CNN is now apologizing for the use of the word “crosshairs” in general political speech, as shown in the video after the “Read More” jump. The implication is that the word itself has been used to facilitate a hate crime. That is untrue, as former New York City Mayor Ed Koch observes. But maybe the belief is that if a lie is repeated for long enough then it eventually becomes true. Then power follows. “Real power is the ability to define what the fight is about.” The entire discussion moves into a rigged casino. Control words and you control truth. George Orwell understood this so well that he believed one of the first things every totalitarian ideology does is redefine the words in a language, purposefully, forcefully and relentlessly. In his novel 1984, he called this artificial language of totalitarianism Newspeak.
Orwell knew that,as someone once said, “you will not prevail just because you are right. If you know something but cannot communicate it, it’s as though you don’t know it.” Take away the words and you take away the power to express a contrary thought. And the best way to do this is to torture words until they meant what the narrative said they should say; by changing meanings until only the allowable meanings were left. Here is how:
embedded by Embedded VideoThe purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of IngSoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought — that is, a thought diverging from the principles of IngSoc — should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meaning and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meaning whatever.
YouTube Direkt
The word “crosshairs” has been singled out for this kind of treatment. It is going to be turned into an unmentionable word, to take its place alongside all the other unutterables in the Newspeak dictionary. It’s going to be a word that Sarah Palin actually never said to Jared Loughner, but which she said to him. It will be the word that drove him crazy, and not the hallucinogens or the “conscience dreaming” he indulged in. It will be a word that everyone will eventually come to believe that Hitler invented. And that will be the end of it. The process, according to Orwell, is simple: the word “crosshairs” is going to be thoroughly purged of any politically neutral connotations until it is a simple “hate” word. To use “crosshairs” will henceforward come to mean “to threaten to shoot someone,” whereas to actually threaten to shoot someone will be defined as “victim’s outrage.”
wot’s a cnn?
Crosshairs News Network
Bring it on – they’re secretly part of the Palin for President club.
“the c word”? I don’t know how they’re going to do it; i mean, while you can destroy the possbility of certain kinds of experiences and corresponding ideas, you can’t really outlaw words can you? People can’t forget words, except by honest redundancy, by eliminating that to which they refer. You can only refuse to say words and inevitably that means relying on euphemisms and guilty memory. The notion of newspeak, in other words, is Utopian or dystopian; it can’t really exist; our shared reality cannot be constructed by bad faith conspiracy, only destoyed. The oldspeak can be destroyed, but only to leave a vacuum in its place. And sooner or later people will have to find the words to put something together again.
Fine article Wretchard,
But dammit, the CNN thicknecks have gone two steps too far here. We who learned surveying in the 50s were taught the practice of replacement of a broken crosshair, unwinding a strand from a spider’s egg-case, and gluing it onto the index marks of the crosshair diaphragm and adjusting the instrument again so our lines would be straight and level.
It’s no wonder that CNN recoils with horror from ‘crosshairs’, since MSM news is the antithesis of holding hold to the straight and level.
wretchard:
The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of IngSoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought — that is, a thought diverging from the principles of IngSoc — should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meaning and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meaning whatever.
Now, what’s the difference between “Newspeak” and the variety of English taught to Indian schoolchildren at federally controlled boarding schools? What is the essential difference between punishing Indian schoolchildren then for speaking their native languages and punishing American schoolchildren now for environmental or racial heresy? On many reservations, English is “Newspeak”.
Let’s not presume that the leftist impulse to control the lives of other people is anything new; the Bureau of Indian Affairs has been doing that for nearly two centuries.
I think that given immense time
I’d get all nouns and verbs to rhyme
And get all prepositions to agree
With adverbs and the adjective
That modifies the way we live
And punctuates the way the world we see
If Orwell George were with us now
I’m sure he’d show us why and how
The words we used to use are now passé
Old fashioned now we speak in rhymes
With lilting tones and metered times
And how we used to speak now déclassé
CNN is so lame. They have run a show called “Crossfire” for years. This is just dumber than a bag of hammers.
Maybe instead of “crosshairs” they should use a less troublesome word, such as “gunsight”. Clarity AND political correctness. A win-win.
buck smith @ 8 is spot on. They haven’t thought this through. It will bite them in the sittin-down-place, I betcha.
Few watch cnn. The audience for ABC, NBC, CBS is old and dying off. The New York Times is influential with the dying media and many clueless politicians. But the tide turned a long time ago. It is just being noticed now. They do not get to define the terms of debate anymore. I think it freaks them out.
cnn is coming within a crosshair of being idiotic.
