The 4 Freedoms Library
2024-03-29T11:12:36Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/66096223?profile=RESIZE_48X48&width=48&height=48&crop=1%3A1
http://4freedoms.com/group/alinsky/forum/topic/listForContributor?groupUrl=alinsky&user=3g0oedh53p9am&feed=yes&xn_auth=no
Mountain Guerilla: Only the Left is Organised / Tribalism is the only way forward
tag:4freedoms.com,2017-03-08:3766518:Topic:186116
2017-03-08T22:22:49.883Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<div>This article got me thinking about the 'organiser' concept again, but from a different viewpoint. Please digest the article then come back. </div>
<div><a href="https://mountainguerrilla.wordpress.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mountainguerrilla.wordpress.com</a></div>
<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote"><p><i>Comment on Sam’s page: ‘<b>Battlefield pickup: Plan for it. Make sure your people know how to clear them, get them into duffle bags, and into your supply channels…</b></i></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>This article got me thinking about the 'organiser' concept again, but from a different viewpoint. Please digest the article then come back. </div>
<div><a href="https://mountainguerrilla.wordpress.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mountainguerrilla.wordpress.com</a></div>
<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote"><p><i>Comment on Sam’s page: ‘<b>Battlefield pickup: Plan for it. Make sure your people know how to clear them, get them into duffle bags, and into your supply channels to be re-issued as necessary. You may keep ammo as needed to replace expenditures, but the rest goes to the S4 for caching and resupply.</b>‘</i></p>
<p><i>My response: While technically about the closest thing to a legitimate response I saw, this is ridiculously optimistic. In all of the classes I’ve taught, over the last half-decade plus of teaching through the MG blog,including the auxiliary and support classes, nobody—NOBODY—has even come close to having anything near an organizational footprint that this answer would matter too…except the Left.</i></p>
</blockquote>
<div>Mountain Guerilla runs training courses for when SHTF. I read that on the next one he won't allow anyone to sleep in the van, even if raining etc, still got to bivvy down in the dirt. It set me thinking again about Alinsky's rules for radicals and how successful was Obama the "Community Organiser" (in gaining power, not in using it wisely). Alinsky was right: that is the way to do things.</div>
<div>The first step is to make a boring old 'organisation' that functions properly. After that you can do anything. If you get infiltrated you can run tests and traps to find them out. You can be peaceful or violent (like Black Blok) as is judged politically expedient. Or you can lobby MPs and conduct 'lawfare' and be totally legit.</div>
<div>Ultimately, that is why Tommy failed. He was a brilliant 'leader' but a poor 'manager', so things were just not organised securely, and it became fairly easy to take down the whole system. e.g. with the idiot Hel Gower bad mouthing me, or Tommy deciding on his own to take the mask off and to do a YT video giving all his financial info. These were all politically crazy acts.</div>
<div>Back to Mountain Guerilla. I want to form a self protection group like he says, but in the UK, where could I even start? Getting hold of firearms and training is near impossible, and where in this packed strip of land would you make your backup site? Then when it comes to approaching people, there are no like minded people. If I asked a British person to get involved with this kind of preparation for societal collapse, he'd think I was very crazy. </div>
<div>I think you both (Paul and Kinana) will know what I am talking about because you can visualise it from a US standpoint, but UK people just don't get it. I don't think any of my neighbours would unite to defend our homes collectively, or even to do a neighbourhood patrol as things heat up. So if you can't unite with your neighbours, it has to be with others that you feel something in common with and there we go again, its an organisation, slowly developing contacts and growing a base.</div>
<div>In the UK, its a hopeless mess.</div>
</div>
Alinsky interview with Playboy magazine
tag:4freedoms.com,2016-11-02:3766518:Topic:183737
2016-11-02T02:41:16.689Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<center><p><font size="+3">Saul D. Alinsky</font><br></br><font size="+2"><b>A role model for left-wing Satanists</b></font><br></br><font size="+1"><br></br><b>by Diane Vera</b></font></p>
<p><br></br><br></br><i>Copyright © 2005 by Diane Vera. All rights reserved.</i></p>
</center>
<p><br></br><br></br>The 1972 Vintage Books paperback edition of <i>Rules for Radicals</i> by Saul D. Alinksy has a page of quotes just before the table of contents. In the last of the three quotes, Alinsky himself said the…</p>
<center><p><font size="+3">Saul D. Alinsky</font><br/><font size="+2"><b>A role model for left-wing Satanists</b></font><br/><font size="+1"><br/><b>by Diane Vera</b></font></p>
<p><br/><br/><i>Copyright © 2005 by Diane Vera. All rights reserved.</i></p>
</center>
<p><br/><br/>The 1972 Vintage Books paperback edition of <i>Rules for Radicals</i> by Saul D. Alinksy has a page of quotes just before the table of contents. In the last of the three quotes, Alinsky himself said the following:</p>
<blockquote><p>Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>On page 71, speaking of his training program for political organizers, Alinsky remarked:</p>
<blockquote><p>The qualities we were trying to develop in organizers in the years of attempting to train them included some qualities that in all probability cannot be taught. They either had them, or could get them only through a miracle from above or below.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And, on the <a target="_new" href="http://www.progress.org/2003/alinsky14.htm">last page</a> of a <a target="_new" href="http://www.progress.org/2003/alinsky2.htm">1972 <i>Playboy</i> Interview with Saul D. Alinsky</a>, he said:</p>
<blockquote><p>ALINSKY: Sometimes it seems to me that the question people should ask is not "Is there life after death?" but "Is there life after birth?" I don't know whether there's anything after this or not. I haven't seen the evidence one way or the other and I don't think anybody else has either. But I do know that man's obsession with the question comes out of his stubborn refusal to face up to his own mortality. Let's say that if there is an afterlife, and I have anything to say about it, I will unreservedly choose to go to hell.</p>
<p>PLAYBOY: Why?</p>
<p>ALINSKY: Hell would be heaven for me. All my life I've been with the have-nots. Over here, if you're a have-not, you're short of dough. If you're a have-not in hell, you're short of virtue. Once I get into hell, I'll start organizing the have-nots over there.</p>
<p>PLAYBOY: Why them?</p>
<p>ALINSKY: They're my kind of people.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I'm not sure whether Alinsky really was a Satanist/Luciferian of some sort or whether he was just joking. He may well have been just joking. The man certainly did have a sense of humor.</p>
<p>When asked his religion, he would always say that he was Jewish. But, on many levels, he seemed to have distanced himself from his Orthodox Jewish background. For example, in <i>Rules for Radicals</i>, when praising Moses as a "good organizer," Alinsky did so in a manner rather irreverent toward the egotism of the Biblical God (pp. 89 to 91).</p>
<p>Be that as it may, he's an excellent role model for politically left-leaning Satanists, whether theistic or symbolic. (When I say "role model" I mean only in a <b><i>very</i></b> general sense, not one to be followed slavishly.) Certainly he can be said to have manifested his true will. And he espoused a lot of values that are familiar to today's Satanists, such as his emphasis on power, self-interest, creativity, and practicality.</p>
<p><i>Rules for Radicals</i> is full of pragmatic realism. For example, on page 88:</p>
<blockquote><p>In mass organization, you can't go outside people's actual experience. I've been asked, for example, why I never talk to a Catholic priest or a Protestant minister in terms of the Judaeo-Christian ethic or the Ten Commandments or the Sermon on the Mount. I never talk in those terms. Instead I approach them on the basis of their own self-interest, the welfare of their Church, even its physical property.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Alinsky accomplished a lot. He built many organzations that gave lot of people the power to improve their lives.</p>
<p>In <a target="_new" href="http://www.progress.org/2003/alinsky8.htm">Part 7</a> of the 1972 <i>Playboy</i> interview, Alinsky said:</p>
<blockquote><p>The biggest obstacles we faced were the apathy and despair and hopelessness of most of the slum dwellers. You've got to remember that when injustice is complete and crushing, people very seldom rebel; they just give up. A small percentage crack and blow their brains out, but the other, 99 percent say, "Sure, it's bad, but what can we do? You can't fight city hall. It's a rotten world for everybody, and anyway, who knows, maybe I'll win at numbers or my lottery ticket will come through. And the guy down the block is probably worse off than me."</p>
