Why are we bailing out the banks? part three – Lies and Opposition

At the end of part two I suggested that the mainstream justification for bailing out the banks, namely that by so doing we have provided them with the money they need in order to lead the rest of us to recovery by investing in the real economy – was what Goebbels and his boss would call The Big Lie. The banks have demonstrably and unequivocally NOT used the money they have taken from the public purse to invest in the real economy. Nor are they going to.

Why not? The reasons often offered for not lending are that there is no demand or that by not offering loans to businesses that look unsure in unsure times, they are just being prudent. And surely we want them to be prudent? These are excuses.  The reason they are not going to lend and lead a recovery is because that is not what banking is about. Helping recoveries is what governments might chose to try and do but it is not what banking is about. Banking is about making maximum profit for those who own the banks (shareholders), those to whom the banks owe money (The Bond holders) and increasingly the senior staff whose bonuses depend not on how much the bank has helped anybody, but on how much money the bank has made. And the fact of our present predicament is that the banks can make much more money, much more rapidly by playing, even deepening, this recession than they can by trying to help us out of it.

This is an unpalatable truth, so it is important that there are lies to distract from us from realizing it. Thus we have been subjected to a multi trillion dollar lie that has been repeated on every news programme and in every financial column of every newspaper for the last four years.

Goebbels and A.H. said that if you repeat a big enough lie often enough people will come to believe it. What this maxim leaves out is ‘how’ people come to believe something they once knew, or at least suspected, was a lie? Why does a big lie work better than a small one? I think the mechanism is not forgetting or the over-writing of truth with lies, but relies on escalating mental dissonance. A small lie leaves the rest of reality untouched. The unmasking of a small lie does not require any great re-adjustment of the rest of your beliefs or your grasp of reality. A big lie, a very big lie, however, ties in to itself so much of the rest of your judgment of what is real and reliable that to question it becomes a painful mental act. It requires you pull the rug out from beneath yourself. It requires you undermine the very ground upon which you stand. That ground which you used to feel, still need to feel, is solid and firm.

To tackle a big lie can feel as if you are weakening yourself more than those you oppose. You feel the branch you are sitting on starting to weaken. Which makes it all the harder to defend what you are doing and saying against those who cast doubt not just upon what you say but upon your motives and even your sanity.

For many people the feeling of self-inflicted unease becomes too great. And the bigger the lie the greater this effect. To oppose a really big lie, particularly one vocally supported by a network of mutually re-enforcing powerful people and institutions who all claim they have your best interests at heart, is hard because of the sheer scale of what your opposition entails.  To oppose the well constructed, well supported, really big lie you are faced with having to question far more than you want to. Questioning is hard to do. It sets one apart. No one likes to be set apart.We are by instinct social animals. If we must set ourselves apart we at least want to feel confident of where we stand. The really big lie ups the ante. It forces us to feel the widening circles of disruption of our own beliefs. 

One can oppose the small lie from the solid ground of the rest of your beliefs. The big lie’s strength and defense is that it forces you to question all the ground you thought was solid; the ground you thought you could stand upon to make your stand. To question the big lie is to feel that you are casting yourself out. It is not a great feeling.

Which brings me to a point I have wanted to make for a while. Why do I write this blog? Why do you come here and expose your own thoughts? Why do we do it? My answer is to ask why do families tell each other the stories of their life together? Why do people recount the events they all already know? Why? Because the act of telling and listening to what is familiar and shared is how we bind ourselves together and how we create for each other new ground upon which to stand firm. I suggest we come here to tell each other the stories which bind us together and transform us from outcasts to builders and occupiers of a new society. In doing that we make for ourselves the things which our rulers fear most, which they wish most fervently we did not have – Clarity, Truth and from them Power.

Sorry to break here. I had not intended writing the above. I had intended a more focused substantive piece, setting out, as I promised at the end of part two, some last reasons why I think we are bailing out the banks, The above thoughts arrived and expanded of their own accord and displaced what I was going to write. I now have to leave for work. I will deliver the last part on Wednesday.

78 thoughts on “Why are we bailing out the banks? part three – Lies and Opposition”

  1. Fantastic explanation of why Andrew Marvell said ‘If you are going to lie, make it a big one.’

    And after having suspended disbelief, for all the reasons that you describe, there is an investment in discounting any contradictory evidence because it would undermine a ‘sense of self’ as being competent to assess and predict accurately… cognitive dissonance.

    The PR people of the plutonomists/neofeudalists, whatever you want to call them, know their job well. Looking forward to the article you intended to write but glad that you wrote this one too.

  2. Thanks for a succinct and lucid explanation of “The Official Narrative”, because it applies to so much more than the subject of this series. In no particular order, and to pick just a few of the more egregious examples from recent history, think:

    * 9/11
    * 7/7
    * The entire “war on terror”
    * The Afghan imbroglio
    * The Iraq war
    * The overthrow of Gaddafi
    * Western hostility to Iran and Syria.

    We live in a manufactured reality where the “Official Narrative” has just one function, viz: To provide a more-or-less plausible explanation for actions dictated by the hidden agendas of power elites so that the agendas remain hidden and control can continue to be exercised and accepted – or at leased aquiesced to – by the general (more-or-less ignorant and duly cognitively dissonanced) population.

    As that venerable Irish Muck-Raker Claude Cockburn so memorably and accurately advised “Never believe anything until it has been officially denied”.

    1. “* The overthrow of Gaddafi
      * Western hostility to Iran and Syria.”

      Did you know there is a real “green” resistance in Libya that is being covered up?
      http://www.sott.net/article/252382-Benghazi-Attack-Libyas-Green-Resistance-Did-It-And-NATO-Powers-Are-Covering-Up

      Did you know that Syria found Gas undersea, on the Lebanese border near Tarsus?, A find that could be bigger than the fields around Qatar? and that the onset of the “rebellion” coincides with the signing in August 2011 of a 10$ billion dollar agreement to make a Shiite pipeline Iran_Iraq_Syria? (Which is why the Sunni’s are pumping money and arms into Syria.) Which fits in with the “new” EU sanctions that specifically target Iran’s “natural gas”?

      The truth is the part that is hidden.

      In answer to David’s question “why do we come here”? One word – Honesty. See things as they are – for which I am truly grateful.

      1. Feminism- if you mean the mess its become I agree, but its complicated because gender inequality suits the status quo . Feminism has been used to divide us even more. Same with DV it happens, to men as well as women, the slogan should be ‘people shouldn’t hit people’. Men and women need to unite against domestic violence. We are being encouraged to quarrel about it.

        But it is true that the powerful lie to us on a massive scale on every issue. The human race can only liberate itself when it begins to see through the lies.