First they came for the crosshairs, and I was silent. Then they came for the crossties, and the train derailed.
Orwell, indeed, is required reading. “1984″ should be read at least every couple of years (like the Bible?), just to keep us Westerners on our toes. (Dispensations will be available for those who have had to actually live that nightmare.)
Though in this, Orwell merely echoes Humpty Dumpty—another one of my intellectual heroes. (Indeed, Lewis Caroll should also be required reading…., though things may soon reach the point—we may have reached it already—where we all will be granted dispensations….)
Did ya notice . . . both host on CNN and hostess on MSNBC . . . they are BLONDES!!! LMAO
Other words or terms that should be banned due to their having been thrashed or misused beyond meaning: hope & change, racist, islamophobia, hate speech, religious vilification, climate change, settled science, stakeholders. And in Australia: asylum seekers, working families & moving forward.
Their power to police the language is diminishing to the point of being non-existent.
The only thing that gives most of these people any legitimacy at all is the fact that they’re on TV, and the blogs, pro and con, continuously repeat their drivel.
This’ll go away once the next big thing comes along, and they no longer feel like they have to cover their a** for their disgraceful performance during this latest tragedy.
I mean really – of what significance is it to anyone what someone like Andrew Sullivan, or Kathleen Parker, to name a couple at random, or any of them say? They’re quoted, analyzed, and condemned or praised based on what?
What is the source of Krugman or David Brooks special place in our commentariat? It’s not like anything either of them would say is the least bit unpredictable, much less thought provoking. They’re intellectuals minus the intellect, and we seem to have a bunch of them around.
Palin had every right to take this seriously and throw this back in their faces, since they were accusing her of being an accessory to a heinous crime, but the response of the rest of us should be derision, not outrage.
They’re not serious enough to deserve outrage. There’s no there there. When’s the last time you read an opinion piece in the MSM, from either side, that had something unexpected, or made an argument in some novel way that made you think? You need to go to the Internet for that.
I keep coming back from time to time to my theory that the best way to defeat these people is to laugh at them every chance we get. Outrage or 1984 type comments give them a gravity they don’t merit. And the last thing those who take themselves oh so seriously can stand is to be laughed at.
16. dtmack: “but the response of the rest of us should be derision, not outrage”
GW Bush tried to shrug it off. How did that work out?
#16. dtmack
They’re not serious enough to deserve outrage. There’s no there there. When’s the last time you read an opinion piece in the MSM, from either side, that had something unexpected, or made an argument in some novel way that made you think? You need to go to the Internet for that.
Exactly. The Progressive line is nothing more than a rehash of old 19th Century ideas that are continually being repackaged under different labels.
I am reminded of what Tolkien wrote in The Hobbit about the Baggins family. They were very respectable in that you knew what they would say on any subject without the bother of having to ask them. Such a description fits Progressives and our current ruling class to a T. Despite their hyper-inflated self-image, the Progressives are really the knuckle dragging Neanderthals of our time.
This silly censorship must die. We must strangle this idea in the crib, lest it become a monster roaming the countryside. If that happens, we will need guns with silver bullets and wooden stakes.
DEATH KILL HUNT SHOOT MAIM WORDS; TARGET THOUGHTS FOR ASSASSINATION; AND ALSO, BACON COMES FROM DEAD PIGS
;-]
on a more serious notes, this call for civility is BS. nothing will ever get ratcheted down- it’s gone too far to pull back now.
remember- there was a time in this country when you couldn’t say ‘johnson’ on teevee
I read and like the article very much, and it gets in deep to the points it makes.
Then I watched the two videos, in reverse order.
All that came to mind after the Ezra the lib spewed was, “what a fat lipped lisping idiot”. So much for his influence over anything.
Next, the CNN crosshair clip is hilarious, the newsspeaker is trying to pre-emptively strike out any “personal or news company” association that may crop up in the future with any deranged hit jobs on any politicians. Talk about walking on eggshells, being a worrywart, admitting you may indeed be part of the problem if you don’t watch it and extolling your “powerful influence” at the same time, and covering the backside rolled up into one fruitless waste of time…
I thought the last quip was special as well, where he declared their newsspeak word ban “your standards”, meaning “the viewers” standards in context.
Pretty amazing CNN and he declare their standards to be compliant with the viewers, apparently they don’t have any of their own to offer – or angry emails caused the scene, or who knows…
Maybe we should talk about how every TV news clip and public spew had to have the required “terrible tragedy” and lines of sorrow attached, with the personal heartfelt proclamations of sadness, when everyone above ambient temperature knows not a single one of them felt the words they were and are required to recite. There’s some newsspeak for you no one but I ever mentions.