<p>The first thing we have to do when we come into a community is to break down those justifications for inertia. We tell people, <b>"Look, you don't have to put up with all this shit. There's something concrete you can do about it. But to accomplish anything you've got to have power, and you'll only get it through organization. Now, power comes in two forms -- money and people. You haven't got any money, but you do have people, and here's what you can do with them."</b> And we showed the workers in the packing houses how they could organize a union and get higher wages and benefits, and we showed the local merchants how their profits would go up with higher wages in the community, and we showed the exploited tenants how they could fight back against their landlords. Pretty soon we'd established a community-wide coalition of workers, local businessmen, labor leaders and housewives -- our power base -- and we were ready to do battle.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Unlike many leftists, Alinsky avoided dogma. In <a href="http://www.progress.org/2003/alinsky11.htm">Part 10</a> of the 1972 <i>Playboy</i> interview, he said:</p>
<blockquote><p>I've never joined any organization -- not even the ones I've organized myself. I prize my own independence too much. And philosophically, I could never accept any rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism. One of the most important things in life is what judge Learned Hand described as "that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're right." If you don't have that, <u>if you think you've got an inside track to absolute truth, you become doctrinaire, humorless and intellectually constipated. The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political and racial fanatics, from the persecutions of the Inquisition on down to Communist purges and Nazi genocide.</u> The great atomic physicist Niels Bohr summed it up pretty well when he said, "Every sentence I utter must be understood not as an affirmation, but as a question." Nobody owns the truth, and dogma, whatever form it takes, is the ultimate enemy of human freedom.</p>
<p>Now, this doesn't mean that I'm rudderless; I think I have a much keener sense of direction and purpose than the true believer with his rigid ideology, because I'm free to be loose, resilient and independent, able to respond to any situation as it arises without getting trapped by articles of faith. <b>My only fixed truth is a belief in people, a conviction that if people have the opportunity to act freely and the power to control their own destinies, they'll generally reach the right decisions.</b>The only alternative to that belief is rule by an elite, whether it's a Communist bureaucracy or our own present-day corporate establishment. You should never have an ideology more specific than that of the founding fathers: "For the general welfare." That's where I parted company with the Communists in the Thirties, and that's where I stay parted from them today.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But his "belief in people" certainly did not translate into utopian idealism. Also in <a target="_new" href="http://www.progress.org/2003/alinsky11.htm">Part 10</a> of the 1972 <i>Playboy</i> interview, Alinsky said:</p>
<blockquote><p>People don't get opportunity or freedom or equality or dignity as an act of charity; they have to fight for it, force it out of the establishment. [...] Reconciliation means just one thing: When one side gets enough power, then the other side gets reconciled to it. That's where you need organization -- first to compel concessions and then to make sure the other side delivers. If you're too delicate to exert the necessary pressures on the power structure, then you might as well get out of the ball park. This was the fatal mistake the white liberals made, relying on altruism as an instrument of social change. That's just self-delusion. No issue can be negotiated unless you first have the clout to compel negotiation.</p>
<p>[...]</p>
<p>In fact, of course, conflict is the vital core of an open society; if you were going to express democracy in a musical score, your major theme would be the harmony of dissonance. All change means movement, movement means friction and friction means heat. You'll find consensus only in a totalitarian state, Communist or fascist.</p>
<p>My opposition to consensus politics, however, doesn't mean I'm opposed to compromise; just the opposite. In the world as it is, no victory is ever absolute; but in the world as it is, the right things also invariably get done for the wrong reasons. We didn't win in Woodlawn because the establishment suddenly experienced a moral revelation and threw open its arms to blacks; we won because we backed them into a corner and kept them there until they decided it would be less expensive and less dangerous to surrender to our demands than to continue the fight. I remember that during the height of our Woodlawn effort, I attended a luncheon with a number of presidents of major corporations who wanted to "know their enemy." One of them said to me, "Saul, you seem like a nice guy personally, but why do you see everything only in terms of power and conflict rather than from the point of view of good will and reason and cooperation?" I told him, "Look, when you and your corporation approach competing corporations in terms of good will, reason and cooperation instead of going for the jugular, then I'll follow your lead." There was a long silence at the table, and the subject was dropped.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Given Alinksi's overall approach to organizing, he has been called a "Machiavelli for the common man." In <i>Rules for Radicals</i>, Alinksy's response to those who ask "Does the end justify the means?" was "The means-and-end moralists, or non-doers, always wind up on their ends without any means" (p. 25).</p>
<p>Some relevant web pages:</p>
<p></p>
<ul>
<li><a target="_new" href="http://www.progress.org/2003/alinsky2.htm">1972 <i>Playboy</i> Interview with Saul D. Alinsky</a>, on the Progress Report website, which also has an article <a href="http://www.progress.org/archive/alinsky.htm">Saul Alinsky and the Industrial Areas Foundation</a> by Sanford D. Horwitt</li>
</ul>
<p><a href="http://theisticsatanism.com/politics/Alinsky.html">http://theisticsatanism.com/politics/Alinsky.html</a></p>
<p></p>
Fascist Left Destruction of Enoch Powell
tag:4freedoms.com,2016-09-10:3766518:Topic:182952
2016-09-10T00:25:11.926Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yJQMz-fZzC0?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EMPDKzdUwpo?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Fp2lorGQV0o?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yJQMz-fZzC0?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EMPDKzdUwpo?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Fp2lorGQV0o?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
The Luminaries of the Totalitarian Left - by PAM at American Thinker
tag:4freedoms.com,2013-08-29:3766518:Topic:136226
2013-08-29T00:55:14.724Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p><span class="home_blog_date">July 14, 2013</span></p>
<h1>Professors of Anti-Fascism</h1>
<p><strong>By</strong><span> </span><a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/paul_austin_murphy/"><strong>Paul Austin Murphy</strong></a></p>
<div id="article_box_ad"></div>
<div class="article_body"><p><span><span>It's good to see </span></span><a href="http://www.tees.ac.uk/sections/research/on_research_story.cfm?staffid=5"><span><span>Professor Nigel Copsey</span></span></a><span><span>, of Teeside…</span></span></p>
</div>
<p><span class="home_blog_date">July 14, 2013</span></p>
<h1>Professors of Anti-Fascism</h1>
<p><strong>By</strong><span> </span><a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/paul_austin_murphy/"><strong>Paul Austin Murphy</strong></a></p>
<div id="article_box_ad"></div>
<div class="article_body"><p><span><span>It's good to see </span></span><a href="http://www.tees.ac.uk/sections/research/on_research_story.cfm?staffid=5"><span><span>Professor Nigel Copsey</span></span></a><span><span>, of Teeside University (in the UK), writing the following:</span></span></p>
<blockquote><p><span><span>"Clearly, the Far Left (i.e., the Marxist Left) is utilising the internet to disseminate its anti-patriotic, revolutionary and anti-democratic vitriol more widely and more effectively. Of the organisations that are specifically identified are Respect, the Stop the War Coalition (StWC), Counterfire, as well as many militant university professors and various university research groups. However, Hope Note hate and the SWP-UAF are by far the most active organisations making their presence felt in this particular domain."</span></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span><span>Ah! But of course Nigel Copsey didn't write that! He wrote this instead:</span></span></p>
<blockquote><p><span><span>"Clearly, the far-right is utilising the internet to disseminate its anti-Muslim vitriol more widely and more effectively. Of the organisations that are specifically identified, the English Defence League, rather than the BNP, is by far the most active organisation making its presence felt in this particular domain."</span></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span><span>Have you ever wondered why literally zero of these university 'think tanks', 'research groups' and individual professors investigate and analyse any far-left groups or individuals? I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that these think tanks and research groups are overwhelmingly made up of, well, Leftists. That would explain it. That<em> does</em> explain it!</span></span></p>
