plenty more where they came from, right?

      Delete
    5. I looked it up and only one out of every 435,000 people who take early retirement retire from coal mining.

      Additionally, I think it was Thatcher's actions which shut down the coal mines in the UK. She didn't have any coal mines.

      Early retirement at age 62 should be eliminated from Social Security. That alone would probably bring it to solvency.

      Delete
  17. I dont like speaking Ill of the dead but Thatcher sank the Belgrano when it was going home, all those men died so this woman could brainwash the UK, while my fellow country men where waving flags singing rule Britannia I cryed as I knew the UK was finished.
    then was the day I woke up turned of the telly and started reading books and so on.
    though it just goes on and on and seems like there is no end to it at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the Belgrano hadn't have been sank the Argentine navy would have wreaked havoc on the British forces coming to the rescue of the tortured Islanders.

      The Argentine Navy was the most sadistic service in the country. It was the Navy and Admiral Anaya which conducted the most brutal rapes and tortures of political dissidents in the dirty war.

      Once the Belgrano was sunk the cowards of the Argentin Navy stayed bottled up on the Rio de la Plata where they fucking belonged.

      As far as I'm concerned every member of the Argentine Navy deserved to be killed.

      period.

      Delete
  18. Thank you for all that has participated in this debate! This is where the real arguments take place!!!! I'm flattered that people have took the time to engage in this subject!! This is exactly what medium's such as this are about!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. 1. Dr. P. updates American Patriots on the Obama International Crime Syndicate: North Korean Bait and Switch Ruse, on the Alex Jones Show, Friday the 12th (shows snapshot of your homepage).

    Reader's Digest Summary:
    DNI Clapper, CIA Brennan, DIA Gen. Flynn, National Geospace Agency + WHITE House neophytes = "Group- Think of Ignorance"(South Korea is laughing their heads off)

    Intelligence contractors (800,000) top secret clearance have no idea what their strategies or rules of engagement are hanging out in the Ritz Hotel lobby (waiting for orders).

    America is republic of Sociopathy: We are ending up to be a 3rd world country, an imperial empire like Rome. We have failed miserably domestically and internationally; We are VIOLATING THE PRECEPTS OF OUR FOUNDING FATHERS.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kLxRR3rqjU

    2. On a collateral matter
    IT IS DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BZCfbrXKs4

    3. SERIAL PRECEDENTS MAKE SERIAL CRIMINAL PRESIDENCIES:
    GARY WEBB (Dark Alliance-San Jose Mercury News) ON C-SPAN 8-1998
    Doesn't appear suicidal to me, but has much to say about the Bush Drugging of America and the Clinton Crimes.
    CIA SHOT HIM IN THE HEAD: NO IFS ANDS OR BUTS

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMI56pme2nQ

    4. Clinton Bush & the CIA full length version:
    "The Mena Connection" (Philip Marshall & Barry Seal were the pilots: Both were murdered by the CIA because THEY KNOW TOO MUCH.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTIXRy7ssbI&feature=endscreen&NR=1

    THERE IS A WARNING THERE FOR YOU, DR. P.:
    GET YOURSELF SOME SECURITY AND A BULLETPROOF VEST AT ALL TIMES!

    5. The Suppressed Article: "THE CRIMES OF MENA" by Roger Morris and Sally Denton.
    Those who forget the past are DOOMED to repeat it.
    Do ya really want the Clinton Crime Family back in the White House to again steal the collectibles?

    (This is the article which had been scheduled to appear in the Washington Post. After having cleared the legal department for all possible questions of inaccurate statements, the article was scheduled for publication when just as the presses were set to roll, Washington Post Managing Editor Bob Kaiser (Like George Bush, a member of the infamous "Skull & Bones Fraternity), killed the article without explanation. According to the sidebar which appeared with the Penthouse Magazine version of this story, Bob Kaiser refused to even meet with Sally Denton and Roger Morris, hiding in his office while his secretary made excuses.)

