Have you become the proverbial frog in the boiling water? From every avenue, I hear about the increasing intrusion of the government in our daily lives. It is not just in the U.S.A, but virtually every “western” country or society.
Like the frog, we are sitting in a pot of water that is being brought to a slow boil with creeping Marxism or Fabian Socialism. Recently, this process or movement has started to accelerate. While the frog boiled to death, what will be our fate?
It cannot be focused on one individual or one group (even a large group). It has become like “soma” in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. Some are not taking soma in this world, and I consider them to be awake to what it going on around them. I would say, though, that a majority are taking soma in one dose level or another. About 20-30% of the population has taken so much of it that there is really no chance of them waking up to reality. They continually try to increase the dosage for those who are slightly hooked and would just as soon see the people that are awake and not taking soma dead… really. How do I know? Do something that rocks their boat and watch the death threats fly.
What brought this to mind today? It was the following verses from Romans that were read in Sunday School this morning:
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities — his eternal power and divine nature — have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator — who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
Spontaneously, several in the class relayed their frustration with the oppression of the government and the blindness of those around them on moral issues. I was also told a few days before about the recently elected Marxist President of Brazil and her Satanist Vice President. One of the first laws they passed was an anti-homophobia law followed by distribution of training material to the schools. Sound familiar? Anti-bullying laws masked as cover for advancing the gay agenda? California two mommies or two daddies training for elementary school children implemented in their textbooks?
I wish to borrow a computer term for the siege we are currently under. It is called it “massive parallelism”. There are so many attacks from so many different angles with the singular objective of… world Marxism/socialism under one world government, or as George Soros would put it, The New World Order. Virtually EVERY action the Obama Administration has performed in the last three years is to advance that objective… NOT to fix the economic malaise we presently find ourselves in. That is Obama’s “fundamental transformation”. No one admits this. They deny it at every turn, but the evidence has become crystal clear.
The problem is that their plan will NEVER work because it is counter to Natural Law. We have to ask what lunacy would drive government to make more and more of my decisions for me 3,000 miles away? Is it some megalomaniac idea of “economy of scale”? How are most business mergers working out with that in mind?
This brings me to my last point. How far can you be pushed before you take action in some manner? We must ask the most grave question of what would we be willing to die for? I do hope and pray that more and more people will wake up to what is going on around them. This will most certainly minimize pain and bloodshed.
The sadist, Frances Fox Piven, is already stirring the Occupy Movement pot for the coming warmer weather. Beware of the frogs in the boiling water. It may be you or it may be someone that will do you harm.
In mid-December, an article on the impact of Homosexual Infiltration in the New Zealand Defense Force. Here is a followup article with the original article below. You’ve seen the slippery slope of K-12 textbooks being rewritten to glorify this lifestyle to our young. NAMBLA is already becoming more militant. Where do YOU draw the line? Time to stop saying, “Ewwww!” and time to start shining a light on this as it affects the future of our society. Of course, this is already a slam-dunk in our military. WOW… Didn’t see it coming…
P.S. Oh, I almost forgot, this IS one of the many tentacles of Fabian Socialism.
Further concerns about Homosexual Politics infiltrating the
New Zealand Defence Force
By Barbara Faithfull
In December 2011 I set out concerns which I had on the above subject, and with the sub-title “Cultural Subversion under guise of “Peer Support”. By e-mail it received limited distribution, including to quite a few news media outlets, but with Christmas nigh, to date it has received no media attention.
That will, of course, be welcome news for the leading figures in the above pernicious escapade, which is set to be launched this month of January 2012. To briefly recap, there is to be set up in the NZ Defence Force a “gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender support group”, a daring event and highly covert if ever there was one.
Fronting this unprecedented move is Air Force Flight Lieutenant (Flt/Lt) Stu Pearce, who would have one believe that his concern is no more than for the “wellbeing” of homosexual, bisexual and transgender service personnel, and of course with this overlooking entirely the question of whether such people should even be serving in the force in the first place, and the potentially dire ramifications this could have for military morale, discipline and efficiency etc.
Although conveniently reduced there to the simplistic notion of “concern for their wellbeing”, the reality is that this threatens to be an issue tantamount to the opening of Pandora’s Box and as such is riddled with deception and intrigue.
Deception and intrigue
After all, Pearce himself is not only a homosexual; wittingly or unwittingly he also will be a political activist for the leftist “gay” rights cause, more of which shortly. So the above reasoning he offers can only be a pretext for what is really intended with this move, and which – all else aside – can only lead to horrendous new layers of stifling service bureaucracy.
