Monday, February 12, 2018

text or video and/or audio

For self-directed information gathering, nothing beats text.  That's why I spend so many hours reading website articles, comment sections, and blogs.  And searching, and I confess reading Quora and * Exchange.

I can barely bear on my own time to watch TV, movies, anything.  It's all too slow, from the standpoint of what I want to know.

Though it is true a picture may be worth 1000 words.  That's when you desire, or need, to have 1000 words directed at you, like a firehose, taking over your mind.  That's what video does by it's nature.  You must submit to it, and it kinda takes over.  Rude is the guest who talks while every else it watching the picture.

With modern production styles, vido can indeed be extreme information overload.  But it's not all the information you are seeking.  It's being blown at you with high pressure.  You have many choices, but they are all useless choices, 1000 channels of shit, none really goes exactly where you want, or even very close.

Channels and programs survive by locking you in, shutting everything else out.  So they pull every trick to keep you locked in.

To bear listening to such, for me, almost requires human company.  I can watch TV, movies, documentaries, clips with someone else, by myself it's a drag.  I can only have video screens running as "background video", without the sound track that...most of all it turns out...locks you in.

And then you have the traditional promo.  That promises a lot and then gives you endless background story before need to buy the product to know more.

I can barely stand to hear the beginning of an advertisement, I don't like long announcements either, for the longest time I tried in vain to find a satellite music provider that would play with no announcements at all.

Now you can program songs in any order you choose, from an endless collection, what could be better?  Well it could be better not to have to make any choices, what you like or would like to discover would just play, but that never presents itself without some form of "announcement."  I've come to accept this.  Now I can get channels of music on Dish network, but the premise is that you are viewing the program names on TV.  Those names just have to be getting to you, in multiple ways if possible.  Somehow it all seems less important to me now, I can tune out a low level of plain talking.

The easy background sound I most often prefer is plain old FM radio, and I can change presets with my remote control.  Old fashioned but still the best background for me, mostly thanks to noncommercial radio stations in the low end of the band.  Easily kept from taking over your mind, and if not, the channel can be changed.  When I can't find anything on radio, I can let Pandora decide what to play.

Thursday, February 1, 2018

In not the murder, what was Oswald doing???

What was Oswald doing?  Did he also intend to shoot the President?  Did he actually shoot from the window and why?

I've long felt the reason was to create an incident, which somehow could be blamed on Cubans.  Not to kill the president.  He was operating under rouge CIA supervision.  Not actual tasked agents, but people who had been long used and had lots of agreeable and agreeing friends. The CIA calls Clay Shaw a "private businessman," but admits he had continuing CIA contacts.  People like him wanted to force the president to invade Cuba.  He had friends all the way up to the still powerful now dismissed and angrier than ever Alan Dulles.  CIA and CIA rogues do this kind of false flag operation a lot.  However, for Oswald himself, this time it was a set up.  He was starting to get afraid of what might happen.  There may have been a second to do the job using Oswald's gun, just in case he started to figure it all out beforehand.

While he was planning to create "an incident" another group of real trained, efficient, and completely trustworthy assassins, not crank deep state properties like Oswald, basically supplied by the mob, specifically Meyer Lansky, took the opportunity to make it more than just an incident.  They had lots of known supporters in key places, and Lansky himself wanted it as much or more than any.

As Oswald or the second shooter was going to be a "pro-cuba crank" if caught, he only had a cheap gun he bought himself.  Obviously it would not be something traceable to the Deep State.  But possibly all that Oswald did was drop off the gun.  It's quite probably Oswald had a story which would exhonerate himself.  He obviously didn't do it.  Once he could see it was a set up after Kennedy got killed, he knew his life would be worth less than nothing to the mob.  They wouldn't trust him not to squeal and blow the whole Presidential Assassination operation.  That's why he fled the scene promptly to get away from association with the assassination, and actually hoping to get seriously arrested to get local Police protection from the mob--but as an amateur he went too far.

To the mob, leaving this open fire hydrant was too risky, after a day of questioning Oswald was jovial and claimed they hadn't even talked about the Kennedy assassination.  On cue, Jack Ruby, a long time local chief and functionary of top mobster Meyer Lansky, rubs him out, before Oswald needs serious defense and before Oswald can get any story about the Kennedy Assassination out.

