The Real Real News Dot Com Network

Twelve minutes and eight seconds into the Real News Network's interview with Eugene Jareki about his documentary "Why We Fight," and its accompanying book, The American Way of War, comes the pitch. It will last for three minutes and eight seconds and constitute one of the strangest appeals I've ever heard.

Strange and smooth at the same time, I might say---like a Rockefeller asking for spare change to get a cup of coffee, which, I submit, is exactly what is happening below the surface. For a news network claiming to be "truly independent [...] of corporations, governments, and political parties," "with ordinary people's interests in mind," to step out of the blue in 2007 and host such a slickly done interview with Jareki, whose seamless film explores issues aiming at the epicenter of American deep power and politics, is to invite curious examination just to see whether or not Jareki hits the bull's eye.

For me, this became the entire point of watching his film. Then for Mr. Karl Marx to hit us up in a PBS-pledge-styled drive looks simply like a transparent cover. Real News Network obviously has all the heroin-and-cocaine trading money, or arms sales receipts, the covert world could come up with, given its slick style and production values---its the human values that don't come through quite as well.

Jareki styles himself as an expert and hero worshiper of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, and his film opens with the common and famous black-and-white television broadcast of Eisenhower's January 17, 1961 farewell address to the nation, with its warning against the undue influence of the "military-industrial complex," treating it as some sort of revelation. This makes me feel I am being talked down to. Eisenhower's offspring tell us that before delivering the speech, the President edited out the word "congressional" from the now lesser-complexed complex, but this news is delivered without any irony whatsoever. Why did Eisenhower do that, we wonder? Was it because he now thought differently, or because the politics had changed and he was delivering a feint? That's called lying in my book.

More startling to me however, is why Eisenhower didn't warn us about the undue influence of the rising media-whore complex, as his big face was being beamed throughout American living rooms on the three licensed network channels that the federal government gave away the airways too. Do you think that process wasn't thought through?

We won't even talk about the undue influence of big oil---then in its approximate 70th year---now more like its 120th, undue, year.

It's Eisenhower's post-war experience which I think history will judge him badly by. Wikipedia puts it this way

Upon full discovery of the death camps that were part of the Final Solution (Holocaust), he ordered camera crews to comprehensively document evidence of the atrocity for use in the war crimes tribunals. He made the decision to reclassify German prisoners of war (POWs) in U.S. custody as Disarmed Enemy Forces (DEFs), thus depriving them of the protection of the Geneva convention. As DEFs, their food rations could be lowered and they could be compelled to serve as unfree labor (see Rheinwiesenlager). Eisenhower was an early supporter of the Morgenthau Plan to permanently remove Germany's industrial capacity to wage future wars.

I read something extremely odd in the phrase "upon full discovery" of the hidden "death camps," as if Dresden wasn't also a "death city" that needed burying and forgetting. I read an obvious abandonment of the "quaint" Geneva convention in regards to slave labor and starvation diets; like George W. Bush, Eisenhower simply changed the nomenclature to "Disarmed Enemy Forces," the precursor to Guantanamo circa 2003. It likely was as abusive of human rights then as now.

Wikipedia doesn't mention the nine million Germans who starved to death after the war ended under victorious American paternalism, beyond saying "their food rations could be lowered," but we get the drift---they were.
The camera crews spoken of, were not trained military documentarians, but Hollywood directors of fantasy, like Billy Wilder, who entered Buchenwald, and accidentally stepped into his own film at one point, for proof.

Jareki is described as a "public policy thinker," but he doesn't seem to have fully thought through the public relations value in his use of a Jewish New York City policeman named Wilton Sekzer, father of Jason Sekzer, who was an up-and-coming young bond trader at Cantor Fitzgerald, the wholesale bond trading house, who supposedly lost his life on 9-11. Jareki uses Sekler as the emotional centerpiece character in the film, but unlike the rest, Wilton is more than just another candidate for prosecution for insurance fraud.

That describes the physical, non-human experience of September 11th, 2001. Never before had "Jewish lightning" paid such big profits and propaganda value, but then again---never before did Jews involve so many dumb Christians in their business, which alas, turned out rather badly, didn't it?

Wilton Sekzer is one of the clearest smoking guns directly binding the events of September 11th, 2001 with the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq in 2003. Playing an obviously blatant public relations role in favor of war, Mr Sekzer senior had prevailed upon the United States Marine Corp to hand sign some high explosives with Mr. Sekzer junior's name. Given the art form, the results were desultory in the extreme, but that's neither here nor there at this stage.

And in the most damning element of all, binding the entirety of the American Media Whore Complex in yet another collective and transparent episode, in a massive effort to distance himself from George Bush's failing war, at the fifth anniversary mark in 2006, Wilton Sekler told his story of shock at hearing President Bush say there was no connection between 9-11 and Saddam Hussein. "What does he mean. I nearly fell out of my chair," he says!

What effort goes in to Real News.com, goes in to make up fake left-wing credentials, but the only real binary isn't a left/right one, it's the insider/outsider model, and with a film top heavy in insider Washington and Pentagon talking heads, each one more oleaginous with the greasy patina of the secrets, I'd say Mr. Jay and Mr. Jareki could use some outsider lessons. Jay now says

"There are times when reality just asserts itself. Despite the haze created by television news and entertainment, sometimes crisis rips a tear in the fabric of myth and propaganda.

Now a profound economic crisis has ripped asunder the American dream itself, with millions of people losing jobs and homes. They lack proper health care and any real sense of security. Since 2001, worker's wages have fallen and remained stagnant, even though worker productivity has risen almost 33 percent. By 2006, the top one percent of households were receiving 23 percent of all pre-tax income---more than double what it was in the 1970's.

It's the greatest concentration of income since 1928 (little shimmy to the neck and head.) As unemployment rises, we need to know why this crisis is happening and what we can do to defend ourselves. Why are wages so low? Why is the society so laden with debt? Is it in ordinary American's interest to have a trillion dollar military budget to project power across the globe?

Corporate television news won't ask these questions let alone try to find answers. Only a truly independent news network can tackle these questions with courage and with ordinary people's interests in mind. We need a news network that's independent of corporations, governments, and political parties. We need the Real News.