    ".. from 1981 to his brutal death in 1986, Barry Seal carried on one of the most lucrative, extensive, and brazen operations in the history of the international drug trade, and that he did it with the evident complicity, if not collusion, of elements of the United States government, apparently with the acquiescence of Ronald Reagan's administration, impunity from any subsequent exposure by George Bush's administration, and under the usually acute political nose of then Arkansas governor Bill Clinton..."

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/ARCHIVE/CRIMES_OF_MENA.html

    Once a CIA member always a CIA member: 1988 Ron Paul
    B-U-S-H
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=0Hl5zt3MvzE&feature=fvwp


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with the thrust of your statements, but the allegations about Mena and Barry Seal are so old not to mention unsupported. The best evidence about CIA drug running in the eightees is the Gary Webb material about southern California, not the allegations about Arkansas. I've been to the Mena airport, and it's not really that remote. It's a regional air facility with a lot of repair and storage facilities for anyone around four hundred miles with no where else affordable to go. It's a high-profile spot which is the last place any clandestine op would chose.

      I agree though that George Bush was a major criminal. However you'll have to convince Dr.P about that because according to him he was a highly intelligent President, blah blah blah....

      As I've said before Dr.P never has an unkind word about Bush, Professor Pye, Eagleburger, or any of the murderous scumbags he worked for in government. Dr.P only has invective for the current bunch of assholes.

      Delete
    2. THE MARXIST PLAN FROM WITHIN

      "...Under Obama, 660,000 Americans dropped off the job rolls…just last month. 90 million working-age, able-bodied Americans are no longer in the workforce. 90 million. The workforce participation rate is the lowest since 1979. For men it’s the lowest since 1948 (when record keeping began).
      Almost 50 million Americans are on food stamps (20% of all eligible adults). 14 million are on disability. Millions more are on welfare, unemployment, housing allowances, aid to dependent children, or 100 other free government programs. Now, add in free healthcare plus 22 million government employees. Record-setting numbers of Americans are emptying their retirement accounts to survive. Student loan debt is a national disaster- with defaults up 36% from a year ago. 16.4 million Americans live in poverty…in the suburbs. Every day under Obama the private sector shrinks, while the government grows like a toxic malignant tumor.
      Obama promised to cut the deficit in half; instead he gave us five consecutive trillion dollar deficits. He promised to spend responsibly; instead he became the biggest spender in world history. He called Bush’s $4 trillion in debt over 8 years reckless, then proceed to pile on $6 trillion in only 4 years. He swore to be on the side of small business, but he added 6,118 new rules, regulations and mandates in just the last 90 days. He claimed taxes are low, yet he just raised taxes to the same level as bankrupt EU countries like Greece, Spain, Italy and France. Our federal income taxes are now far higher than former Soviet Republics....
      This is no accident, or the work of an economically inept liberal. This is a purposeful plan to drown the nation in debt and hook a majority to government handouts, happening in front of our eyes. It’s crystal clear Obama’s plan was hatched in our college days, at Columbia, Class of ’83.
      While I never met Obama at Columbia, I can certainly put him at the scene of the crime. He either went to Columbia, or he didn’t. If he didn’t, he’s a fraud. If he did, he knew the Cloward & Piven plan like the back of his hand. He studied it and his goal- like almost all my classmates- was to use it to bring down the U.S. economy and destroy capitalism to create what they consider to be “equality, fairness and social justice.”
      ...A bankrupt America wipes out the middle class and small business. That wipes out the majority of donors to conservatives causes- meaning Obama has no opposition. It creates “equality”- by putting everyone on equal footing (shared misery). It causes panic- and in panic, voters often make hasty decisions- like choosing big government to save them.
      The destruction and devastation we see happening right now is classic Cloward & Piven. It’s the plan we learned, studied, and discussed day and night at Columbia. This is no coincidence. This is the Marxist attack from within. This is a purposeful attempt to take down the economy, collapse the middle class, wipe out small business, bankrupt the wealthy (conservative donors), and addict the country to big government Nanny State socialism.
      ... We are all going to need to muster the power of relentless to defeat Obama and his socialist game plan. We’re going to need to overcome the damage Obama has done to our economy…and our children’s future. It’s time for battle. Go create your own Booming Personal Economy. Go protect your family. Go take back this country. Your mission is to survive, thrive, and prosper despite Obama..."

      http://www.humanevents.com/2013/04/14/obamas-plan-to-destroy-america-hatched-at-columbia-university-says-classmate/

      Delete
    3. Obama grew up surrounded by communists and pretended to be a socialist to advance his career.