The basic form of the story is pretty easy to imagine, it seems almost essential, and yet I'd never heard it said as simply as this.

One of these mob shooters was the lucky guy, who shot just after the Oswald "incident", from the straight, clear, and perfect shot from the grassy knoll.  Lucky or not, as it were.  There were probably shots from other shooters too, one government funded university study (later discredited by FBI) said as many as 6 shooters.  The best specific person story I've heard has numerous books and videos by a Dutch investigator.  The confessor spent much of his time in prison after that...but for other crimes...only confessing in his last few years, on video you can buy.  One slight issue with this story, is that it is not at all unique, many prisoners have "confessed" to killing Kennedy, except there is only one confession video I know of.  But also, more than one of these confessions could be correct, as far as the individual shooter knew.

Wednesday, January 31, 2018

JFK, Israel, LBJ, and Mathilde Krim

JFK was determined to stop Israel from getting Nuclear Weapons.  (At least, according to the late "conspiracy theory" author Michael Collins Piper, 1960-2015, in his landmark book Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy, sold by far the cheapest at, this is not an endorsement of their other books..  MCP was the first to capitalize on the Israel aspects of the JFK assassination, so hidden I had never heard them before yesterday.)

In May 1962, Matilda Krim and her husband befriended Lyndon after he was snubbed at a party with President Kennedy.  That was the beginning of a friendship which lasted at least to the end of his Presidency.  His previous mistress, Alice Moon, the strong New Dealer, was fed up with Lyndon because of the Vietnam War.  Krim had her own bedroom in the White House, and a house was built for her on Johnson Lake, designed by Lyndon's favorite architect.

Curiously Mathilde Krim was not semitic at all, but sympathized with the  pleight of Jews so strongly she worked tirelessly for Jews during and after WWII, married an Irgun soldier, and converted.  But once in Israel she divorced and married a rich American Jew, and after awhile became friends with Lyndon Johnson as well.

Nowadays, Mathilde Krim is mainly known as the AIDS researcher, who insisted that AIDS be studied despite Reagan, but that's a later story.  She denies having said much to Johnson about politics, it was supposedly her husband who was said to be one of his advisors, but a very detailed record says otherwise.  She was a key player in the politics of Israel, a liason and a lobbyist, and even Chomsky admits US policy toward Israel changed dramatically during the Johnson administration in favor of Israel getting whatever it wanted militarily and diplomatically (though he chalks it up to the Pentagon being impressed by Israel's ruthlessness--just what the empire needs, and not so much the political level--he denies the importance of the Israel Lobby--while ex military friends of mine say it was all in the politicians, the military and state were sick of all the kowtowing to Israel...especially after the USS which I argue that perhaps they weren't aware of the thinking of the "top planners" to which Chomsky refers).  In any case, the rare occurance of even not vetoing a tounge wagging at Israel in the UN Security Coucil would wait from Johnson until Obama's last days.  Israel First declarations pass Congress annually with hardly a no vote.

Mathilde Krim was especially involved with smoothing relations during the 1967 War, including walking back an early White House comment about it, and ultimately getting the White House to respond to the war exactly as Israel wanted, documented at the link below.  And probably involved with the USS Liberty coverup too, according to comments following the article.  This is the straight up version, not reaching beyond the known, at least in the article itself.

Below is the full on conspiracy version, including the Rothchilds and all.  I haven't seen the actual book Final Judgment yet, but I'd guess it to be not quite so all-conspiratorial as the article below, and more well documented.  It is a well known fact Krim and her husband were Lyndon's closest friends between May 1962 and after.  And she's mentioned at the conspiracy site below, but only among many many others.  Many of LBJ's advisors were Jewish, and certain to be Zionist as well.  Meanwhile, other Jews and likely Zionists (though not necessarily Mossad, etc) were Jack Ruby (Rubenstein), an associate of Lansky,  Clay Shaw--the shady CIA operator in New Orleans associated with Oswald there--and Meyer Lansky, the top mob boss most closely associated with the JFK assassination in many theories even being the one who sends at least one real assassin including the one who actually does the deed from the Grassy Noll with mob precision and logistics.  I just learned yesterday the mainstream American Mafia became a mix of Italians and Jews before the second half of the 20th century, the Sicily-and-only-Sicily group in the US was assassinated in the first half of the 20th century.  Lansky was one of The most major players in the Mafia in the 20th century, at one time called "the Accountant."  He had been heavily into Cuba.  Lansky was involved in smuggling rackets, some say he smuggled nuclear bomb triggers to Israel as well.  All these men could be heroes to a Patriotic Zionist, though it's possible Lansky just did it for the money, or a number of other reasons (he went to Israel later for a few years...but then was kicked out), but I've always found a "revenge" motive hard to believe, when there were lots of possible things wanted by different parties:

[Actually, Michael Collins Parker mentions a list of actual Israel figures.]

Militarists, proto-neocons, wanted the Vietnam War
Anti-Castro Cubans wanted Cuba invaded
Oil Barons wanted to keep the Depletion Allowance
Mafioso's wanted Robert Kennedy's investigations to stop
   and they wanted Cuba invaded
J Edgar was the ultimate protection for Organized Crime,
    determining who wins and loses, he wanted to
    continue his system, and saw Kennedy as existential
     threat, plus of course he hated Kennedy thoroughly
Israel wanted the Bomb, and Kennedy was blocking this

Saturday, January 27, 2018

Beyond General Relativity

Time and Space and Mass and Energy are related to each other.

But what about...organization.

Clearly organization is crucial.  The universe is a vast every changing organization.  It's what we are, and most likely that from which consciouness and thinking and all human creation and destruction arise.  Of course, it's what human society is, materially and organizationally, though you might also consider it "disorganization," but that's just a kind of organization.

Atoms, bosons even, are organized.  What drives organization, and where is it headed?

Thursday, January 11, 2018

Decentralization and Diversity

Thinking about Judaism, in terms of centrality it is the polar opposite of Roman Catholicism.

Catholicism is centralized.  The Pope makes the rules, defining what Catholicism is, and who Catholics are.  Roman Catholicism was organized by the Roman Emperor Constantine, and it became the official religion of the Roman Empire, and by extension much of Europe.  Centralization serves the needs of empire.

Judaism has no such central human authority.  There is the Torah, of course, but it does not actually interpret itself, or execute it's own will.  Rabbis interpret the Torah, and there is no central authority of Rabbis.  Instead, there was the original Rabbi, who authorized his disciples, and they authorized their disciples, and so on.

So, when we get to the present, there is a hugh diversity of opinion among Rabbis.  Some are still anti-Zionist, as most were in the beginning of the 20th century.  Others, of course, are Zionist. And that divergence even exists among the well known groups, Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox, which are exceedingly different.

This has the strength of adaptability, and is the perfect approach for a Diaspora, where people are living far aflung, and where there is not an overriding political or "national" objective.

Once there is a common political or national objective, organization, hierarchy, and centralization become useful, and ultimately, demanded.

Malcolm Gladwell wrote a classic article, "The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted," explaining why networks are great at disseminating information, and adapting, but not well suited to political organization or revolution--for those purposes hierarchies are better.

Tuesday, January 9, 2018

The Terror Behind the Creation of Israel

Documented in one of the best posts at Mondoweiss ever, followed by the one of the best comments sections.

The original post is by Thomas Suarez, author of the recent book State of Terror, which is the best book on the Zionist terror from the beginning of Zionism up to the Nabka.  The book is endorsed by the likes of Ilan Pappe, himself the best historian of the Nabka.  Suarez spent many years studying archival documents, some not seen in ages, to produce this book.

The comments section is far longer than the original post, and equally interesting.

One of the commenters sounds a bit like a friend of mine who moved to Israel recently.  Their points are rebutted in a mostly excellent part of the comments, bit by bit.  Very educational.

Then within the comments are many excerpted articles, with the full history of Jerusalem, as best known to objective historians.  Everyone knows it wasn't founded by Jews in 2700 BCE.  David and Solomon are conventionally said to appear 1000 BCE and 900 BCE, however the archeological evidence is that the city was empty then, there is no evidence of palaces or a great civilization.  Then the region is conquered by one empire after another.  But perhaps only under actual Jewish rule for less than the last 200 years BCE.  Afterwards, one empire after another.  In it's 3700 year history, less than 200 years (the Hasemite rule) are known to be under Jewish rule, and at most not much more than that.  (Not that this matters, but it certainly isn't the basis of an objective immortal claim.  Most people have ancestors from many parts of the world...does that give the the right to most people to displace the people who are in any of those places now and create a new exclusive sovereignty for the co-religionists who were dominant in an ancient slice of time in the past?)