Moreover, far from the impression being conveyed – of him just spontaneously expressing concern for the “wellbeing” of such service personnel – there is every likelihood that he will have been scrupulously hand-picked as a respected authority figure to spearhead, and to afford an aura of credibility and respectability, to what loom as revolutionary changes in the culture of the NZ Defence Force. They are changes, moreover, which are required by NZ’s Human Rights Act of 1993. So these changes will have been long planned, and include copious directives for employers against “discrimination” of homosexual, bisexual and transgender employees.
Curiously, though, the critical term “discrimination” remains ill-defined in a booklet Out at Work?, supposedly compiled to inform homosexuals of their “rights” in the workplace. For example, on page 2, under “Your right to an inclusive workplace – the law”, the first two mentions of the term are without any specific definition of the word at all, such as : “It is against the law in NZ to discriminate against employees on the basis of sexual orientation” etc.
Then follows this cop out : “The definition of discrimination is wide. It also includes practices that seem neutral but have a discriminatory impact.” etc. (emphasis added) (1) Produced by Full Spectrum Ltd., whose founder and director is longtime homosexual political activist Eugene Moore, in all probability he would have written that material.
He is also styled as, among other things, “an Auckland gender consultant”. As such he has been deeply involved for years providing “sexuality education” for, among others, NZ military and law enforcement agencies, including time with naval personnel at sea. All this, presumably, designed for NZ to meet its UN obligations under the Human Rights Act 1993, although this is rarely, if ever, spelt out. While there is much more which calls for reporting about Moore and his activities, right now other matters are more pressing for our attention.
Earlier I described the “gay” rights cause as “leftist”. “Leftist?” does someone ask? Yes, leftist, and communist, not that evidence of this is readily available from our mainstream media which, after all, is mainly leftist also. In fact there seems to have long been a strict taboo about acknowledging the very existence of communism, let alone of its pernicious existence in our everyday lives.
After all, for many years there has been spread the false message that it is dead, when it is very much alive, and covertly operating to subvert all the institutions of Western society : the Church, the family, the Police and Justice systems, the education system etc. – and also the military.
From the NZ perspective, to cite such evidence it helps to go back as far as the 1970’s, when the homosexual political movement was at least open and honest about its ideological thrust, which was anti-capitalist, clear and simple. Take this 1976 quote from a Christchurch group Gay Liberation Front: “On the one hand, we have written articles and position papers that…..denounce capitalism as the prime force in gay oppression, and refer to the need for a socialist society” etc.(2)
By 1979, also in Christchurch, homosexual teachers were involved with the forming of the National Gay Rights Coalition (NGRC) and the insinuating into some local schools pernicious homosexual political propaganda entitled On Being Homosexual which included “eight advantages” of being homosexual.(3) Now, of course, they portray themselves as victims, and in need of “peer support groups”etc.
A key figure in such activism back then was homosexual activist teacher Robin Duff, of the NGRC executive, whose ongoing activism through the years seems to have been no handicap to his career path, with him currently being President of the NZ Post Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA). On 29th March 2008, for example, TV3 News featured him supposedly “fighting bullying”. He was “sick of seeing staff and students ‘unsafe’ at school” he declared. Present day, of course, while acknowledging that genuine bullying is a serious problem, it is also an in-vogue cover for homosexual political activism.
Also in 1979, on 27th June at the University of Auckland, I attended a strident, no-holds-barred, in-your-face homosexual political forum. Guest speaker was Felix Donnelly, Catholic renegade priest, University lecturer, youth worker, author, Radio Pacific talkback host – and destined to be for the next 20 years – and dedicated crusader for the homosexual political cause and all similarly-aligned issues.
Chairing the event was homosexual activist Dr. Ian Scott, Northern Representative of the NGRC and a member of the Board of the newly-launched Radio Pacific. Just one memorable and highly revealing quote from Scott : “We are about a revolution, and it is the Patricia Bartletts who recognize this!” (At that time she being a campaigner on moral/social issues)
On 25th August 1980 the revolutionary nature of such activism was spelt out in a Radio NZ Checkpoint programme by Dr. Keith Ovenden, a political science senior lecturer at Canterbury University. In discussing the Trotskyist Communist group Socialist Action League (S.A.L.) he remarked : “(they) have bizarre issues : race relations, homosexuality, abortion, women’s rights etc.”(4)
With the decline of the Cold War in the 1990’s came the spreading of the false message that communism was dead, not least by the likes of Felix Donnelly on Radio Pacific. Many were thus duped, but a glance at communist literature of that time was proof positive that it was indeed still very much alive and well, such as this from the Auckland Socialist Workers’ Organisation (SWO) : “ Liberation from oppression : “We fight for democratic rights. We oppose the oppression of women, Maori, Pacific Islanders, lesbians and gays…Their liberation is essential to socialist revolution and impossible without it.” (5)
While the communist SWO has now evolved into Socialist Worker (Aotearoa) its rabid pursuit of all those issues is as strong as ever, as shown in their ten-point programme currently available in Unity on
http://www.unityaotearoa.blogspot.com/p/where-we-stand.html To quote No. 6 :-
“The history of capitalism is marked by the systematic oppression of indigenous peoples, workers, ethnic minorities, women and non-heterosexuals” etc. Also:-
“…..women, whose second-class status to this day is measured by…restrictions on abortion rights and a lack of state support for child rearers. The same ‘family values’ scourge also hit people who didn’t (sic) neatly fit into the heterosexual category, and to this day lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people face pervasive discrimination despite legal near-equality…”etc.