      Obama however has no real ideology of any kind, and that's clear from his life's history.

      All his time in Chicago as a "community organizer" he never really organized anything, never created any jobs, or did anything to benefit his community. All he did was set up crooked schemes to plunder foundation funds and other sources intended for community development.

      Nothing Obama has done has contributed to the demise of the US economy, in fact he's acted to shore it up as much as possible under the circumstances.

      The US has little manufacturing base anymore, runs massive trade deficits every month, and is in massive debt and has a low currency value as a result.

      The only thing any President could do at this point is phase out the current free trade regimes, and that's not something ANY politician in either party is seeking to do.

      Delete
    4. You are quite naive & uninformed.
      Please do not offer your services to him pro bono.
      There is a CANCER METASTISING AT 1600 PENSYLVANIA AVENUE.

      Delete
    5. Obama doesn't need my advise. He actually has a pretty good team of economists advising him. The problem is that he tempers their advise with those from Axelrod and his other political advisors, just as all recent Presidents have done.

      Delete
  20. Why are the elite bent on savagery?

    Or putting up other's to commit savagery.

    Such a shame.

    It's not the way.

    It doesn't have to be.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not just the elites.

      Public opinion is what drives conflict and love of violence.

      Yes the elites are cynical about the common people, but the common people if made into elites are every bit as corrupt.

      Your assumption that common people are more noble is unfounded.

      There are assholes and non-assholes in all levels of society.

      Delete
    2. MITmichael,

      You are making an assumption. Of course, common people can be savage.

      But the savagery of common people does not lead to the deaths, murder & physical impoverishment of tens of thousands, even millions of people, from overt & covert official policies & private acts pushed by the elite.

      That's what I was talking about and I think you know that, but you can't help yourself.

      Individidual acts of savagery by common folks can, and often are, prosecuted by the criminal justice system.

      This is rarely the case for the elites.

      Remember "to big to jail" and HSBC, who only recieved fines instead of criminal prosecution for what was identified as criminal conduct.

      MITmichael, please, don't make assumptions about my positions because more often than not you will be wrong.

      Delete
    3. I'm not making assumptions.

      My point is that the malevolence of the elites only mirrors the evil nature of most people regardless of their class.

      My point is that if you take the average working-class person and put him in a position of power he will become just as corrupt and savage as individuals currently in the "elites."

      The only reason why the middle classes have values which elites don't have to live up to is because they don't have the ability or power to do anything otherwise.

      I'm a cynic about human nature.

      Most people are only good because they can't get away with doing much that's bad.

      Delete
    4. Furthermore...

      The evils which you point to such as war, etc., are only brought about because the masses of people like the idea of it.

      It takes very little prompting or propaganda to egg most people on into violence and rage.

      Most people love the idea of violence until they actually have to experience it, then they fall apart like the cowards they are.

      Most people are BAD BAD BAD.

      Delete
    5. Most people have no real courage because they have no real convictions, will always cave-in to whatever evil they're asked to go along with, could care less about what happens to anyone else, and have no particular talents or virtues.

      Most people really don't care about anything except the pursuit of pleasure or exhileration.

      This is true of about 65% of all people who are not negros, and is true of 98% of all negros.

      There are always exceptions.

      Delete
    6. Sorry I have to define human characteristics according to race, but humans are bounded by the physical characteristics they are composed of.

      Culture follows genetics, not the other way around. Culture and environment determines very little.