But there won't be a Real News network unless we raise substantial funds right away. The current financial crisis has hit our funding hard. Together, we do have the power to turn it around. There are already hundreds of thousands of people watching the Real News every month. If everyone pitches in we can build an internet and cable television network that will change the face of media forever. You can organize house parties, talk to friends at school and at work. Send email blasts and spread the word. Distribute this video to everyone you know. Pick up the phone and call a few friends and suggest they visit the Real News.com. Invest just ten minutes a day to ask friends and colleagues to join the campaign to create a truly independent source of internet and television and news. Together we can build this network. Just 50,000 people at ten dollars a month, gets us to our first level of sustainability. You can help us reach this goal, and when we do, we'll move to television and millions of homes across North America. Help us reach an audience in the millions, Please contribute generously. Spread the word. Let's make the Real News television network a reality.

It damns him that he even has to ask the questions rhetorically, like "why are wages so low? Why is the society so laden with debt? Is it in ordinary American's interest to have a trillion dollar military budget to project power across the globe?"

The answers are: because jobs were shipped overseas to the places with the lowest possible labor costs; unrestrained illegal immigration flooded American communities with an oversupply of labor, which drove down wages; advances in automation, like that seen here at Kawasaki Robotics (USA), Inc. only benefited capitalists; predatory lending tricked families into insurmountable indebtedness; and, no, it's not in ordinary American's interest to have a trillion dollar military budget to project power across the globe. Any other questions?

An online Real News junkies page is not up-to-date, and very sad.

Since the second and third portions of the interview also contain three-minute appeals for support, it's apparent a symbiosis is afoot. This explains something I've observed in settings likely staffed with covert operatives, and that's the similarity in the level of expression---the sense of ''where you're coming from'' and the ''where you're going.'' Although stylistically distinct Paul Jay and Eugene Jareki come across as over rehearsed and lacking in spontaneousness.
The American Way of War pt.2

Jewish War Whore Wilton Sekler:

"When I was in Vietnam, I remember, we used to get requests, can you put my father's, my son's name on the side of the helicopter, can you put it on a rocket.

"You know what, that's a good idea. I'm going to do that. I'm going to try and do that. So I sent out emails to the secretaries of all the armed forces. 'I am a retired New York City Police Department Sargent, and proud Vietnam veteran. I lost my son on 9/11. I can't tell you in words what his loss means to me. I would respectfully request, if you could put his name on some piece of armament in the Iraq war.'

"You know, we haven't caught bin Laden, but let's do something. Who is responsible---come on, let's hit him! Iraq was responsible? OK, good, let's go. You say Iraq? Good, let's go get in there, let's kick hell out of em.

"Bush: No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September 11th. Now, what the Vice-President said was...

"What did he just say? I mean, I almost jumped out of the chair. 'I don't know where people got the idea that I connected Iraq to 9-11?' What is he nuts? What the hell did we go in there for? We're getting back for 9-11 We'll if he didn't have anything to do with 9-11, why are we going in there? I was mad. I was mad. My first thought is: you are a liar.

"I am from the old school. Certain people walk on water. The President of the United States is one of them. If I can't trust the President of the United States...I don't know...it's a terrible thing, when American citizens can't trust their President. You begin to wonder---what the hell is with the whole system. There is something wrong with the entire system

"The government exploited my feelings of patriotism. Of a deep desire for revenge, for what happened to my son. But I was so insane with wanting to get even, I was willing to believe anything.

"Undoubtedly, there are people who may listen to my statements and think that I'm no good, that I'm a SOB, and a war monger, and this and that and whatever, and I should have never put my son's name on it, I should be ashamed that I put my son's name on it.

"Am I sorry I asked my son's name to be put on the bomb? No, because I acted under the conditions of that time. Was it wrong? Yeah, it was wrong, but I didn't know that, so. Is it regrettable? ....?

"We have become a monster in the eyes of the whole world – a nation of bullies and bastards who would rather kill than live peacefully. We are not just whores for power and oil, but killer whores with hate and fear in our hearts. We are human scum, and that is how history will judge us… No redeeming social value. Just whores. Get out of our way, or we’ll kill you." – Hunter S. Thompson

Good Grief: Who Wrote Your Stupid Narrative?

There was no damage in the A and B rings---none at all! No fire, no smoke, no rescue, no drama---nada. Why would somebody need to escape out this window in any case? This is the fourth floor, so it's not likely you're going up or down from here. Or will the claim be someone needed in? At base, can't they see the real message this photograph delivers? "Oh look Martha, damage! Let's take a close-up!"

You stupid, stupid simulators! Give us back our money! Go back to your bunkers and play your video games, with your pumped-up techno-music death feeds blasting into your helmet's speakers, and take your amphetamines and your anti-psychotics, and don't forget to wear your Pampers, because when you satiate your blood lust and squirt out watery projectile diarrhea in your cock pit, it can get messy.

All of you are losers at the game of real life. We're tired of your movie. Get out of our cave now.

Why We Fight By Eugene Jarecki & Amy Goodman

That should read: Why We Conspire.

Well, Amy Goodman's in on the plot too. Fetch me my shotgun, ma. It ain't never going to end!

Can't you just remember her in Minneapolis? The wounded outrage!

You have to read this interview just once over lightly to see what's going on here. Not only is Amy Goodman rehabilitating Eugene Jareki, whose rehabilitating Wilton Sekzer---together they are rehabilitating Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who to the liberal Goodman, even "sounds very radical, very revolutionary today."

Try Thomas Jefferson woman.

Where was she when Eisenhower was giving it to the defeated Germans "good and hard," by starving nine million of them after they'd surrendered, to pasturalize their synthetic paranoia, through a thorough "stewing in their own juices?"

Oh daddy, beat me with your rhythm stick, ten to the bar.

Just read this one paragraph of Jarecki talking:

"And on 9/11, he turned a corner on an elevated train in New York City, looking across the river to the city, and he saw that the tower of the World Trade Center was on fire. To those in the train, it was a horror. To Wilton, it was an unimaginable horror, because his son, Jason, worked in the building, and he knew at that moment, I think, that it wasn't good, and when he lost Jason, Wilton, like many people, dealt with that kind of strange mix of anguish and the impulse toward revenge. The impulse toward revenge was there in some people, not all people, but certainly in Wilton, and I think he felt particularly helpless that morning, because he was a cop. I think, you know, imagine if you're someone who is used to thinking that your job is to get people's cat out of the tree and help somebody on their way to school, and you watch something unfold in your own city about which you're completely helpless, and it affects you so directly."

Anybody out there, liberal or conservative, think a policeman in 2001 considered his or her job was "to get people's cats out of the tree and help somebody on their way to school?" Shor nuf, boss.

But now I'm going to go out on a limb. Deep into the interview, Jarecki mentions how he was led into co-creating his young-people's film-within-a-film device in "Why We Fight," by the creative efforts of a Steve Goodman. Is Steve Goodman related to Amy by any chance? I'm getting a hit here. And Fort Meade: incredible means unbelievable in all cases.

