No more Heroes anymore

[Lynne]

Creating a manufactured feel good factor, that has the country united together against the government created “them”. This feel good factor is in contrast to the one created after 7/7. What 7/7 achieved were fear and a sense of helplessness and it was following that the government pushed for further anti terrorist laws to restrict our freedom under the banner of saving just that freedom. Their aim now from the aftermath of these recent actions is one of we are the heroes; it was the general public that came to save the day. This mindset is a form of propaganda: a division of us and them.


Instead of analysing the events, people are carried away in the media craze of the individual stories. The stories of the heroes who saved the public were the mainstream media focus. Analysing whether this is false flag terror or genuine terror is pointless. The reason being is that regardless of the intent or who is behind the intent. The end product is not fear but a sense of fearlessness. It is a change of tactics and we should be aware of it.

Any rational mind can sit down and logically deduce motivations for groups in the middle and where UK forces are placed in a war that the majority of the world opposes. It is expectable that resistance will evolve. However who benefits from these resistances? The fact is that if a terror cell was working to bring us down, then they certainly have not done any study on the outcome. This seems to me to be not very rational. If you are going to risk your life for a cause, surely you want to have an impact. However it is evident clearly from UK foreign policy, that unless you are a country that we are interdependent on, then your actions have no effect.


Trying to hypothesis all the different motivations for the government being behind this begins from a biased view. It is particularly important, when the media is already attempting to create this bias that we are clear of it when we have to look at the important factors after an event. These are: How much does the “Why?” really mater, because “why?” after an event is not always the same as the “Why?” before. What happens after and the result can hide the original “Why?

There is no case of some secret agenda in my opinion and many people here may think I am deluded in saying that. However let me clarify that I do not mean they do not have an agenda. Just that it is apparent and how observation of it is subject to us as individuals. It is basic 101 politics that a nation acts not in another nation’s interest, but ultimately their own. This can be economic and it can be security. Within any organisation there are individuals and individuals just as nations and just as corporations, act to prolong their own existence. However the issue now is that due to the economic structural basis of our societies, we produce actions that whilst in the short term seem to be profitable, there is no long term insight, Conflict is a very economically productive business and at the centre of conflicts sits the arms trade. Europe is the largest producer of arms in the world, Followed by the US and then Russia, (I recommend a good and also enjoyable read about the arms trade is Mark Thomas’s: As used on the Famous Nelson Mandela) . Within these Britain is at the forefront in Europe, therefore you have three permanent members of the UN security Council, being the biggest arms dealers. How Paradoxical from an organisation set up to create security.



There is global pockets of conflicts around the world and we would be extremely naïve to take the view that every incident, is down to a simple equation of the powers that be were behind it. Likewise it is naïve to turn around and state the government mantra of it is al quida funded attacks.


Let it be or made it happen, none the less it happened and if anyone thinks that groups who I would prefer to name as resistance fighters are not operating then they are deluded. This is the case also with the evidence that those in the upper echelons of the Neo conservative regime benefited and have unanswered questions regarding 9/11. Who accepts that a man in a cave did it all anyhow? If general public opinion is on the side of those against the government line is that not an achievement just as good as any inquiry? Do we really expect that a honest one can occur. We have our official relations and we have our unofficial relations. Governments deal with and aid states regardless of their record of human rights and to be fair they would be hard pressed too make judgement considering the UK and US own record when it comes to human rights. What is said on the public pulpit is spin and most people are aware that a government gives what it believes its citizens can stomach. It is all about business ultimately. Hypocrisy, which is a word I use a lot, is evident and I use it a lot because it happens a lot.



We have a system now though that is imploding in its self. Wars are fought on ideology based on religious fundamentalism and what we have now is not a situation where it is as in cold war; where the situation was that the ideology lay out with the country. The last war of words was the war on communism. There was never really any war on the ideology, in the sense that anyone truly thought Marxism was evil. The issue lay at the threat to capitalistic ideology and the fact that people would question it. Now the ideology is about religion and freedom, but ultimately translates to protecting an ideology through the use of religion as the control. . just as now, the situation is about keeping Britain in a strong position for trade purposes and security purposes. Yet this is about bad business management, if they could take a step back from the get rich now mentality , then they can still have the benefits. Instead of thinking of the immediate profit and sending off the arms, it should be thought of the humanitarian cost. Instead of continuing to fund a war for oil, they should spend that money on funding an economy based on alternative energy resources. The subsidies to the oil companies and car companies are met by tax payers ultimately. I could go on and on about what we should do. The fact is that they have an agenda and it is to make profit for a small group of individuals and they will do as much as public opinion lets them away with. It is here that we have to be vigilant in what governments say. We need to look at the underlying current take as an example a story about China and how much is spent on military for example and another reminder of how it has threatened Taiwan, to create fear of China’s motives. Words of China has the biggest army in the world, are not also stated along side the fact that it is a country with a large population. There is an agenda to put our selves as the heroes with no ulterior motives. Just as no human is perfect; neither is any collective constituted of humans. We can see the motives if we bother to care.

[karlos]

[Lynne]

stelios wrote:

[karlos]

Hey so we agree on everything.
Your article was quite an in depth peace and very good i thought.


I hope other people read it and come to the same conclusions.

[Lynne]

Thank you , I am a lazy writer though , which can lead to misunderstandings ( I am attempting to sort that).

If you have any links about the Rothchilds' I would be very interested to read.

[kbo234]

[Leiff]

Corti - The Rise of the House of Rothschild (biggest war profiteers in the history of world) (1928).rar 2.13 MB

http://www.8thestate.com/thinktank/download.php?id=8

Armstrong - Rothschild Money Trust (1940).rar 1.36 MB

http://www.8thestate.com/thinktank/download.php?id=9

[karlos]

[Mark Gobell]

[Leiff]

Yes, the Monbiot quote in my sig is pure sarcasm - it is my revenge for that vile 9/11 truth hit piece article that he wrote...

[Mark Gobell]

My apologies Leiff.