The gist of this blog has been continued on the Rational Politics blog, here:
! 1984 NEWSPEAK !
* In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell * This blog gives current examples of how George Orwell's novel became a primer for the American government circa 2014
Saturday, August 2, 2025
Monday, November 2, 2020
2020 election summary
So far, 2020 has seen the most prolific production of Newspeak in history.
The 2020 election in the United States has been the culmination of several years of fake news and hoaxes. The most notorious was the Russia collusion hoax, which generated the Mueller report that itself omitted key evidence that contradicted Mueller's conclusions.
The "fine people" hoax was so well choreographed by the media and the Democrat party that Joe Biden used it as the premise for his entire campaign.
The best single summary of 2020 was this cartoon by Scott Adams.
(click to enlarge)
Saturday, August 12, 2017
Democrats and Republicans speak different languages — and it helps explain why we're so divided
http://www.businessinsider.com/political-language-rhetoric-framing-messaging-lakoff-luntz-2017-8
Sunday, July 23, 2017
AP style guidelines
Brainwashing at its most fundamental level.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2017/07/18/bozell-graham-column-ap-style-book-getting-crazy
Bozell & Graham Column: The AP Style Book Is Getting Crazy
Saturday, July 22, 2017
Now the Left bans Dawkins?
http://motls.blogspot.com/2017/07/pro-islamist-berkeley-hosts-banned.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29
sunday, july 23, 2017 ...
/
/
/
/
/
Pro-Islamist Berkeley hosts banned Richard Dawkins' talk
In the morning, I saw a two-day-old tweet by Steve Pinker:
The Left continues its slow suicide by intolerance, emboldening the right: Richard Dawkins deplatformed in Berkeley. https://goo.gl/Ey12K7
Richard Dawkins deplatformed at a book talk Berkeley for “abusive speech” about Islam on Twitter
Richard Dawkins was supposed to speak at this event in Berkeley on August 9: a talk about his new book, Science in the Soul: Selected Writings of a Passionate Atheist. As you see, the talk has been…whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com
The article that Pinker linked to reveals (see also other outlets) that a radio station disinvited Richard Dawkins who was supposed to give a talk at the First Congregational Church on August 9th.
The talk should have followed the August 8th publication of Science in the Soul, Dawkins' new book. The organizers' explanation why they cancelled the talk is rather amazing. It obviously includes the usual assumption that the "free speech" may only include the speech that the self-appointed ideologues-in-chief like – all the other speech must be banned as "abusive or hurtful speech". Well, the statement that "the speech that is liked by everybody is allowed" isn't a principle that may underlie a civilization: it is a worthless tautology.
We know that the overgrown haters of the freedom of speech at Berkeley have banned right-wingers Ann Coulter, Ben Shapiro, and Milo With-a-Greek-name before. But there's another layer of craziness in this particular e-mail.
The KPFA radio station wrote the following to the ticket buyers:
Dear Richard Dawkins event ticket buyers,The explanation is absurd and proves that these people's brains are broken beyond repair. Dawkins' book is about atheism and so was the scheduled talk. One only needs to know one basic bit of information to be sure that Dawkins is against religions; he is arguably the world's most famous outspoken atheist intellectual. And in the present world, Islam is obviously the most extreme religion that puts all the characteristics that atheists may dislike about religions on steroids.
We regret to inform you that KPFA has canceled our event with Richard Dawkins. We had booked this event based entirely on his excellent new book on science, when we didn’t know he had offended and hurt – in his tweets and other comments on Islam, so many people. KPFA does not endorse hurtful speech. While KPFA emphatically supports serious free speech, we do not support abusive speech. We apologize for not having had broader knowledge of Dawkins views much earlier. We also apologize to all those inconvenienced by this cancellation. Your ticket purchases will automatically be refunded by Brown Paper Tickets.
Sincerely, KPFA Radio 94.1 FM
So how can the organizer of a talk by the world's leading atheist be surprised that this atheist also opposes Islam? And its irrational approach to science, celebration of brute force, dogmatic attachment to the Middle Ages, suppression of human freedoms and women's basic rights, and tons of other things? The mental dissonance of the KPFA people is absolutely staggering.
Just to be sure, none of the leading atheist pundits suffers from this kind of a flagrant inconsistency. The fact that Islam is a strengthened version of the things that they dislike about religions is often pointed out by every single leading atheist pundit in the world – including Richard Dawkins, Steven Weinberg, Bill Maher, Sam Harris, and others. All sane people know that it would be crazy to fight against religions for hours every day and defend Islam at the same moment. After all, Islam is a religion. And when we say that it's not just a religion or it's not a true religion, we mean that Islam is trying to be even more far-reaching than other religions and this makes things worse, not better.
The KPFA and similar people may be utterly insane. But they may also be just immoral jerks who don't actually care an iota about atheism or science. Instead, they only use "atheists" as allies against their actual enemies – the traditional social and moral values of the Western civilization. Because most of the people in their environment who defend these values are Christians, they simply decide that Christianity is the enemy and atheists might be allies. But these extreme leftists only treat them as allies for political reasons. They don't actually understand the logic of the atheists. They don't really care about it at all.