Just like you had to worship the state in Orwell’s novel, the modern speak is the required emotional bowing to whatever the powers consider “national tragedy” – a dog, a cat, a child, a little girl, a poor woman, any of which harmed in any fashion in the out of the rules book method, requires this false emotional pity and sorrow party on mic and cam, which serves to inoculate the commenter from accusations of hate or uncaring, in a twisted state sanctioned ideological way.
Of course they don’t all cry in their morning coffee when they hear it, but they sure all claim they do – and they all definitely demand of themselves and everyone else in the public circle, that they declare it so, before they are allowed to speak or be listened to, at all. Talk about “training” and newsspeak… WOW.
Makes me wish they’d bring back “Crossfire”, their debate show. I’d like to recreate such a show and purposefully use as many military terms as possible, with the Left/Right view expressed as “defilade” and “enfilade”. The first show could be about “ambush journalism” and the show’s motto, “L’audace l’audace toujours l’audace”.
Dictionary’s shrink according to purpose and “apartheid” has been re-purposed to apply to Israel and “imperlialist” similarly changed to basically include anything America has done in the post world period despite clear disinterest in occupying territory. In the middle east it is a given among many journalists that America has an empire.
One of my favorite quotes by the debauched Aymin El-Amir in the June, 2008 issue of Cairo’s Al-Ahram Weekly goes:
“Of all the empires in history, the United States will go down as one of the most aggressive and least inspiring. After nearly 160 years of warfare and imperial conquest, US policy, and the war machine it marshaled, has left nothing in its tracks but death and destruction, with no lasting cultural value.”
In fact American technological and cultural innovation and exceptionalism rules Mr. El-Amir’s life whether he is willing to accept it or no and will redound through the centuries as the benchmark of all further developments in these areas. Even the moon Mr. El-Amir looks up to at night must seem an American moon so I can see why he feels like a small man in a small culture.
The idea of intent is also a casualty to be skewered according to one’s agenda and so you have Israel’s “violent military occupation” nowhere contrasted with the violent military occupation the Palestinian Arabs, Syria, Jordan and Egypt tried and failed at; success is immoral in these terms. Failure equals a great lessening or a non-event. It is in this manner that inaccurate rockets from Gaza meant to kill make Israel’s response “disproportionate” when in fact it’s simply a successful version of what the Gazans failed to do.
The bewildering excuse proponents of the Palestinian-Jewish civil war at the end of the British Mandate of Palestine make when they even deign to admit such a war took place is that the Palestinian armies were ineffective; intent is stripped right out of the equation and firmly placed in the convenient failure equals morality bag.
Some of it can be written off as sheer stupidity as in this 2010 “truther” quote from Jeff Gates article ironically titled “Anti-Semitism: What Is It?”, “Is it anti-Semitic to report that the so-called ‘mastermind’ behind 9/11 cited as his motive the US-Israeli relationship?” Gates reports that his “colleague” Noam Chomsky supposedly warned him off such an article.
In one brief sentence Mr. Gates debates and contradicts himself by at once implying that a man in fact was not the mastermind of 9/11 but then citing the importance of his motives behind the hijacking he was not the mastermind of.
Now “crosshairs” is the latest casualty to go along with using the term “black hole” in mixed company along with any other manifestation of the English language that imparts a negative connotation with anything dark. Therefore, like the TSA grope-downs suggest, being scared of the dark must come to equally mean there is such a thing as being scared of the light in order to spare hurt feelings over people who have decided to co-opt entire sectors of the English language for their very own, to be walled off, protected and covered from the light.
Perhaps we should start using the Russian term for black holes, “frozen star”. No one will know what the hell we’re talking about but that’s where we are anyway.
Some words are merely transformed into others such as criminals going from “illegal aliens” to a more polite “undocumented workers” which suggests the liberal agenda and delusion in one fell swoop in that it says that every single illegal is here to work cuz their economies are bad, no matter facts to the contrary. Many are criminals who have criminal ideas far beyond the criminality of their mode of entrance to the U.S. The liberal Left simply wants these people to be given a free pass in the same manner that politicians honor their oaths of office by obeying only the laws they agree with including our President and his top dog Eric Holder. An oath is not an oath is not an oath and moral duty supercedes all so that Obama and Holder will never have to answer to some analogue to the Nuremberg Trials.
“CNN is now apologizing for the use of the word “crosshairs” in general political speech…”
Bah!
Let the liberals apologize for their use of the term “War on Poverty”, if they’re serious about this.