<p><span><span><a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/assets/Copley.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/assets/Copley.png?width=350" width="350" class="align-right"/></a>I think at most one of these 'think tanks' (e.g. the </span></span><a href="http://extremisproject.org/2012/10/new-players-on-the-british-far-right-a-beginners-guide/"><span><span>Extremis Project</span></span></a><span><span>) does deign to investigate Islamist or Muslim extremism (though not Leftist extremism); but it too does so only in conjunction with far more investigations into 'far-right extremism'. In any case, the amount it spends on Islamist extremism is minimal in relation to how much time, and space, it spends on what it calls the 'far right'. This leads me to conclude that the addition of Islamist groups is often or always tokenistic; just as when the UK's </span></span><a href="http://theenglishdefenceleagueextra.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/searchlight-angie-choudarys-big-mac.html"><span><span>Hope Not Hate, or Nick Lowles, included Anjem Choudary </span></span></a><span><span>and </span></span><a href="http://theenglishdefenceleagueextra.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/searchlight-angie-choudarys-big-mac.html"><span><span>Muslims Against Crusades/Al-Muhajiroun </span></span></a><span><span>in its list of 'extremists' (yet not a single other extreme Islamist group or individual). Hope Not Hate only did so after this Communist-run organization had existed for many years and around six or more years after the London bombing, as well as at least twenty years after Islamist and Muslim extremism had become a big problem here in the UK. In other words, both Hope Not Hate, and that single 'investigative project into extremism', include a single Islamic extremist group precisely to counteract -- or anticipate -- any accusations of bias against, or overemphasis on, the 'far right.'</span></span></p>
<p><span><span>As for Professor Nigel Copsey. This guy is literally a professional 'anti-fascist'. He has written a big bunch of books on fascism -- or what he takes to be fascism. And you need to be careful because people like him often take groups or individuals to be fascist when hardly anyone else outside his own university, or Leftist meetings/ seminars, does so.</span></span></p>
<p><span><span>Our universities are full of these professional and full-time self-appointed 'anti-fascists'. I wouldn't be surprised if each university has its own resident anti-fascist and even a Chair of Anti-Fascism (or a Department of Anti-Fascism). In fact, there is a</span></span><a href="http://www.tees.ac.uk/sections/news/pressreleases_story.cfm?story_id=4221&this_issue_title=January%202013&this_issue=236"><span><span> Fascist Study Center </span></span></a><span><span>at Professor Copsey's Teeside University. (There's also something bizarrely called </span></span><a href="http://chronicle.com/article/Taking-the-Right-Seriously/48333/"><span><span>Center for Right-Wing Studies </span></span></a><span><span>at Berkeley, at the University of California. That doesn't mean a place in which right-wingers formulate theories and policies. No. It's a critical center devoted to 'analysing' the 'Right'.)</span></span></p>
<p><span><span>The upshot is, then, that these 'experts on fascism' are more often than not themselves extreme -- extreme Leftists. They are people who think they can pontificate about the 'far right' and yet do so from their own theory-intoxicated, fringe positions. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.</span></span></p>
<p><span><span>These academic Leftists indulge in journals, 'think tanks', seminars, etc. and in none of them do they allow any contradictory positions to be advanced. They never for one moment <span id="IL_AD2" class="IL_AD">express</span>, at least not objectively or without any severe and copious injections of Marxist theory, the positions of the EDL, etc. They don't do so lest they infect their gullible and star-struck students -- and others -- with 'false consciousnesses'. And when they do consider why the 'far right' believes and does what it does, they offer their </span></span><a href="http://theenglishdefenceleagueextra.blogspot.co.uk/2010/09/socialist-workers-party-analysis-of-edl.html"><span><span>ancient and shop-worn Marxist </span></span></a><span><span>analyses to do so. They argue that the average 'far right' individual believes what he believes and does what he do because he is unemployed, alienated, a victim of 'today's austerity', etc. (This is more or less the same Marxist analysis they also give of Islamic terrorists. That is, the millionaire Osama Bin Laden, the university/college-educated terrorists and leaders of Hamas and other groups do what they do because they are unemployed and victims of capitalism -- either that, or victims... of <em>something</em> not of their own making.)</span></span></p>
<p><span><span>The professors of Anti-Fascism are paid very well, both by the universities and by the state. The average salary of an established UK professor is around £70,000 a year. Professor Nigel Copsey will earn a lot more than that through his books and the rest of his private <span id="IL_AD1" class="IL_AD">enterprise investments</span> and initiatives. (The average salary or wage in the UK is between £20,000 and £26,000. Prof Copsey earns at least three times as much as this a year.) Copsey has in fact also written many books on fascism, as well as articles, papers; and no doubt he's done a fair amount of well-paid 'lecture tours' too.</span></span></p>
<p><span><span>(Professor </span></span><a href="http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/politics/people/matthew.goodwin"><span><span>Matthew Goodwin</span></span></a><span><span>, an 'expert on far right groups', is another good example of a career anti-fascist. He comes across as a mix between an arrogant snob and a Leftist Tory Boy. He's always on the TV discussing 'extremism'... yet never Leftist extremism, Muslim extremism, Islamic extremism or any kind of extremism not carried out by the white working class; a group which tends to make his snobby little choir-boy face go into contortions of hatred. [See him here on </span></span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWPfoLttTpg"><span><span>the BBC's "The Big Questions</span></span></a><span><span>", debating, five-to-one with his allies, with Tommy Robinson.])</span></span></p>
<p><span><span>So beware of professional 'anti-fascists'. They are obviously politically biased and paid handsomely. That's why they invariably discover at least ten 'fascists' before each breakfast. They work on piece rate. In fact, since they are academics, I'll offer an equation here:</span></span></p>
<p><em><span><span>the more fascists discovered = the more <span id="IL_AD3" class="IL_AD">money made</span> = the more <span id="IL_AD4" class="IL_AD">holidays</span>, cars, investments, etc.</span></span></em></p>
<p><span><span>The Leftist bourgeoisie love money. So it's not surprising that the Leftism Industry is very productive, profitable and extensive. Yes; there's very good money to be made in the anti-fascism and anti-racism business.</span></span></p>
</div>
<p><span><br/> Read more: <a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/professors_of_anti-fascism.html#ixzz2dJaqYtGv">http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/professors_of_anti-fascism.html#ixzz2dJaqYtGv</a> <br/> Follow us: <a href="http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker" target="_blank">@AmericanThinker on Twitter</a> | <a href="http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker" target="_blank">AmericanThinker on Facebook</a></span></p>
ACORN and Alinsky's Rule #13 - by Michael Volpe
tag:4freedoms.com,2013-03-16:3766518:Topic:121323
2013-03-16T06:25:20.804Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p>Those that follow ACORN closely know that the organization is skilled in the fine art of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky">Saul Alinsky</a> and his strategies for organizing. Alinsky put his rules together in order provide a textbook for this without money or natural power to organize and to affect change without the sort of power and connections that those with power would have.<br></br><br></br> ACORN uses these fundamentals in order to harrass, manipulate and ultimately extort…</p>
<p>Those that follow ACORN closely know that the organization is skilled in the fine art of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky">Saul Alinsky</a> and his strategies for organizing. Alinsky put his rules together in order provide a textbook for this without money or natural power to organize and to affect change without the sort of power and connections that those with power would have.<br/><br/> ACORN uses these fundamentals in order to harrass, manipulate and ultimately extort money from powerful people and organizations. Their tactics come from Alinsky rule #13: identify, isolate, freeze and escalate. The blue print works like this. ACORN will identify an individual, usually a powerful head of a powerful organization. They will show up in front of that person's home with several hundred protestors. Since these powerful folks normally live in quiet and wealthy suburbs, such a commotion will soon be the talk of the neighborhood. The message for this person's friends and neighbors will be clear "they are a bad person". By doing so, they will have isolated this person from their friends and neighbors. Soon, not only will the target themself be a pariah but so will their children. That is the process of isolation. At this point, the target thinks that things can't get worse, and it is then that ACORN only raises the stakes. Not only will ACORN, and their protestors, show up everywhere the target frequents: the mall, the movie theater, the library, etc, but they will be there before the target even shows up. As such, before the target even arrives to their shopping, ACORN will show up with a crew of several hundred to protest them.