Add your Email here to follow EUbrainwashing

Tuesday, 21 December 2010

WonkiDrips Agenda

If WikiLeaks were truly agents of change; exposing state crimes, openly publishing secret information, an independent platform for whistle-blowers, would there not be some tangible evidence of this in the material they release?  Instead, it is clear no lasting damage has been done.

From those who work a little harder assembling the raw material, opinions and facts, from which they draw their own reasoned conclusions, other than just entirely drawing a ready made paradigm from a compliant 'mainstream media', WikiLeaks is being broadly decried as nothing less than a sham.  A propaganda operation with a clear agenda.

There are not two but three conclusions to draw of WikiLeaks; 1. they damage 'western' security and interests, 2. they are providing an important 'check and balance' - exposing misdeeds, or 3. they have been deliberately feed information and the process of  (so called) 'redaction' is a further control in the process to manage the effect of the release for optimum political effect.

The key rafts of independent 'truth' opinion, available almost exclusively via the internet, study and consider apparent falsehoods behind; the attacks of 9/11 including subsequent events, man-made climate change and, steaming from both of these, the recognition of a drive toward an authoritarian neo-socialist global governance.  WikiLeaks is no ally to these campaigns to expose these truths.

WikiLeaks has made statements which clearly attempt to deny the veracity of such truth movements and has not ever been first to release any documents which assist either movement's case.  Indeed it is now becoming evident WikiLeaks has been and continues to be fostered by some of the very elite considered to be the forces serving and behind the agendas these truth campaigns have set-out to expose.

Aside from the immediate political agenda actually being served, by the managed release of these selected and censored documents, the wider danger is the resultant demand for a new series of international legal mechanisms to police the content of the internet.

Thursday, 16 December 2010

Wikirrigation - By means of water, we give life to everything. - Koran, 21:30


On one hand it is important that the freedom to spread information, and opinions, of a sensitive political nature is preserved; is not degraded or amended especially via the internet. It is important political force is not unduly wheedled. International authorities handling of WikiLeaks should not be allowed to set any precedents and must not be prejudicial, which currently it looks very much to be. Potentially spurious allegations should be dealt with as they would for any other individual of political significance who may be a target for false attacks.

On the other hand none of this situation means Julian Assange should be considered to actually be that which he appears, is cast, to be. He should not be taken to be anything less than a covert mouth-piece of a US/Israeli imperial/militaristic agenda. The information he is dispersing, these so called US diplomatic cables, can be seen to be not actually doing the US or Israel any real significant or lasting harm. Any harm is almost entirely reserved for other parties and indeed whilst little 'new' material is being revealed it can be seen to only consolidate a certain 'world view' - very conveniently.

Julian Assange and WikiLeaks warrant one's extremely close factual background examination before going too far down the line of 'being on side' with them; of thinking what they reveal represents a meaningful alternative world view.

Indeed any general damage to journalist's confidence and freedom, to result from this apparent debacle, could be no less a part of a predestined outcome also.

Wednesday, 15 December 2010

The War We Don't Bother To Look For

A few scribes line-up to let St John of Pilger take their confession and, by way of attempting to purify (or perhaps indemnify) themselves, in penance have their contrition open for all to see, for all to pour scorn or forgive.  I say; hang the dogs!

We cannot complain about Bush, his NeoCon masters, the CIA, Mossad, Blair (spit), the shower of MP's and senators who should have asserted their power, the military, the MOD, the UN, the Hutton & Chilcots and even the hoods who are allowed to own or control the worlds media (including the BBC).  Such human faeces will always float to the surface and it is the duty of the news' commentators to help clean such foul detritus away.

I am just an everyday fellow but one who has taken serious note of events, studied and learnt, since the, so called, attacks of 9/11 and have since reached solemn conclusions, available to all who take the trouble to seek it out, about the nature of world leadership - especially today.

The War You Don't See?  If any of this documentary is news to you you are a mainstream-media junky; you need to start to develop your own understanding and opinions.  People are dying at the hands of those who are acting in our name; don't you know?

The keystone in the success of those who command a plethora of hidden and conspiratorial agendas is a contrite, muted, compliant press.  We need journalists (not reporters) who will seek-out the truth and write it no matter the consequence.  They fear the truth will, at the least, finish their careers.  And at the worse, of cause, fear much more serious threats too. The alternative, the continued failure of the media/press, will be very tough indeed for all but the ultra elite - not just some easily forgotten foreign johnnies.