They started talking about that in 1964, and look how many poor people have died by violence since.
Their hands are dripping with blood.
#13 Barry Meislin:
“Orwell, indeed, is required reading. “1984″ should be read at least every couple of years (like the Bible?), just to keep us Westerners on our toes.”
Good idea. Just remember, though, for a lot of (most of?) the left 1984 isn’t perceived as a warning, it’s perceived as a how-to manual.
Sorry libs, but words have meanings, and I will continue to use the correct words to express my thoughts and opinions whether you like it or not. Furthermore, I won’t let you get away with redefining words to mean whatever you wish they did, if I hear or see you doing that. I’ll call you on it every time, and not especially politely. Finally, I’m going to take back the meaning of words you’ve perverted, like “tolerance,” “discrimination,” “judgmental,” and “fascist.” I’ll use them correctly, and won’t let you use them incorrectly. You will lose your surreptitious campaign to foist your weeny-word definitions on us.
The Left has used this tactic very successfully for at least fifty years. It is a bit more subtle than the crosshairs example. For example, it is now impossible to use the word ‘woman’ with a meaning that is distinct from the word ‘man’, at least in talk about morality, politics, or promotion and hiring. It is very refreshing to see Mr. Hernandez challenge Newspeak in the direct way that he does here. If his challenge can become mainstream then it could be a powerful element in politics.
And Nina Totenberg apologized for using the word “Christmas”.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2010/12/20/nina-totenberg-i-was-forgive-expression-christmas-party
Just words……
I don’t know,”1984,” “Brave New World,” or Monty Python’s “Fish Dance”?
Now if only CNN would apologize for using the word “News” in their title then we would get somewhere.
A minor point in the Lefts’ arsenal of linguistic offense is the way that they preemptively make the observer culpable for their crimes. The newsreader, a genuine airhead, says “call us if we fail to meet your standards.” This is a form of passive voice, the bureaucrats way of being passive-aggressive and absolving themselves of responsibility. They are not reflecting a democratic consensus but attempting to manufacture one.
I suppose CNN Targeted Crossfire to be Shot Down as a show. Bullseye!
*Ahem*
Let’s see, “1984″, “Brave New World”, or Monty Python’s “Fish Dance”?
http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/monty-python-fish-dance/39971dcd3639d324c82339971dcd3639d324c823-300678840474?q=video+Monty+Python's+Fish+Dance&FORM=VIRE3
The use of the term birther, as in truther, to refer to people demanding the best evidence of eligibility, is an excellent example of newspeak.
The problem these morons have had for some time is that they are now in charge of the political and media landscape and are therefore the “oppressors” in their own paradigm. Most Americans are characterized by a significant rebellious streak, and this kind of idiocy benefits the Davids in opposition to the tottering Goliaths of the MSM. They have little hope of relevance.
So, what does the term “crossfire” mean?
CNN is guilty o the same just by having a show named after an ambush technique.
Jesus F. Christ; They can’t be satisfied until they can control every term in the english language. They pretty much control the narrative in our every day conversation, today.
When they get everybody so stigmatized that no one says a word, they’ll have to regulate facial expressions.
OUR MINDS HAVE TO BE REGULATED LIKE NUCLEAR WEAPONS. (snort)
Primly policing the language and purging it of color and power is the left’s way of concealing its rapacious appetite for power.
The hypocrisy & political correctness will get CNN in the end as they continue to lose viewers.
Buck Smith: CNN is so lame. They have run a show called “Crossfire” for years. This is just dumber than a bag of hammers.
Hilarious!
The PC crowd preaches tolerance but they are very niggardly about putting it into action.
–
In a side note, Joe Lieberman will not run for Veep in 2012. That means Hillary will.
That is so true. But, as was said in the start of the article, “Maybe the belief is that if a lie is repeated for long enough then it eventually becomes true.” Dr. Goebbels would have been proud of CNN. Americans, though, are smart enough to see through all that, which is why someone like Sarah Palin is so popular. Deal with it, main stream media.
Satirony
Libertyship46: Do you also find it ironic that the Liberal youth of today spray paint “Question Everything” everywhere they can, yet they never question the marching orders and groupthink their “Leaders” tell them?
I will now make it a point to sprinkle the word “crosshairs” in every political discussion I have.
At a base level, this is an outrage. CNN should be in the crosshairs for extermination for this.
The truth is finally coming out. CNN is solely responsible for the beginning of ALL of the political hate speach in this country. They are now subtly trying to atone for it by banning the use of the innocuous “cross-hairs”. BUT…… they started it
ALL with their political TV show “CROSSFIRE” in 1982. This show was designed to create political WAR by pitting liberal debaters against conservative debaters. Oh…… the Horror of it all!!!!!