  3. Great piece of insight into human psychology. It might be going off on a tangent to what you intended, but I actually found this really useful. it explains the stress I feel, the frustration, the disbelief, and the overwhelming desire to get things off my chest. There are so many lies being told, probably to support the really big lie, that it makes it hard to challenge the powerful people who tell the lies. And I so want to scream at the people who believe it all (with a passion) and shout how gullible and even stupid that they are, but I usually manage to calm myself.

    We may be dismayed about the financial crises, but the damage to democracy is more worrying. We have so little choice, and we can’t trust our media. That’s probably why we turn to the internet, to find the truth, and to tell the truth.

  4. I used to read the papers to get information now all i find are ‘acceptable’ narratives/opinions on ‘acceptable’ subjects, and i don’t think they’ve changed.
    Well said Golem.

    1. Thank you for your insights, Jesse. Your blog has been a lighthouse and a comfort. You are my Macro Guru.

      Golem: Excellent essay. Thank you too. Having experienced the red pill moment, and the related personal fallout, I’m glad someone so articulate was able to capture the modern plight of the inquisitive.

  5. PFI contracts, Rail Franchises, Bank bailouts under the guise of QE or any other dubious lexicon they can dream up. Money from nothing in conjunction with no money for anything. Corporate welfare assured from the public purse and the public’s pocket, the adoption of government policies first used in the Irish potato famine to teach the victims a lesson. Twelve thousand dysfunctional pleb families were the cause of the English riots and let’s celebrate the centenary of the start of a war which allowed the 1% of the time the unrestricted right to slaughter millions of plebs while the tills of industry kept tringing. The obnoxious selective propaganda of the MSM distilled by cheap news and even cheaper views, distorting truth and facts behind a cloak of toxic smoke and distorting mirrors. Institutions corrupted by their own incompetence and Public Inquiries by the shed load while their findings are shuffled off to the long grass of justice forensically analysed to the point of overkill then the results pointedly obscured.
    Rule Britannia – it certainly rules its slaves.

    But isn’t it paradoxical that this new egg of financialism could kill the goose of capitalism that laid it?

  6. The Big Lie – a simplistic mantra fortified by what is not highlighted & hardly mentioned. The Libor scandal for instance seems to me to have been brushed under the carpet & I imagine that if most people were asked they wouldn’t know much about it, except maybe it’s something to do with banks & the Diamond geezer got fired. I think I am right in saying that TPTB hope this story will simply fade away.

    As I avoid the MSM like the plague I am only assuming that not much mention has been made of the fact that this tweaking of the rate by the bankers has meant that certain loans have been made more expensive for what I would imagine to be, a substantial group of people. I found this link on Zerohedge that tells of a group of people who are putting lawsuits together in order to sue US banks on overcharging for adjustable rate mortgages issued since 2005.

    Just a thought but would it be worth us trying to publicise this development ? on social media or whatever, in the hope of opening a can of worms & increasing the spotlight on the bankers ? I have no idea but isn’t there likely to be a large number of people who have fallen victim to this scam in the UK, Ireland & elsewhere ? after all the disinterested might well become more open to the truth if they find they have been directly ripped off. Mobilise ambulance chasing type lawyers, set up a face book page ?

    I realise this could be one of my more stupid ideas but who knows what could light a fire under peoples behinds ? If it is a load of bollocks go easy on me.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-15/us-homeowners-launch-class-action-suit-against-libor-manipulating-banks

    PS – RBS are one of the banks listed.

    1. @StevieFinn good post, I think you’re onto something. I’d like to see a non-partisan legal action against the so called officials and the banks. Against BOE, the Fed and chancellors, pms and presidents.

      All were responsible to ensure propriety and all “failed” to give the public the protection they deserved. It’s a scam, pure and simple. A scam.

      At the moment I’m reading Jon Ronsons book “The Psychopath Test”. Very interesting. Another excellent piece David.

      1. Thanks James

        I have done a little research – it seems as though there are over 250 banks who have membership of the British Banking association these I assume all use the Libor rate :

        http://www.bba.org.uk/about-us/member-list

        Bank of Ireland, AIB & Santander to name 3 non British ones.

        Seems as though it’s not only mortgages but also car loans :

        http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/07/09/the-800-trillion-scandal-how-banks-libor-lies-affected-you/#

        & here is the affect that the Libor rate had on the adjustable rate mortgages ( larger effect on sub-prime ) in one American state, Ohio.

        “How important are these different interest-rate paths for mortgage-holders? For a typical subprime borrower, the divergence of the two rate paths quickly translates into a monthly payment difference of about $100 for every $100,000 of remaining principal (see figure 5). For prime borrowers, the resulting difference is less dramatic, but still meaningful, rising to roughly $50 by the end of 2009. In the aggregate, these differences would cost Ohio’s Libor-based ARM-holders roughly an additional $34 million in 2009 alone, should current interest-rate trends continue, with about 55 percent of this burden being shouldered by subprime borrowers.”

        http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/commentary/2009/012109.cfm

        & finally from the Slog, courtesy of Phil, RBS are suddenly in an almighty rush to put the boot in, surely some of their potential victims have been overcharged.

        http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/exclusive-desperate-rbs-lobbying-for-tougher-repossession-laws/

    2. @StevieFinn – “Just a thought but would it be worth us trying to publicise this development ? on social media or whatever, in the hope of opening a can of worms & increasing the spotlight on the bankers ?”

      The problem in the Mess Media is the existence of an effective “censorship by subject”. ie, Many “Forums” don’t allow off topic comments, and if they don’t suggest the topic first it is never discussed.

      Even if the topic is on subject – there can be censorship. Recent examples; from the “Guardian”.
      Topic – cancer sufferer. My suggestion “Tumeric, (Curcumin-English ?) used traditionally against tumors”. Pulled, I presume because it wasn’t pro-big Pharma and expensive medecines.
      Topic Monsanto – comment re the “600% increase in rat deaths in tests as long as the test was over 2 years. + references.” (M only did tests for 9 months) Pulled.
      Topic – Almost any reference to Settlers causing Palestinian suffering, if the subject is not distinctly approved first.
      Topic – Any mention of the CIA or US special forces is “flipped” while I am writing the words, causing the loss of the comment. ( that may be only my computer !)

      Then there is still their next line of defense – organised trolls.
      At that, the Guardian “comment is free” is not bad as a forum site.

      Another method of censorship ; The elimination of PressTV Iranian ( and others of their programmes) from the EutelSat by the “EU” commission. This cuts out alternative news sources etc. We can expect to see more of this as control over media is gradually extended.