Another view : ramifications of communism on present-day society
Ten years ago far more comprehensive evidence of the communist influence behind those issues was presented in an article by Canadian author and “student of gender” Henry Makow Ph.D. While covering the North American scene, much of it seems broadly applicable to other Western nations also, including NZ, and is entitled American Communism and the Making of Women’s Liberation (6) Some quotes :-
“In a new book Red Feminism : American Communism and the Making of Women’s Liberation, feminist historian Kate Weigand…..has shown that modern feminism is a direct outgrowth of American Communism….(It) pioneered the political, economic and cultural analysis of women’s oppression….Communists pioneered women’s studies and advocated public daycare, birth control, abortion and even children’s rights……The main contribution modern feminism made was to try to eliminate heterosexuality and the nuclear family altogether.
“Feminism’s roots in Marxist Communism explain :-
*Why they want revolution….and have a messianic vision of a genderless utopia.
*Why they don’t believe in free speech, refuse to debate and suppress dissenting views etc.
“It is hard to escape the conclusion that feminism is communism by another name. Having failed to peddle class war, communism morphed into a movement dedicated to gaining power by promoting gender conflict. The ‘diversity’ and ‘multicultural’ movements represent feminism’s attempt to forge ‘allegiances’ by empowering gays and ‘people of colour’. Thus the original CPUSA (7) trio of race, gender and class is very much intact, but class conflict has never been a big seller. Feminists wish to destroy a Western Civilisation that is dominated by white men who believe in genuine diversity (pluralism), individual liberty and equal opportunity (but not equal outcomes).
“Feminists dominate the mass media and the education systems (both primary and secondary). They believe in using these for indoctrination. They have great power in the legal system, many parts of government, and are currently subverting the military.[emphasis added]
The scourge of political correctness
“The term ‘politically correct’ (PC) originated in the Communist Party in Russia in the 1920’s. We use it every day to refer to adherence to feminist dogma…..
“Rituals of denunciation and recantation typical of Stalinist Russia or the Maoist Cultural Revolution (for the ‘sin’ of ‘sexism/racism’) have become commonplace in America. They are ‘showpieces’ designed to frighten everyone into conforming to PC. We have ‘diversity officers’ and ‘human rights commissions’ and ‘sensitivity training’, all designed to uphold feminist shibboleths. They talk about ‘discrimination’ but they freely discriminate against whomever they like. ‘Sexual harassment’ is something they use to fetter male-female relations and to purge their enemies…..” (emphasis added)
Makow concludes : “Communism is alive and well and living under an assumed name.”
Such an “assumed name” could well be that of the United Nations, whose tyrannical dictates via the NZ Human Rights Act 1993 are being covertly executed under guise of a need for NZ Defence Force homosexual “peer support groups”, but threatening to subvert the very culture of the military in the process.
Moreover, and unsurprisingly, NZ’s mainly leftist news media is utterly silent on this whole dastardly affair.
Barbara Faithfull B.A. (Psych.Anthr.)
6th January 2012
1. Out at Work? Understanding your rights to an inclusive workplace. Produced by Full Spectrum Ltd., P.O.Box 5255 Wellesley St., Auckland. Dated 2000 or later.
2. In Gay Liberation Front’s aequus, May 1976, Vol. 3, No. 4, page 2.
3. As reported in the April/May 1979 newsletter of the (then) Concerned Parents’ Association, Christchurch.
4. The S.A.L. has since been renamed Communist League.
5. Under “Where We Stand”, the Auckland Socialist Workers’ Organisation publication Socialist Worker, 5th May 1998.
6. In www.toogoodreports.com 3rd October 2001 but access now problematic.
7. Communist Party U.S.A.
Homosexual Politics infiltrate New Zealand Defence Force :
Cultural Subversion under guise of “Peer Support”
By Barbara Faithfull
The Christmas 2011 “silly season” is upon us, and not for the first time NZ is dumped with an issue of gigantuan proportions, debate about which seems destined to conveniently slither under the radar until it is too late for public debate and protest.
NZ’s already burgeoning bureaucracy is set to further escalate with news of a homosexual political coup affecting the whole of the country’s Defence Force – Army, Navy and Air Force – and inevitably wider society also, if not even our national security.