The MSM managed to define the argument by endlessly repeating the meme. And they led Palin, et al, into the quicksand. The Arizona shootings will forever be relatable to Left vs. Right political conflict (and the Right is the default antagonist). The Tea Partiers will be required to explain & defend themselves whenever they wander onto the MSM’s portals.
Headline: Limbaugh denies involvement in massacre.
The country awaits Palin’s response to the incident. What say you, Sarah, about some nutcase who shot all these people? Time for a Youtube response. Uhggg.
Conservatism always seems to lose the language war; we fall knto their trap every time, trusting that the consumers of CNN will decipher truth from utter lunacy.
In any case, we have to observe people’s sensitivities and discontinue use of the term “crosshairs.”
From now on I will use a more modern term: “Laser Dot.”
Oh, Mario Savio and Lenny Bruce, where are you?
Re. 39. Teresita
I believe they’ve banned “niggardly” few years back and you are still using it. How bad of you! They will volunteer you to the reeducation camp… any time now.
–
Demanding or offering a media apology has become nothing more than a puerile parlor game. When demanded, an apology is merely a cudgel used to place opponents on the personal defensive while subordinating more substantive issues. As something offered, as in the CNN clip, it is rarely other than a bit of puffery trumpeting one’s own perceived sense of self-righteousness.
To whom, exactly, does CNN believe it is apologizing? To the schizophrenic who will supposedly take the words just uttered as a directive for criminal action? To those who may become victims of the schizophrenic’s actions? Or to CNN’s listeners, whose language is being stolen as the network and fellow progressives shape a debate using methods that even the Soviet citizenry would have derisively recognized as politically correct speech?
And how is a media apology anything other than an empty gesture assuming any of those outcomes?
For its worshippers, Big Government becomes a kind of religion:
the state as church.
Dependence Day – Steyn
Somewhere along the way a quintessentially British sense of self-deprecation curdled into a psychologically unhealthy self-loathing. A typical foot-of-the-page news item from The Daily Telegraph:
A leading college at Cambridge University has renamed its controversial colonial-themed Empire Ball after accusations that it was “distasteful.” The £136-a-head Emmanuel College ball was advertised as a celebration of “the Victorian commonwealth and all of its decadences.
Students were urged to “party like it’s 1899” and organisers promised a trip through the Indian Raj, Australia, the West Indies, and 19th century Hong Kong.
But anti-fascist groups said the theme was “distasteful and insensitive” because of the British Empire’s historical association with slavery, repression and exploitation.
The Empire Ball Committee, led by presidents Richard Hilton and Jenny Unwin, has announced the word “empire” will be removed from all promotional material.
The way things are going in Britain, it would make more sense to remove the word “balls.”
It’s interesting to learn that “anti-fascism” now means attacking the British Empire, which stood alone against fascism in that critical year between the fall of France and Germany’s invasion of Russia. And it’s even sadder to have to point out the most obvious fatuity in those “anti-fascist groups” litany of evil—“the British Empire’s association with slavery.” The British Empire’s principal association with slavery is that it abolished it.
—
Cecil Rhodes distilled the assumptions of generations when he said that to be born a British subject was to win first prize in the lottery of life. On the eve of the Great War, in his play Heartbreak House, Bernard Shaw turned the thought around to taunt a British ruling class too smug and self-absorbed to see what was coming. “Do you think,” he wrote, “the laws of God will be suspended in favor of England because you were born in it?”
In our time, to be born a citizen of the United States is to win first prize in the lottery of life, and, as Britons did, too many Americans assume it will always be so. Do you think the laws of God will be suspended in favor of America because you were born in it? Great convulsions lie ahead, and at the end of it we may be in a post-Anglosphere world.
A contributor to a conservative website, possibly PJ, or AT recently authored an article defending CNN as the most objective MSM right along with FOX news. He said CNN is very concerned with their image. This is true, but only with their image with the lefties.
I’m surprised they apologized. Liberals never apologize for anything and can generally say anything they want – and do. It’s white conservatives who are denied free speech.
Didn’t some idiot on NPR apologize for using the word “CHRISTMAS” recently?
God, please save my country.
28. toadold
Actually, I think this falls more along the line of Demolition Man.
52. lolly
I think that you’re mistaken on that. Liberals will apologize for everything and anything that they (or the human race) has ever done, real or imagined. They’ll apologize, bite their lower lip, cry and once all the drama’s done proclaim themselves good people.