      OK, So the idea of going more public with Libor is dependent on THEIR agreeing to it. I don’t know much about Facebook and Twitter etc. Possibly they might be a better way?

      1. shaun s

        Thanks for your comments & I think you are right in what you are saying. Maybe if the idea is at all feasible it would have to be started at a grass roots level. I could put a small ad in a local paper asking people if they have had a certain type of mortgage over a certain period & if so they might be owed money, giving a phone number to contact. I have a friend locally who has been crippled by a variable rate mortgage over the last few years with Santander & is now under threat of repossession. I am sure there are many more like him.

        We are spread far & wide & if anyone was willing to give it a try, we could create dots that would eventually, hopefully join. Initially I imagine it would be pretty labour intensive until maybe lawyers took over, assuming there are enough plaintiffs to make it worth their while & cast iron information would be needed before placing the ad & perhaps organising a meeting in a village hall.

        I just think the fact that if people think they will profit from this it might be a good way to mobilise them. There are I would imagine all sorts good housekeeping / finance advise type blogs & websites where a link to a FB page, website, or a twitter account could be posted, & I know that in a place like where I live, word of mouth could play a big part once some sort of momentum started. The FB page or whatever could act as a source of information with a link to this site.

        I am aware that I am well out of my depth & if this idea is viable it needs someone with much more knowledge of these things to organise it, or to at least advise on it. I hope that my ravings are not taking anything away from David’s wonderful writing or distracting people away from perhaps a much better course of action.

        PS – I should have made it clear that the figures from the above Cleveland link show the difference between libor & US treasury rates & not the extra that would be paid due to rigging. I was just trying to get an idea of the extent of those types of mortgages within a certain population. If the figures above were divided by ten to account for rigging it would still be a substantial amount given that the population of Ohio is about 11.5 million as opposed to the UK at roughly 65 million. It was very late & I was nodding off.

        1. Interesting to start at really “ground” level.
          The following link is of the US situation, but I don’t know how many of those walking away would have been subject to Libor. In France there are some, my neighbours, but here there are also fixed rates and Bank sliding rates (also based on Libor?). I’m not even sure how to go about “attacking” Banks legally in France. (From what zero hedge says, lots of them are likely to just roll over and die anyway)
          http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-15/us-households-are-not-deleveraing-they-are-simply-defaulting-bulk

  7. We are lied to by our parents, teachers and the state in all its forms until we have our own children to lie to while hoping to find a pill/substance to calm that growing feeling oft referred to as anxiety/depression (of which there appears to be a growing tidal wave) as it gnaws at our souls.

    1. LogiclEmpiricist

      This about sums it up for most people, doesn’t it Jay? As someone who has at long last broken free of these terrible lies and rebuilt his life and his relationships on Truth, let me tell you that it is beautiful on the other side, like emerging from a dark cave into the broad daylight for the first time.

      David talks about the discomfort of opposing the Big Lie, but it’s not really that taboo to trash the banks these days. If you want real social ostracism, try the actual Big Lies, like the lie of religion, the lie of the state, or the lie of the family.

      These are the real lies, and not one in a thousand have the courage to face them. Sadly, or fortunately depending on your perspective, now that we have access to the internet there are no longer any excuses for living in vincible ignorance.

  8. David, I too have noticed how some cannot shake their “tribal allegiance”. One of my buddies simply could not say “yep, you’re right, Joe Paterno is a fraud”. As far as I can tell, he could not because he lives right there in the midst of all those (still wrong) Paterno fans. Can’t go against the group right? Another example, who cares if you were once a big Lance Armstrong fan and then can turn on a dime and say “yikes, what a fraud! Turns out he was not what I thought. I am glad I know now.”.

    Too many cannot simply take in information and respond accordingly.

    … thanks, I have enjoyed your series…..

    1. LogiclEmpiricist

      The ultimate “tribal allegiance” that most operate under is to the “state”, a group of armed thugs claiming authority over an arbitrary geographical area. Apply your logic to this, and you’ll see that it’s as absurd to favor one “state” over another in the same manner as that of rooting for a sports team based on where you happened to be born.

      1. backwardsevolution

        I think the armed thugs would like a one-world government with no geographical boundaries, a government run by the financial elite.

        It’s the people who want their sovereign countries back.

  9. Thank-you David for the great analysis of our present demise. And for the courage to invite others to find community here.

    I specialize in being an outcast, often for the wrong reasons. Thanks for helping me see the right reasons.

    @ Jay D. Indeed we are a confused, really very fragile species. Our very fragility the cause of so much that truth-seekers find abhorrent about our existence.

    I find some small comfort in the saying that we are not human beings having a spiritual experience but spiritual beings having a human experience. And from my own perspective not doing to well with it.

    We must love one another or be damned.

  10. Great conclusion there, and a switched-on reader comment discussion.

    The tradition of telling stories will be the battle field of our future. Whoever tells the best stories wins.

    Propaganda has many masters. But I hope the global community that by common sense and reason abstains from what is wrong, and perpetuates what is right, and that upholds the universal moral truths that remain true everywhere and at all time, will prevail eventually.

  11. backwardsevolution

    Charles Hugh Smith on Max Keiser’s program – Max asked Charles how we get people to realize they’ve got some power in the equation. Charles said:

    “I think it might go back somewhat to the nature of the hold that the status quo has on people, and the status quo has issued all kinds of promises, and people are wary of fighting the status quo for fear that they won’t get what was promised to them, their pensions, their Medicare, and so on. So it’s only when they realize that the promises are impossible to keep and that they’re not going to get what they were promised, only then will they be free psychologically to contest the status quo and to bring it down.”

    Max replied:

    “Yes, most of the world’s population is like a wolf that has its paw caught in a trap, and the sad fact is that the only way to get out is to chew that foot off. These people around the world have to realize that there is no help coming for them from the hunters. The hunters have all day and you’re stuck and you’re bleeding to death; either you chew your foot off or you lose your sovereignty.”

  12. Thanks, Golem, you are offering here something really positive.

    BTW, am I the only one who is feeling how more and more people come out to the truth, making it much more bearable to defend?

    Not so long ago one felt like a fringe when opening his mouth against the prevailing ‘system’. I could see in their faces that people found it really hard to question the “Big Lie”: it was easier to disregard “the anti-system guy”. And it felt quite bad.

    Today that tide seems to have changed. More and more people question the system. Then it becomes a bit easier. Let’s see what it brings.

    1. gatopeich,

      Agree it is finally getting easier to find people who realise we might just be being sold a massive con than it was a few year ago, and that creates opportunity to spread knowledge.