"Well, the Educational Video Center is an incredible group here in New York City, run by Steve Goodman, who invented this wonderful apparatus for teaching young people how to document their lives with cameras, and for professionals like myself, it’s a wonderful opportunity to do something very hands-on and not just sit in a dark room somewhere contemplating the fate of mankind. You can actually become directly involved in it. And movies can get pretty tiresome, and you can spend years not knowing if you’ll ever come out with your movie. So I was teaching these kids in this inner city youth program how to document things around them.

"And they knew I was making a movie about war. The kids were cool, and they were smart, and they figured if they made a movie that was also sort of tangentially related to war, it would have a sporting chance of ending up in my movie, and they played their cards right, because they decided to start filming the story of the recruitment of one of their friends, because people are being recruited on all sides of them right now, because we do have, as so many of us recognize, a kind of poverty back-door draft in America that is forcing young people by economics to put themselves in harm’s way at a time of war and join the military. And so they said, “We’re going to go off and film the story of one of our recruits.”

"Now, a lot of the kids are black and Latino, so out of probably my own just presumptuous, you know, impulse, I thought they would come back with a black or Latino kid and the story of some kid who was in their ethnic groups. And they didn’t. They came back with a white kid. And what was fascinating about that was that they were—the kids were race-blind and very class-aware. They knew that this is a class issue, that ultimately, if you’re poor in America right now, there’s a draft."

This is prime evidence why the whole foundation world needs to be completely dismantled. Teaching young people video arts would be a wonderful and meaningful experience, if the true agenda weren't legitimizing false synthetic realities. These people can't think in any way that isn't self-serving. We don't believe your anecdote Mr. Goodman. Jarecki does volunteer work with young people in NYC? Like bringing arts into the public schools? And the kids wanted to put on a show? So the blacks and Latinos put forward a white or Jewish kid to be of merit as star? You lumpen chunk of dark matter, you are poison to youth---everything you touch will turn to shit before your eyes.

But the question that really takes the cake, is when Amy Goodman asks:

"Eugene Jarecki, your film is going nationwide today, but the politics of how a film makes it in this country is not very well-known, because the very corporations that control the message on television -- How does something like this get out there amidst all the Hollywood hype?"

JEWS, MY DEAR NAIF! JEWS!

As Joni Mitchell put it once---"the star-making machinery behind the popular songs."

I don't know who Paul Jay, the senior editor for "The Real News," interviewing Jarecki is, but I don't like him. He talks about getting down to the foundational matter of things, but then he says

"Another piece is the strategic planning that has imbued American foreign policy, at least since World War II, if not before---that the United States should have a dominant global position in the world, and should have a military to back up this dominant position. In fact, to the point that this should be a single, super-power world, if that's achievable."

As though such a policy had to be a given, to which Jareki replies, Yes, Yes, and Yes, in all the right places.

A single super-power world has been a total disaster! Much worse than the balance of power world ever was! How about America defines her mission, and then eschews any more power than what's necessary to complete that mission?

If you let him, Jareki starts talking too fast, like all the other operatives and cointelpro Energizer Bunnies out there. Also, both Jay and Jareki use their hands too much when they talk, and that reminds me somehow of the Kabuki hand poses Rumsfeld use to hold.







(I'm going to go watch the bfilm now on Google Video. If I find out I was wrong in any of my assessments, I'll come back here and apologize, but don't hold your breath, waterboarders.)

Wilton Sekzer, Father of Jason, Got a Bone, an Inch Long Back

He says, from the "pit"---or was that a "pile?"---or maybe it was from the Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island, all that was left after the World Trade Center towers were demolished on 9-11, and too quickly cleaned up. This is all the forensic evidence he has to indicate his son Jason really died that day.

But I'll have to ask the cop---show me the bone please. What if instead of being killed, his son had been "disappeared"---or would that be called "rendered," as in extreme rendition, something I'd never conceptualized prior to 9-11, although running away and joining the circus is a close second, but for that daddy has to stay in the dark until the prodigal son returns home. How about "hondled" to indicate a transaction took place? Is that fair?

CNN: 9/11 was a Jew Job! @ Yahoo! Video

I don't support the captioning in this video, either to its exclusive labeling of 9-11 as a "Jew job," when it's clearly not, nor in its uniform implication that all Jews knew, and were in on the conspiracy. When I find an unannotated copy of the CNN Paula Zahn video segment I will replace this.

But troubling, is evidence that the Jews who were calling the shots that day conspired with the son and grandson of Hitler's banker, along with their historical nemesis, antisemitic fundamentalist and evangelical Christians, like Reverend Hagee.

Midway in this CNN news video, Wilton, a retired New York City cop, says rumors that 4000 Jews stayed home from work in and near the towers that day can't be proven, and he cites 400 Jewish fatalities in New York City that day as a counter argument to Jewish foreknowledge. But in an event which left almost 3000 people dead, and only 12 corpses which could be visually identified, we are told, left only one open-casket funeral in the record---the very first---so I'd like to ask for evidence the 400 Jewish fatalities from 9-11 are really and truly dead.

I have known for awhile that I had to continue testing my theory---that many of the 9-11 dead were in fact, alive---what now seems like such a commonsensical cornerstone to understanding the 9-11 conspiracy. Having first visualized Lt. Col. Brian Birdwell, one of the six very lightly burned victims at the Pentagon, as having willing submitted to his wounding, I thought fake wounding made fake death logical---especially in the closed-shop world of the United States military. When I published these theories online on this blog, and I wasn't immediately struck by lightning in return, I began slowly to inch toward intellectual consistency regarding the New York City victim's lists.

It is now absolutely evident to me that the New York City uniformed services were in on the conspiracy---but not straight across the board necessarily, a fact which should be kept in mind across every category---especially in the final category of predictable, and thus ritual and sacrificial, death consisting of those workers on floors above the level of the first plane crash in tower one---the people who could be guaranteed to lose their lives with near 100 percent certainty.

The failure to rescue a single one of the 200 civilians who died while trapped in elevators provided for a nice "scatter" effect---like a liminal blending in the lists.

Chief among the rank came from Cantor Fitzgerald's offices on the 101st-105th floors, where 645 employees were lost (everybody who was in the office that day), or about two-thirds of workforce stationed in the towers. That statistic alone bears study. How many employees are normally out of the office on any given morning due to illness, appointments, or vacation? Also to be studied is the rationality of the company being able to bring its trading markets back online within a week, then chart the dip, if any, in the market share they were handling.

