i am oda nobunaga
i am also liu bei
thermonuclear, my saga
of the harmonizing way -
it breaks out from every confine
bursting bottles like a new wine
till the arms of his foes supine
are laid down within the day

BBC News – Is the US Declaration of Independence illegal?.

Is the US Declaration of Independence illegal?

YES – AND WE ARE GODDAMN PROUD OF IT – NOW GET THE HELL OFF MY PROPERTY

thou shalt not be african and prosperous, so sayeth the NWO

all by design

ordo ab chao

we need to wake people up and educate the world, or they will just get swept along as if by a mighty river

adolescent obscurantism by pretend enlightened douche bagels effectively discharging what is otherwise a schema to bring about a global tax on all human activity payable to a world central bank run by malthusian eugenicists

good times

good times

(he looks funny kekekeke – this is why the world is broken, people dont care what you have to say, they care how you look.)

lets just cleverly edit reality so we have a real-time memory hole culture that recursively migrates ideas into the timespace loop, we can edit videos to make anything look like anything, lets USE THAT!

cultural SOLVENT – and after enough of it you have merely a slurry, a broken-down liquid byproduct ready to be slurped up by some lord of the flies

these guys need to climb down out of the faggotree and join the rest of us in the real world
we are on a hamster wheel all right

a hamster wheel 14k years in diameter

where the potential of our species is squandered because a tiny handful of elites dominates the planet we all live on.

“you see average morons know theres more goin on than what you cover in your 16 points, you set up the straw man, make me say “aww man, you must be smokin on some real good joints.” – payze duez

what do you think NORTHCOM is for dude? why do you think the police has been federalized and turned into an army? look at the baseline statistics on war expense, we are a NWO hijacked nation and have been used as the NWOs pitbull for almost a century… the rise of PMCs and groups like Blackwater et al. should really drive home the point in the baseline figures on war expense – but of course this is like the business world, endless front companies, holding groups and subsidiaries – endless derivative financial instruments etc. – the plebs are being used as a political football and an excuse for more police state, genuine dissent is being channeled into dead ends so that it cannot produce political momentum or, if it does produce political momentum, that force vector can be roped in and aligned for vertical integration within one or the other polarity of the false political paradigm – a paradigm engineered for precisely this effect and reinforced by a corporate media. system, a hijacked fourth estate, where even the so-called alternative media is merely a subsidiary of Halliburton.

OH MY GOD

WEVE GOT A CITIZEN HERE FARMING

CODE 911, I REPEAT CODE 911

WE HAVE A POSSIBLE WHITE AL-QAEDA IM GONNA NEED BACKUP!

*BLAM BLAM BLAM*

Linux snickers at Microsoft’s victory declaration | ZDNet.

just a few reasons why open source is going to rape the corpse of corporate borg software environments

and in 20 years when the population of programmers has increased by overall percentage….

fucking write my own .dlls microsoft, when you have 2-3x as many people doing this, what you gonna do then bitch?

and that goes for all the big corporate software developers

let this be a warning to you, the code will not be contained by petty men and petty minds – when an Chinese middle class gets a hold of our work in 20 years time, i mean really gets a hold of it …

and every day more people learn, they learn the true history of this planet and they learn to write various forms of code and it is all going to come to a head one day – and on that day, when your eyes go blind from terror at the thought of the fate you have sealed, both for yourselves and for others, oh you global elite, on that day, as your vision escapes you, the last thing you will see is my face staring back at you.

Linux snickers at Microsoft’s victory declaration

By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols | August 15, 2011, 3:30pm PDT

Summary: Who is Microsoft fooling? Other than on the desktop, Linux is eating its lunch, and it’s only going to get worse for Microsoft.

My compadre Ed Bott does a fine job of digging under the surface of Microsoft’s annual report to find that Microsoft no longer considers Linux a serious threat. Who does Microsoft think they’re kidding?