The "Second" Temple existed independent of the various imperial rulers, however, so so for about half a millenium, out of the entire 3700 year history prior to modern Israel.  Because...Judaism is a religion.

The Dome of the Rock was the first major Muslim architecture, and has been there almost 1400 years.

Evidence of a First Temple is lacking.

After the revolt of Bar Kochbar, only a small number of leading Jews went into diaspora.  The majority in the levant remained, mostly as farmers, many converting later to Christianity and then Islam.  I said this before from common sense, it is confirmed here.   (Do the Jews have rights to displace the former sovereigns because those poor farmers mostly didn't stick with the religion? What about others that moved in and out, as in fact the Jewish ancestors must have done at some time, and/or may have been there for far longer? )

[This history of Palestine, whose name dates back to the Greeks but was populated for millenia.  The peoples, cultures, religions and empires that have been in and out are astounding.  At the time of Jesus, Greek culture was dominant.  The known Jewish kingdom, the Hasemites, was a mountain group--around Jerusalem--who allied with many other groups to create The Holy Land, a kingdom which lasted less than 200 years, yet it figures big in Western imaginations.]

But this is not to say, even during Jewish rule, that Jews were the only ones in the sourthern levant.  They never were.  I also said this before.  Although the biblical story has Jews as invaders of the Levant (from Abraham's birthplace, Iraq), the best historical evidence is that they were a sect of the regional population of Caananites whose descendants also include modern Palestinians an many other groups.  There is no evidence that any "slaves" escaped from Egypt (and, fwiw, the Pyramids were not built by slaves) or conquered a neighboring territory in 1200 BCE or whatever.  That's all mythology.

The first anyone else knows of Jews is from captivity and that's also when the original Torah was written.  Many including me believe that the Ancient Jewish story (with David, Solomon, and so on) was invented to give the re-settlers a better chance of succeeding.  The returned to their home territory within the new empire created by Cyrus who had conquered Babylon, and under his authority.  Though this is often described as motivated by Cyrus' enlightenment, there may also been considerable geopolitical advantage to him to have a client state near his border with Egypt.  Curiously he and Truman may have had similar motivations in establishing a "Jewish" state, Truman being President who broke ranks with the ongoing UN process  (it was intended that neither Israel nor Palestine in the Resolution 181 plan unilaterally declare independence--in fact it had been forbidden--but be part of a dual nation mandatory system--not to say that 181 had any moral or ethical force either especially as it gave the majority of the territory to settlers rather than the idigenous who, by rights, should have had it all) and recognized Israel's unilateral declaration of independence.

The southern levant has often been a frontier between empires because of it's geography (the connection between 3 continents) and human history.  It seems that Jews--people who claim ancestry from the region but were found elsewhere at various times--have been re-settled twice to run or at least be part of a client state in this region for the major imperial power of the time, first by Cyrus, second by the UK and US.  The Torah casts the Egyptians in a rather unfavorable light--all the better for the Jewish re-settlers not to be co-opted by their new neighbors and remain loyal to the more distant Cyrus.

Given it's central connecting location and proximity to the birthplace of humanity, it's likely that nearly all people have some ancestry from the southern levant.

As Suarez says, however, none of the ancient history really matters now.  But I think clearing away the mythology helps, especially against the backdrop where some are saying "Jews were building Jerusalem for 3700 years."  It would be much more true to say the Palestinians were building Jerusalem for 3700 years.

Correction to earlier post: the Romans used the name Palestine for the region from their first conquest in 6 CE, not later after the sacking of Jerusalem or the revolt of Bar Kochbar as I had previously said.  The name Palestine also had been used by the Greeks, the previous imperial ruler, who had conquered the levant in 330 BCE.  So the name Palestine is at least 2348 years old, and in use for nearly all of that time for the whole region.