But I know that Cantor's CEO and chairman, Howard Lutnick was a willing co-conspirator, if only by dint of the common narrative factor of sharing a brother amongst the lists of the dead. Since no human being could be so sick and evil as to consider the possibility that losing a sibling, or spouse, might be seen as being used as a credential, ultimately to be known a shibboleth, proof of being part of a knowing conspiracy---or so it was thought. Battalion Chief Joseph Pfeifer, who also lost his brother in the north tower's collapse, after watching him go up the stairs on 9-11, variously reported that he died in Building 7---however, no one would doubt a fireman, even when he's inconsistent.

The meaning of the following paragraph from Wikipedia changes dramatically if you accept that many of the 658 former Cantor employees could be alive. The pattern is those on the inside lived, those on the downsized died---a very evil field to explore.

On September 19, Cantor Fitzgerald made a pledge to distribute 25 percent of the firm's profits for the next five years, and committed to paying for ten years of health care, for the benefit of the families of its 658 former Cantor Fitzgerald, eSpeed, and TradeSpark employees (profits which would otherwise have been distributed to the Cantor Fitzgerald partners).^{[citation needed]} In 2006 the company completed its promise, having paid a total of $180 million (and an additional $17 million from a relief fund run by Lutnick's sister, Edie).

Blood money---who pays? Unique unto himself is the Cantor employee whose father was a Jewish New York City cop. A distraught father who said, "[a]fter 9/11, I couldn’t work. But I thought, I gotta do something. Somebody has to pay for 9/11. I want the enemy dead. I want to see their bodies stacked up for taking my son." So he started a campaign to get his son's name written as an honorific on 2000-pound bombs dropped in Iraq, and accompanied by a publicity campaign to let Americans know of it. Jed Babbin on National Review Online

Even more unique would be the father whose son's story would be made into an award winning documentary by Eugene Jarecki, "Why We Fight," winner of best documentary at the 2005 Sundance Film Festival. Newsday


But beyond the pale of unique-ity would be the father who when things started to go seriously south in Iraq in 2006, would unleash a media blitz on the September anniversary, telling all who would listen, "I was shocked when I heard George Bush say there was no connection between 9-11 and the Iraq war! Shocked" Parade Magazine, The New York Times, chicagotribune.com, The Capital Times, etc., etc. etc.

War in Heaven

Pieter Bruegel the Elder - The Fall of the Rebel Angels

Isn't this sad? Who thinks stuff like this up? At first, I laughingly thought this image could serve to illustrate the "manufactured" 9-11 truth community as we have known it. What would Carl Jung say was the shadow here? Angelology, or ponerology? But we're moving so rapidly now this symbol already feels passe. I wonder what imagery will come up next?

A few days ago I bought this sconce at auction, and I definitely feel it has a connection with Bruegel's imaginary world. Late 19th-century English brass, it obviously stylistically devolves from the classical dolphin motif revived in the regency period in tribute to Nelson and Poseidon. But it has become something quite different, more akin to a Transylvania bat than a flying fish with fingernails. Then again, I also see a pineapple design at center, which makes for a, perhaps inadvertent, international symbol of welcome. Oh well, the price of empire I say!

One other thing---even though it's only a single, two-armed wall light, which wishes it were one of a pair---in my experience, being able to acquire it for only $120, is such an absurdly cheap bargain that even in a declining market I can truly know, we must be in last days and not in end times. Why couldn't this have happened back when shopping was fun and had a future?

In any event, when it arrives, I'm going to hang it over my bed and burn white candles in it and see what happens. Jay Rockefeller wants to shut down the internet and that deserves some scrutiny:


...along with a full transcript.

"...tomorrow, a full committee hearing on cyber security, and um, this comes within our purview on this committee, and it, I mean not trying to be dramatic about it, but when we, when the internet was invented, everybody fell flat on their face, they were so thrilled. And the world began to do business in a different way.

"Now both the, President Bush's Director of national Intelligence, Mike McConnell, who I greatly respect, and President Obama's Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Blair, who I greatly respect, have labeled cyber security, perpetrated through the internet, as the number one national hazard, of attack, on the homeland in West Virginia, on, ah, West Virginia and America---or anywhere else.

"So, I mean, it really, it really, almost makes you ask the question, would it have been better if we hadn't invented the internet, and had to use paper and pencil or whatever---and that's a stupid thing to say, but it's, it has genuine consequence, because it's on the internet that these acts of shutting down...you know, they have the television saying, that ah, ads every day saying that the, the Department of Defense is, is, um, attacked three million times a day, and it's true. Um, that everybody is attacked, anybody can do it---people say, well, it's China and Russia, but there could be, you know, some kid in Latvia, ah, doing the same thing. I mean, it's an individual act---it doesn't require a sleeper cell, it doesn't require any, aah, you know, ammonia, or explosives, it's just an act. And, um, it's an act which can shut this country down, shut down it's electricity system, it's banking system, shut down really anything that we have to offer.

"It is an awesome problem. On the intelligence committee, we were taken for a full day, to discuss, to a, to a...an undisclosed place in Virginia to discuss this. Um, it is a fearsome, awesome problem...[edit]... to speak, I mean, obviously it's broader than that too.

"I wonder where this stands with you where your thoughts are, and what you think we ought to be doing about it.

"Senator, ah, cyber security is obviously of utmost importance..."

It is patently obvious that Senator Rockefeller isn't talking about the technical or mechanical aspects of computer security---either on the level of securing my bank account, or of securing America's nuclear activation codes. What the "any kid in Latvia" can only do, is harass, or test, and compete against and tighten the tier of necessary security, which becomes increasing high the more you want to keep something a secret, and in that way a young Latvian would provide a service and not a threat.

I think what Rockefeller is talking about here is the movement toward failure of a long-established system used to manage and control transmissible words and ideas---the news and reports of individual truth and perception traveling from the mind of one person to another.

They should have seen this coming---so maybe they were blinded by profit. The artist Robert Wilson acquired an abandoned Westinghouse factory building in Water Mill, New York years ago, and transformed it into an artist's workhouse and showplace. The father of an acquaintance of mine who worked for Westinghouse and held a high-level security clearance there, tells a story about how the advent of fax machines was withheld for a decade after their practical perfection by agents of the C.I.A. who worried they transmitted information too quickly and widely---remember too, we are talking about machines requiring you mount one page at a time onto a cylinder, which then took a stylus four minutes to send.