      I think we still need to use the mainstream media blogs to point out the truth – it’s where most people still get their information and where we can most quickly get alternative sites like this one linked in to the biggest number of people.

      We don’t need to suddenly find millions of readers overnight – Six Degrees of Separation always applies. This is always the first place I point people on the web once they’ve shown an interest in the con we’re subjected to, and there are other good sites which should all cross link with one another (this site does that a lot already)

      David, the quality, clarity and incisiveness of your writing remains a joy – can I please suggest this current series is added to Liars Lexicon since that seems to me the best place to bring together all the “must read” pieces you’ve put together for us over the years

  13. Hello David,

    love your blog and have been following it for several months now. I was blissfully, radiantly ignorant of market economics and you have been an education. Small point, bankers being paid bonuses based on how much money the bank has made? In Ireland? Bankers not being in the business of helping anybody, in the clique that is the financial community in Ireland?
    By the way, during the summer of 2008, before Lehman brothers collapse, I was told by several people involved in finance that at least two Irish banks were in big trouble. If they knew……………..?

  14. I too love your blog and thank you for your hard work.

    When the lie becomes big enough and the money generated is sufficient the PTB can simply declare it illegal even to investigate the facts. Problem solved.

  15. Golem: “In doing that we make for ourselves the things which our rulers fear most, which they wish most fervently we did not have – Clarity, Truth and from them Power.”

    Another thing I think they wish we don’t have… Our vote. If you can find someone you can stomach to vote for that is.

    1. I suspect the day is coming where that pesky ‘will of the people’ thing will be quietly retired. All we need is the right crisis and elections will be ‘postponed’ while matters are dealt with… and dealt with… and dealt with…

      Now who gets to be Emperor Palpatine?

      1. LogiclEmpiricist

        That ship sailed long ago, if it ever really existed in the first place.

        “The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”

        ― Frank Zappa

    2. I’ve got bad news, brother. They already took our vote, as confirmed by, ” If you can find someone you can stomach to vote for that is.” An American ballot is simply a menu offering different bites of the same shit sandwich.

  16. LogiclEmpiricist

    You keep using that word “We”. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    It’s a very powerful and dangerous word. Please stop misusing it. People with any moral integrity whatsoever completely reject any and all associations with the violent gang of thugs that claim to represent the “state” (philosophy tip: beware of meaningless and self-contradictory euphemisms) who perpetrated and continue to perpetrate these financial crimes. To insinuate by use of the word “We” that others are in any way complicit or responsible for the actions of these people is patently absurd and more importantly downright insulting.

    Understand that as someone who has been the beneficiary of the theft of the “state” his entire life, the lines have become blurred for David. He is incapable of critically examining the thugs of the “state”, so he focuses his energy on the thieves in the banks (who are, of course, not blameless in this, but they are not the ones brandishing the guns). What’s the old saying? “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it”?

    David makes films for the “state”, and he writes a blog about the banks. He cannot see the violence of the “state” because deep down he knows he depends on it, and at some level he understands the immorality of working in exchange for stolen money. Perhaps it is his guilty conscience that drives him to write this blog.

    David writes of Goebbels, and yet does not see the irony in the fact that he has spent his entire life producing films for the “state”. Don’t get me wrong, David is no Goebbels – I’m sure his films are perfectly informative and benign – but the hands of “his” “government” are no less bloody than those of Goebbels’, and David’s paycheck is stolen from the mouths of the masses, just as Goebbels’ was. Those who suck like a tick from the largess of the “state”, which is nothing but a protection racket with a good PR division, will not be able to let go of their delusions until they face some hard truths. For many, these truths are too hard and, consequently, they are never faced. The sad result is the classic definition of insanity: repeating the same actions over and over and expecting to get a different result.

    I used to read David’s words with anticipation and enthusiasm, but now I have only pity, for I have moved on into the paradigm of the primacy of the empirical, the logical and the moral, and in his current paradigm (which accepts a priori the necessity of violence to solve problems), David cannot follow me. Perhaps it is not too late, though, for the rest of you. The truth is out there, and with the marvelous invention of this digital Gutenberg called the Internet, one need only courage to seek it out. A good place to start would be familiarizing oneself with the Non-Aggression Principle.

    Now let the ad-hominems begin; Libertarian! Anarchist! Right-Winger! When logic cannot assail an idea, only emotional windbaggery is left. It’s all so predictable, but poking at people’s normalcy bias isn’t without it’s consequences. “A truth’s initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie was believed. When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker, a raving lunatic.”

    The Big Lie in this instance is not the idiotic propaganda regarding the reason for the bank bailouts, which nobody of any intelligence believes anyway. No, the Big Lie here is the third word in the title of David’s post: “We”.

    1. Well…..I’m just so glad to discover you are able to explain it all to us. Perhaps you could tell us more about yourself so that readers know where you are coming from.

      1. LogiclEmpiricist

        And right out of the gate we have sarcasm, a rude way to respond, and a request for personal information, presumably so that ad-hominem attacks can be marshaled in lieu of reason or evidence.

        Where I am coming from was contained in my post, and that is the universal application of the Non-Agression Principle. I do not use violence in my life to solve problems. I do not threaten women to get them to go on dates with me, I do not threaten my boss so that he will employ me, and I do not threaten my friends to get them to do what I want. This seems obvious to me, and it seems obvious to everyone around me as well; it is wrong to use force to get what you want. This is the essence of morality.

        Once you accept that this is universally true, the argument for and justification of the state absolutely falls apart. The state threatens you with guns in order to steal your labor (“taxes”) which they use to pay mercenaries (“soldiers”) to murder millions of people (“wars”) and indoctrinate children (“schools”). If you do not wish to fund these evil enterprises, a man in a costume (“police officer”) will come to your house and kidnap (“arrest”) you. If you do not want to be kidnapped, you will be murdered.

        This is the cold, hard reality that nobody wants to acknowledge, let alone discuss. The issues in the “banking system”, a construct of the state, cannot possibly be understood, let alone resolved, until the coercive nature of the state is as well.

        As for me, though I’m not sure why it’s relevant, I’m just a regular guy (I work in IT) from the midwestern “United States”. Like so many these days, I had the disadvantage of spending 12 years in government propaganda centers (“public schools”), but the fortune to be born during the beginnings of the age of the Internet, an unprecedented medium that allows those who seek it to find the truth on almost any topic, presuming they have the patience and the tenacity to keep going down the rabbit hole.

        I understand the difficulties involved in shedding the propaganda of the state and embracing the truth, though for me it was relatively easy. I voted for Barack Obama in 2008, believing his lies as I believed most of the lies of the state. Now I know better, and will no longer give my consent to a system that is built upon a foundation of debt and murder and evil.