      Delete
    7. No need to apologize or qualify yourself, as unpopular and scathing as your critiques on African Americans are, I will admit that there is a lot of truth to what you say. Even though the idea of there being exceptions may seem extremely unlikely to you, trust me when I say that they are out there! My parents are immigrants from Haiti but we are highly cultured and highly educated, my father is a surgeon. I enjoy reading your comments, I've learned a tremendous amount from you.

      Here's my question for you though. I've been very interested in the UFO phenomenon for the past few months, and I'm starting to agree with a former physicist and leading UFO researcher Stanton Friedman that there is an overwhelming amount of evidence available that proves Earth is being visited by intelligently controlled extraterrestrial spacecraft. So my question to you is, since you were formerly in the CIA, do you personally know or have any friends that know if there is an extraterrestrial presence on Earth at this moment? As in underground or hidden bases, or something of the sort.

      Delete
    8. Reggie D,

      Almost anyone, who visits various websites, will come across the UFO discussion, plus, here, in the States, the History Channel has covered UFO's exhaustively.

      So, it is that I have seen & read UFO material.

      In some sense the evidence seems overwhelming.

      But it's not proven.

      There is also, as you might guess, discussion of advanced technology available after WWII to the United States (war booty, if you will) that possibly relies on electromagnetic manipulation (plasma dynamics) so the craft appears able to violate the laws of gravity.

      But it's not... it takes advantage of physics the public is not privy to.

      Some say the UFO phenomenon is a cover-up for secret advanced technology craft.

      Well, this comment won't answer any questions with definity.

      Both possibilities need to be considered.

      Because the government won't tell you either way.

      Delete
    9. The answer is yes. I know, or knew, several government people who were aware of the simple facts about UFOs. Stanton Friedman has layed this out in his lectures, "Flying Saucers Are Real," which you can find on Youtube. Friedman relies on government documents which are unassailable.

      But I would go further....

      The work of historian David Jacobs about contactees is persuasive. Jacobs is the only one still alive doing this research. John Mack of Harvard was killed in an "accident," and Bob Hopkins recently died of disease.

      Don't believe for a moment that there aren't artifacts and physical evidence - there is. Several labs, including Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio [which does primarily CIA work] have processed artifacts.

      The simple truth is that standard scientists are emotionally frightened by the implications of these topics, and avoid them.
      For that matter behavioral scientists still insist that hypnosis doesn't exist because they are emotionally afraid of the implications of it.

      Standard scientists are basically very immature individuals who will simple ignore anything which emotionally threatens their cherished beliefs.

      Delete
    10. According to David Jacobs aliens have been creating hybrids with the intent of integrating with humans for some tranformational reason.

      Jacobs and most others who are persuaded of this are DISMAYED!

      "We're better than this!," they declare.

      "We humans are entitled to govern ourselves and are doing a good job of it!"

      "We humans don't deserve to be made into second-class citizens!"

      BULLSHIT!!

      If you were an alien lurking above the earth and say into the minds and hearts of most humans YOU WOULD BE SHOCKED AND APPALLED.

      Just as I think that most [but not all] negros are incapable of cooperation, empathy, etc.,....

      I also have to admit that I belong to a race of overall failed and melevolent people.

      If a morally superior race or species comes here and imposes themselves on my species I have to accept it.

      I am part of a failed and largley malevolent species.

      Delete
    11. I think I understand the aliens.

      They are morally superior beings.

      I don't think they'd be intervening if it weren't absolutely necessary.

      Delete
  21. Maria Bartiromo CNBC: why today-why Boston ?

    "THE DIE HAS BEEN CAST & THE RUBICON CROSSED" John Adams

    The SHOT HEARD ROUND THE WORLD 2.0
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord

    And our NEW KING GEORGE (OBAMA THE DOMESTIC FINANCIAL & geographical TERRORIST) WILL CONTINUE THIS COLD BLOODED MURDER UNTIL HE IS EXPOSED & ARRESTED.

    Let the 2nd AMERICAN REVOLUTION COMMENCE!

    Do not surrender your muskets!

    "The Massachusetts militias had indeed been gathering a stock of weapons, powder, and supplies at Concord, as well as an even greater amount much further west in Worcester, but word reached the rebel leaders that British officers had been observed examining the roads to Concord.