The Christian Crusaders kicked out Jews and Muslims.  When the Muslims ultimately regained control, they let the Jews back in.  So for most of the 2nd Millenium, up until the dawn of Zionism, Jews lived in peace under Islamic rulers in the Levant, sometimes going there as a safe haven from Christians and others in other places.

Judaism is just like all other religions in being a mind control system to create useful idiots.

But true Judaism doesn't hold a candle to Zionism in that regards.


Saturday, December 30, 2017

Not My Hero

Jon Schwarz has an excellent critique of The Post at one of my favorite sites, The Intercept.

I wrote this comment about the Post and legendary publisher Katherine Graham.

The Post has always been at social center of plutocracy. Owner Edward McLean bought the Hope diamond for his wife, who wore it socially. Cursed or not, he died in a sanitarium, and the Post was purchased by the boy financial wizard of his time, Eugene Meyer, who had made $15 million dollars before the age of 40 in 1915. He used the pages of the Post to rail against the New Deal. Katherine Graham is his daughter. Eugene gifted the paper mostly to her husband, but also partly to her.
Certainly the paper represents the plutocratic class. Does it also represent the Deep State, CIA, and so on? It has long been alleged, and nothing in the facts would dissuade one from that belief. It's also been called the Pentagon Post.
By 1965 the Vietnam War was obsolete, the ultimate domino, Indonesia, having been taken by a client dictator and purged of adversaries. Johnson Advisors including McNamara were decrying pointlessness. Noam Chomsky has written the capitalist class was turning anti-war by the last years of the 1960's. But the war was a political inconvenience for some people, and opportunity for others. I narrowly escaped the draft years, but somehow never learned for decades that Nixon officially ended the war just before the 1972 election, the ultimate October Surprise. So it had finally served its purpose.
Anyway, printing the Pentagon Papers was gutsy and admirably, but hardly an act of treason either to the capitalist class or the national security class of the day.
Nixon, though he did oversee the undoing of Allende, was not proving the domestic neoliberal that the capitalist class really wanted, and finally got with Reagon, after Carter having done some capable preparatory work. Chomsky has called Nixon the last New Deal President, and Nixon's last unrealized proposal was national healthcare reform based on employer mandates. THAT is what was undone by exposing the Watergate Burglary.

*** end of comment posted.

The Book on Katherine Graham was originally written in the 1970's, entitled Katherine the Great.  It exposes much of the way the government used the paper as a propaganda mouthpiece for the government.  Katherine Graham herself suppressed the mainstream publication of the book.

I found this great background information site looking for info on Philip Graham and the CIA. all the comments!  Mr Graham had a stellar rise, as editor of Harvard Law Review, clerk to Felix Frankfurter, and assistant to William O Donovan, the colorful "Oh So Social" director of the OSS.  Then he marries into the Washington Post by marrying Katherine Meyer, and turns it into the nation's most efficient conduit for pumping out pro-cold-war disinformation cooked up at CIA under Project Mockingbird.

But by the late 1950's, Philip's father-in-law begins to have doubts about the arrangement.  Philip and Katherine are living separately, often forcing friends to take sides.  Philip has a new mistress, and tries to get his will re-written 3 times to make her inheirit the Post.  Ultimately, at a press convention in the spring of 1963, he launches a tirade about government manipulation of the media.  He names a name.  His wife rushes to the scene, Philip is put in a strait jacket and put into a sanitarium (reminiscent of what happened to Edward McLean).  Later, Katherine drives him back to the country home, where he is shortly found dead in the bathtub, the death ruled a suicide.  The last will is ruled intestate, and Katherine becomes the full owner and publisher of The Post.  All this, the efficient elimination of a potential independent voice, someone who has actually had enough and won't take it anymore and might go public about the whole corrupt establishment--conveniently occurred just 4 months before the Kennedy assassination, when there might need to be good media control.

As her fate becomes secure Katherine Graham continues the Post's proud traditions of boosting war and plutocracy and otherwise serving the Deep State better than any major paper, ultimately becoming the last major US newspaper to denounce the Vietnam War.

The Post's leading role in exposing Watergate is also in the comments brushed away as I have done, against the background of the plutocracy deciding Nixon is too independent minded to implement the desired new regime of neoliberalism to replace the New Deal, so he is done in by the Deep State through their friendly local newspaper, somehow always owned and operated by friends, the Post.