who can give up essential
liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety, deserve neither liberty
-- Benjamin Franklin
"All governments lie and nothing
say should be believed."
"Power tends to corrupt, and
absolute power corrupts
absolutely. Great men
almost always bad men."
1. Honoring the ‘Accomplices’
to Truth Who Caught Clapper
in a Lie
2. We Demand an Investigation: NSA and GCHQ Spying on
3. Striking Back: Germany
4. Get Real: Peter G°tzsche
5. On advertisements,
education, sadism and internet
This is in part a crisis file
and in part continues what I wrote yesterday about advertisements and
The first three items are regular crisis items, while the fourth is an
update about the mental sickness called psychiatry, for indeed it comes
to that, if you do not have a real science, but only function as an
idiot eager to prescribe anybody any patented hugely profitable drugs
for almost any reason.
These are the four more or less regular crisis items. The last item
continues yesterday's items on advertisements and on sadism: it has
become very easy for the unintelligent to get on line - and
to fuck up almost anybody's good and careful work, at least if this is
Note that all I do here is to register a very dominant and - to me -
quite frighening tendency: I can't do anything to undo it or to stop it.
Honoring the ‘Accomplices’ to Truth Who Caught Clapper in
The first article is by
Robert Scheer on Truth Dig:
It repeats news I
reported yesterday, but the news was fairly important, and the reaction
is word reading, and starts thus:
Yes, indeed - and I also
note the "Or so one hopes", to which I add: "though not if one
is an ordinary "journalist" today, who is there to serve the
corporations, and gets paid by them".
The tide is turning.
Yesterday’s traitor is today’s hero, and the brave journalists who
helped Edward Snowden get the word out are at last being honored for
their public service. Or so one hopes.
On Sunday it was announced that the prestigious George Polk Award
for National Security Reporting would be given to the four journalists
– Glenn Greenwald, Ewen MacAskill, Laura Poitras and Barton Gellman –
most active in reporting about the content of the NSA documents leaked
by Snowden. The award, named after a CBS News correspondent killed in
1948 while covering the civil war in Greece, is intended to honor
journalists who “heightened public awareness with perceptive detection
and dogged pursuit of stories that otherwise would not have seen the
light of day.”
That is, of course, the very
purpose of the First Amendment’s guarantee of a free press, an
indelible standard of freedom subverted by figures like James R.
Clapper Jr., the president’s director of national intelligence, who
condemned those reporters as “accomplices” to Snowden’s disclosures and
suggested that telling the truth should be treated as a serious crime.
Of course, Clapper’s own blatant lies to the Senate Intelligence
Committee, denying mass-scale surveillance of the American public under
his direction, are to be presumed virtuous.
And that is one of the major problems of the present times: the lack of
good, independent investigative journalists and their being classified
as "accomplices" and "terrorists" by the sick military figures who try
to make the U.S. into a police-state.
As Scheer also says, quite correctly:
There is no
evidence that this reporting has weakened the U.S. government’s ability
to protect the nation or that the NSA’s mass surveillance of the
private communications of Americans has made us safer.
But you can read it all
by following the last dotted link.
On the contrary, the Privacy
and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, appointed by the president and
confirmed by the Senate, concluded, after an exhaustive investigation
in the wake of the Snowden revelations, that the NSA surveillance
program should be ended, as it is ineffectual and dangerous to our
Demand an Investigation: NSA and GCHQ Spying on
article is by Julian Assange on Common Dreams:
Here is part of his
strongly condemns the reckless and unlawful behavior of the National
Security Agency. We call on the Obama administration to appoint a
Special Prosecutor to investigate the extent of the NSA’s criminal
activity against the media including WikiLeaks and its extended network.
News that the NSA
planned these operations at the level of its Office of the General
Counsel is especially troubling. No less concerning are revelations
that the US government deployed "elements of state power" to pressure
European nations into abusing their own legal systems; and that the
British spy agency GCHQ is engaged in extensive hostile monitoring of a
popular publisher’s website and its readers.
The NSA and its UK
accomplices show no respect for the rule of law. But there is a cost to
conducting illicit actions against a media organization. We have
already filed criminal cases against the FBI and US military in
multiple European jurisdictions. The FBI’s paid informant, who
attempted to sell information about me and my staff to the FBI, was
imprisoned earlier this year.
No entity, including
the NSA, should be permitted to act against journalists with impunity.
We have instructed our General Counsel Judge Baltasar Garzˇn to prepare
the appropriate response. The investigations into attempts to interfere
with the work of WikiLeaks will go wherever they need to go. Make no
mistake: those responsible will be held to account and brought to
I think he is
justified, although I doubt that, at least now, "those responsible will be held to account
and brought to justice".
Then again, there is the next item:
Striking Back: Germany
Next, an article by
SPIEGEL Staff in the international edition of the Spiegel:
This starts as follows:
That seems to me a false
direction and a mistaken initiative: The correct reply to being spied
upon is not to liberate one's own spying. Then again, as the article
explains, it seems to be the case Germany has not got anything from the
US after the news that Chancellor Merkel's phone was tapped for a long
The question seemed out
of place, especially when asked three times. A female journalist from a
satire magazine wanted to know if Thomas de MaiziŔre liked cheese
snacks. "Questions like that are more appropriate for breakfast
television than here," the minister snipped back. It was de MaiziŔre's
first visit as interior minister to the Federal Office for the
Protection of the Constitution, Germany's domestic intelligence agency.