<br/><br/> All of this is done in order to beat the target into submission. For weeks and months, ACORN goes on a relentless campaign of harrassment in which a powerful CEO can't seem to shake this group. Wherever they go, ACORN is there, and often they are there before the target. One such campaign involved H&R Block. ACORN showed up at the home of then CEO, Mark Ernst. The relentlessly harrassed him all over his neighborhood. They showed up everywhere he frequented until he became a pariah in his own neighborhood. They finally got concessions. <a href="http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3658553/H-R-Block-and-Acorn.html">They teamed up to provide free tax service in low income areas.</a> ACORN got a piece of H&R Block's <a href="http://www.hrblock.com/bank/emerald_prepaid_mastercard/index.html">Emerald Cards</a>. Of course, that's what the media knows about. What's almost certain is that ACORN also received, and likely continues to receive, cash payments directly from H&R Block. Of course, we'll never know how much, if any, cash payments were transferred. That's because all cash that ACORN receives starts in their so called accounting firm, Citizen's <a href="http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2009/01/inside-story-of-acorn.html">Consulting Inc.</a> Because both H&R Block and CCI are both private companies, seeing their books is next to impossible. As such any payments are hidden in the books of two companies that aren't sharing them.<br/><br/> Similar tactics to the ones employed to extort H&R Block were also used in the case of firms like Sherwin Williams and S.I.F.M.A. Just recently, ACORN began a campaign of protesting Wachovia. ACORN already has an agreement with Wells Fargo, in which Wells pays off ACORN in order to be left alone. Wells soon after bought out Wachovia, and so this tactic was made mostly as a message to WF to make sure that they continue with their agreement.<br/><br/> The only known such campaign like this to have failed is one perpetrated on David Rubenstein of the Carlyle Group. This campaign started in late 2007 and continued through February of 2008. ACORN initially followed Rubenstein as he received a humanitarian award. It's unclear why the campaign fizzled out, but ACORN became the subject of significant media scrutiny at exactly the time that the campaign was unfolding. First, it was finally revealed that <a href="http://www.ncrp.org/blog/2008/07/acorn-in-hot-waters.html">Dale Rathke</a> had embezzled millions from ACORN years earlier. This was of more significance because Dale Rathke is the brother of Wade Rathke, one of the founders of ACORN. Other stories like <a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2008/10/27/acorn_owes_millions_in_taxes">unpaid taxes</a> and the <a href="http://massachusettsfamilylaw.blogspot.com/2008/10/acorn-voter-fraud-hoax-case-of.html">violation of ERISA laws</a> also originated in this period. It's unclear if this was orchestrated by Rubenstein or if it was just good timing for him. Either way, ACORN began facing all sorts of internal strife in this period and had to abandon the campaign.<br/><br/> Make no mistake, ACORN continues to look for any opportunity to apply Saulinsky rule #13 to put pressure and ultimately extort money from powerful individuals. The next time you read about an agreement between some business and ACORN to provide services to the underprivileged you should wonder if someone had their home picketed. If the rules of identify, isolate, freeze, and escalate were employed.</p>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><a href="http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.co.uk/2009/02/acorn-and-alinskys-rule-13.html">http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.co.uk/2009/02/acorn-and-alinskys-rule-13.html</a></div>
The unreliability of the media - you'd better believe it
tag:4freedoms.com,2012-08-07:3766518:Topic:109703
2012-08-07T23:02:46.687Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<h1>HOW TO KILL A RATIONAL PEASANT</h1>
<div class="meta"><div class="flt-r"><div class="flt-r bbc-st bbc-st-slim bbc-st-colour bbc-st-light" id="bbc-st-toolbar-1"><div class="bbc-st-wrapper bbc-st-rst bbc-st-v1"><div class="bbc-st-count"><span title="This page has been shared 1535 times">1.5K…</span></div>
<ul class="bbc-st-buttons">
</ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<h1>HOW TO KILL A RATIONAL PEASANT</h1>
<div class="meta"><div class="flt-r"><div class="flt-r bbc-st bbc-st-slim bbc-st-colour bbc-st-light" id="bbc-st-toolbar-1"><div class="bbc-st-wrapper bbc-st-rst bbc-st-v1"><div class="bbc-st-count"><span title="This page has been shared 1535 times">1.5K</span></div>
<ul class="bbc-st-buttons">
<li class="bbc-st-share-cta"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2012/06/how_to_kill_a_rational_peasant.html#" title="Share this page to other places">Share</a></li>
<li class="bbc-st-facebook-cta"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2012/06/how_to_kill_a_rational_peasant.html#" title="Share this page on Facebook">Facebook</a></li>
<li class="bbc-st-twitter-cta"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2012/06/how_to_kill_a_rational_peasant.html#" title="Share this page on Twitter">Twitter</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><p class="categories">Post categories: <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/back_stories/" rel="tag" title="">Back Stories</a></p>
<p><span class="vcard author"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/adam_curtis/">Adam Curtis</a></span> <span class="separator">|</span> <abbr class="published" title="2012-06-16T14:46:17+00:00">14:46 UK time, Saturday, 16 June 2012</abbr></p>
</div>
<div class="cleardiv"></div>
</div>
<div class="post_content"><p><strong><span>AMERICA'S DANGEROUS LOVE AFFAIR WITH COUNTERINSURGENCY</span></strong></p>
<p id="aeaoofnhgocdbnbeljkmbjdmhbcokfdb-mousedown">At the beginning of this year one of the weirdest characters ever to become involved in the present Afghan war died. He was called Jack Idema and he was a brilliant con-man. For a moment, during the early part of the war, Idema persuaded all the major TV networks and scores of journalists that he was some kind of special forces super-hero who was using all kinds of "black ops" to track down and arrest the terrorists.</p>
<p>In reality, before 2001, Idema had been running a hotel for pets in North Carolina called The Ultimate Pet Resort. He had been in prison for fraud, and had tried to con journalists before about being some kind of super-spy. But September 11th gave him his chance - and he turned up in Kabul dressed like this.</p>
<p></p>
<div class="imgCaptionCenter"><img class="mt-image-center" src="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/idemaarrives.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="450"/><p> </p>
</div>
<p></p>
<p>And everyone believed him and his stories. In the process Idema brilliantly exposed the emptiness and fakery of much of the TV and newspaper reporting of the war on terror.</p>
<p>He told the journalists and the TV presenters all kinds of lies and fantasies. He even became the central, heroic figure in a book called The Hunt for Bin Laden.</p>
<p></p>
<div class="imgCaptionCenter"><img class="mt-image-center" src="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/idemabook.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="595"/><p> </p>
</div>
<p></p>
<p>Then Idema charged journalists fortunes for what he said was an "al qaeda" video of a "a training camp" - where strangely many of the terrorists spoke in english, and allegedly you could hear Idema's voice on the soundtrack. Few of the journalists did anything to really check if any of what he was saying was true.</p>
<p>CBS did a special programme about the tapes fronted by Dan Rather, called "Heart of Darkness". They did check on the tapes - the producers went to some of the new breed of "terror experts" that were spawning after 2001. CBS's press office said that they "showed the tapes to three former British Special Forces officers, who verified the tactics being practiced in the video were consistent with those of Al Qaeda".</p>
<p>The BBC did a report that showed the tapes. And they travelled to the village where they had been recorded - and found an old man who said, yes there had been Arabs there.</p>
<p>But much later a number of journalists did investigate Jack Idema properly - and the consensus now is that the tapes are probably fakes.</p>
<p>Here is the original BBC news report</p>
<p></p>
<div id="idnews" class="player"><object id="bbc_emp_embed_idnews" width="512" height="323" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://www.bbc.co.uk/emp/10player.swf?revision=18269_21576"></param><param name="quality" value="high"></param><param name="wmode" value="opaque"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="false"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="never"></param><param name="flashvars" value="embedReferer=&embedPageUrl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2012/06/how_to_kill_a_rational_peasant.html&domId=idnews&playlist=http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlist/p00txnvt&guidance=unknown"></param><embed wmode="opaque" id="bbc_emp_embed_idnews" width="512" height="323" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.bbc.co.uk/emp/10player.swf?revision=18269_21576" quality="high" allowfullscreen="false" allowscriptaccess="never" flashvars="embedReferer=&embedPageUrl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2012/06/how_to_kill_a_rational_peasant.html&domId=idnews&playlist=http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlist/p00txnvt&guidance=unknown" bgcolor="#000000"></embed> </object>
</div>
<p></p>