Such is called transformation. Like from Pieter Bruegel the Elder to Jonathan Meese perhaps.

Or back again.

Well, the sconce arrived safely from down south and it is not a dolphin at all.

It is a little Aztec, art deco warrior bird

Quite powerful indeed. Who do you serve little warrior bird?

Tis better to light two candles than to curse Howard Lutnick.

Ah! This better not turn out like my blogging about my William Etty painting only to have it heisted by shadow cons.

Did I Ever Tell You About the Time I Tripped on Psychedelic Mushrooms with a Young Nathanial Rothschild?

Yes, that one. Nathaniel Philip Victor James to be precise. I know I alluded to this once, in my masterpiece Critical Thrash thread, when that knucklehead from Blackwater was being seriously threatening, leaving me no recourse but to pull international oligarchic food-chain rank on him. However, since I meant it as a discrete code, I couched the reference within a food metaphor---and if there is any topic on the planet less suitable for English language tropes, it would have to be hallucinating with a Rothschild!

That Tamsin Greenhill woman was there, sharing the experience of an off-schedule weekend trip. I was called at the last minute to come out and bring my inimitable hospitality services to that aptly tear-drop shaped isle with the rare riparian rights---the island that dare not speak it's name. Shush! I don't know what it was about her, but anyone who by way of contrast can make a Rothschild look like a naif, is much too sophisticated for my tastes.

All I did was serve dinner in the kitchen Friday evening, as they were already beginning to peak, when he kindly offered for me to join in with them. I weighed my usual commitment to ordinary reality, along with the possibility I might have to answer the telephone, but gave in to the once-in-a-lifetime chance I was being presented with.

I must say, the two of them both ate like horses, which surprised me. We of the middle class will fast, will flush our intestines even, before starting such a heavy psychic experience---scrubbing diligently under our fingernails so that we may achieve liftoff. Aristocrats must need more of a tether, or anchoring, lest they slip the surly bonds of Earth and go out into the stratosphere and not come home. In any event, they know how to stay thin, so I shouldn't talk.

When I met Nat Rothschild in 1998, he was already at age 27 a chronic alcoholic, who often appeared stumblingly drunk in public. To me he was the spitting image of the Dudley Moore character from the movie Arthur---except Nat was quite tall, so he was constantly banging his head on things. But his behavior changed suddenly, when on April 29, 2000, his French cousin Raphael de Rothschild overdosed on heroin at a party in Chelsea, with his fellow guests carting him downstairs to lay him in a New York City curbside gutter, where he was found dead at the age of 23.

Reminds me of Father Mychal Judge actually.

Nat had a psychic and personality conversion of the immediate kind in consequence. I can still picture him with the New York City tabloids carrying this senseless news tucked under his arm, as he gravely began to talk of the Earl of this or the Duke of that---people who were absolutely out of control, and in need of fast intervention---as if he and Betty Ford were the closest of friends!

A New York Times profile in March 9, 2007, said he was still "serv[ing] his guests the best wines from the Rothschild vineyards, which he himself will not drink."

Good word has it that several other of the younger party lions in that circle also got and stayed sober, seemingly as a millennial resolution.

It's not like this story has a trick ending or anything---far be it from me to distinguish my own reptilian brain from its later mammalian neo-cortexualizing layers---or cast stones, especially if all we're doing is sitting around caves and watching movies anyway. But I can state for the record that Nat lacks even one iota of le goût anglais for what that's worth.

It would serve my fancy to image all these sober people as being as deeply concerned about the state of the world as I am, but I really don't. Synthetic events like the 1rst Gulf war were enormously profitable to a rapacious few on the inside. But it does give me comfort to imagine men such as this with clear heads as they turn the screws. And I know the truly operative level is higher than even these machinations.

When I came to New York in 1977, the holy grail within the wholesale European antiques business that I joined downtown was the catalog of the just-concluded sale of the Rothschild country house Mentmore, which I relentlessly devoured. I still own multiple copies of the five hardbound volumes, from an uncracked set in crisp onion skin to the scribbled and notated copies.

I can even trace my fascination with French furniture to a Rothschild origin. It came out of reading a book on the holocaust published in the 1960's when I was about ten years old. To my memory, the head of the Viennese branch of the Rothschild bank was taken away and placed in local custody. Given his stature, arraignments were made to have some furniture sent over from his house to make his jail cell more comfortable, but he was appalled when the authorities placed a Louis XV clock on top of a Louis XVI pedestal. I thought to myself, "Gosh, you have to learn 16 different styles!" I was delighted to discover that essentially we only have to deal with three---the baroque, the rococo, and the neo-classical, and that the challenge was met.

In what I can only describe as an act of God, my relationship with Nat and everyone else on the island came to an abrupt end shortly after his conversion experience. I mourned my banishment from Elba for a long time afterward, but hush money succored me. Now I only mourn that I was never able to take up Nat's kind, if vague, offer of a housekeeper's tour of his father's house, Waddesdon Manor, which can be seen as part of the British National Trust, but only in groups, and only downstairs. I do have multiple copies of the multi-volume catalog of the house's contents, published over a period of a decade---all except for the volume on the Sevres, and that's very hard to find. Oh well, perchance to dream!

P.S. You should have seen all the spinning, twinkling and winking Stars of David at the televised Michael Jackson memorial recently. The I's were dotted---even LOVE was spelled L۞VE. You know that means Jackson really didn't die, don't you? He just made a Cabala career change?

In honor to his Lordship:
I Got That Peanut Butter Pussy

palestinian archipelago

Osama bin Laden in Cave with Hookah Decor

Or is it Samovar? Are we really in the Russian Tea Room?

Someone reached StevenWarRan on an image search for "bin Laden in cave," but when I tried the same search, I couldn't find hide nor hair of this uncropped image well unto a dozen pages of hit returns. What I did find were lots of low-resolution versions of Osama talking into a microphone, sometimes with al-Zawahiri, but even if the hooka/slash/Samovar isn't cropped out, it is obscured by a logo or chyron---like "BBC," or some such.

This is unacceptable. If there is one thing we must rely on---it is the primacy of War Ran's Googelability.

More importantly, does the average Joe see the absurdity of this set dressing? My eyes have been open for so long now they're starting to dilate.

Compare it with this image. Is this the real Osama bin Laden?

al-Zawahiri by Robert Mapplethorp. Or Hanna Barbera?

As-Sahab- Wikipedia, or, Adam Gadahn, the "Azzam the American" story.

I want this picture at number one within the hour my Googelicious Googlelings!

Janet Langhart Cohen & William S. Cohen Meet Anne Frank & Emmett Till

In a narrative element that raises coincidence and irony to the level of perversion and farce, on the day of the antisemitic gunman's attack on the Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C., which took the life of an African-American security guard, a premier was scheduled to open there later that evening of Janet Langhart Cohen's one-act, two-character drama, Anne and Emmett, whose literary device---a thematic pairing of Jewish victimization with the African-American experience of bigotry---was itself neatly twinned in a parallel reality that day. Too neatly, in my opinion.

But there are unforeseen consequences rippling out from the parable, and the moral remains up for grabs. It would be ironic indeed, if the boy whose mother demanded an open casket, saying "Let the people see what I have seen. I think everybody needs to know what had happened to Emmett Till," were to meet the black man in the closed casket, who had learned the secret Obama way to get ahead.

And the closed casket is the perfect symbol for all the missing millions of dead, like Irit Shitrit, or the Auschwitz millions, revised downward not by deniers, but by the Jewish custodians of "memory."

Counting the not-dead even has its own parallel in the not-counting of the actually dead, like the hundreds from the 3/7 Cavalry, the Ghost Troops lost in the 2003 Battle for Baghdad.

Of course it doesn't help that here is a short play written for minors by a non-playwright, to be performed in a non-theater, or that it first appeared in a book co-written by a half-black and a half-Jew

"Originally published in the book “Love in Black and White: A Memoir of Race, Religion, and Romance,” written by Langhart Cohen and her husband, former U.S. Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen, “Anne and Emmett” tells the story of a beyond-the-grave meeting of its two titular characters: Anne Frank, a 13-year-old German Jewish girl who hid from Nazis until she was sent to a concentration camp and died at age 15, and Emmett Till, a 14-year-old African-American from Chicago who was kidnapped, beaten and murdered on a trip to Mississippi in 1955." The Bay State Banner April 17, 2008 — Vol. 43, No. 36

Or how about a Secretary of "Defense," who can see the gunman get out of his car and then hear the gunfire, but without witnessing the event? Then he is suddenly inside the building escaping up stairs, while helping others to escape?

"Secretary Cohen, did you know immediately that they were gunshots?"

"I did. I'd arrived much earlier and had come up to try and make contact with Janet, who was scheduled to arrive momentarily, so I was on the phone to get a radio signal on the phone, to touch base with her in the car. At that point I noticed that there was a car parked---it seemed to be out in the middle of the street and an older man getting out of the car but I didn't pay much attention to him because I was on the phone. And then a few seconds later I heard the gunshots, it was pretty clear that they were gunshots. So, Arthur Berger, one of the chief executives at the museum, he and I were together, about five feet apart, and we were about 30 or 40 feet away from where the shots were ringing out. And we just ducked as low as we could and went up a set of stairs to get up to the second level."

"Describe the scene around you."

"Well, it was fairly chaotic as we went up the stairs, we didn't know if people were going to be following us up, or if there were more than one gunman. And as we approached the stairs. there was a group of people who had just completed their tour of the museum, so they were on their way out, and they wanted to go down those stairs, and to leave the building, but we were able to stop them, saying, "don't go there, it's too dangerous."

CBS Early Show June 11, 2009 Video
Former Defense Secretary William Cohen and his wife describe the scene at the Holocaust Museum as the shooting happened and it became a crime scene.

What a horrible idea for a play! Anne Frank died in a concentration camp of typhoid, more a victim of Allied bombing and systemic deprivation than of antisemitism. A better parallel to Emmett Till would be any of the nine million Germans who died of enforced starvation as the war ended.

Jews on Crack

In this much-distributed one-minute, three-second news clip (safely maintained, I should hope, here at the BBC,) Sergeant David Schlosser, with the federal Washington D.C. Park Police, holds a news conference about an attack on the U.S. Holocaust Museum. Because he's in possession of such a remarkably abbreviated amount of information (the gunman is a "male;" he carried a "long gun;" two injured have been transferred to hospital, but "no information" on their conditions,) he overcompensates in his mustered sternness, to the point he comes across as Barney Fife.

As the clip begins, we see Schlosser standing before a blank stretch of asphalt. At the nine-second mark, a male with distinctive red hair and beard sidles in from the right. He is wearing payot, or payoss, the uncut locks of hair worn on the sides of the head by Orthodox male Jews. At the 17-second mark, a similar red-haired male Hasidim who could be his twin, moves to occupy the space on the officer's right, followed almost immediately afterward by a woman who appears to be dressed in a similarly colored wig, and who is smiling demonically, or perhaps pathologically. She holds the insane grin for as long as we catch sight of her---at least until the 34-second mark. At the 30-second mark, a crowd of reporters, camera people and onlookers flood the background as though released through a stanchion.

I haven't found a time stamp for this clip, but it would appear to be the earliest official report released during the day, with the least amount of information, given by the law-enforcement department with the least standing to be working the case---the others being the District of Columbia Metropolitan police department and the FBI, who had lead-agency status and control.

A logical interpretation of the clip would have us witnessing the police officer starting a news conference at a chaotic moment, without a proper head's-up announcement to the assembled beforehand, and with the late arrivals scurrying to take positions as close as possible.

But with men wearing bullet-proof vests, and what looks like FBI windbreakers joining in, it looks more like a director yelled, "Extras!" and used whoever was about to fill in.

The appearance of these Jews in this fashion is meant as a non-verbal communication claiming false-flag responsibility for the shooting, to a world-wide audience who were in on the code---in my humble, gentile opinion---and in on the joke. Nothing else explains the dance of choreography and the Cheshire-cat grin on the inappropriately emoting female.

The following AP news video is of a later portion of the interview, with the same Park Police officer,and one of the Hasidic men is still seen in the background, although it has even less of a grasp on the facts then before.



Although having to stop and correct himself, this scene is a repetition of the limited facts available, and it came after the first clip with the empty background.

This AP News video has most of the operative portion of the BBC:


FOX News has a 4:30 minute extension of the interview, where Sergeant Schlosser takes questions.

Erik von Brunn,

If you put ["Erik von Brunn" statement to abc] into Google, you'll find "it" on top of a good list---but what "it" is, is strange in every way.
Alleged Museum Shooter's Son Slams Dad's 'Cowardice' - ABC News

Perfectly straightforward on the surface, ABC News hosts what it calls, "Statement by Erik von Brunn, Son of Accused Holocaust Museum Shooter Issues Statement Concerning His Father June 12, 2009," without telling us how the news organization happened upon it.