On 6th December Radio NZ News reported :
“The NZ Defence Force is to set up a gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender support group, to be launched in January. NZ is one of very few countries around the world to do so….and other organizations say it is leading the way.”
However, to say “other organizations” was facile to say the least, because they were merely homosexual interest groups predictably championing their own cause. One was Chief Petty Officer Stuart O’Brien, chairman of the Australian Defence Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex Information Service. Others were listed that day on Yahoo News under “Gay support group for NZ military praised”. The Radio NZ report continued:-
“Stu Pearce is an openly gay Flight Lieutenant (Flt.Lt.) in the Royal NZ Air Force (RNZAF) and part of the group’s management team. He says it is a significant step for the Defence Force, which he describes as a conservative organization, despite lifting a ban on openly homosexual people in 1993. (Emphasis added) ‘It is important to have a support group’..
“He estimates between 5-7% of force personnel are gay, and says they are still going to operate under a self-inflicted ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy, which can cause anxiety. He says although in the main the Air Force and the Defence Force are very supportive, ‘There is still work to be done in order to address some of those concerns and anxieties and worries that LGBT people face on a daily basis.’”
Hardly convincing justification for the earth-shattering changes being sought, and to services which, after all, homosexuals volunteer, to enter. As for that “5-7%” figure, which went entirely unchallenged or even questioned, and with no source whatsoever for it supplied by Pearce, it can be safely assumed to be no more than a further example of such activists quoting bogus figures simply for political expediency.
On 6th December there was also a report on www.3news.co.nz that “The peer support networking group to support LGBT personnel has been approved by the Defence Force Chief”, although he was not named. (but see below) Also this astonishing bit of information :-
“The network will allow meetings during work time, resources to publish newsletters, maintain a resourse page on the internal NZDF intranet, and conduct meetings using video telephone conferencing equipment.” Also this disconcerting news : “The decision also includes the establishing of networking groups for other minority groups within the NZDF”. (emphasis added)
All this for the supposed “wellbeing” of homosexuals, bisexuals, transgender people and transsexuals who, after all, choose to enlist. It is certainly not beyond the realms of possibility that paedophile activists will in time be included also. After all powerful groups already lobby for them overseas, such as the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), and NZ has already had an Aotearoa Man Boy Love Association (AMBLA – currently defunct).
Little specific information
The reporting of this quite extraordinary turn of events is curiously short on information about key players in it. For example, it is difficult to locate any information about Flt.Lt. Pearce and his place as a homosexual commissioned officer in the RNZAF. Nor was there any naming of the Defence Force Chief who, since earlier in 2011, has been Major General Rhys Jones of the NZ Army. This post of Defence Chief was previously held by NZ’s new Governor General, Sir Jerry Mataparae.
However a year ago, on 7th December 2010, the N.Z.Herald did announce that coming changeover in posts, with the news that Major General Jones, the new Defence Chief, “Will face the task of cutting $400M a year from defence spending”. That would seem a faint hope with this shock announcement.
Further from that flagrantly one-sided Radio NZ report of 6th December 2011 was a quote from the former Chief of NZ Army, Lou Gardiner. The impression conveyed was that he was utterly relaxed about such an earth-shattering event. In his 37 years’ service he saw “a considerable amount of tolerance, and that’s what it’s about.” Oh yes? If only it was so simple, so harmless and so uncomplicated.
The duplicity surrounding this most daring escapade I find quite staggering, but nevertheless simply typical of such activism. So NZ is “one of very few countries around the world to do so”? No report that I have seen of this matter names even one! Then we are told that “NZ leads the way”, which is probably more accurate, yet even then, only through sheer deception. As for public debate, there just isn’t any. It has been shut down, muzzled, made an impossibility, until the Christmas “silly season” is over and the January 2012 launch of the initiative is complete.
Interestingly enough, nor is there very much general NZ news media coverage about overseas homosexual political activism, especially for example of that in the U.S.A., which lags very much behind the huge advances made by the NZ homosexual lobby, but which, unlike in NZ, is widely debated. Such lack of NZ coverage seems a deliberate move so as not to disadvantage NZ activists as they push for ever greater political advances, even as they pretend to be so far behind the rest of the world. While in NZ we do read/hear of U.S.A. activism regarding marriage, etc. it is generally quite selective. For example, it is rare here, in a land which has allowed homosexuals in the military since 1993, to have reports about the push to allow open homosexuals in the U.S.A. services.
Over there it is still a thorny issue, and fiercely opposed by concerned conservative organizations. So much for N.Z. being forced to remove such a ban in 1993 because of its amended Human Rights Act. Now we are confronted with a further, quite revolutionary demand for “rights” in the military; a lesson the U.S.A. might care to take from this sorry state of affairs. Yet we might also learn some lessons from their public debates on the matter of homosexual activism in general.