<p>But then Jack Idema started to believe his own stories. He set up his own militia group that he called Task Force Sabre Seven - and he and his men went and arrested Afghans they were convinced were terrorists. And then he locked them up in his own private prison.</p>
<p>Things got out of hand in June 2004 when Idema arrested the Afghan Supreme Court judge, Maulawi Siddiqullah, because he believed he might be involved with terrorists. The judge later described what it was like in Idema's prison:</p>
<p>"<em>The first night, around midnight, I heard the screams of four people. They then poured very cold water on me. I tried to keep myself from screaming, but coudn't. Then they played loud, strange music. Then they prevented me from going to the bathroom; a terrible situation. I was hooded for twelve days</em>."</p>
<p>In July Afghan police raided Idema's house in Kabul and found what was described as a private torture chamber. Eight hooded men, including the judge, were incarcerated there, and three of them were hanging by their feet from the ceiling, with their heads hooded.</p>
<p>Idema and two others were put on trial - and sentenced to ten years in an Afghan jail. And all the journalists puffed a lot about how persuasive he had been.</p>
<p>Here is Idema during the trial - still trying to persuade the journalists that he is what he said he was. And how he is being set up by dark sinister forces.</p>
<p></p>
<div id="idcouta" class="player"><object id="bbc_emp_embed_idcouta" width="512" height="323" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://www.bbc.co.uk/emp/10player.swf?revision=18269_21576"></param><param name="quality" value="high"></param><param name="wmode" value="opaque"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="false"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="never"></param><param name="flashvars" value="embedReferer=&embedPageUrl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2012/06/how_to_kill_a_rational_peasant.html&domId=idcouta&playlist=http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlist/p00txnv2&guidance=unknown"></param><embed wmode="opaque" id="bbc_emp_embed_idcouta" width="512" height="323" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.bbc.co.uk/emp/10player.swf?revision=18269_21576" quality="high" allowfullscreen="false" allowscriptaccess="never" flashvars="embedReferer=&embedPageUrl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2012/06/how_to_kill_a_rational_peasant.html&domId=idcouta&playlist=http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlist/p00txnv2&guidance=unknown" bgcolor="#000000"></embed> </object>
</div>
<p></p>
<p>But what is also interesting about Jack Idema is that in a strange way he may have been ahead of his time.</p>
<p>Because at the moment that Idema was entering his Afghan prison, a group of very senior US military men, led by a General called David Petraeus, were sitting down in a military staff college in Kansas and beginning to write a study that would completely transform the tactics of the US army in Iraq and in Afghanistan.</p>
<p>What General Petraeus and his team did was to go back into the past and exhume a theory of warfare that had been discredited by the US military who thought it was long buried and forgotten. It was called Counterinsurgency.</p>
<p>And out of that would allegedly come the same kind of arms-length, privatised interrogation and torture methods that Idema was indulging in.</p>
<p>I thought I would tell the history of how Counterinsurgency was invented, why it was discredited in America, and how it returned in 2007 to dominate and brutalise the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is a fascinating and weird story that is far odder than anything Jack Idema could have dreamt up - it involves Mao Zedong, John F Kennedy, French fascists, the attempted assassination of Charles De Gaulle, and strange Potemkin-style villages in Vietnam where women get pregnant for no discernible reason.</p>
<p>The theory of Counterinsurgency also had a terrible logic built into it that repeatedly led, from the 1950s onwards, to horror - torture, assassination and mass killing on a far wider scale than anything Jack Idema ever did in his house in Kabul.</p>
<p></p>
<div class="imgCaptionCenter" id=""><img class="mt-image-center" src="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/idemastill2.jpg" alt="" width="350" height="263"/></div>
<div class="imgCaptionCenter"></div>
<div class="imgCaptionCenter"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2012/06/how_to_kill_a_rational_peasant.html">http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2012/06/how_to_kill_a_rational_peasant.html</a></div>
</div>
Muslim Police Organisation: "EDL trying to kill us".
tag:4freedoms.com,2012-06-13:3766518:Topic:104069
2012-06-13T13:09:15.013Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p>I'll overlook that this BarthsNotes guy doesn't know how to spell "Roland Barthes". </p>
<p>He actually seems to be picking up and highlighting the infiltration techniques of the Muslim Brotherhood National Association of Muslim Police. (One wonders why that organisation's name does not end with "Officers"; is it because they seem themselves as the early days of a muslim "morality police", as seen in Iran, Gaza, Kuwait, etc.?)</p>
<hr></hr><p> …</p>
<p>I'll overlook that this BarthsNotes guy doesn't know how to spell "Roland Barthes". </p>
<p>He actually seems to be picking up and highlighting the infiltration techniques of the Muslim Brotherhood National Association of Muslim Police. (One wonders why that organisation's name does not end with "Officers"; is it because they seem themselves as the early days of a muslim "morality police", as seen in Iran, Gaza, Kuwait, etc.?)</p>
<hr/><p> </p>
<h2><a href="http://barthsnotes.com/2012/06/11/the-edl-an-unresolved-investigation/" rel="bookmark" title="The EDL: “An Unresolved Investigation”">The EDL: “An Unresolved Investigation”</a></h2>
<div class="postinfo">Posted on <span class="postdate">June 11, 2012</span> by Richard Bartholomew</div>
<div class="entry"><p>From the <em>Independent</em>, <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/utoya-attack-was-norway-killers-backup-plan-2329187.html">31 July 2011</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p><span>Britain’s <strong>National Association of Muslim Police</strong> <strong>(Namp)</strong> will deliver a letter to Theresa May, the Home Secretary, stating that <strong>its officers have been targeted by radicalised members of the EDL</strong>. It details an unresolved investigation of an unidentified man arrested last year with “quantities of fireworks/devices” alongside <strong>names of Muslim police officers circled on whiteboards for attacks</strong>.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thanks to a Freedom of Information request, I now have <strong>a copy of the letter</strong>. Here’s the relevant section:</p>
<blockquote><p><span>Last year the <strong>Metropolitan Police Service (MPS</strong>) arrested a man who was actively gathering intelligence/information on serving Muslim Officers including myself and other senior NAMP executive members. According to MPS he was in possession of a quantity of fireworks/Devices, neither NAMP nor any of other persons targeted have or were ever made aware of the full extent of this enquiry e.g. explosives and other enquiries to date. The police also found partial addresses and surveillance videos on his computer, this would suggest that he was undertaking reconnaissance activities. <strong>At the time were told that the man arrested was a lone wolf and not linked to any organisations. It took us just a few minutes of basic internet research to establish that this individual has links with the EDL and has attended EDL rallies and meetings, which we brought to the attention of MPS. He was released with any bail conditions and no risk assessment was carried out. This individuals is still of concern to us and we are not aware whether he is still subject to any ongoing intelligence work by SO15 or whether he has been referred to the National Domestic Extremism Unit for intelligence purposes or de radicalisation programme.</strong></span></p>
<p><span><strong>The investigation by Specialist Operations (SO) was very poor and dismissive of our concerns…</strong> It took the intervention of ACPO officers to inject a degree of seriousness into the investigation. However, sadly <strong>the investigation did not lead to charges being brought forward</strong>… MPS advised us that a file was sent to Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and they have advised no further action be taken. Earlier this year we had the opportunity to meet senior officials from CPS, we were extremely upset and disheartened to learn that they have no recollection of giving MPS advice on this particular case</span>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Despite the <em>Independent</em>‘s description, the detail of the “whiteboards” is not mentioned.</strong></p>
<p>The letter was passed to James Brokenshire MP, Parliamentary Undersecretary for Crime and Security. His reply includes a direct quote by way of response from the Metropolitan Police:</p>
<blockquote><p><span><strong>The MPS is extremely disappointed with the inaccurate assertions made in Mr Ahmad’s letter, including issues around the quality and conduct of the investigation and the lack of referral to the CPS.</strong> However we do understand that the concerns raised by Mr Ahmad need to be addressed. A senior officer from the Counter Terrorism Command has already been in touch with him and a meeting has been arranged for September, during which we will address the allegations and hopefully provide him with the necessary assurances.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>There’s not anything else in the public domain out there</strong>, although <a href="http://barthsnotes.com/2012/06/01/london-mayors-muslim-engagement-expert-likes-abuse-by-thug/">on-line thug</a> Charlie Flowers has claimed on his abusive Twitter feed that NAMP was “making it all up”.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/19/police-undercover-officers-court-perjury-claim">Back in October</a>, <strong>the <em>Guardian</em> noted that prosecutions were sometimes “mysteriously dropped” when police spies were involved.</strong></p>