What liberals won’t ever do is take responsibility for the things they’ve done.
Newspeak has always been a favorite tactic of the left. Some words are eliminated or changed in meaning (I remember when “sex” was replaced by “gender” when referring to men or women. Ingsoc also sought to eliminate sex.)
Other words of course are simply eliminated. The favorite technique in political discourse is combining words so that the subject is linked to the goodthink meaning. Thus Israelapartheid, corporategreed, environmentalcrisis, etc. Antonyms are elimitated so the only way to really express something positive that a business has done, at least in the subliminal sense, is to say “uncorporategreed”.
Progressive causes from the enivronment through the undermining of the family all point to the same ends “Never again will you be capable of love, or friendship, or joy of living, or laughter, or curiosity, or courage, or integrity. You will be hollow. We shall squeeze you empty and then we shall fill you with ourselves.”
What happens to metaphor?
Because the way that crosshairs gets there is by way of metaphor, whereby the most extreme sort of change comes to represent any of the whole series of ordinary changes.
Which is an ordinary literary process.
Another literary process is metonymy, which Orwell perhaps did not contemplate, like when you characterize the MSM as assholes.
That might be the antidote.
If the Clinton News Network were really being honest, wouldn’t they apologize for their left bias every minute of every day since they started polluting the land with their sordid form of politically correct, hate-America-first, free-flowing slobbering leftist, progressive speech?
CNN is to journalism what Michael Moore is to intellectual honesty.
On October 28, 2008,when some leftist in West Hollywood, Ca., hung by a rope noose a life sized Sarah Palin doll in effigy and people driving by took .22 caliber shots at it, Michel Moore’s reaction was, “If only the guy had hung the real Sarah Palin.
CNN reported it as a funny Halloween gag. Of course, the New York Times didn’t report it.
When you look at a picture of it, it’s still an eerie sight.
Then Bill Maher, December last, was reported to say, “a dead Sarah Palin was first on his Christmas wish list, possibly her head stuffed in his Christmas stocking.”
A female comedian Ann Bernhardt who you can look at only for seconds before you must look away for fear of going blind; kind of like looking at the sun; the gal is so ugly, well, when it comes to her words, they’re even uglier than her. On Sept. 19, 2008, Sarah told her audience she predicted if Palin traveled to Manhattan that a gang of black men would gang rape her.
CNN reportedly said this. During Bernhardt’s comedy show she brought down the house with the prediction that a gang raping in Manhattan by blacks might “loosen Palin up” by giving her a taste of what it’s like to be poor. “A load of black semen down the throat” Bernhardt mused at her show, might help Palin clear her throat and stop talking conservative nonsense. Who knows”, Bernhardt mused, “if Palin gets a taste for black love juice; it may even open up a new world for the incredible tight lipped Palin who, in a series of Sept., 2008 interviews, wouldn’t or couldn’t tell Katie Couric what newspapers she read. At the very least,” Bernhardt noted, “Sarah would have something else to talk about: sleeping with a gang of black men.”
#55 Spindok
“Other words of course are simply eliminated. The favorite technique in political discourse is combining words so that the subject is linked to the goodthink meaning. Thus Israelapartheid, corporategreed, environmentalcrisis, etc.”
Good point.
25. Doug Loss: I agree. When the game is fixed, the best way to win is not to play.
6. Alexis: First of all, it is not the same thing. They are not being taught to change the meaning of their own native words, they are being taught english so they can interact with the majority of Americans. I could not, personally, care less if native american children learn to speak english, it just makes it harder for them to assimilate. Those who have refused to assimilate have mostly lived in squallor because of this but I respect their right to choose. We should stop subsidizing their choice however since it IS a choice. They were conquered as a people, it has happened many times in history. You either adjust or get left behind. Wah.
The greatest disinformation and use of “newspeak” ever perpetuated on the U.S. population is the Fereral Reserve Bank
Follow the shrinking dollar and increasing debt:
The Federal Reserve headquarters is in Washington, DC. It sits on a very impressive address on Constitution Avenue, right across from the Lincoln Memorial. But is it ‘Federal’? Is it really part of the United States Government?
Well, what we are about to show you is that there is nothing ‘Federal’ about the Federal Reserve-and there are no reserves. The name is a deception created before the Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913 to make Americans think that America’s new central bank operates in the public interest. The truth is that the Fed is a private (or, at best, quasi-public) bank owned by private national banks, which are the stockholders, and run for their private profit.
As economist Henry Pasquet noted:
“That’s exactly correct; the Fed is a privately owned, for-profit corporation which has no reserves — at least no reserves to back up the Federal Reserve notes which are our common currency.”