Two conservative organizations so involved are the Culture and Media Institute (Robert Knight) and Americans for Truth about Homosexuality (Elaine Donnelly) at the following websites:-
Over a year ago Elaine Donnelly, described on the above second-mentioned website (23rd November 2010) as “the leading proponent of maintaining the military common-sense ban on homosexuality”, was warning against “debilitating politically correct agendas in the armed forces.” Among others she then covered the following :-
- The unforeseen harm to good order and discipline that would result from allowing open homosexuals in the military,
- How pro-homosexual diversity sessions and policies would be foisted on the conservative military culture to enforce sexual orientation non-discrimination.
- How religious service members and chaplains who opposed homosexuality as a matter of faith and conscience could be targeted for disciplinary action in a homosexual-affirming military, especially if their opposition were to become public. Etc.
There are surely lessons there for us in NZ as we are confronted with this latest daring episode of homosexual political activism. The above references to Robert Knight include his 2008 report on the gruelling experience, including insults, of Elaine Donnelly at Congress, when testifying before a House sub-committee in support of the military’s ban on homosexuals.
Another U.S.A. media outlet frankly confronting such issues is NewsWithVision.com. On 28th May 2010 journalist Cliff Kincaid wrote the following under the grim heading “Saving Soldiers from Gay Death” :-
“There is a simple reason why the gay rights lobby is trying to rush through repeal of the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy. They know that a comprehensive review of a proposed change would disclose the substantial evidence that admission of open and active homosexuals would put our troops in further danger through exposure to tainted blood. In fact, evidence to this effect is already in the hands of top military commanders and Pentagon officers……
“The gay rights lobby is labelling as ‘offensive’ a new video that exposes homosexual. misconduct in the Armed Forces, and wants it taken down from YouTube. Their desperation is being guided by the realization that male homosexual conduct is directly linked to tainted blood and deadly diseases such as HIV/AIDS, and that no cure or vaccine has yet been found.” Etc.
A year later, on 21st May 2011, and also on NewsWithViews.com, attorney Rees Lloyd commented on a recent homosexual lobby success under the Obama Administration, entitled “New Navy Homosexual Love Boat to be named for Cesar Chavez?”, deeming this an insult and not a tribute as had been claimed :-
“The New U.S. Navy is being ‘transformed’ by Obama through the new politically correct post-Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell policy embracing open homosexuality on what were formerly warships, even to the point of the New Navy having announced that Navy chaplains would perform pseudo marriage ceremonies for homosexuals in Navy chapels – quickly ‘suspended’ (not withdrawn) – following a national outcry.”etc.
Another worrying and highly revealing matter has been the well-publicised case of the treasonous U.S.A. homosexual serviceman Bradley Manning of the WikiLeaks saga. A year ago (7th December 2010) on RightlyConcerned, a website project of the American Family Association (www.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost) came comment from one Bryan Fischer, headed “Julian Assange not the bad guy here – the homosexual soldier is”. In part it read :-
“The out-of-the-mainstream media has collaboratively kept the focus on the sex criminal Julian Assange, and off the guy who has committed actual treason, the homosexual soldier Bradley Manning…(He) sold out his country in what may turn out to be a fit of gay pique….he is a one man argument for keeping open homosexuals from serving in the military in the first place.”
Inevitably there will be the usual trite and deceitful “gay bashing” homosexual lobby response to what is discussed here. Yet such concerns focus only on the activities of political homosexuals and the undermining of culture which such activism inevitably brings, and not on homosexuals per se, so such criticism is far from being valid or fair. There again, for such activists as these, confusion and manipulation of public opinion are all-important parts of their battle strategy, along with the presenting of a benign and kindly front.
It is only by closely scrutinising their underlying, laboriously-concealed ideology – atheistic, leftist, anti-authority and all traditional values – as well as their true long-term goals, that one is able to see through their elaborate pretences and subterfuge, and recognise their true colours. Such is the Pandora’s Box, the can of worms, with which the NZ Defence Force is being saddled : beguiled by the sophistry of the likes of homosexual political activist Flt.Lt. Stuart Pearce – who holds a Queen’s commission, no less – and his fellow travellers.
The result is confidence trickery of the highest order, which even top Defence personnel seem incapable of grasping; that the true, long-term goal of such activism will be to destabilize the legitimate authority of all traditional institutions of Western society, in this particular case of NZ’s Defence Forces.
As an ex-servicewoman (WAAF) ny personal reaction to this issue was summarised in a comment I posted on the www.3news.co.nz website on 8th December :-
“An appallingly retrograde step, riddled with deception. It has the potential to be deeply divisive and to undermine morale and military discipline. The leftist ideological belief system underlying homosexual political activism is the very antithesis of the Godly belief system which presently honours God, the Queen and the country.”