</div>
<hr/><p>This (would be) Roland Barthes guy seems to be implying that the "radicalized EDL member" is actually a police officer/snitch. If that is the case, then it would seem that he was being used as an agent provocateur within EDL (or associated organisations); the police on their own, or in connivance with the state, to encourage people in EDL to "bomb" (with a few sparklers), the homes of some muslim police officers. (Unless of course, we are to interpret this poorly-drafted complaint as saying the provocateur had real explosives, not a few sparklers). </p>
<p>Let's compare the scale of this complaint with a few incidents from our gloriously enriched capital city. When one of my neighbours complained about the shockingly indifferent and dangerous driving of some muslims, the next night her neighbours window had a bullet fly through it. Apparently realising that their reconnaissance was as bad as their driving, the muslim gang returned the following night and fire-bombed my neighbour's house (with her and her child inside). Did the story reach even the local media? Not to my knowledge. Or let's compare the whining of the NAMP - as we know, the koran induces muslims to suffer simultaneously from supremacism & paranoia - with the Met's leafletting the area within 1 sq mile of East London Mosque, <a href="http://4freedoms.ning.com/group/uk/forum/topics/london-police-transport-police-suspect-fertiliser-bomb-plot-near" target="_self">begging</a> people to come forward with information about a suspected, massive, islamic fertilizer bomb. The ordinary people of London seem to have far more to worry about in the area of being targeted by high explosives, than the namby-pamby NAMP.</p>
<p>That there's nothing else "in the public domain" about the NAMP's claims would suggest that this could be another example of the media keeping silent in their role as an organ of the state (i.e. the media think that entrapping EDL is of more propaganda value than yet more muslim whining).</p>
<p>And the point about The Independent larding the NAMP's claims would also tally with Nick Cohen's book "What's Left", where he argues that "the Indy" long ago gave up any idea of journalism, and is simply a propaganda rag. NB: it was The "Independent" that uncritically carried <a href="http://4freedoms.ning.com/group/uk/forum/topics/muslim-sponsored-report-edl-are-white-supremacists" target="_self">the shoddy report</a> by Prof. Copsey, which report enabled The "Independent" to claim that EDL were "white extremists" (despite the existence of prominent jews and sikhs mentioned in the same article by The "Independent"). And who paid the honest Professor his shilling? Why, "Faith Matters", a front for islamic dawah. And who heads up Faith Matters? None other than Fiyaz Mughal OBE, the man <a href="http://4freedoms.ning.com/xn/detail/3766518:Comment:98900" target="_self">exposed</a> for his cover-up activities whenever the extremism of islam gets publicity in Britain.</p>
<p>I'm far from being "a grammar nazi" but you would think that the NAMP would be able to elect an official who could construct a coherent letter. And you would think that if this issue was so important (involving muslim griping against EDL, the Met, SO, and the CPS were not taking their potential assassination seriously), that NAMP could have made sure that their assertions were actually coherent.</p>
UAF Ships "locals" to Luton to Conceal their National Weakness
tag:4freedoms.com,2012-05-06:3766518:Topic:101009
2012-05-06T11:23:49.412Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p>The media present whatever the UAF say about themselves as if it came down on tablets of stone (like the idea that they are "anti-fascits" when they are, in fact, "neo-fascists"). </p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-17950734">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-17950734…</a></p>
<p></p>
<p>The media present whatever the UAF say about themselves as if it came down on tablets of stone (like the idea that they are "anti-fascits" when they are, in fact, "neo-fascists"). </p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-17950734">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-17950734</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.heart.co.uk/dunstable/news/local/review-edl-march-luton/">http://www.heart.co.uk/dunstable/news/local/review-edl-march-luton/</a></p>
<p>With the EDL demo in Luton, there was a (supposedly) "local group" called "We Are Luton". This "local group" managed to get approx. 1000 supporters to demo in Luton. "We Are Luton" portrayed the EDL as "unwelcome visitors in Luton".</p>
<h1 align="center" class="heading">UNWELCOME VISITORS IN LUTON</h1>
<p>(We could say the same about islam being unwelcome visitors in the west; as Tommy says, "EDL is an effect, not a cause".)</p>
<p>The only website I can find for WAL is this one, and practically all their support comes from trades unions and muslim groups (funnily enough, just like UAF):</p>
<p><a href="http://www.lutontradeunioncouncil.org/WE-ARE-LUTON">http://www.lutontradeunioncouncil.org/WE-ARE-LUTON</a></p>
<p><strong>Yet from the UAF website it is clear that this national organisation was shipping in people from around the country to pose as "locals". This is to mask the fact that, as a national organisation, the UAF are incapable of rallying equivalent numbers to a national organisation like EDL.</strong></p>
<p>Here is the page showing that UAF were organising coaches from at least 27 different towns and cities (including south Wales). </p>
<p><a href="http://uaf.org.uk/2012/04/national-transport-to-luton-demo-against-edl-saturday-5-may/">http://uaf.org.uk/2012/04/national-transport-to-luton-demo-against-edl-saturday-5-may/</a></p>
<p><b><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110489069?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110489069?profile=original" width="620" class="align-full"/></a></b></p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Assuming that the smallest coach they hired contained 10 people, then approx. 300 of the 1,000 "local" people were shipped-in by the UAF. Considering that the UAF was organising these coaches from 7th April, and that UAF has the backing of the TUC and LibLabCon, it seems quite likely that more than 1/3rd of the "locals" were shipped-in.</strong></p>
<p>Amazing to think that the suburbs of Luton extend to Barrow (nearly Scotland) and into south Wales.</p>
<p><b><br/></b></p>
Stockholm Syndrome: Appeasement Since the Rushdie Affair
tag:4freedoms.com,2012-05-02:3766518:Topic:100550
2012-05-02T10:16:29.704Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p>I think this hits the nail on the head. My impression too, is that the whole doctrine of multi-culturalism emerged in the 1990s, and that the pivotal event was the Rushdie Affair, and how a liberal society was to react to that. We see that the reaction was appeasement, appeasement which has continued for a generation.…</p>
<hr></hr><p></p>
<p>I think this hits the nail on the head. My impression too, is that the whole doctrine of multi-culturalism emerged in the 1990s, and that the pivotal event was the Rushdie Affair, and how a liberal society was to react to that. We see that the reaction was appeasement, appeasement which has continued for a generation.</p>
<hr/><p><a href="http://nigelwingrove.blogspot.com.au/2012/04/britains-got-cultural-stockholm_15.html">http://nigelwingrove.blogspot.com.au/2012/04/britains-got-cultural-stockholm_15.html</a></p>
<h3 class="post-title entry-title">Britain's Got Cultural Stockholm Syndrome</h3>
<div class="post-body entry-content" id="post-body-4918073429409163304"><div><div>For some time I've wondered how the UK's tolerant, inclusivity loving, diversity embracing, multiculturally aware, sexually outreaching and <i>in</i><i>tolerant of intolerance</i> establishment would deal with the inextricable march of Islamic fundamentalism and all that comes with it? Would our new enlightened leaders finally stand up to Islam's inherent homophobia or challenge its attitude to women's rights, or even, occasionally speak out against its treatment of animals, arranged marriages, female circumcision or criticise this politicised religion in anyway?</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div>The answer of course is not just no, but is, in fact, a much more sinister form of creeping cultural appeasement in which our establishment, (by establishment I mean everyone from politicians, to the police, councils and councillors, the Civil Service, educators at schools and universities, the mainstream media and those whose powers, when combined, effectively control what we say, read, and ultimately think), is nolonger just accommodating fundamentalist Islam, but is slowly being absorbed into it. This is the same way a hostage comes to care for, and eventually ally themselves with their captors; a paradoxical psychological process or phenomenon known as the Stockholm Syndrome.