 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Sibel Edmons also speaks on that audio recording of a public address, public service, radio broadcast. If you do not know about Sibel Edmons you may be encouraged by her example so please look into that name.
Philip Giraldi discusses the Israel Lobby, Larry Franklin, the recent scandal involving Representative Jane Harman, the continuous erosion of our civil liberties, and much more.
Philip Giraldi is a former CIA and DIA counter-terrorism officer, member of the American Conservative Defense Alliance, and contributing editor at The American Conservative magazine.
My next commentary (up for discussion to anyone who may wish to discuss the general topic, or this specific topic), my next commentary concerns the last part of that radio broadcast where the question was tabled concerning any scenario whereby the march toward absolute despotism may, somehow ratchet down.
There were no positive perspectives on that question from those people in that broadcast.
Why not?
I see a very real scenario whereby the march toward absolute despotism ratchets down, and I see this because this is happening and it is happening in a measurable way.
From the measurable perspective of a power relationship between despots and victims (criminals and victims) the pendulum is swinging in favor of the third group.
That sentence above is English. If the reader has a problem reading English, the reader could blame me for that problem, and if that is done by the reader, then I ask for a measurable power transfer in this specific case. Does that transfer of blame constitute a measurable power shift, or is that transfer of blame merely identifying someone as a victim?
Are you a victim?
If so, why are you a victim?
Why not join the group of people who are not victims?
The following is a sentence:
From the measurable perspective of a power relationship between despots and victims (criminals and victims) the pendulum is swinging in favor of the third group.
That is a sentence and that sentence addresses the question asked by the host in the radio broadcasts linked at the top of this page.
- Criminals
- Victims
- Not A or B
Criminals are linked to victims by fraudulent monetary (legal) currency. People who are not linked by fraudulent (legal) monetary currency are not criminals or victims by that measure.
Take the torture of some hapless victim in some legal dungeon somewhere as that victim screams and follow the money from the paid torturer on back to your pay check. You are an accessory to that crime, a criminal, confessed or not, you paid for each scream - if you are linked by that fraudulent currency.
Is that an uncomfortable bit of news? Is it accurate? Do you wish to censor such transfers of power?
Welcome to the machine.