    On April 8, Paul Revere rode to Concord to warn the inhabitants that the British appeared to be planning an expedition. The townspeople decided to remove the stores and distribute them among other towns nearby.

    Between 9 and 10 pm on the night of April 18, 1775, Joseph Warren told William Dawes and Paul Revere that the King's troops were about to embark in boats from Boston bound for Cambridge and the road to Lexington and Concord. Warren's intelligence suggested that the most likely objectives of the regulars' movements later that night would be the capture of Adams and Hancock. They did not worry about the possibility of regulars marching to Concord, since the supplies at Concord were safe, but they did think their leaders in Lexington were unaware of the potential danger that night. Revere and Dawes were sent out to warn them and to alert colonial militias in nearby towns.

    ....bells, drums, alarm guns, bonfires and a trumpet were used for rapid communication from town to town, notifying the rebels in dozens of eastern Massachusetts villages that they should muster their militias because the regulars in numbers greater than 500 were leaving Boston, with possible hostile intentions. This system was so effective that people in towns 25 miles (40 km) from Boston were aware of the army's movements while they were still unloading boats in Cambridge....

    In the morning, Boston was surrounded by a huge militia army, numbering over 15,000, which had marched from throughout New England. Unlike the Powder Alarm, the rumors of spilled blood were true, and the Revolutionary War had begun. The militia army continued to grow as surrounding colonies sent men and supplies. The Second Continental Congress adopted these men into the beginnings of the Continental Army.

    Even now, after open warfare had started, Gage still refused to impose MARTIAL LAW Boston. He persuaded the town's selectmen TO SURRENDER ALL PRIVATE WEAPONS in return for promising that any inhabitant could leave town...,"

    AMAZING WHAT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT THE SINISTER NSA CIA DNI DHS DARPA FBI.

    Left to our own ingenuity we could reclaim AMERICA!!

    Whatever commission is appointed to conclude (collude) the MALEVOLENT COLLABORATORS GREED, it will AGAIN be whitewashed.

    Maybe one day a true patriot will emerge & expose the TREASONOUS CONSPIRATORS ulterior motives.

    I never, in my wildest dreams thought I would be around to see déjà vu all over again!

    Obama will not be able to claim his billions (in escrow) off shore unless he INCINERATES the constitution piece by piece. ("Mission Accomplished")
    http://www.jonmcnaughton.com/one-nation-under-socialism-1/

    He was installed for that & ONLY that function; & for his contractual agreement, if he breaches, he will lose his assets & his 18% tax liability.

    Reject the OBAMA PHAROAH, according to his fictitious bio-A BRITISHBSUMBJECT WHO INTENDS TO COLLAPSE AMERICA VIA TERROR.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. THURSDAY, APRIL 11, 2013

      USA BEHIND ALL THE TERRORISM - TOP ITALIAN JUDGE
      On 11 April 2013, Imposimato talks about the unsolved terrorist killings in Italy:

      "I found a document that left me appalled.

      "When it comes to terrorist slaughter it speaks of the Bilderberg Group...

      "I can say that behind the strategy of tension and the terrorist slaughter there is the Bilderberg group, a sort of Big Brother, manipulating events, using terrorists, foreigners and Masons."

      "Confirming information gathered by veteran journalist Jim Tucker’s source, it appears almost certain that the secretive Bilderberg group will conduct its annual confab at the luxury Grove Hotel just outside Watford, UK from June 6 to June 9, 2013.
      http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2013/04/bilderberg-2013.html?m=0

      CIA chief Allen Dulles devised the plan to set up 'terrorist' forces across Europe. The whole exercise that became known as Operation Gladio was "born in the head of Allen Dulles" and was financed by the CIA. For those who are familiar with the political world that author Peter Dale Scott describes as "Deep Politics", this puts Dulles squarely in the nexus of two of the biggest "deep events" in American history. Scott defines a deep event as “events, like the JFK assassination, the Watergate break-in, or 9/11, which violate the … social structure, have a major impact on … society, repeatedly involve law-breaking or violence, and in many cases proceed from an unknown dark force.” Dulles has long been suspected of involvement in the assassination of JFK, or at least covering up CIA involvement through his position on the Warren Commission. Though Dulles died in 1969, long before the events of 9/11, by being the architect of Operation Gladio, his influence is all over that conspiracy as well.