</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div><strong>This process of cultural, spiritual and political acquiescence has been slowly evolving over the last twenty five years and I think probably began, not with the Iranian Revolution in 1979, but with the fatwa issued against the UK author<i>Salman Rushdie </i>in 1989 by Iran's Revolutionary leader, the charismatic and media-savvy, Ayatollah Khomeini. For while the sight of Muslim demonstrators in London, Bradford and other English cities burning copies of Rushdie's book, the<i>Satanic Verses</i>, shocked and upset many on the soft left of the UK's then establishment, there were also many, even then, who for political expediency refused to directly condemn either the fatwa or the book burnings. Indeed some of the most notable deniers of all were the then Deputy Leader of the Labour Party,<i>Roy Hattersley </i>and, Labour's then Shadow Foreign Secretary,<i> Gerald Kaufman</i> who are typical of those who have been championing multiculturalism since its inception.</strong></div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div><i>Hattersley</i>, a rather pompous man who has ironically re-invented himself as a man of letters and all-round bon viveur since leaving politics in 1992, though unfortunately having neither the intelligence or wit necessary to pull this off, tried to court the Muslims and find favour with <i>Rushdie </i>and his supporters at the same time. Firstly in a sop to his mainly Muslim constituents he called on <i>Rushdie</i> to cancel the paperback edition of the <i>Satanic Verses</i> as this would<i> 'signify his regret for the offence, and assuage Muslim anger'. </i><i>T</i>o make sure he won the most votes in the next election <i>Hattersley </i>further stated that <i>"we might even have to support Islam's right to declare a fatwa against offending infidels"</i>.<br/><br/><br/>Secondly, remembering that he was also in the process of being reborn as an literary intellectual <i>Hattersley</i> added that a <i>"free society does not ban books and nor does in allow writers and publishers to be blackmailed and intimidated</i>" before going on to demonstrate that he was both intimidated and prepared to ban the paperback edition.</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div>The singularly unpleasant and caustic <i>Gerald Kaufman</i> was even more direct in his defence of the protesting Muslims as he immediately linked criticism of their protests as an attack on the emerging holy of holies, multiculturalism. By doing so,<i>Kaufman</i> demonstrated how in future, criticism of racially, sexually or religiously sensitive topics could be deflected or nullified by terming any such attacks 'racist', 'sexist', 'homophobic' or Islamophobic and if those terms didn't apply then in an emergency criticism could simply be branded as hate speech or incitement or extremism.</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div><strong>However, in 1989 this form of cultural censorship and politically correct trickery was in its infancy which makes <i>Kaufman's</i> early use of deflective guilt-speech all the more impressive:</strong></div>
</div>
<div><div><strong> </strong></div>
</div>
<div><div><strong><i>"Britain has to decide if the freedom that we so value is consistent with attempts to suppress the religious practices of the county's fastest-growing faith. The fact that most of us do not share their beliefs (and some of us have no beliefs at all) is irrelevant. Only primitive people want to destroy everything they do not like or understand. The civilised, and sensible, approach is to welcome diversity as a stimulus to renewed vitality'.</i></strong></div>
</div>
<div><div><strong> </strong></div>
</div>
<div><div><strong><i>Gerald Kaufman</i> then went on to chastise and belittle English culture, its religion, education and values, which he saw, and still sees, as a threat to the greater good of multicultural and religious diversity. For <i>Kaufman</i> and other champions of multiculturalism, the immigrant is an almost revolutionary force that will firstly weaken, and then utterly transform the host nation. For Kaufman's defence of Islam and diversification is seething with class hatred and a barely concealed yearning to radically alter the then middle-class and Christian based society in which he was writing into an envisaged multicultural nirvana:</strong></div>
</div>
<div><div><strong> </strong></div>
</div>
<div><div><strong><i>"</i><i>the attack on multiculturalism is no more than a refined, middle-class version of "Paki-bashing". Yet people who ought to know better have joined in the chorus of intolerance. To demand that Muslims abandon their way of life - what they eat, how they dress, which way they choose their husbands and wives - is to make a frontal assault upon their faith. Islam is a total religion. People who go to church on Christmas Eve and think that makes them Christians may not realise that devout Muslims believe that the Qur'an should inform their whole lives. Britain has to decide if the freedom that we so value is consistent with attempts to suppress the religious practices of the country's fastest-growing faith."</i></strong></div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div>Since then the Establishments cultural appeasement has continued unabated and witnessed everything from checkout girls refusing to handle wine purchases because it 'offends their religion', to, most recently, the London Metropolitan University deciding that in order to be more 'culturally sensitive' to Muslim students that it should ban alcohol. But beyond these ridiculous and almost daily examples of non Muslims self-abasing themselves before our would be conquerors, we are also beginning to see the slow realignment of the left's traditional political values when those values potentially clash with Islam.</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div><i>Ken Livingstone</i>, once the darling of the radical left and a champion of gay rights, has noticeably changed tact during his recent Lord Mayoral campaigning where Muslim votes now carry far more clout that the pink block. The Conservative Party,<i>Livingstone</i> declared in language more suited to the page of <i>Julius Streicher'</i>s <i>Der Stürmer</i>, was '<i>riddled with people indulging in homosexuality</i>' and further, that some Labour MPs only got their jobs because they were gay.</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div>Then, to further emphasise that he knows which side his bread is now buttered, at a speech delivered at the hardline North Central Mosque, <i>Livingstone </i>stated that he would make London <i>'A beacon of Islam', </i>saying that if elected Mayor he would:</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div><i>"…educate the mass of Londoners about Islam….I want to spend the next four years making sure that every non-Muslim in London knows and understands Islam's words and message. That will help to cement our city as a beacon that demonstrates the meaning of the words of the Prophet."</i></div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div>Not to be outdone, <i>George Galloway,</i> the milk-lapping, ex-Labour MP and founder of new political party Respect, who successfully campaigned and won the Bradford West by-election with Muslim support, is not only aggressively pro-Islam, but aggressively boasted of his teetotalism. He was also uncharacteristically quiet on where he stands on gay rights when challenged by activists.</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div>This is a new phase in our slow subjection to Islam and one that could finally wake up the mass of people to the threat posed by it to their cherished liberal democracy. However, for most people criticism of Islam is, as <i>Gerald Kaufman </i>so effectively said twenty years ago, a form of Paki-bashing and as such is still an anathema. Also people generally opt for a quite life and are more likely to begin accommodating their lifestyles with the changes creeping Islamification brings in its wake rather than manning the barricades or going on EDL marches.</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div><strong>We can expect to see more politicians becoming apologists and converts to Islam, more shops and public meeting places becoming Islam-lite as they seek, not just the Islamic pound, but more importantly, Islamic approval. Equally interesting will be the shift of alignment as gay issues begin to lose their political kudos and the language of women's rights changes, as it already is. Recently the hijab has been described as 'liberating' and 'empowering' by female journalists trying to understand its growing use by female converts, further some Western commentators have said that arranged marriages work and that genital mutilation should not only be referred to as genital augmentation to avoid giving offence, but that clitoridectomies should be performed on the NHS as they would be done anyway.</strong></div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div>Apologism will be the new radicalism and, as demonstrated by the words of the Marxist activist and multicultural champion <i>Tariq Ali </i>which he wrote in the days immediately following the London tube bombings, fighting these views will soon be akin to heresy and probably just as dangerous. The alternative is, as with<i>Stockholm Syndrome</i>, that we come to love our oppressors...</div>
</div>
<div><div> </div>
</div>
<div><div><i>'In the face of terror attacks Anglo-Saxon politicians mouth the same rhetoric. One sentence in particular--shrouded in layers of untruth--is constantly repeated: 'We shall not permit these attacks to change our way of life.' It is a multi-purpose mantra. The first aim is to convince the public that the terrorists are crazed Muslims who are bombing modernity/democracy/freedom/ 'our values', etc. This is the first lie…'</i></div>
<div><i><br/></i></div>
<div><i>Tariq Ali, </i>after the London tube bombings in which 48 innocent Londoners were murdered and dozens more maimed and injured.</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
Motoons Exposed in 2006 - yet the Fraud Continues until this day.