In unison there is a tough challenge before journalists and commentators.  I am sure John Pilger could speak far more plainly than this documentary portrays, speak of how this outrageous violence has come about, but if he did the program would not be on TV.  So he gets what part of the message he can across in the best way he can - the rest is up to you.

Monday, 13 December 2010

TrickiLeaks or WikiBollocks.

Sorry folks but this 'item' is more of a selection of links to resources whereby you will assemble the facts rather than an article (or rant) that tries to pull it all together into one meaningful ... err ... lump!  I think this is the best way on this occasion.  So a rather fascinating little journey awaits.

Julian Assange’s glaringly FALSE assertion that Wikileaks had anything to do with the original release of the (so called) ‘Climategate’ Climatic Research Unit (CRU) emails.



The CRU emails were first anomalously uploaded to a server belonging to ‘RealClimate’ and subsequently a file-share server in Russia. If this had been carried out by WikiLeaks, as Assange perhaps is attempting to impress, why would they not just have posted the files to the public via their own server?

Why does Assange feel it necessary to comment of the significance and veracity of the revelations within? 

See: http://climateaudit.org/2010/11/30/assange-on-climategate/






Wikileaks and Julian Assange - Another False Flag Operation? Who Are behind Them?

http://euro-med.dk/?p=18863



Just who is Julian Assange?
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/the-robin-hood-of-the-cyber-world-20101210-18sxl.html

http://www.theage.com.au/national/keeper-of-secrets-20100521-w230.html?from=age_sb

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santiniketan_Park_Association

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA
 

Friday, 10 December 2010

Nose on your face

One thing is for sure: the EU € EURO single currency either was or was not created by fools. The EURO member nation states do not have the economic control mechanisms to prevent the occurrence - it is a car-park on a cliff full of cars with no handbrakes!

If we generously consider the EU economists were not all blithering idiots it must have been clear to them the current situation was indeed ultimately inevitable. In other-words this path to economic failure was deliberately planned.

WHY? The objective of the EU is, and always has been, ever deeper political integration, to dismantle the national sovereignty of the nation member states and build a federal EU soviet state. The EURO was one step to that goal but did not give the EU total control of the member-state’s economies - that would have been a ‘bridge too far’ at the time of establishing the currency.

So instead a deaf-ear was turned to those who proclaimed the eventual outcome could only be economic meltdown. Not because they were not right in the assertion but because this was actually the covert intention.

I am rather taken with the following video which goes far into explaining so much of what has happened to the EU economy:



- just for fun!

Caustic Deniers

Use of the term ‘climate deniers’ is a shallow and offensive rhetorical device employed to attempt to subliminally influence readers to draw together those who question the veracity of ‘man-made climate change’ alongside that of rampant neo-Nazis who do not accept any Jews at all were murdered in WWII - Holocaust Deniers.

As a matter of sensible precaution I strongly recommend when you spot such rhetoric you fact check every aspect of the item you are reading before you accept any part as meaningful or valid. Otherwise dismiss it as being propagandistic brainwashing.

For a further example of the pro-man-made global warming lobby’s thinking see:


This film was created by vastly successful director Richard Curtis and with the involvement of his ‘partner’ Emma Freud, great-granddaughter of psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud. Her younger brother, Matthew Freud, is the husband of Rupert Murdoch’s daughter Elisabeth Murdoch.

Wednesday, 8 December 2010

Nuclear Energy’s Vital Role in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions - say it after me children

Many of the folk I know and meet are deeply concerned with the effects of the so called ‘greenhouse effect’ or ‘global warming’ or its more recent title ‘climate change’. I do not share their conviction that climate change, if it is occurring at the rates reported, is as a direct result of man made CO2 emissions.

I remember learning in school history lessons that people used to hold fairs on the frozen river Thames in Tudor times, that the Romans grew grapes in York and even against Hadrian’s Wall between England and the wild tribes of today’s Scotland. Where Britain now stands has been both tropical and under ice sheets. Climate changes I do not deny. A warming climate may produce higher historically recorded levels of CO2 as a result of increased vegetation.


I reckon that a majority of those most deeply concerned with the effect of man-made CO2 climate change are the same people who are generally concerned with the environment, wildlife, pollution, the squandering of natural resources, reduction of habitat and so on. This is my finding when I talk to such folk.