The Federal Reserve Act was railroaded through a carefully prepared Congressional Conference Committee meeting scheduled during the unlikely hours of 1.30 am to 4.30 am (when most members were sleeping) on Monday 22 December 1913, at which 20 to 40 substantial differences in the House and Senate versions were supposedly described, deliberated upon, debated, reconciled and voted upon in a near-miraculous four-and-a-half to nine minutes per item, at that late hour.
At 4.30 am (editorial comment…..4:30 A.M. BOHICA), a prepared report of this Committee was handed to the printers. Senator Bristow of Kansas, the Republican leader, stated on the Congressional Record that the Conference Committee had met without notifying them, and that Republicans were not present and were given no opportunity either to read or sign the Conference Committee report. The Conference report is normally read on the Senate floor. The Republicans did not even see the report. Some senators stated on the floor of the Senate that they had no knowledge of the contents of the Bill.
At 6.02 PM on 23 December, when many members had already left the Capital for the Christmas holiday, the very same day that the Bill was hurried through the House and Senate, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 into law. (editorial comment: Quick, get up Mr President , we need to perpetrate a giant hoax on the American population 6:02 pleeese)
The Act transferred control of the money supply of the United States from Congress to a private banking elite. It is not surprising that a bill granting a few national bankers a private money monopoly was passed in such a corrupted manner.
We were dead fish that night right up to today.
http://tinyurl.com/488k9b4
News flash! “Crosshairs” in the crosshairs! “Target” targeted! “Bullseye” in the bullseye! “Direct hit” takes a direct hit! “Assault” under assault! “Under fire” under fire! “Bombarded” bombarded!
No internal contradictions here, folks. Move along.
Nor irony either.
when some leftist in West Hollywood,
The Leftist Hollywood folk themselves should “tone it down.” Violent shoot-em-ups are a staple of the movie industry.
George Orwell understood that in order to control millions of people totalitarian government had to somehow make them accept lies. Intelligent people will naturally see the truth and comprehend when government lies to them – and so that’s the rub – how does totalitarian government deal with intelligent people when they must be lied to? Orwell provides the answer – intelligent people must be conditioned to reject the sanity of common sense – reject self-evident truth – accept the lie and the truth in their minds simultaneously – with the lie “always one leap ahead of the truth.” Orwell’s 1984 character, Julia; an enemy of Big Brother’s Totalitarian government, “did not feel the abyss opening beneath her feet at the thought of lies becoming truth;” where “the heresy of heresies was common sense.” How do Dictatorships lie to intelligent people and get away with it? The use of Orwellian Newspeak is preferred to blatant in your face lies because Newspeak is the clever use of words used in such a way as to mean one thing to the speaker and it’s opposite to the listener. Newspeak government lies are cleverly disguised in rhetoric – the lies can received and accepted by otherwise intelligent people via the insanity of Doublethink – simultaneous mental acceptance of both the lie and the truth. Taken together – the Newspeak lies of totalitarian government – and Doublethink insanity within the minds of millions – government renders rejection of truth within human minds on a colossal scale – what Orwell referred to as “Controlled Insanity.” Under totalitarian government the proper response to their Newspeak lies is Doublethink insanity on the part of their subjects. Insanity is the mental state where reality (the truth) cannot be separated from falsehood (the lie). Since totalitarian government lies to their people using Newspeak, and since such government requires their intelligent subjects to accept the lie and the truth simultaneously via Doublethink; totalitarian government is in the business of “Controlled Insanity.”
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously (the lie and the truth), and accepting both of them (Insanity)… with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth… Those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is; in general the greater the understanding the greater the delusion; the more intelligent the less sane… If human equality is to be forever averted; if the “high,” as we have called them, are to keep their places permanently; then the prevailing mental condition must be controlled insanity…” George Orwell – 1984
Another part of the game is the appropriation of certain words and phrases for specific grievance groups.
The word “Warrior” has now been deemed to belong to Native Americans, despite its widespread use by virtually all cultures. Any school team named “Warriors” has committed an offense, unless it’s a reservation school.
The term “Blood Libel” may only be applied to Jews.
Location expropriation has come into vogue as well. The Lincoln Memorial “belongs” to African Americans, hence the outrage when Glenn Beck had his big rally there.
And it goes on:
Solar Power and “Green Energy” are the province of environmentalists. Affluent Sierra Club members may visit our national parks, but yahoos in RVs should be verboten; a variant on the original intent of Medieval poaching laws.