So although the “silly season” may be upon us, I trust that there may still surface some vestige of public discussion, if not even debate, about this vital issue, before it is too late to do so. With that faint hope I wish those reading this a merry Christmas.
Barbara Faithfull B.A. (Psych.Anthr,)
13th December 2011
OWS has one target of many… Those Evil Bankers.
Here is my take by point…
- Today’s bankers WILL NOT loan you money unless you have either the money or highly discounted collateral available to them to pay them back.
- Bankers loaned a lot of money to banana republics because the loans were guaranteed by the U.S. Government.
- They periodically try to make nice with consumers through various promotions. I’ve not been able to understand their motivation as yet.
- They’ve gone fee crazy because the Fed had driven interest rates through the floor not allowing anyone any benefit for loaning money to previous expectations.
- They pay squat interest rates and may even start charging you for “holding” your money for you. (Negative interest)
- In steps the strong-arming U.S. Government forcing them, against better judgement, to make risky loans to those unable to pay them back or those who would not normally qualify.
- The Federal Government then bails them out and slaps many of their hands big time.
- The banks try to build up their reserves to more conservative levels.
- The Justice Department goes after banks because Barney Frank is again yelling we are not getting people into houses.
How stupid and corrupt can a system be? We haven’t even started on the relative merits of the Federal Reserve System, which can print money and give first users of that money the full un-inflated value of that money. Driving interest rates so low HAS NOT been to spur growth in various sectors. Most companies factor interest rates into their cost of business. Certainly, the lower the better, but the real reason, in my mind was simply a hedge against Federal debt service, nothing more. Want to bring the whole thing down? Try to raise interest rates to the “keep pace with inflation” level of old and see what happens. With CD rates in the 2-3% range, I reckon holders are losing at least 10-15% capital value per year just through inflation and devaluation of the currency. Mind you, the stimulus money still has not fully impacted our economy as yet except for the obligatory union and crony payoffs, public jobs, etc built into the scheme. When it does, Weimar Republic here we come!
What’s missing from this banking fiasco that the morons of OWS will never understand?
Bankers with a backbone and good business sense.
For the most part, the head guys are nothing but overpaid caretakers of wealth that someone else created. This is very similar to GE, GM, etc. Did I hear crony capitalism? Yes, indeed that is the case for banking, as well. Mr. Geithner should have NEVER been approved for his position. Greenspan and Bernanke have become bumbling fools in my eyes, as I did deeper into their folly. Many have written about how the monetary and financial systems have so deliberately become intertwined, that it has become a house of cards to the detriment of us all.
Never in my life have I ever seen so much money in the hands of such incompetency. George Soros is loving it!
P.S. Anyone with experience or knowledge of the fiat currency system, please let me know.
Several of you on the list are avid Ron Paul fans. You’ve heard the expression “unelectable”… probably most viciously applied to Sarah Palin, but Ron Paul IS NOT electable and if you can bear with me for a moment, I will lay out my case.
I start with a caveat that after several political compass tests, I always come up as a “conservative libertarian”. Ron Paul is a libertarian, NOT a Republican OR a conservative. I like Ron Paul as well as John Stossel, Ed Crane, and Milton Friedman… all subscribing to libertarianism.
What is so damned attractive about the libertarian position? To me, it is its impeccable logic. If you ever listened to Milton Friedman about legalizing drugs, you’d soon say, “Where’s the petition I can sign?”
At this moment, we have an administration that is totally out of control and inept to boot. Out of chaos, libertarianism sounds pretty good, as it cuts to the quick of every stupid thing the government is currently shoving down our throats with increased momentum. If you scroll down to the end, I’ve pasted in an interesting description of libertarianism… Something just short of a conservative anarchist… a different flavor of chaos.
What really got my goat in the last couple of weeks was a flyer from the CATO Institute and a blog by John Stossel. Both of them were “impeccably” describing that nothing was wrong with same-sex marriage.
I have found libertarianism to be very amoral. The philosophy can simply be stated that if you don’t affect my life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, you are free to do nearly anything you want. The immediate tired saw of the left comes out on same-sex marriage, “How does same-sex marriage affect my marriage?” Logically, this is difficult to respond to, but an overlay of Judeo-Christian morality soon sets the matter straight, at least to the Judeo-Christian. Libertarianism is a logical construct for society. Alternatively, if you overlay the chaos and fallen nature of man upon this construct, it falls apart.
I have jokingly stated that libertarianism could survive IF those subscribing to it were living at least one mile from each other, a la Alaska. Consider what happens when that one mile is stretched to 6,000 or 10,000 miles, as would be the case of foreign relations with China or Russia or even the U.K. Over and over again, libertarians have exhibited absolute naïveté and a marked inability to understand and deal with other sovereign nations. In a pure sense, if we don’t bother them, they will not bother us, but we will advocate open borders, free trade, etc., etc. Total poppycock! Mind you, I detest this default world policeman role in which we seem to constantly find ourselves ensnared. Nonetheless, there are rogue states, and I must concede some level of protecting our interests here and abroad…BUT with support of a coalition NOT generated via the U.N.