What they care about are things like "identity politics". Along with practitioners of assorted sexual deviations etc., the Muslims have been declared by their ideological movement to be a minority (in the West) that must enjoy privileges and they mindlessly work to make this happen. When they need to disinvite the most famous atheist, they happily do so. When they need to sacrifice their life in fights on the side of ISIS, they probably won't but they will happily sacrifice yours. A leftist is a person who is willing to sacrifice your life for his delusions. A Muslim warrior is at least willing to sacrifice his own, too.
Aside from comments that are compatible with my thoughts about the event, we could enjoy some texts by these brain-dead leftists. For example, Pat Mc Ginley wrote on the WhyEvolutionIsTrue website:
Unfortunately, it’s true that leading atheists, like, Dawkins, Harris, Maher are blatantly Islamophobic. Allowing their politics to harm their great work for atheism. Politically-motivated Islamophobia coincided precisely with the so-called war-on-terror. It was easier to get public support to invade Muslim countries by demonising Muslims. Bush even called it ‘a crusade’.Wow. Again, leading atheists must obviously be Islamophobic because this implication follows from the very definitions of these two words. An atheist is someone who is repelled from every God ("a" is negation and "theism" is some acknowledgement or celebration of God's existence). An Islamophobe is someone who is repelled by a specific God, namely Allah, the God of Islam. The previous sentences imply that every atheist must be an Islamophobe. If you can't understand this simple logic, your brain is broken beyond repair and I recommend euthanasia to you, Pat.
Note that even the very word makes it unambiguous that Islamophobia is a phobia of Islam as a faith, not a phobia as Muslims as human beings.
As other participants of the discussions have mentioned, the term "Islamophobia" was coined by the Muslim Brotherhood, the parent organization of Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. The word "Islamophobe" was intended to be a precise synonym of a "heretic". Except that an "Islamophobe" lives at places that the Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda don't control yet. So different tools have to be used against these heretics than the tools that are usable on the territory of Daesh or other Islamic regimes. Instead of the "stoning to death", they have to fight the heretics by tools like "terror by the politically correct left-wing useful idiots in their fifth columns". But the term "Islamophobe" has been defined very clearly and the definition can't be changed. It's spectacularly clear that every good and sane person in the West is an Islamophobe to one extent or another. So although the ending -phobia was designed to indicate that there was something ill about Islamophobia, the truth is obviously opposite: It's utterly sick not to be an Islamophobe.
Incidentally, Bush may have used the term "crusade" at one moment because the conflict against the Islam was a crusade. The purpose of the original crusades was to liberate the Holy Land from Islamic rule. At least to some extent, some parts of the war on terror had similar sides and a similar purpose so they may have deserved to be called "crusades".
Incidentally, Dawkins himself responded with a kind letter to the radio station:
...I used to love your station when I lived in Berkeley for two years, shortly after that beloved place had become the iconic home of free speech. I have criticized the appalling misogyny and homophobia of Islam, I have criticized the murdering of apostates for no crime other than their disbelief. Far from attacking Muslims, I understand – as perhaps you do not – that Muslims themselves are the prime victims of the oppressive cruelties of Islamism, especially Muslim women...One more comment. If you read the responses to Steve Pinker's tweet, they are absolutely terrifying. Many of them hysterically attack both Pinker and Dawkins and the authors seem to be biology students and similar things. I would be scared of teaching this brain-dead, brainwashed youth. It's a bit surprising that these Western allies of the Islamic terrorists haven't started their own terrorist attacks yet – if we don't count things like the destruction of the Berkeley campus. When these fanatical savages figure out that yes, they can, things may be tough.
...I am known as a frequent critic of Christianity and have never been de-platformed for that. Why do you give Islam a free pass? Why is it fine to criticize Christianity but not Islam? ...
...You say I use 'abusive speech' about Islam. I would seriously – I mean it – like to hear what examples of my 'abusive speech' you had in mind. When you fail to discover any, I presume you will issue a public apology, which I will of course accept in a spirit of gratitude for what KPFA once was. And could become again...
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
Scott Adams comments on the news
https://www.periscope.tv/ScottAdamsSays/1MnxnLmmamyGO?t=26
Wednesday, March 8, 2017
False Flag attacks
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-07/ever-growing-list-admitted-false-flag-attacks
Presidents, Prime Ministers, Congressmen, Generals, Spooks, Soldiers and Police ADMIT to False Flag Terror
“Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.”