And he was in no mood for jokes.
Instead, the minister
preferred to focus on the basics during the appearance two weeks ago,
with counterespionage at the top of his list. The issue, he warned,
shouldn't be underestimated, adding that the question as to who was
doing the spying was but of secondary importance.
In other words: Germany
intends to defend itself against all spying efforts in the future, even
if they are perpetrated by supposed friends.
While the minister's
words may have sounded innocuous, they marked nothing less than the
start of a political about-face. Away from the public eye, the German
government is moving toward implementing plans to turn its own spies
against partner countries like the United States, putting allies on the
same level as the Chinese, Russians and North Koreans.
Anyway - there is a lot more in the article, and no doubt there will be
Real: Peter G°tzsche Responds
Next an article by David Healy (introduction) and Peter G°tzsche (article):
I will quote from the
introduction by David Healy (minus the red color):
You can see his response
by clicking the above link - and Dawson seems to be a young bearded
nutter who got lost in psychiatry, and will defend it against all
arguments and all comers, I guess because he has a soft job.
will recognize Peter as the
man who, among other achievements, prised open the question of
access to RCT data, forcing the European Medicines’ Agency to open
up their files. His motivation to do this came in part from a
discovery of how appallingly bad the state of affairs in
psychiatry IS. How almost all trials on which the field
depends are ghostwritten, all data withheld and all dissent
suppressed. Whatever it is this is not science and there has to be
a good chance it’s killing and disabling more people prematurely than
you hear from Peter is a howl
of horror. The rest of us have got so inured to the situation we
can no longer see how bad it is. The Allied troops arriving at
concentration camps must have reacted the same way, where many inmates
had gotten used to the situation.
quite possible as George
Dawson says that psychiatrists could make equivalent comments about
other concentration camps in internal medicine. That doesn’t
excuse what’s happening in either psychiatry or the rest of
medicine. It’s time to Get Real or at least recognize how an
outsider from the media or elsewhere would react if they found out what
is really going on.
response to George Dawson
5. On advertisements, education, sadism and internet
continues yesterday's items:
I have linked them so
that you can check them out, but I will here formulate their main
You may doubt this, as
you may doubt everything, but these seem to be all facts, and they have
been investigated and counted carefully, and this also holds for the
third outcome (which in fact I thought ever since I got internet in
- British TV-viewers
each watch, on average, 47 advertisements
while wasting the four hours they daily spend on
average on TV.
- The Brits get
adverts - 2.8 billion - adverts a day, and that is
just by television.
- The ordinary
trolls are in fact "prototypical everyday sadists".
But I am now less interested in the third outcome than in the other two:
I live in a world where almost everyone reads more advertisements and
than he or she reads books or solid facts; where only a very small
minority really knows any science, and generally feels proud of
that; where the average person believes - by the tens or hundreds of
millions - totally insane religious (Christian right), political (GOP,
Tea party) and medical (psychiatrists are real scientists, who care
more for you than for their own excellent incomes)
and now, by the force of computers, can "unite" with his or her own
equals, and deflect, flounder or destroy almost any rational
initiative, for they can do so simply by clicking on some piece of
ill-written nonsense prepared by some hidden anonymous propagandist or
troll, whom they generally also defend, because they feel flattered and
pampered by them, and indeed they are.
That is: I have seen the lower half of the ability and intelligence
range arrive at the internet the last 10 or 15 years or so, and at
having computers (generally these days: tablets, which in fact look
quite primitive, but then also require no thought and no knowledge),
and by finding the internet prepared for them, namely by providing
artificial websites for the lower half of the abilities range
(Facebook), that steal their data, so as to give them more
"personalized" advertisements, which the majority seems to like and
approve rather than detest.
My point is that this is quite different from how things used
Fifty years ago - say: it doesn't matter that much - there were far too
many advertisements, but this was as nothing compared to the
incredible amounts of propaganda and
relations poured out over everyone nowadays, for every
corporation now has its own propaganda departments (generally styled as
"public relations"), with the result that the vast majority reads more
propaganda and ads than anything else; and fifty years ago - again it
doesn't matter much - the average and sub-average minds were as
unintelligent as these are nowadays, but they only stole elections, and
were mostly ineffective otherwise, whereas these days they may get
organized by propagandists and trolls and anyway are absolutely everywhere,
with billions of ill-written "opinions" on absolutely everything,
almost wherever one looks. (This is also why I have no space for
This is really radically different from how things were, and
these changes have happened within the last ten or fifteen years, at
most. I find it disquieting, especially because it makes all rational
activism almost impossible, and because there is nothing I can do about
 Here it is necessary to insist, with
Aristotle, that the governors do not
rule, or at least, should not rule: The laws rule, and the
if good, is part of its executive power. Here I quote Aristotle from my
More on stupidity, the rule of law, and Glenn
It is more proper
that law should govern than any one of the
citizens: upon the same principle, if it is advantageous to place the
supreme power in some particular persons, they should be appointed to
be only guardians, and the servants of the laws.
(And I note the whole file I
from is quite pertinent.)
(that I prefer
to call M.E.: The "/CFS" is added to facilitate search machines) which
is a disease I have since 1.1.1979: