‘The witness in questioning the wisdom of the establishment pays a price and incurs hazards. He is diverted from his professional activities. He stirs the enmity of powerful foes. He fears that reprisals may extend beyond him to his institution. Perhaps he fears shadows, but in a day when almost all research institutions are highly dependent on federal funds, prudence seems to dictate silence.’

Few scientists are any longer willing to question, even privately, the consensus views in any field whatsoever. The successful researcher-the one who receives the biggest grants, the best career positions, the most prestigious prizes, the greatest number of published papers-is the one who generates the most data and the least controversy. The transition from small to big to megascience has created an establishment of skilled technicians but mediocre scientists, who have abandoned real scientific interpretation and who even equate their experiments with science itself. They pride themselves on molding data to fit popular scientific belief, or perhaps in adding nonthreatening discoveries. But when someone strays outside accepted boundaries to ask questions of a more fundamental nature, the majority of researchers close ranks to protect their consensus beliefs.”

-Dr. Peter Duesburg

-President Eisenhower’s 1961 Farewell Address

aaron reads an e-mail he got.

link for the form to to the e-mail to friends: http://svtplay.se/popup/tipsa/v/2264028

e-mail transcript:
they tell you
DO NOT OPEN
attachments, they get you to be afraid of attachments, untrusted sources,
they want you to need your JOBS
for
Justice protects
insurance
unions
and multinationalism for the sake of very BIG and
Fictitious money

when we could already have what we need
in fact we do have what we need
the internet is all we need
and this is ONE thing they can not take down as a whole
we now over power them, virtually
they can only shut down a little bit here and a little over there
and make BIG news of it
BUT THEY HAVE NO POWER!
we OVERPOWER THEM NOW
RIGHT NOW

But it’s so simple really, they can’t stop this without hurting the very thing they want to protect, the internet
fighting forces
it was created for them,
but now we own it
you do not have to like them, support or acknowledge OR PROSECUTE them
them
them
them
not one of the greater pronouns, the personal pronouns

if you are transparent
we can be transparent

this is the evolution

we become transparent

if you are not hurting someone
you are not committing a crime
however you can see that it is THEY who are hurting somebody
it is they who are committing the crime
AND YES, MILLIONS ARE GUILTY
but we do not need to prosecute
as of right now, you are the owner of the entire world in a virtual sense
you and no one owns it
if you refuse to even acknowledge them, walk away
they fade away
DO NOT support their courts, fire all lawyers, collection services and make love to your local police
seduce the dark blue
sack the taxes and fees altogether
pay no attention to those who lose power slowly and want to panic
and you can stand up close to them and say
DO NOT BE AFRAID I will not hurt you.!

your logical mind should tell you that
not some legal doctrine
we have a new doctrine now
hehehe

I’m reading the new Dexter book (Dexter is Delicious), and I’ve always liked these books because they are amazingly written to show the emotionlessness of sociopaths. He’s much less emotional in the books.

It’s just funny to me that this is the authors description of sociopathic logic, yet it isn’t too far off from how many people view housing foreclosures. Maybe not so blatantly put, but I guess I just think it’s a great example of the cognitive dissonance required to accept that our system is working.

charlie’s post arrest statement, describing the brutality he endured inside:

Charlie interviewed about the experience by Alex Jones, who acts like Alex Jones, but they make some good points about Canada’s Fascism being real:

Ani Difranco – Fuel

They were digging a new foundation in Manhattan
And they discovered a slave cemetery there
May their souls rest easy now that lynching is frowned upon
And we’ve moved on to the electric chair
And I wonder who’s gonna be president
Tweedle Dumb or Tweedle Dumber?
And who’s gonna have the big
Blockbuster box office
This summer
How ’bout we put up a wall
Between the houses and the highway
And then you can go your way
And I can go my way
Except all the radios agree with all the TV’s
And all the magazines agree with all the radios
And I keep hearing that same damn song
Everywhere I go
Maybe I should put a bucket over my head
And a marshmallow in each ear
And stumble around for another dumb numb week
For another hum drum hit song to appear
People used to make records
As in a record of an event
The event of people
Playing music in a room
Now everything is cross-marketing
It’s about sunglasses and shoes
Or guns or drugs
You choose
We got it rehashed
We got it half-assed
We’re digging up all the graves
And we’re spitting on the past
And we can choose between the colors
Of the lipstick on the whores
Cuz we know the difference
Between the font of twenty percent more
And the font of teriyaki
You tell me
How does that make you feel?
You tell me what’s real
They say that alcoholics are always alcoholics
Even when they’re dry as my lips for years
Even when they’re stranded on a small desert island
With no place in two thousand miles to buy beer
And I wonder is he different
Is he different
Has he changed
What he’s about
Or is he just a liar
With nothing to lie about
Am I headed for the same brick wall
Is there anything I can do
About anything at all
Except go back to that corner in Manhattan
And dig deeper
Dig deeper this time
Down beneath the impossible pain of our history
Beneath unknown bones
Beneath the bedrock of the mystery
Beneath the sewage system and the path train
Beneath the cobblestones and the water main
Beneath the traffic of friendships and street deals
Beneath the screeching of kamikaze cab wheels
Beneath everything I can think of to think about
Beneath it all
Beneath all get out
Beneath the good and the kind and the stupid and the cruel
There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel
There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel
There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel There’s a fire that’s just waiting for fuel

i decided i’d bury it on some blog somewhere too.

from the zeitgeist movement forums, obviously on the subject of child abuse / discipline.  link to thread:

IDMclean wrote:
My question for you and any other person who sees a distinction between discipline and abuse, what is the distinction? Where is the line drawn? I draw it at the application of mental, physical, and social violence. Which excludes the majority of types of discipline commonly cited. In my experience as a nomadic child, living between two different parents in different places with different schools, discipline is synonymous with abuse as you can see by reading through this thread.