The Associated Press reported the younger Mr. Brunn was interviewed for a Washington Post article from his mother's house in Homosassa, Fla.---going on to quote her, Pat Sadowski, as saying, "her son was not home and was unavailable for further comment."

Since the AP article also said that Erik was "an aspiring teacher and fiction writer who recently graduated from the University of Maryland," he sounds young enough to still be living in her home. When she actually spoke for him, saying he would have no further comment, I also wondered if maybe she wasn't responsible for routing the document.

Since the only editorial comment ABC appended to the communication reads,

"Following is a statement by Erik von Brunn, a son of James von Brunn, the 88-year-old man accused of a shooting attack at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C.:"

I wondered if by its arms-length distancing, and lack of context, who ABC was intending to benefit journalism, or the family?

The "aspiring fiction writer" reference is also troubling, because I've never encountered a tone such as the one found here. Looking at it from any level you can think of---the psychological, spiritual, emotional, interpersonal, political, egoistic, or just its plain public-relations value, the message has about as much credibility and meaning as something penned in Elizabethan English would.

Sticking with the ABC angle for a moment---on the document's web page were 25 comments left from June 12--20 in response to the statement. There, an almost total uniformity of sensibility and outlook is so striking, I felt I'd stumbled upon a reunion of the Stepford family, with the opinions and agenda so honed Karen Hughes could have written it herself.

One exception with an air of authenticity is the posting by a Dalton Lewis, and since he is immediately followed by two lengthy responses directed personally at him, the structure of how operative communications can flood and dominate any genuine discussion or arising exchange on the internet becomes very clear.

What a boring job this must be! No wonder they call them "covert" intelligence agencies and assets!

One other posting stands out. Obviously by an operative on task, "DarthVain" indulges himself in a little mental play nonetheless. This is a risky business, and why they always tell you in psy-op school to stick to the script Darth

"A well written piece. However considering the topic was basically his Nazi father, and with a name like "Erik von Brunn" perhaps using the word "blitzkrieg" may not have been very appropriate. However other than that tiny lapse in judgment it sounds like he said the right thing."

Touché DV---but since Brunn also used the word "appeasement" in the piece, I think the lapse in judgment may be yours, and it isn't tiny!

I'll let the internal evidence within the statement speak for itself. It doesn't bare analyzing. The bottom line is, it lays it on thick when making the case Brunn was a Nazi.

The rest of the Google list below the primary document consists mostly of low-brow blog references---much of it the kind of apparently paid "smalled talk" whose heyday has passed. One item I checked out was this June 14th board-posting on craigslist> Manhattan> politics
thread

Erik von Brunn: NOTHING like his hate filled father. Erik von Brunn sent the following statement to ABC News. Statement by Erik von Brunn Son of Accused Holocaust Shooter Issues Statement Concerning His Father...
newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/pol/1219835667.html

The page I got back was unusual I thought:

This posting has expired. (The title on the listings page will be removed in just a few minutes.)

So I took the page's IP address and put it through archive.org, and got back the dreaded

Robots.txt Query Exclusion.!

We're sorry, access to http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=5&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewyork.craigslist.org%2Fmnh%2Fpol%2F1219835667.html&ei=2Og9SpyfEdyLtgflxMQB&usg=AFQjCNE1GfnNknFxRe7bRcU7IrOgzN_6GA&sig2=PMwrhvbnHAH9fUdk68uacA has been blocked by the site owner via robots.txt.

Now, even I know this isn't kosher. craiglist could clean up its server (leaving only eight days archived?) and this could lead me to a dead link---but shadow copies and caches are a different thing entirely. A robots.txt query exclusion means a site- or page owner is taking a deliberate step to hide something that normally should be there. It looks guilty, I think. The Washington Post does it all the time. Well, they all do.

The Faked Assault on the Holocaust Museum

In the United States government-sponsored psychological operation designed to simulate an antisemitic terrorist attack by a lone-wolf gunman on the Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C., a mistake in the narrative planning was made so fundamental and basic that no amount of amending or eliding to the record will correct it.

The only visual proof of the attack publically released to date are several images of a bullet-scared glass entrance door, the location where a gunman who was approaching the museum building, met a security guard stationed inside, who held the door open for him in welcome. At this close range, the gunman fatally shot the guard, and he fell just inside the door. The gunman was then himself shot by other armed security guards who were present, and the gunman fell wounded just outside the door.

This encounter is said to have bought enough time to mount a response, which prevented the intruder from accomplishing his apparent terroristic goal of causing maximum causalities. By taking a bullet in this fashion, the African-American guard has been lionized a hero, especially by the Jewish custodians of a holocaust memory housed there.

It is up to police and law enforcement professionals to determine the proofs of forensic evidence---establishing the trajectory of a bullet, for instance---and then release it to a supposedly skeptical media, where it filters into the court of public opinion. Ultimately, a court of law makes a decree---and afterward, everybody in a nation of laws accepts it.

It is not up to me to question this visual evidence---noting its contradictions and implausibilities. The ground beneath the record can shift---first reports indicated five shots were fired, later dispatches report eleven shots. Were I to make a legitimate point, I only do the work of those people tasked with manipulating the public record, which is actually quite a malleable thing---the "public" part being only a matter of perception. Operators can suppress and alter "published" sources to a degree honest people find hard to imagine---despite having read George Orwell's dystopian novel 1984. Who "wants" to believe in dystopia?

If a man holds a door open for another man, and is shot at the threshold in the process, he could fall wounded inside. Then while the door is still open, the attacker could get shot, and fall backwards outside. Then the door could close, and be pierced by five subsequent bullet shots, but that would take at least seven shots.

Some of the five bullet holes in the glass may have come from the same shot which wounded the assailant, but only if he was hit first while inside, with the bullet continuing on through a closed door, but he would have to open it and stagger outside first to fall---and no report states anything like that. A report could suddenly appear though, which is why the plausible deniability of a compliant bureaucracy in cahoots with amoral media leaves us shaking our heads.

If the multiple reports of five shots being fired were to hold up, then it wouldn't fit the evidence we have of five bullet holes in glass doors separating two men with bullet holes.

One thing I can state with complete assurance: A security guard who holds a door open to allow someone carrying a rifle to enter is never a hero, even if he takes a bullet that buys enough time to save lives. That would be called two things: a bored, distracted, menial worker of a type we all know, combined with an accident of fate.