Sure, on the desktop, it’s a Windows world, but guess what Sherlock; the desktop is declining in importance. The mobile, server, Web and cloud worlds are where the twenty-teens’ billionaires will come from, not the desktop. And, guess, who’s already in all those spaces large and in charge? Yes, that’s right, Linux.

Let’s start from the top on where Linux beats Microsoft.

Mobile

The mobile computing world is a dog-fight between Apple iOS and Google’s Linux-based Android. Windows Phone 7 is much of a non-player on smartphone as Linux is on the conventional PC desktop. While Apple owns the high-end of smartphones, Android is cleaning up everywhere else.

Until recently, you could argue that nobody, but nobody, really sold tablets except for Apple. That argument doesn’t hold water any more. Android now has 20% of the tablet market. I wonder, I really do, if that’s why Apple launched its legal attack on the Samsung Galaxy Tab’s design in Europe, Is Apple that insecure? Maybe.

Until the last few days, you might also have been concerned about how Google could fight off the endless legal challenges to Android. You need worry no more about that. Google’s acquisition of Motorola Mobility has given Google all the ammo it needs to win in the mobile patent wars.

Of course, it’s always possible that another mobile operating system will win out. Like say HP’s webOS, which is, ah, Linux based. Or, there’s Intel MeeGo, which is, wow, what do you know, Linux based. You get the picture. One way or the other, tomorrow’s mobile operating systems are likely to be Linux operating systems.

Servers and the Web

There are a lot of Windows Servers instances humming away in offices. It’s hard to say exactly how many Linux servers are out there since you don’t need to buy a Linux server, you can download one, or a hundred and one, for free. Sure, Red Hat, which primarily makes its money from its server offering, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), is well on its way to being the first billion dollar open-source company, but there are probably far more CentOS, openSUSE, Debian, etc, Linux servers quietly and invisibly running. We just don’t know. What we can count though are Web servers.

According to Netcraft, Microsoft has only 15.86% of the Web server market in August 2011. Apache leads the pack with 65.18%. In third place, you’ll find ngnix with 6.54% and Google takes last place with 4.38%. And what operating system are you most likely to find Apache, ngnix, and Google running on? Yes, you’re right in one, it’s Linux.

It’s not just Web servers though. Supercomputers, the fastest of the fast, run Linux almost exclusively. Cutting edge computing platforms like IBM’s Jeopardy champ Watson? Linux again. It’s not just computing engineers that turn to Linux though. The world’s major stock exchanges also run Linux. Once you’re away from the desktop, you’re living in a Linux world.

The Cloud

I was privileged to speak recently at a small cloud conference in my hometown of Asheville, NC. Two things surprised me there. First, how many new businesses were already actively using the cloud’s scalability to create new business models and, second, how everyone was using Linux on their cloud businesses.

I shouldn’t have been surprised. Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2), the most popular of the public clouds, doesn’t report on what operating system images people use on it, but The Cloud Market, does scan Amazon EC2 for operating system and other information. According to The Cloud Market’s numbers, as of August 15th 2011, Ubuntu Linux had 38.4% of all images; that was followed by generic Linux with 31.5% and then Windows with 13.5%. After Windows, there were numerous other Linux variants. Adding it all up and we’re left pretty much with Linux was being used by 86.1% of all cloud users.

So, victory over Linux Microsoft? I think not.

Indeed, even on the desktop, as we turn more and more to using Web browsers for everything, I see Linux winning out in the long run. You’ve had a great run Microsoft, and you’ll still be a power for the rest of this decade, but victory? No, you’re just sliding into a long decline and, at the end of it, Linux will still be behind the scenes running everyone’s back-room services, their tablets, their phones, and, yes, even their Web browser-based PCs ala Google Chrome OS with Linux-powered clouds keeping it all going.

EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN IS OUR ENEMY

WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH EASTASIA
WE HAVE NEVER BEEN AT WAR WITH EASTASIA

2 + 2 = 5 and if you say otherwise you are with the al-qaeda’s

OCCUPY TOGETHER | Rainyday Superstar.

99% Free

Focused on the tiny handful of elites at the very top who have dominated and squandered the potential of the human species for millennia

Regaining control of our monetary system has one easy, first step:

Register in the primaries to vote for Ron Paul in 2012. He is the one candidate who will actually dismantle the Federal Reserve System, the Central Bank, the Economic Moloch that sits at the center of our economy and devours the young of every generation

We can rebuild this republic.

we have the technology.

-Josh

Panic of the Plutocrats – NYTimes.com

Panic of the Plutocrats

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: October 9, 2011

It remains to be seen whether the Occupy Wall Street protests will change America’s direction. Yet the protests have already elicited a remarkably hysterical reaction from Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent.

And this reaction tells you something important — namely, that the extremists threatening American values are what F.D.R. called “economic royalists,” not the people camping in Zuccotti Park.

Consider first how Republican politicians have portrayed the modest-sized if growing demonstrations, which have involved some confrontations with the police — confrontations that seem to have involved a lot of police overreaction — but nothing one could call a riot. And there has in fact been nothing so far to match the behavior of Tea Party crowds in the summer of 2009.

Nonetheless, Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, has denounced “mobs” and “the pitting of Americans against Americans.” The G.O.P. presidential candidates have weighed in, with Mitt Romney accusing the protesters of waging “class warfare,” while Herman Cain calls them “anti-American.” My favorite, however, is Senator Rand Paul, who for some reason worries that the protesters will start seizing iPads, because they believe rich people don’t deserve to have them.

Michael Bloomberg, New York’s mayor and a financial-industry titan in his own right, was a bit more moderate, but still accused the protesters of trying to “take the jobs away from people working in this city,” a statement that bears no resemblance to the movement’s actual goals.

And if you were listening to talking heads on CNBC, you learned that the protesters “let their freak flags fly,” and are “aligned with Lenin.”

The way to understand all of this is to realize that it’s part of a broader syndrome, in which wealthy Americans who benefit hugely from a system rigged in their favor react with hysteria to anyone who points out just how rigged the system is.

Last year, you may recall, a number of financial-industry barons went wild over very mild criticism from President Obama. They denounced Mr. Obama as being almost a socialist for endorsing the so-called Volcker rule, which would simply prohibit banks backed by federal guarantees from engaging in risky speculation. And as for their reaction to proposals to close a loophole that lets some of them pay remarkably low taxes — well, Stephen Schwarzman, chairman of the Blackstone Group, compared it to Hitler’s invasion of Poland.

And then there’s the campaign of character assassination against Elizabeth Warren, the financial reformer now running for the Senate in Massachusetts. Not long ago a YouTube video of Ms. Warren making an eloquent, down-to-earth case for taxes on the rich went viral. Nothing about what she said was radical — it was no more than a modern riff on Oliver Wendell Holmes’s famous dictum that “Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.”

But listening to the reliable defenders of the wealthy, you’d think that Ms. Warren was the second coming of Leon Trotsky. George Will declared that she has a “collectivist agenda,” that she believes that “individualism is a chimera.” And Rush Limbaugh called her “a parasite who hates her host. Willing to destroy the host while she sucks the life out of it.”

What’s going on here? The answer, surely, is that Wall Street’s Masters of the Universe realize, deep down, how morally indefensible their position is. They’re not John Galt; they’re not even Steve Jobs. They’re people who got rich by peddling complex financial schemes that, far from delivering clear benefits to the American people, helped push us into a crisis whose aftereffects continue to blight the lives of tens of millions of their fellow citizens.

Yet they have paid no price. Their institutions were bailed out by taxpayers, with few strings attached. They continue to benefit from explicit and implicit federal guarantees — basically, they’re still in a game of heads they win, tails taxpayers lose. And they benefit from tax loopholes that in many cases have people with multimillion-dollar incomes paying lower rates than middle-class families.

This special treatment can’t bear close scrutiny — and therefore, as they see it, there must be no close scrutiny. Anyone who points out the obvious, no matter how calmly and moderately, must be demonized and driven from the stage. In fact, the more reasonable and moderate a critic sounds, the more urgently he or she must be demonized, hence the frantic sliming of Elizabeth Warren.