If you take punitive measures, you are behaving abusively. When you yell at a kid, you teach them yelling at people to get what they want is okay. If you hit a kid, you teach them hitting people to get what they want is okay. If you hold their possessions hostage, you teach them that holding the possessions of others hostage is okay. In many cases, the ancestor generations discuss what amounts to techniques of social and psychological terrorism forgetting that the use of such techniques teach the child that such techniques are okay to use.

This isn’t to say that I’m saying you can’t structure your child’s life and correct behaviors. If discipline is to be held as separate from abuse then discipline is the correction of dysfunctional behavior by example and restraint both yours and theirs. You can not correct dysfunctional behavior with dysfunctional behavior. Additionally, you can not correct dysfunctional behavior in another if you, yourself, are engaging in that dysfunctional behavior regularly; especially, if you are engaging in the behavior in practicing discipline. To do so, exacerbates the behavior and creates a double standard.

One thing to consider is that most often when a person is behaving poorly it is because that person needs or wants something. In many cases, it is because they want attention and can not get positive attention. It is a simple truth that people seek to avoid the absence of stimulation preferring positive or negative stimulation, pleasure or pain, over nothing.

If you watch the Zeitgeist Movement videos, it is a common theme that the dysfunctional behavior of the society itself comes about due to its dysfunctional structure. Remove the impetus for dysfunctional behavior, and the dysfunctional behavior itself should abate.

This principle is extensively discussed in the writings of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. Specifically, it is addressed in Three Ways of Meeting Oppression. Additionally, you can find more about the application of Satyagraha here.

iI really have nothing to add I just thought that was fantastically put. wish I’d wrote it.

If you do have to sell your body, once, or twice, or seven times, it’ll be worth it. And trust me, one day my band is gonna make it and this will all be just a distant, distant, dream…

Until the earth’s removed!
Or daddy don’t approve!
Whatever happens first!
Depending on my mood!

You gave your love to me,
and now you are my property”

-Say Anything (again)

When someone says my boyfriend or my girlfriend, what do they actually mean?

What about that person is yours?

A relationship (I’d think) should be based on a deep-felt connection, of two minds, who happen to compliment each other in a unique way. I’m talking about love, though I hate to use the word because it is so loaded with preconceptions that to even bring it up can lessen the chance of what I’m saying being understood.

Person: “When I say my girlfriend, I don’t mean she’s literally mine. It’s just a way of expressing that we are in love, or at least are in a serious relationship. That we share ourselves with each other, connect.”

Amazing. Perfect. So why the proprietary terminology? Why say “my boyfriend”. I know, I know, you didn’t invent the language, but I think that this is something we should take a closer look at because the way we use language affects the way we view the world around us and the things in it.

People might argue against me on this, but I think generally when most people claim a person as their ‘partner’, they are claiming exclusive sexual rights to that persons body. At least, that’s the biggest thing. Emotional lapses can be forgiven, but CHEATING on someone, having sex with any other person, even once, is a huge deal. It means either they made a ‘mistake’, or they don’t really love you, and it’s time to leave. That’s quite an assumption.

I mean, cheating is usually a marraige ender, right? Why?

And then there’s marraige. A legal contract to love someone for the rest of your life. I can’t think of anything less romantic than putting my name on a LEGAL CONTRACT tying myself to another person for life (or until divorce). It’s so cold and sterile.

I know for most people it’s not about the contract, or the legal aspects, it’s about openly declaring your love for each other with a big ceremony, and making a lifelong commitment, and that’s something I just have to say I just don’t get. I don’t get the public ceremony thing at all. If I want to declare my love for someone, that’s a personal thing between me and him. To put it on display almost cheapens it.

It’s like the episode of the office where Pam and Jim get married. I know it’s hyperbole, but the whole office shows up at their wedding, and the day turns out to be more about the event and the other people than it is about Pam and Jim. So they sneak off, and have this romantic boat-ride ceremony that Jim conveniently had preplanned… whatever, it’s a tv show. What I’m saying is that marraige and monogamy are two social institutions that we kind of take for granted as things that are beneficial.

I’m just saying maybe they aren’t, at least, not all the time.

I’ve never been in love, so call me naive, but I think if I was, really was, there’s no way I’d want to hold that person back, in any way.

Sometimes in the morning I am petrified and can’t move.  Awake but cannot open my eyes.

And the weight is crushing down on my lungs, I know I can’t breathe
and hope someone will save me this time

and your mother’s still callin you insane and high, swearing it’s different this time.
And you tell her to give in to the demons that possess her.
That god never blessed her insides.

Then you hang up the phone and feel badly for upsetting things,
crawl back into bed to dream of a time when your heart was open wide
and you love things just because… like the sick and the dying.

and sometimes when you’re on, You’re REALLY fuckin ON
and your friends they sing along and they love you.
But the lows are so extreme that the good seems FUCKING CHEAP
and it teases you for weeks in its absence

But you’ll fight and you’ll make it through
You’ll fake it if you have to
And you’ll show up for work with a smile!
You’ll be better
And You’ll be smarter
And More grown up

And a better daughter

Or son

And a real good friend

And you’ll be awake
You’ll be alert
You’ll be positive though it hurts
And you’ll laugh and embrace all your friends

And you’ll be a real good listener
You’ll be honest
You’ll be brave
You’ll be handsome and you’ll be beautiful

You’ll be HAPPY

Your ship may be coming in
You’re weak but not giving in
To the cries and the wails of the valley below

And your ship may be coming in
You’re weak but not giving in
And you’ll fight it

you’ll go out fighting all of em

Please listen to this song  and tell me you aren’t moved.

Maybe it’s just me.