      Imposimato says that he was given the document by a former Ordine Nuovo terrorist.

      The CIA-linked Ordine Nuovo ("New Order") carried out the 1969 Piazza Fontana bombing and a host of other terrorist attacks.

      Judge Imposimato announced that he is going to recommend that the International Criminal Court hold a criminal trial into 9/11....

      As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: “You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, TO TURN TO THE STATE & ASK FOR GREATER SECURITY...

      http://www.lawyersfor911truth.blogspot.it/2012/09/lawyers-for-911-truth-member-to-refer.html?m=1

      http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2013/04/usa-behind-all-terrorism-top-italian.html?m=0





      Delete
    2. Our government CONTINUES to plot against us: THE ENEMY WITHIN.
      Alex jones investigates:
      http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=plcp&v=4iPoJQKPRFk
      http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=plcp&v=kQWH2epffQY

      Delete
    3. Italy is my second home and I can tell you Italian jurists are very comical and no one there considers them an authority on anything.

      Don't mistake them for people like what we have here as judges.

      Italy is a mad, mad, mad place.

      It's fun!

      Delete
  22. "Eric Holder runs this operation under the cover of Attorney General, just as he ran the hatchet man operations for the Clinton Administration under Janet Reno and caused all sorts of mayhem for Bill and Hillary Clinton for Waco to the ice pellet assassination of Ron Brown, with the murder of that plane load of people, including that surviving flight attendent murdered on ground.

    Ann Smedinghoff was murdered in Afghanistan by an operation run out of 1600 Penn Avenue. She was sent deliberately to her death with her escort in a cover story to "blame it on terrorists" as she had come to the conclusion like Richard Holbrooke before he was terminated, that the Obama regime was murderous and she was attempting to do her part to rectify this, by talking to Israeli intelligence operational inside Afghanistan in the Jewish states interests there..

    There is a pattern now of Richard Holbrooke, Christopher Stevens and Anne Smedinghoff, that when their "Obama operations" they are involved in reveal too much criminal information and they start questioning the treachery, that just like Ron Brown and Vince Foster, the grim reaper comes calling..."
    http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2013/04/lost-in-smedinghoff-afnamistan.html?m=0

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Look friend I think there are other explainations for these deaths. I think you're giving the interpretations of homicide too much certainty. I think you would be better served to be just a tad bit less certain and just a little more skeptical...just a tad.

      Now as for Presidents going around murdering people for private gain, or to cover-up crimes, yeah President Lyndon Johson did that.

      I've spent my life where Johnson lived and operated and there's no doubt in my mind because of credible witnesses and undeniable circumstances.

      But Johnson was a raging sociopath!

      Everyone who has studied him objectively know that.

      Johnson was a crimal sociopath with all the obvious characertistics of that.

      Despite the exaggerations Dr.P posts here Clinton, Obama, etc., are not obvious sociopaths like Johnson was. Johnson was an asshole, cruel, mean, violent, unpredictable, erratic, self-pitying [like Lincoln] obcessed with himself, etc.....

      Johnson was CLINICALLY a criminal sociopath.

      Delete
  23. Hello Everybody, My name is.Mrs.Juliet Quin. I live in Canada and i am a happy woman today? and i told my self that any lender that rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to him, he gave me happiness to me and my family, i was in need of a loan of $ 73,000.00 to start my life all over as i am a single mother with 3 kids I met this honest and GOD fearing man loan lender that help me with a loan of $ 73,000.00 Canada Dollar, he is a GOD fearing man, if you are in need of loan and you will pay back the loan please contact him tell him that is Mrs.Juliet Quin that refer you to him. Contact Dr Purva Pius via email: reply to email (urgentloan22@gmail.com)

    ReplyDelete