During the debates, Ron Paul has embarrassed himself when issues beyond our borders arise. While I mostly agree with his domestic policies, the hole in his foreign policy is too big to patch.
Libertarian or Anarchist?
Libertarians are often accused of being anarchists or asked what the difference is between a libertarian and an anarchist. The popular image of anarchy is unrestrained violence and looting. Libertarians take a stronger stand against violence and looting than any other political group including republicans and democrats. The early history of the United States with its severely limited government was strongly libertarian and completely different from this image of anarchy.
The misunderstanding on this issue comes from the ideal state of peace and productivity with no government interference imagined by many libertarians who forget that we are the only ones who can imagine it. In a libertarian society the evolution of voluntary institutions providing the few remaining government services might lead to the gradual elimination of government but this scenario is completely beyond the imagination of the general public and it harms our cause to confront them with such a startling vision.
Here is a menu of answers to the question:
What’s the difference between libertarians and anarchists?
The traditional answer
Libertarians want severely limited government and anarchists want none.
The humanist answer
Libertarians are nonviolent; some anarchists are violent.
The funny answer
Libertarians are to anarchists as nudists are to naked people.They’re just middle class & organized so they appear less crazy.
The Party answer (from Andre Marrou)
An anarchist is an extreme libertarian, like a socialist is an extreme democrat, and a fascist is an extreme republican.
The graphic answer
It’s like the difference between a lover and a rapist.They’re both in the same place but one uses violence to get there.
The straight answer
Libertarians believe in free markets, private property, and capitalism. Anarchists who believe in these things usually call themselves libertarians.
You will note that the number of “Pet Peeves” is growing exponentially. Don’t ask me for a history.. I am not that well organized!
Anyway, to my point…
I am listening the talk radio and I hear this ad from Chase that they will give small businesses a special deal is they take out a loan to hire people. Think about that for a minute. Has Chase gone mad or are they again having their arms twisted by the likes of Frank and/or Dodd and ultimately Barack Obama, none of whom have the slightest idea of how a business is run? Obama complains about small businesses not hiring, when the policies he and his lieutenants have put in place have not yet been quantified by the business community as to how these policies will adversely affect business (It is a foregone conclusion they will not aid business.).
Obama said one time he was frustrated that small businesses are not hiring, so this plan seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to this statement. Moreover, this class warfare that the current administration is engaging in is further damaging small business investment and/or hiring, since many of the business owners fall into that dangerous >$250,000 “GROSS” income zone.
The left’s solution? Figure out a way to confiscate the cash from persons and businesses, because the current administration knows better what to do with it AFTER further support of entitlement programs and union payoffs have taken their piece of the action.
Am I frustrated? You betcha!!
There is a little hot dog stand near my office that I don’t visit too often because the Polish Dogs are soooo good, but they are so unhealthy. The other day when I stopped by, something triggered a discussion about the current millieux we find ourselves in. I started by using an illustration that a friend told me one time of a five gallon carboy filled with water. One can slowly drop red dye in the carboy, drop-by-drop, and it seems like forever, the water will develop a pink tinge. This is what we are faced with under Fabian Socialism, i.e. the incremental introduction over time of increased socialism leading to oppressive communism, i.e. socialism with a gun. The owner of the hot-dog stand was really listening, but there was a foul-mouth airhead sitting there that always seems to be there, and he asked me what I’d been smoking.
I’ve seen this going on for some time with the increasing number of edicts from Washington putting more and more restrictions on our freedoms and liberties via unread and unpopular legislation and executive orders by the poseur in the White House. Recall the left’s exaggerated reaction to the Patriot Act under Bush. Why are they so quiet now?
The last couple of weeks, I’ve become addicted to watching Glenn Beck’s program and his focus on history. I really believe the man has found a vital programming niche and it is reflected in his rising ratings. He spends a lot of time going over history and connecting the dots of current events. Anyone who has been keeping up on things would find little or no flaws in his analysis. This has been driving the left nuts.
This week, Glenn reminded us of the stated communist goals that were documented in 1963 below. Please read them and then think about what is currently happening. You should be able to find a tangible example for each. I would remind you, again, that this IS NOT one force by the Communist Party USA, but it is multiple forces dispersed through our society as special interest groups: George Soros, PACS, teachers’ unions, MoveOn.org, Media Matters, Code Pink, NOW, Planned Parenthood, SEIU, etc., etc. Overwhelming, isn’t it? How many people do I meet on a day-to-day basis that are mindless drones for these forces.