tag:4freedoms.com,2012-04-27:3766518:Topic:100186
2012-04-27T10:32:07.369Z
Joe
http://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p>Brussels Journal exposed the fraud 6 years ago, but still the media react as if the whole thing was not manufactured and provoked by Danish imams.</p>
<p>The full story is also retold here (including photos of the actual newspaper article proving the 3 most incendiary photos were manufactured by muslims): <a href="http://zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/jyllands-posten_cartoons/">http://zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/jyllands-posten_cartoons/</a></p>
<p><strong>This needs to be…</strong></p>
<p>Brussels Journal exposed the fraud 6 years ago, but still the media react as if the whole thing was not manufactured and provoked by Danish imams.</p>
<p>The full story is also retold here (including photos of the actual newspaper article proving the 3 most incendiary photos were manufactured by muslims): <a href="http://zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/jyllands-posten_cartoons/">http://zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/jyllands-posten_cartoons/</a></p>
<p><strong>This needs to be recorded here under Alinsky Techniques, because it was no doubt a dirty trick and propaganda coup. As the strength of us freedom fighters grows in number, we need to remember how successful such dirty tricks are, and use them against our enemies.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Brussels Journal was also able to establish that the so-called image of Mohammed as a pig, was in fact a degraded photo of a French clown dressed as a pig i.e. nothing to do with islam and Mohammed. And as BJ notes, since these were muslims who manufactured and presented these images as being of Mohammed, under the very islamic laws they support, the imams should be the ones to be killed, not Kurt Westergaard.</strong></p>
<hr/><p> <a href="http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/775">http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/775</a></p>
<p></p>
<h2>The Cartoon Hoax</h2>
<p>From the desk of <a href="http://www.brusselsjournal.com/paulbelien">Paul Belien</a> on Tue, 2006-02-07 18:51</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p> </p>
<div class="content"><p>Radical Danish imams have deliberately incited hatred against Denmark, the country that had hospitably welcomed them in. To this end, while on a visit to Arab countries last month, they added three false, extremely offensive Muhammad “cartoons” to the twelve relatively mild ones published by<em>Jyllands-Posten</em> last September [see the latter <a href="http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/698">here, halfway down the page</a>].</p>
<p>One of the three additional cartoons [we linked to them in <a href="http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/668">this article</a>], which the imams distributed on a faxed image of appalling quality, was said to be a depiction of Muhammad with a pigsnout. When the Danish press discovered the three false so-called Danish cartoons, the imams refused to say where they had got them. They claimed, however, that the false cartoons were genuinely Danish and had been added to “give an insight in how hateful the atmosphere in Denmark is towards Muslims.”</p>
<p><em>The Brussels Journal</em> has always doubted whether the cartoons added by the imams were genuine. Whenever we mentioned them we explicitly wondered whether they were not “<a href="http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/756">of the imam’s own making</a>.” Certain Western mainstream media, however, such as the Australian network <a href="http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/735">SBS</a> and the British <a href="http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/778">BBC</a> authoritatively declared that the pigsnout was one of <em>Jyllands-Posten</em>’s cartoons.</p>
<p>Yesterday an <a href="http://www.neandernews.com/?p=54">American blogger</a> discovered where the “pigsnout Muhammad” comes from. It has no relation to Muhammad whatsoever, it is not even a cartoon, but a fax image of a photo of a French clown performing at a pig festival.</p>
<p><img src="http://tbj.intersight.netdna-cdn.com/sites/brusselsjournal.com/files/pigmask.jpg" alt="pigmask.jpg" title="pigmask.jpg" width="400" height="138" class="inline"/></p>
<div class="caption">"Muhammad" according to the imams</div>
<p><strong>Denmark is being punished at the instigation of radical imams because twelve cartoonists have depicted Muhammad. However, these imams <em>created their own three Muhammad images</em>. They have even presented a French clown as being Muhammad. Because the twelve JP cartoonists are not Muslims, the Muslim blasphemy laws do not apply to them. But these laws do apply to the imams. Consequently, these imams deserve death. They – and no-one else – depicted the prophet as a pig – the highest imaginable insult in Islam.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>In his <a href="http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/736">letter of “apology”</a> <em>Jyllands-Posten</em> editor Carsten Juste wrote:</p>
<blockquote><p>“<em>In our opinion the 12 cartoons were moderate and not intended to be insulting. They did not go against Danish laws, but have evidently offended many Muslims, for which we apologize. Meanwhile a couple of offending cartoons have circulated in the Muslim world which were never published in Jyllands-Posten and which we would never have published if they had been offered to us. We would have dismissed them on the grounds that they breached our ethical limits.</em>”</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Indeed, the three cartoons breaching the paper’s ethical limits have been made by fanatical Muslim clerics themselves in order to set the world ablaze and provoke a religious war with the West.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Even under Western law the Danish radical imams belong in jail. Their <em>hate crime</em> must be punished. The imams are the hate preachers who are responsible for the destruction and the fatalities that resulted from their lies and their blasphemy. One of these lying imams is Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban. He works as a translator and distributor of an <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/vidino200602060735.asp">al-Qaeda related publication</a>.</strong></p>
<p>Western papers and blogs that published the twelve cartoons were right to do so. If they had not published, no-one would have been able to ascertain that the pigsnout was not among them. If they had not published, the cheating, blasphemous imams would have got away with their lies. The public is served by information, never harmed by it. Let this be a lesson to the cowards of <em>The Guardian</em>, SBS, the BBC and the British and American mainstream media, who “out of respect” for Islam would have allowed blasphemous imams to get away with their gross insult of the prophet, with slander and libel, and with the violent acts which they instigated.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Muslim moderates have established <a href="http://www.sorrynorwaydenmark.com/">a website to apologize</a> to Denmark and Norway (though in our opinion the <a href="http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/774">Norwegian government does not deserve it</a>). They write:</p>
<blockquote><p><em>In the middle of all the mayhem surrounding the Danish cartoons controversy, a group of Arab and Muslim youth have set up this website to express their honest opinion, as a small attempt to show the world that the images shown of Arab and Muslim anger around the world are not representative of the opinions of all Arabs. We whole-heartedly apologize to the people of Denmark, Norway and all the European Union over the actions of a few, and we completely condemn all forms of vandalism and incitement to violence that the Arab and Muslim world have witnessed. We hope that this sad episode will not tarnish the great friendship that our peoples have fostered over decades.</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Meanwhile, too, an American blogger is currently updating his “<a href="http://publicfiguresbeware.blogspot.com/2006/02/is-europe-united-on-cartoons-country.html">Country Report Card</a>” on how the various governments and nations react to the cartoon scandal. He has given an A to the governments of Denmark, France and Germany; and an F to those of Norway, Britain and Poland. The U.S. government got a D. Governments that got grades below C should be ashamed of themselves.</p>
</div>