Those who are old enough to have formed opinions on such matters before the ‘man-made greenhouse climate global change warming’ paradigm took-off were previously, in the vast majority, all strongly anti nuclear-power yet are now, in the main, reluctantly accepting or even advocating it.

These CO2 warriors and worriers even support the plethora of ‘Carbon Taxes’ and ‘Carbon Trading’ that have been piggybacked in with the CO2 paradigm, (designed to keep governments and corporates on side with a package of benefit for them too).

Accept or not my assertion CO2 warming is a fake, public support for nuclear energy has reached a record high as policy leaders voice the ‘need’ for new nuclear power plants.

See report: http://www.nei.org/resourcesandstats/documentlibrary/publications..........

That has not occurred because people are now convinced nuclear power is clean and green but rather because they are told it does not contribute to global warming. Such is the power of propaganda to brainwashing the people of the world.

1,2 & 3

By the way.  Revolution happens one step at a time.

First you are influenced, secondly you change and thirdly you influence.  Its a knock-on effect.

We do not need a violent revolution to knock our world back on track.  All we must do is assimilate verifiable facts, understand how matters come about and draw our own reasoned conclusions.  When confident; express yourself clearly, communicate!

Do not allow your opinion to be formed by others.  When sufficient of us start this process off we become an unstoppable force.  Together we can change the world, individually it is a more daunting task.

Tuesday, 7 December 2010

Drip, drip, drop.

David Cameron continues the work of every other UK PM over the last 50 years. Devolving power in any direction away from Westminster, diluting the population through immigration and poor education, dissipating the United Kingdom.

The drive to the EU is but a staging-post before the formation of a system of global governance for a global plethora of desperate non-sovereign semi-autonomous regions. And the people are considered too stupid, too tribal, too territorial and too self-interested to understand to poetic allure of the ambition so hence they are to be kept in the dark and feed ****.

Wiki, wiki, little bat! How I wonder what you're at.

I have noted over the last few weeks that Jimmy "Jimbo" Wales, of Wikipedia founding fame, has been prominently fronting a Wikipedia campaign seeking donations on a header added to every Wikipedia entry I have looked at. As the 'fountain of all knowledge' perhaps he has had the foresight and happy timing to clarify resoundingly that Wikipedia is NOT WikiLeaks and that he is NOT Julian Assange.

Julian Assange may appear to be being dragged around the floor as revenge for WikiLeaks' recent and ongoing US diplomatic cable leaks but these rape allegations have been ongoing for over three months - although he clearly appeared to be no friend of the US administration since before then too. Is Assange a victim of reprisal false allegations or honey trap?

Nothing WikiLeaks revealed yet has looked like a knock-out blow to this US administration or to its Bush/NeoCon predecessors. Indeed nothing has greatly tarnished the US diplomatic service or whispered squat-diddle of its uglier underbelly - the CIA. Funny that!

In a world of smoke and mirrors I would ignore the relevance and veracity or these cables or selection thereof. Even Assange's lawyer admitted on BBC News-Night that WikiLeaks were being careful to 'redact' details that may damage individual's security. (who, one may wonder, are they troubling to lookout for; Americans or everybody).

Bitter pills they may appear to be but every cable leaked so far can be seen also to assert the US view on the world, mostly at the expense of other leaders and nations.

If these documents had found their way directly into the hands of say a UK National newspaper they may have been resistant to publishing them. Now they know it would meet with the wrath of the US.

If independent news media publishers are confronted with leaked information to publish or whistle-blower's information, they too have now seen the writing on the wall. Indeed the US will use this episode to help them justify tighter controls of the internet.

As Franklin D. Roosevelt is attributed to have said "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."

Monday, 6 December 2010

Kelly's death was not correctly examined by Lord Hutton

Without access to all the evidence and without witness testimony under oath; debating the cause and circumstance of Dr Kelly's death is not the matter of importance and indeed may serve as a distraction from the correct path to unequivocally establishing the truth.

The point is that we still do not know what really happened with reasonable and correct certainty because the circumstances of Kelly's death were not correctly examined by Lord Hutton and yet his inquiry was used to supplant the process of the corners inquest, which was the correct mechanism but was not allowed to draw a conclusion.


Hutton usurped the inquest and then acted upon a prejudicial conclusion of suicide as though such a finding had already been correctly drawn. Lord Hutton certainly appears to have whitewash on his hands.

The people must demand nothing less than allowing a full coroner's inquest to draw a verdict.  Continued denial of an inquest is most suspicious.