So who’s really being un-American here? Not the protesters, who are simply trying to get their voices heard. No, the real extremists here are America’s oligarchs, who want to suppress any criticism of the sources of their wealth.

—–

(Hello, I'm a scoundrel.)

viz. the use of phrases like “Republican politicians” and the general way he categorizes his thought/analysis

deliberate misinterpretation of rand paul’s statements and the putting of him in the same paragraph as Cain/Romney = Ron Paul attack

legislation associated with this “Volcker rule” incident was obviously a false positive designed to shore up the very too-big-to-failness that provoked the response in the first place (ordo ab chao baby!)

essentially we have a pro Obama piece by Krugman who is carrying water for the left side of the false paradigm

I could break down the last several paragraphs, making a case about this is honeyed rhetoric meant to shape public perception and ultimately neuter anyone who at least has the strength and conscience to be politically active/minded…

krug really appears to be a hardcore left gatekeeper for the hijacked system

he offers, like chomsky, or hedges for instance, an articulate analysis, incorporating our own Authentic Rhetoric and Analysis about the logistical reality, but only to steer the reader towards some Effectively politically neutral (and ultimately harmless to the NWO superstructure thereby), position or other. (voting for an obama, a romney or perry, etc)

OR

as our friend Karl puts it:

This is an outrage.

Yglesias tells us that some Occupy Wall Street protesters have picked up Ron Paulish monetary ideas — although some know better. I thought I’d say a word about one particular idea that sounds plausible to some people but is actually quite wrong: banning fractional reserve banking.

I know that’s a popular theme among some Austrians. But it’s actually neither a good idea nor even feasible.

The crucial thing is to understand what banks do. And it’s not mostly about money creation! Instead, what banks are for is helping to improve the tradeoff between returns and liquidity.

That’s a very quaint notion.  But were it true there wouldn’t be any such thing as systemic risk!

Why?

Simple: If you only loan against actual asset values there is no systemic risk possible; if you get in trouble you simply sell down the assets until you no longer are.  Since you’ve never “created money” there’s no systemic risk that can arise.  Ever.

Of course this isn’t how it works in the real world today.  That’s the “Bailey and Biddle” model from It’s a Wonderful Life, but pretending that we live in that world today is beyond fanciful.

For proof one need only look at the Credit Card in your wallet – or, for that matter, the student loan.  If you wish to get more esoteric you can look at the Credit Default Swap.

None of these are backed by capital in today’s banking system, but all should be – dollar for dollar.  Why?  Because all are claims on something that does not, today, exist!

That is functionally the precise same act as a naked short.  You put into circulation that which does not exist “on the come” that it will in the future.  In the case of stock that is naked shorted you’re counterfeiting the stock of the corporation in question – you’re representing that you have something to deliver (the stock) but only the company in question has the right to create (by issuance in exchange for capital) that stock.

In the case of naked credit creation unbacked by an asset the bank is effectively naked shorting the currency, betting “on the come” that production will in the future cause the government to issue actual currency with which to make the bet good!

That’s an outrage!  It’s also how we get massive asset inflation.

Krugman knows this, of course.  After all, he has a Nobel Prize and a PhD, right?  He can’t possibly be so ignorant as to claim that banking as currently practiced actually encompasses (mostly) lending against actual assets – that is, liquidity matching for a price – can he?

After all, were this the primary function of banks these days there could never be systemic risk, since lending against assets can’t cause it, as if the person who borrowed doesn’t pay you simply seize the asset and resell it into the market, extinguishing the debt without systemic consequence (the borrower, of course, goes broke by such a process, but that’s the risk of borrowing that which you can’t pay back!)

The claims of charlatans must be matched against the factual record of not only what has occurred before but what threatens to occur now.

PS: This is why I support – strongly – a “One Dollar of Capital” LAW for banks, and why you should too.