        David’s blog was one (among many) of my first steps down the path to truth and Freedom, and it is primarily out of gratitude that I come back here to try to share the truths that he cannot bring himself to see.

        1. backwardsevolution

          LogicLEmpiricist – countries are not in charge, they’re not sovereign. They’re administrative districts of the global capital machine. We’re led to believe otherwise, urged to go and vote, but it makes no difference.

          No politician is going to make one iota of a difference. How is it that Obama and Romney are the chosen two? Is there anyone in America who actually likes them, likes what they’ve done, and yet they are the two that are advanced by the global capital machine. Financial puppets are brought into sovereign European countries, and the elected leaders are thrown out. Who is running who? Surely it is not the state.

          There is no “state”, if there ever was one. It’s all an illusion.

        2. With so much excellent content to start out questioning the Big Lie in Davids 3 part series and also the great links and further points directed by new contruibutors and regular participants in the discussions I do wonder why It is Logical Empiricists comments that have compelled me to feel the need to make a contribution, I had felt no contribution was required , having linked back to this series from the main stream blogs that I contribute to in an attempt to put alternative thoughts into the mix.

          Firstly I would seperate the apparent need in the comments made by EL to attack Davids motivations or clarity of thought, My own examination of these charges leaves them looking groundless and churlish, I only wonder to what end are they necessary for LE himself?

          On the points about State, Religion and other big lies, well ? To Be or not to Be, Aye theres the Rub.

          I read an essay yesterday examining the philisophical aspects of the first sentence of Hamlets sililoquy, I have been delving deeper and deeper into the Mind Body problem the past few months spurred on by a long discussion about elimitavism and reification and logical objects and such like. Why is that relevant? well its really about experience and recognising ourselves as individuals we are by definition right at the very centre of our own experiences and seeing and respecting other points of view requires a certain empathy.

          To gain trust we need to display empathy, zietgeist preachery is not in my view the best way to display empathy and it is the preaching of zealots from any viewpoint that I find turns most people off.

          Epictetus helps us out quite a lot on this one.

          28. If a person gave your body to any stranger he met on his way, you would certainly be angry. And do you feel no shame in handing over your own mind to be confused and mystified by anyone who happens to verbally attack you.

          One recommendatio for LE do watch Davids FIlm Dangerous Knowledge it is in my view a masterpiece, I saw it long before I read this blog and realised it was David who had made it.

          1. Thank you Roger.

            I was thinking of Hamlet’s famous soliloquy as I wrote the above. As always, Shakespeare thought is first and said it best. The rest of us trail after him.

    2. backwardsevolution

      LogicLEmpiricist – “Understand that as someone who has been the beneficiary of the theft of the “state” his entire life, the lines have become blurred for David. He is incapable of critically examining the thugs of the “state”, so he focuses his energy on the thieves in the banks (who are, of course, not blameless in this, but they are not the ones brandishing the guns). What’s the old saying? “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it”?

      Does the state print its own money, or are they required to BORROW their money from the banks? Answer: they must borrow from the banks. So if the state is so all powerful, how did this situation come about then? Who is really calling the shots? Perhaps David focuses his energy on the “thieves in the banks” because they ARE the real thieves, not the individual salesman trader, but the money machine behind them.

      I’m not going to call you a “Libertarian, Anarchist or Right-Winger” because I think the word “illogical” fits you better. I think David writes this blog, and we all come here, because we are interested in the truth, because we are sick and tired of the lies.

  17. “To tackle a big lie can feel as if you are weakening yourself more than those you oppose. You feel the branch you are sitting on starting to weaken. Which makes it all the harder to defend what you are doing and saying against those who cast doubt not just upon what you say but upon your motives and even your sanity.”

    Brilliantly put. In a hot July afternoon in 2004, I had an epiphany, while working on a roof of a Midwestern factory, of all places. What sparked the said epiphany was a commanding view of an adjacent trailer park where I observed numerous, new, $30k-$40k pickup trucks parked in front $20k-$40k homes. I said to myself, “There’s no f$%ing way this can hold up,” and, I, consequently, removed my blinders. I began studying all the economic information available to me. I came to the realization that the “growth” we were seeing was really just a massive credit bubble.

    This realization was contrary to the “Big Lie” being propagated by the press and government that our expansion was solid and would continue in perpetuity. With few exceptions, everybody I shared this view with told me that I was insane and that my fears of an imminent credit bubble collapse were absurd. As the real estate bubble accelerated from 2004-2007, I began to wonder if I was insane and whether I’d always regret my refusal to buy a house due to my fears of getting underwater. After all, I’m no economist and when you hear the same lie over and over and over, it does, indeed start to sound true. I can’t tell you how relieved I was when somebody bought me one of Peter Schiff’s books, which essentially confirmed everything I feared was inevitable. Blogs, very much like this one, were invaluable to me as they were often the only source of economic truth that the MSM would never provide.

    The degree of corruption and dishonesty has finally reached the point where the masses are beginning to realize to what extent they’ve been rooked over the last 15 years. Blogs, such as this one, provide an important resource to those who are starting to doubt the “Big Lies.”

  18. Hitler and the ‘Big Lie’

    It has been repeated so often that virtually no one bothers to challenge it: Adolf Hitler created and used the “Big Lie,” one of his many evil techniques. As holds true for so many things we are told, this belief, too, must be examined to see the underlying truth.

    In Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote:

    But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute responsibility for the downfall [of Germany in WWI] precisely to the man who alone had shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to Justice. All this was inspired by the principle — which is quite true in itself — that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper stata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily, and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.

    From time immemorial, however, the Jews have known better than any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not their very existence founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a religious community, whereas in reality they are a race? And what a race! One of the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has branded the Jews for all time with a statement which is profoundly and exactly true. He (Schopenhauer) called the Jew “The Great Master of Lies.” Those who do not realize the truth of that statement, or do not wish to believe it, will never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth to prevail.

    Clearly, Hitler is not advocating the use of the “Big Lie,” and, far from creating it, he in fact is ascribing the “Big Lie” technique to the Jews and Marxists. The “Big Lie” technique is Hitler’s in the same fashion that Halley’s Comet is Halley’s — not because either man was the inventor, but rather because he was the discoverer.

    Sources

    Adolf Hitler. Mein Kampf. James Murphy, translator. London, New York, Melbourne: Hurst and Blackett Ltd; April 1942; page 134.

    Or:

    Page 231 of the Mannheim translation, London: Hutchinson; 1969.

    Page 232 of the Houghton-Mifflin edition.
    http://www.historiography-project.org/misc/biglie.html

    1. I didn’t say he discovered it. I said he and Goebbels talked about it. They certainly formulated it and Goebbels wrote about it further and advocated its use.

      As for A.H.’s claim that the Jews are masters of this or any other technique I think we can safely file this along with all Mr Hitler’s other genius achievemnts and insights.

      1. “Goebbels… advocated its use” – please document this assertion.

        Schopenhauer said, ““(Jews)The Great Master of Lies.” so your beef is with Schopenhauser.

        Hitler said, “the Jews have known better than any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited”. It is reasonable to take issue with this statement, but that’s not what you did. You simply gave the pavlovian response you are programed to. It’s time we get to the truth about Hitler and National Socialism instead of just repeating the old lies.

        1. No, actually I can have a beef with all of them. No one said Mr H. got his beliefs from a sealed jar. Many of his less savoury attitudes were voiced by others before him. So what?

          I was taking issue not just with what the sentence says but some other quite well known things Mr H. advocated, agreed to, ordered, facilitated and oversaw.

          When I was making a film on WWII black and sexual propaganda I read both Goebbels and his UK counterpart in propganda, Mr Sefton Delmer. They both made reference to the use of The Big Lie as well as many other useful propaganda ploys.

          Certainly Goebbels and I think Sefton also observed that the ‘other’ side used the technique. They both suggested it would work. Both sides can be seen to have used the technique in the propaganda war they were in charge of.

          1. “Many of his less savoury attitudes were voiced by others before him. So what?” – Then why use him as the bogeyman? I suggest because using Hitler carries a lot of other baggage, real and imagined, that’s been associated with him through years of propaganda. The layers of lies and half truths serve a purpose they keep us from exploring what he actually did for the German economy and society for the six years prior to ’39. Did you know that Roosevelt sent Gailbreth to Germany to study Hitler’s agricultural policy because it was so successful? If you are truly interested in how we got where we are today follow the money, and read about what the National Socialist understood.

            “They both made reference to the use of The Big Lie as well as many other useful propaganda ploys.” – This is a neutral statement. What propagandist won’t observe that it works? It is certainly working today. Why didn’t you use Ilya Ehrenburg as an example of a propagandist? He actually told Russian soldiers to rape as many German women (of all ages) as they could and then kill them. He convinced them to do it by lying. Goebbels never even came close to that nor did he try.

            I don’t want to take up anymore of your time, I just want the record to be straight, because I’m tired of the lies.

    2. “Clearly, Hitler is not advocating the use of the “Big Lie,” and, far from creating it, he in fact is ascribing the “Big Lie” technique to the Jews and Marxists. The “Big Lie” technique is Hitler’s in the same fashion that Halley’s Comet is Halley’s — not because either man was the inventor, but rather because he was the discoverer.”

      What is clear is the distortion of logic in your conclusion. The provenance of the ‘Big Lie’ technique has been utilised by the power brokers, of all persuasion including religious and secular throughout documented history. As such Hitler and any other practitioner neither created or discovered it they merely adapted it to suit their own ends.

      1. Quite right John. The power brokers of Germany pre-1933 were by in large men of Jewish ethnicity. What good would it have done Hitler in his efforts to break this power if he had spoken of the Mongols?

  19. “Only the small secrets need to be protected. The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity.” Marshall McLuhan

  20. “The banks have demonstrably and unequivocally NOT used the money they have taken from the public purse to invest in the real economy. Nor are they going to.”

    The statement of purpose itself is a lie in any case. The money going into banks is driving up their reserves which are only used in the clearance system. Banks don’t use reserves to fund lending.
    The politicians may not understand this, as most of the public doesn’t, but Mervyn King et al certainly do.

  21. As a general point, and in reply to logiclEmpiricist, one of the great things about Davids blog is the attempt to break the present corrupt systems into accessible parts.

    David HAS connected corruption inside “Governments” with Banks (Spain – Portugal). So claiming that because he makes films for the “State”, he is somehow in league with them is false. He makes films for the public.

    The overall problem is that the “old-boy” networks and revolving-door systems (including the military) allow Government officials (among others) to get “retirement directorships” for sevices rendered. This is not the “State”, but an individual lack of ethics.

    The “State” is simply a system whereby some people are put in a position to govern (if Democratic) or rule (if Dictatorial or Monarchic). Even in the US, if the “State” does not do what is best for the mass of the population, the Constitution appears to condone that the people change it to one that does. A problem that we all have is that the “State” AND the Government AND the military AND the Financial system, are run by a self-serving group of crooks.

    The only way to counter this is to understand their inter-relationship, and a way to do this, is to understand it’s component parts. In this Davids’ blog is invaluable.

    PS. I’m using “State” which includes the Judiciary, in lieu of “Authority”. Mainly because I don’t believe that “authority” comes from a person being given an official position or hat – but that it has to be earned. (Think of William Tell and apples,).

  22. LE says:

    ” it is wrong to use force to get what you want. This is the essence of morality.”

    That doesn’t sound true. I believe the essence of morality is to see every human life as sacred, regardless of what tribe he or she originates from. See the world through another’s eyes. Or more simply, love them. That I believe is the essence of morality.

    Further, David implicates the state anyway, so your critique of him is weak:

    “But take off the distorting lens of of ideological hatred and what have we really done? I argue we have exchanged one group of insiders in big government for another set in big banks.”

    And anyway another of the biggest lies is that government is bad. Government (or the state) is not a moral being that can be good or bad. Its a formation of people to provide a structure for civilized life. What’s bad is that it has been captured by people who are immoral…who don’t see the innate scaredness of every human.

    It is no longer an institution promoting the values of civilization, it has become an institution promoting the values of the rich and powerful.

    Keep up the good work David. Your written words are inspired and inspiring.

  23. backwardsevolution

    “In the prescient words of Leopold Kohr in his 1957 book Breakdown of Nations, “There seems only one cause behind all forms of social misery: bigness. Whenever something is wrong, something is too big.”

    That’s a very truthful quote. It’s from a really good article entitled, “Major Powers versus Small Nations: Globalization and the issue of National Sovereignty.” The article makes a really good case for going smaller, and is full of good stats and arguments.

    “Since 1972 the king of Bhutan has been trying to make Gross National Happiness the national priority rather than Gross National Product. Although still a work-in-progress, policies instituted by the king are aimed at ensuring that prosperity is shared across society and that it is balanced against preserving cultural traditions, protecting the environment, and maintaining a responsive government.”

    Now that’s a novel idea!

    “Transnational megacompanies not only tell so called emerging market countries (most of the world) what they will produce, how it will be produced, when it will be sold, and at what price, but they also influence local working conditions, wages, benefits, and labor laws. They often dictate local government monetary, fiscal, trade, and banking policies. International money managers decide which foreign currencies are overvalued and which are not, as well as which countries should be punished for not playing by their arbitrary, self-serving rules. This is truly a one-size-fits-all game.”

    Perhaps we are feeling what most other developing countries have felt for years, the loss of our countries to a big machine, a machine that does not have our interest at heart.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/major-powers-versus-small-nations-globalization-and-the-issue-of-national-sovereignty/5307957

    1. Ironic isn’t it, EU awarded the Nobel peace prize for sowing seeds similar to the ones that resulted in the election of a certain carpet muncher.

      I would also be afraid of Italy blowing up as it did not so long ago, in the so called ” Days of lead ‘. There have already been many shootings of immigrants & more calls for the prosperous North to dump the Camorra & mafia ridden south. Like Vesuvius a slumbering giant.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_of_lead_(Italy)

  24. Golem, the truth is far more mundane. To see it, you must start at the beginning.

    The banks provide funds to politicians – in return the banks require the politicians to impose the desired monetary system.

    The monetary system that has been imposed unilaterally and arbitrarily is based on Fractional Reserve Banking or inflation.

    Fractional Reserve Banking insures that, in time, society’s productive capital and wealth will be transferred to the financial sector.

    Hence the reason that at a time of the worse economic crisis since the 30s, bankers are making bonuses hand over fist – because, as you rightly point out, bonuses are calculated on turn over rather than on GAAP profits

    The banks are being bailed out because they are both: the ultimate beneficiaries of Fractional Reserve Banking and the entities that fund politicians.

    Now that the entirety of Western wealth is in the hands of the banks, what the banks need to do next is to get BRICS to write off the debt we owe them.

    So, the next war will be expanded and taken to a band of land that snakes roughly from India to South Korea. Once we obliterate the infrastructure and productive capacity of these countries (and by the way, somehow we have to also obliterate Japan) we will then tell them that our debt is null and void.

    That done, the cherry on the cake will be when we turn around and offer the countries we have just laid to waste loans to “rebuild” their societies and their economies.

    That is why we are bailing out the banks.

  25. Taking on board all David wrote, the banks, nonetheless, would lend if they expected a sure return.

    The peculiar situation. Banks create money and ‘lend’ and they thus choose whom/what/where to lend to.

    They are in charge of investments (for a large part.) So they lend – if at all – to sure bets, e.g. for land ownership to someone who gets state stipends and earns enough money to pay heavy interest. (Thinking a productive farm for ex., supported by the State…) If they control the money flow, it is good to go to always skim off the top.

    Or they buy shares in Facebook because it is the latest hype and this will grow, etc. They run the money game, or at least, control a large parts of it, thus really managing the country/economy, though they deny it and hide behind pol’s skirts or suits and attempt at every turn to show clean hands and probity.

    Add on that hate of Gvmt strictures and controls is associated to gasp! communism and to be feared and despised by JoeSix, the banks have a free reign.

    So the pols play along, and pretend they are directing the orchestra of economic growth or development, but basically the pols, don’t control money flows, despite QE, printing and the like, and “central banks” ..

    Because on the ground other mechanisms come into play.

    Well, a bit or seriously exaggerated. The banks are bailed out not primarily because of occult influence and networks (though there is a lot of that) but because they hold the power cards, the winning hand, the control on the levers.

  26. Here is an article which perhaps shows a minnow with more guts than the whales.

    The Battle Of Iceland
    Why Icelanders should pay attention to the constitutional referendum
    18.10.2012 Words by Hallgrímur Helgason

    This coming Saturday a referendum will be held in Iceland. The people can say yes, we think we need a new constitution, or no, we think the old one is just fine. Once again Iceland is at a crossroads. A new constitution has been drafted and now it’s up to us to say if we think our country needs a fresh start.

    With the big crash in October 2008, when all the Icelandic banks fell in the same week and the country found itself on the brink of national bankruptcy, people lost all faith in politicians, the whole political infrastructure, governmental institutions as well as bankers and businessmen. It was a total nervous breakdown of the Icelandic system. Iceland was in a state of shock.

    First came sadness and mourning, then anger and fire, followed by a bloodless revolution and finally a leftist clean-up government, full of pride-swallowing compromises Obama-style. Slowly the land was brought back on its feet, but anger remained, though the loud swearing and bully-blogging now has mellowed into 24-hour whining on Facebook.

    The guilty bankers and businessmen still go unpunished, hiding in luxury restaurants abroad, making jokes about the people, who still struggle at home, trying to repair the damage they left behind. The politicians, who steered us over the edge, with flawless inactivity, are mostly gone, though some linger on.

    The man who was Minister of Business Affairs in 2008 still seeks re-election, to much sighing and eye-rolling, and the man who was head of the Central Bank (the world’s only one to go bankrupt) is now the editor of a big newspaper, and the fiercest critic of the people rebuilding his old bank and the economy. Sometimes life is just that simple.

    But the political system has not changed and the Independence Party (the Fianna Fail of Iceland) still has not made their inevitable housecleaning. For a century it was the ruling force of Iceland. For the decades leading up to the crash it practically owned Iceland, from coast to courts, when it played out its free-market Thatcherian experiment that for a time was dubbed “The Icelandic Wirtschaftswunder” but eventually came to be known as one of the biggest economical bubbles in history. After the big crash, the Independence Party was forced out of government, and then suffered a heavy blow in the first post-crash elections in 2009. But according to the recent polls it’s gaining its former strength. We’re a bit afraid that this Fianna Fail will become our Gonna Fail.

    Parliamentary elections are set for April 2013, and we know that if the Gonna Fail Guys will be back in charge, there won’t be any more housecleaning on the national level. No more thinking of a fresh start, to do things differently. We’ll go back to the old system of grown men in suits talking to grown men suits about grown men in suits. We’ll go back to the evil threesome of Money, Politics and Friends. That’s why, before this happens, we have to get a new constitution in place. We can’t afford to lose our country again. We want to build a decent and stable society, a society for all, a goodhearted meritocracy. And this will not be easy. This is quite a task. Since the Icelandic nation is so small, it only takes a handful of corrupt individuals to gain power. That’s why we’re in such a hurry. That’s why we need to put things straight. That’s why we have to vote yes on Saturday, yes to a new constitution. And that is also why the Gonna Fail Guys are voting no.

    The old constitution dates from our Day of Independence in 1944, a “temporary” wartime thing, hurriedly drafted on the previous ones, dating from 1920 and 1874, the latter written by a Danish king for a Danish colony. Looking at those dates, a constitutional update is long overdue.