- The murder of the Turkish Prime Minister (1960)
- Bombings in Portugal (1966)
- The Piazza Fontana massacre in Italy (1969)
- Terror attacks in Turkey (1971)
- The Peteano bombing in Italy (1972)
- The Atocha massacre in Madrid, Spain (1977)
- The abduction and murder of the Italian Prime Minister (1978) (and see this)
The Agency maintains liaison in varying degrees with foreign police/security organizations through its field stations ….[CIA provides training sessions as follows:]a. Providing trainees with basic knowledge in the uses of commercial and military demolitions and incendiaries as they may be applied in terrorism and industrial sabotage operations.b. Introducing the trainees to commercially available materials and home laboratory techniques, likely to he used in the manufacture of explosives and incendiaries by terrorists or saboteurs.c. Familiarizing the trainees with the concept of target analysis and operational planning that a saboteur or terrorist must employ.d. Introducing the trainees to booby trapping devices and techniques giving practical experience with both manufactured and improvised devices through actual fabrication.***The program provides the trainees with ample opportunity to develop basic familiarity and use proficiently through handling, preparing and applying the various explosive charges, incendiary agents, terrorist devices and sabotage techniques.
At this moment, we are confronted with the extraordinary story of a CIA guerrilla manual for the anti-Sandinista contras whom we are backing, which advocates not only assassinations of Sandinistas but the hiring of criminals to assassinate the guerrillas we are supporting in order to create martyrs.
“Under Rumsfeld’s new approach, I was told, US military operatives would be permitted to pose abroad as corrupt foreign businessmen seeking to buy contraband items that could be used in nuclear-weapons systems. In some cases, according to the Pentagon advisers, local citizens could be recruited and asked to join up with guerrillas or terrorists…
The new rules will enable the Special Forces community to set up what it calls ‘action teams’ in the target countries overseas which can be used to find and eliminate terrorist organizations. ‘Do you remember the right-wing execution squads in El Salvador?’ the former high-level intelligence official asked me, referring to the military-led gangs that committed atrocities in the early nineteen-eighties. ‘We founded them and we financed them,’ he said. ‘The objective now is to recruit locals in any area we want. And we aren’t going to tell Congress about it.’ A former military officer, who has knowledge of the Pentagon’s commando capabilities, said, ‘We’re going to be riding with the bad boys.’”
U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.
He should do what I did when I was Minister of the Interior … infiltrate the movement with agents provocateurs inclined to do anything …. And after that, with the strength of the gained population consent, … beat them for blood and beat for blood also those teachers that incite them. Especially the teachers. Not the elderly, of course, but the girl teachers yes.
In police jargon, a throwdown is a weapon planted on a victim.
Perez, himself a former [Los Angeles Police Department] cop, was caught stealing eight pounds of cocaine from police evidence lockers. After pleading guilty in September, he bargained for a lighter sentence by telling an appalling story of attempted murder and a “throwdown”–police slang for a weapon planted by cops to make a shooting legally justifiable. Perez said he and his partner, Officer Nino Durden, shot an unarmed 18th Street Gang member named Javier Ovando, then planted a semiautomatic rifle on the unconscious suspect and claimed that Ovando had tried to shoot them during a stakeout.
As part of his plea bargain, Pérez implicated scores of officers from the Rampart Division’s anti-gang unit, describing routinely beating gang members, planting evidence on suspects, falsifying reports and covering up unprovoked shootings.
Most terrorists are false flag terrorists or are created by our own security services.
By any measure the US has long used terrorism. In ‘78-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation.
Provocation is one of the most basic, but confounding, aspects of warfare. Despite its sometimes obvious use, it has succeeded consistently against audiences around the world, for millennia, to compel war. A well-constructed provocation narrative mutes even the most vocal opposition.***The culmination of a strategic provocation operation invariably reflects a narrative of victimhood: we are the
victims of the enemy’s unforgivable atrocities.***In the case of strategic provocation the deaths of an aggressor’s own personnel are a core tactic of the provocation.***The persistent use of strategic provocation over centuries – and its apparent importance to war planners – begs the question of its likely use by the US and other states in the near term.
“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin
- The NSA admits that it lied about what really happened in the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 … manipulating data to make it look like North Vietnamese boats fired on a U.S. ship so as to create a false justification for the Vietnam war
- One of the central lies used to justify the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq after Iraq invaded Kuwait was the false statement by a young Kuwaiti girl that Iraqis murdered Kuwaiti babies in hospitals. Her statement was arranged by a Congressman who knew that she was actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the U.S. – who was desperately trying to lobby the U.S. to enter the war – but the Congressman hid that fact from the public and from Congress
- Another central lie used to justify the Gulf War was the statement that a quarter of a million Iraqi troops were massed on the border with Saudi Arabia (see also this article)
- Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Ron Suskind reported that the White House ordered the CIA to forge and backdate a document falsely linking Iraq with Muslim terrorists and 9/11 … and that the CIA complied with those instructions and in fact created the forgery, which was then used to justify war against Iraq. And see this and this
- Time magazine points out that the claim by President Bush that Iraq was attempting to buy “yellow cake” Uranium from Niger:
had been checked out — and debunked — by U.S. intelligence a year before the President repeated it.
- Everyone knew that Iraq didn’t have weapons of mass destruction. More
- The entire torture program was geared towards obtaining false confessions linking Iraq and 9/11
- CIA agents and documents admit that the agency gave Iran plans for building nuclear weapons … so it could frame Iran for trying to build the bomb
- The “humanitarian” wars in Syria, Libya and Yugoslavia were all justified by exaggerated reports that the leaders of those countries were committing atrocities against their people. And see this.