As Beck says, using his hands as a megaphone, “Wake Up America!!”
Communist Goals (1963)
Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35
January 10, 1963
Current Communist Goals
EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 10, 1963
Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.
At Mrs. Nordman’s request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following “Current Communist Goals,” which she identifies as an excerpt from “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen:
[From “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen]
CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.
Obama sees Obamacare in sight and he is already campaigning for more financial reform.
One must ask why the right attempts to reduce regulation, and the left attempts to increase regulation. To me, it is clear.
The right knows that freedom and liberty depend on the free flow of ideas and a reasonable amount of risk taking. The left is risk averse and therefore is, to paraphrase Churchill, good at redistributing misery with other people’s money. Their solution is layer after layer of suffocating rules and regulations.
If you analyze all the great financial fiascoes, there were rules in place, but they were either not enforced or a “legal” bypass was devised. It has become too difficult with conflicting regulations and arcane interpretations to clearly lay blame. So, in one respect, this has become a big game fed by the bureaucrats, the legal system, and the crooks.
This is, more and more, leaving the average citizen with invisible handcuffs on. Recall the stifling number of agency approvals needed to open a business in San Fransicko.
I think this problem is sinking in because it has been years since I’ve heard the refrain, “There oughta be a law!”
Some time ago, I’d complained that the government reaction to lower usage of mass transit or parking was to raise fares or fees. Business is a bit quirky in this regard, as well. Recall the flood of paperwork earlier this year surrounding fees, etc. for credit cards. Some held their position… very few did that. Citi raised one of my credit cards from 13.9% to 21.9% for no reason other than to get by coming legislation that would limit such usury. I complained and they gave me 50 bucks. Hmmm. Needless to say, I am looking for a new credit card company that doesn’t yank my chain every other month with new rules or reduced benefits.
The latest debacle is with Anthem Blue Cross. As we watch this health care fiasco, one has to wonder what Anthem Blue Cross was thinking when they announced a nearly 40% increase in rates at such a sensitive juncture. If I were the chairman of that company, I would have fired the CEO for such a blunder. One can only think conspiracy theory and that we are all being set up. I.E. Obama and his lackeys have been chastising Insurance Companies when they take time off chastising Wall Street. Suppose there was government/insurance company collusion on this issue to help the passage momentum Stretch Pelosi is trying to muster in the house. We’d all heard that certain mandates would be a short-term windfall to insurance companies until the illusive government option puts them out of business long after the current Blue Cross CEO is out of the picture. Be watchful.
Michael Savage stated, "Liberalism is a mental disorder". I have since substituted "Leftism" for "Liberalism" since the leftists keep moving the label target.
But I digress… At issue here is to accurately portray in as few words as possible the mental problems of the loony utopian left. I do this with a quite contemporary role playing skit:
Mr. Leftist: "We must pass this healthcare bill at all costs! Think of the children! I know this woman who is using her dead sister’s teeth."
Mr. Conservative: "We have no way to pay for it and it will, as written, cause prices to rise and service levels to fall."
Mr. Leftist: "Why are you against healthcare reform, you selfish and cruel un-nuanced moron?"
Overlay this template on ANY leftist/conservative discussion and you will find the true illogic of the left. If this three-liner is too obtuse, let me know, but I am attempting to portray the parallel universe in which these utopians live.
The constant accusation from the left that conservatives are morons, anti-intellectual, and anti-science is a bit tiresome.
The reality is they should look in the mirror and they would find this is simply a reflection of their own short-comings. This is often the case when one entity criticizes another. I chalk it up to a defence mechanism for the very insecure circumstances the entity may be in at the moment.
For the record, conservatives ARE NOT anti-intellectual, but I do believe they are against intellectualism. With apologies to Webster’s fine volume of words, I use this last term as a catchall religion (“ism”) for discussion.
My new definition(s) for “intellectualism” is…
1. Imposing untested theories on humanity in order to: gain power, achieve some ideological goal, or do what an elite group believes is good for humanity at the moment.
2. Using the word “nuance” to imply that solutions to humanity’s problems are too complex for the average person to deal with and must be assigned to a ruling elite to solve.
3. Using “intellectual” arguments to demean segments of our civilization to be able to lord over them.
4. Undermining our intellectual standards to be more inclusive of those that may agree with or support the ruling elite.
…can you add to the list? This IS NOT a slam against intellectuals, but a slam against elites and statists that think they are intellectuals.
A necessary caveat must be inserted. As our detractors on the left continue their various character assassinations to divert attention away from their hollow ideas, conservatives also follow blindly behind right-wing concepts that are generally established as polar opposites of a related concept on the left. Don’t follow such ideas blindly but use your mind to discern the underlying merit or truth. Don’t shoot the messenger, but to wake you from your slumber, you must remember that even Hitler did some good things.