    The new constitution is based on the outcome of a National Forum held in 2010 of one thousand citizens picked randomly from the national register. The people opposing it now claim those thousand people were “misled by the leftist government.”

    The new constitution was written by a specific panel of 25 people picked in a referendum out of a pool of 500 people offering their services.

    The people opposing a new constitution did not vote in that referendum. One even measured the thickness of the voting ballots and the height of the voting booths and managed to convince the Supreme Court of Iceland who annulled the referendum based on those charges. (!) So the promised Constitutional Assembly was turned into a Constitutional Council, but with a full mandate from the parliament. The opposition now calls its members “a bunch of leftist lunatics.” But let’s look at the main points of the constitution draft.

    The new constitution states that a certain number of the population can call for a referendum on a certain issue. The opposition calls the referendum on Saturday “undemocratic.” The new constitution states that all our national resources shall be commonly owned by the Icelandic people.

    And this is the main issue. Some privileged people might lose their privilege. For example, the present quota system in the fishing industry is totally feudal, with 20 sea barons “owning” the un-fished cod in the sea. They do so because “they always have” and because “they bought it from each other.” (Yes, some people have become rich by selling other people the right to fish “their” fish in the sea.) Of course, the sea barons fight the hardest against a new constitution, pouring their money into propaganda newspapers, websites and TV programs. Their lawyers and politicians now try their best to confuse people with lawspeak for lunatics: “What exactly does “commonly owned” mean?” The new constitution also states that in parliamentary elections all votes shall carry the same weight.

    In the present system the votes of people living around the coastline carry more weight than people living in the city. The sea barons all live around the coastline.

    The road leading up to the referendum on Saturday has been bumpy, to say the least. The opposition has been fierce and strong. Our system is still full of Gonna Fail Guys or people appointed by the Gonna Fail Guys. To give you an example: The Supreme Court that annulled the first referendum was all appointed by GFG. The main sponsors of the GFG are the sea barons. In parliament the GFG managed to delay the upcoming referendum by four months, by holding the parliament hostage for weeks by 24 hour filibustering.

    So there is a battle going on. The battle of Iceland. A battle between the old castle, now out of power, but full of money, and the people in the square, the people who have some power for the time being, but are deadly afraid it won’t last more than this coming winter. To safeguard themselves they want to write a new set of rules before the Gonna Fail Game starts again. This is why the referendum on Saturday is quite important.

    Hallgrímur Helgason is an Icelandic writer and artist. His most known books are ‘101 Reykjavik’ and ‘The Hitman’s Guide to Housecleaning. This article will appear in the Danish paper Politiken this coming Saturday.

    1. Thanks John, I wish them luck, it just goes to show the lengths the power junkies will go to, & that their vision sees nothing further than their bellies. It would be tragic if they suceeded in putting out that one solitary light.

  27. Well in the end, as the philosopher Roy Bhaskar has suggested, we may only solve this when we learn to live, play and work together without any money at all.

  28. And I thought that the Icelandic problem was “solved” !

    Now for another manipulation in the works.

    This is from “George Washinton’s blog”. He specializes in finding masses of relevant links.

    However, this – which is a “cybernetic false-flag” description – could be the way the Banks will try to get out of THEIR debt problem. By blaming the coming collapse of the financial system on Iran. In which case it is a “war action” and will be “compensated” by you know who – the taxpayers !
    They could also use it to seize control of the Internet.

    The blog half-suggests that it is the same people that created Stuxnet, Flame and the other viruses that attacked Iran’s nuclear sites and Banks, that are now behind this attack on US Banks. (With Mess Media articles to point the finger at Iran)
    ie. The US Administration, and the Israelis.

    Very plausible.

    Pass it on please.

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/10/are-we-in-the-middle-of-a-cyber-false-flag-attack-being-launched-to-justify-war-against-iran.html

    Note that opposition news outlets (Iranian PressTV et al) have been taken off EuTelSat. So first hand information from Iran has been effectively censored.

  29. gzxp [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/]トリーバーチ[/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/]chanel 財布[/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/]トリーバーチ 財布[/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/]tory burch 財布[/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/]トリーバーチ[/url] rjfk
    [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ [/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/]chanel バッグ[/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/]tory burch 財布[/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/]tory burch 財布[/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/]トリーバーチ[/url] qcbm
    [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/]トリーバーチ[/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/]chanel[/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/]トリーバーチ 財布[/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/]tory burch 財布[/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/]トリーバーチ[/url] jdwi
    [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ [/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/]chanel バッグ[/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/]tory burch 財布[/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/]tory burch 財布[/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/]トリーバーチ[/url] acpg
    [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/]トリーバーチ[/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/]chanel[/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/]tory burch 財布[/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/]トリーバーチ 財布[/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ [/url] zsmq

    hnub
    oveh [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/]トリーバーチ 財布 アウトレット[/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/]シャネル 財布 アウトレット[/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/]tory burch 靴 新作[/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ アウトレット[/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ 激安[/url] bbux
    [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/]トリーバーチ 財布 アウトレット[/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/]シャネル 財布 格安[/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/]tory burch 靴 新作[/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ アウトレット[/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ 激安[/url] eijd
    [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/]トリーバーチ 財布 2013[/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/]シャネル 財布 2013[/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/]tory burch 靴 通販[/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ アウトレット[/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ 激安[/url] tpdd
    [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/]トリーバーチ 財布 アウトレット[/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/]シャネル 財布 アウトレット[/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/]トリーバーチ 2013[/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ 2013[/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/]トリーバーチ バッグ 店舗[/url] mvgu

    htwl [url=http://www.eregansubaggunosekai.com/][/url] [url=http://www.osharebaggekiyasu.com/][/url] [url=http://www.annkabagryuukou.com/][/url] [url=http://www.tokukakubagnesage.com/][/url] [url=http://www.uresujibagmabushii.com/][/url]

  30. IIRC, Hitler, not Goebbels, was the source of the “big lie” theory and the mechanism that underlies it. It was his contention that the average person does not like lying and therefore confines him/herself to “white” lies or otherwise the minimum lie needed to get through a tight situation. This is so both because they value truth on ethical grounds, and because considerable effort is needed to conceal even a small lie, with acute humiliation should the lie be discovered.

    To such people, a “big lie” is inconceivable. Therefore, Hitler contended, people might more readily accept a big lie than a small one. All one had to do was convince the people that “we’re all in this together” and they would be unable to believe that one would be capable of such a monstrous lie.

    To a sociopath, this situation is just begging to be exploited.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.