It is also less than a substitute for what could have been an heroic scenario completely in sync with the established visual evidence:

Imagine a gunman on a mission, walking up to the entrance of a fraught facility. An alert security guard inside the door sees him coming, and has time to draw his handgun, but it doesn't stop the assailant, who is on a mission. As he pulls on the door to open it, the guard refuses to yield. He yanks on the door and a struggle ensues. Either of them could be the one to shoot first ---either in assault or defense---but the image of the guard physically holding the doors shut, as the frustrated gunman fires through the glass and kills him, is the more heroic.

When I was 15 and 16 years old, I was a dishwasher and busboy at Nero's Cactus Canyon and Silver Slipper, a restaurant and nightclub in suburban Nashville, Tennessee that had a one-man band and a postage-stamp dance floor. Despite the sound of that, it was the top place in the city of its kind, with cocktail waitresses dressed in long gowns, and an annual blow-out night after the Tennessee-Vanderbilt football game. One Halloween, everyone who worked there got dressed up in costume for the evening. Although a work shift, given all the festivities, the staff was allowed to join in and start drinking. Two old-school African-Americans---a grillman, and a waiter, got into a fight in the kitchen over a woman, and a disturbance ensued.

I was standing near the bar when the waiter tore past me, stalked by the man marching in deliberate rage and carrying a big knife. The waiter dashed through the front door of the dining room and out into the parking lot, with his assailant right behind. But then, just as quickly, the waiter popped back in an adjoining door to the Silver Slipper bar. A pretty little blond secretary who worked in the office was sitting in a booth up front. Sensing a call to action I was oblivious too, she popped up just in time to grab the door from the inside and hold it, even against the man's far superior strength.

Dressed up as Scarlet O'Hara in a real hoop skirt, the memory of the sight of her, with the skirt's hoops bouncing up in the back from the force of her exertions, is so crystal clear in my memory that I know I was given a gift of something real back then, with which to compare something unreal now. Nearly 40 years later, seeing images of white people, and black people, and Jewish people acting in ways that are so patently unreal, fills me with eternal anguish.

The Day of the Living Dead

This is not about making Jews the fall guys in some battle between good and evil. We are only proxies here anyway. But this sad rerun of a failed Shakespearean sit-com known as 9/11---staged assaults against police, abortion providers, and a Jew's internal sense of safety---isn't working and has to stop. As a life-long liberal, I am angered to see the right-wing set up this way. If an ideology is to fail it should do so on its own demerits, not because somebody turned a dial up somewhere. And if the right-wing could be made to take a fall, it could be the Jews who were getting set up here too---just at a higher level.

In the closest I've come to live blogging, yesterday I made an editorial aside. Having theorized the day before that the African-American victim of the Holocaust Museum shooting, Stephen Tyrone Johns, was a part of a conspiracy, and was in fact, alive, I'd suggested I could be proven wrong by an open-casket funeral the next day, and this is my description of what followed:

In the Washington Post coverage of Johns' funeral, Museum Shooting Victim Remembered at Funeral, Hundreds Gather to Honor Slain Guard in Fort Washington Ceremony, by Washington Post staff writers Keith L. Alexander and Hamil R. Harris, posted online at 2:24pm, today, June 19, 2009, the article explicitly states Johns' was an open-casket funeral:

"At 9 a.m. mourners were allowed in to view the body, walking up to two security guards posted on both sides of the open casket. Leading the mourners were Johns's fellow security officers from Wackenhut security firm. Several officers saluted the casket as they walked by.

Johns was dressed in a cream linen suit, a toy butterfly on the pillow next to him. A recording of local recording artist Jeff Majors's "Psalm 23" was played as mourners streamed in to view the body."

But an accompanying video by Anna Uhls of WaPo, Slain Holocaust Museum Guard Mourned in Md, reports matters slightly differently. The journalist giving the on-camera report was unnamed, but he was a young African-American with a disarming speech impediment that could sometimes get in the way of his report. He said that

"people gathered here as early as seven-thirty this morning to pay tribute to Officer Johns', who lost his life at the Holocaust Museum, when a White Supremacist [oops] walked in and shot him in the stomach---after Officer Johns' opened the door for him.

"Johns' casket was brought in by National Guard, and put at the alter of the church, um, and the first few persons who were able to see him---obviously besides his family---were his co-workers at the Holocaust Museum.

"A lot of the people I talked with, strangely enough, didn't even know officer Johns. They came out to show their support for him and his family."

He says this while the camera pans a shot of crowds of well-dressed professional white people who are seen disembarking off tour buses, which helped to fill the 3000-seat church auditorium.

A single comment posted to the article, by someone with the nic LiveontheHill says:

"Mr. Alexander - don't quit your writing job. TV is not for you."

So it seems Mr. LiveontheHill may actually be DeadBetweentheEars, as he completely misses the subtle distinctions between Mr. Alexander's written reporting and that which he lisps. I didn't miss it. The truth in what Mr. Alexander says is quite clear, and I commend him on his efforts. Revealed are some of the parameters of how things work in the real world. Now: we shall return to our regularly scheduled programing...

Within hours, the video online was radically different, recut so almost to complete eliminate the reporter, Mr. Alexander, and filled up instead with disconnected segments showing the talking heads of white and black living dead.

This is just how the errant bits of our perceptions could formerly be nipped in the bud before being fully transmitted to our group consciousness. Sometimes a swell could swamp a boat, but usually the bucket brigades keep things afloat. Now with the internet, and after the hubris of 9/11, we're all up a creek without a paddle.

I knew this would be the result as I live blogged it but still it came as a surprise. I thought briefly about finding a less transparent style of working but there isn't one. I've found one piece of evidence that Johns' was not an open-casket funeral. A report at WTOP Federal News Radio said

Shortly before the funeral, mourners filed past Johns' body in a large wooden casket topped with an enormous bouquet of cream and blue roses. The casket was flanked on either side by a security guard from Wackenhut Services Inc., the contractor Johns worked for during his six years as a security guard at the museum. Several family members sobbed loudly as they walked past to pay their final respects.

It's hard to top an open casket with an enormous display of flowers. I think I have a safe cache of the page, but you never know. Internet technology seems designed for just these sorts of purposes.


Thomas Jefferson's famous quote, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants---it is it's natural manure," is from a letter he wrote to William Smith, dated, Paris Nov. 13. 1787. A more extended version of Jefferson's quote reads

"...the British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, & what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honorably conducted? I say nothing of it's motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, & always, well informed. The past which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive; if they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13 states independent 11 years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure."

So, the buying off of the press by politicians was old news already in 1787, was it? Well, somebody should have told me. The record of a record has now been cracked open sufficiently enough that there is no way they can stuff the entrails back into that rotting corpse.