Speaking of “Medieval,” Sumptuary Laws were instituted in the late Middle Ages to discourage conspicuous consumption by the emerging merchant and craftsmen classes. The same suppressive, malignant spirit guides all the above attempts at expropriation.
You forgot the best one of all: only whites can be racist.
SpeakEasy
6. Alexis: First of all, it is not the same thing. They are not being taught to change the meaning of their own native words, they are being taught english so they can interact with the majority of Americans.
From what I’ve read, this wasn’t the case. Indian children in the reservation schools were actively punished for speaking their native language. Take away the language and the culture dies.
As mentioned by others above, the whole Global Warming debacle is governed by Newspeak (which should be the proper name for Newsweek magazine, by the way).
Use of the word “Ever” is especially insidious, as in “2010 Was The Hottest Year EVER.” The actual “Ever” turns out to be 131 or 150 years or however long “records have been kept.” The fact that the Holocene we’re now living in has had literally hundreds of years that have been “hotter” than 2010 is totally omitted. “Hottest” is also a Newspeak term, because it implies greater severity than the more appropriate “Warmer,” or the truly accurate and positive-sounding “Milder.”
What we once considered very welcome mild weather is now considered a prelude to catastrophe.
“Climate Change” is an even greater distortion. For the bulk of the Holocene, once the now-temperate bands climbed out of the sub-Arctic climate it had during the Ice Age, the zones/bands have been temperate — for the last 9,000 years; yet warming and cooling has occured in cycles in that time. At no time however have these temperate zone’s temperature fluctuations taken them out of the temperate climatic range. Therefore, no genuine “climate change” has occured on a total scale. large, localized climate change has occurred (like the Sahara), but not a total global change. Yet I will see long-term drought conditions (which are cyclical) referred to as “Climate Change.”
The latest Newspeak term is “Climate Disruption,” due to the a cyclical occurence of unusually severe weather extremes.
Wretchard,
Any reason why my offerings aren’t getting posted?
Thx
Habu
My god
is there anything someone you approve of can do to change your mind about them?
George Wallace would have expressed disapproval, but he was from the South and they have a tendency to tell the truth.
Here’s my challenge to you, Richard. Take a picture of any American political adversary you personally disapprove of, paste their picture up in your column right now, and put the benign surveyors symbol over them with the message don’t retreat, reload.
Go ahead pal, we’re are all waiting.
You know, and while I’m thinking about it, do the same with Lincoln’s head, Kennedy’s head, and Bobby’s head.
rp@57: A female comedian Ann Bernhardt
Sandra Bernhard perhaps? I hadn’t seen or heard of the performance in question, but that’s her schtick.
(Yep. A little google action gets you there. That’s our Sandy.)
Some months back, I used the word “n****r” word in a thread on wretchards comments page. I used it in a totally non hostile way. As I remember I was trying to make a historical point as to the use of inflammatory speech in American political discourse.
My post disappeared into that wormhole that Pajamas Media has every right to send the editorially unacceptable too, in monitoring what kind of words they deem decorous to these threads.
Recently Mark Twain and the story of Huckleberry Finn have been subjected to the “newspeak” monitors. The irony is Pajamas Media is selectively subjecting itself to the “newspeak” standard while trying to modulate mediate consecrate remediate what is proper speech or “words”.
I suspect what Pajamas Media is most concerned about is that their “Brand ” possesses gravitas. In my opinion it does. My warning to Pajamas is be careful that the “Brand” comes to supersede the mission and the promise that legitimately warmed us to you. Unfettered words thoughts and speech. Your not perfect I’m not but let freedom ring. And that should include every friggin word on Gods green earth. If we tie ourselves into knots over our words and speech we will be more ready to herded like sheeple and regrettably this process is well on its’ way to being accomplished. Let freedom (words) ring.
Love those “News Flashes.” Add: “Shot down” shot down, and “cut” cut. The irony of all this is that the first definition given in the dictionary for “campaign” is a series of military operations in a stage of war. Whatever shall we name future political or advertising campaigns?
Don Rodrigo:
As mentioned by others above, the whole Global Warming debacle is governed by Newspeak (which should be the proper name for Newsweek magazine, by the way).
God bless ‘em, they’re only trying to make a living. Here was the cover of Time in April of ’77. Be funny if Al Gore didn’t come so close to being President.
It is one thing to repeat a lie constantly to make it stick.
It is another to be caught repeatedly lying on a broad range of subjets while displaying a consistent bias.
Eventually you get conditions were people tune you out.
“They pretend to pay us, we pretend to work.” Old Soviet Joke.
W quoted Orwell: “It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought — that is, a thought diverging from the principles of IngSoc — should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words.”
Consider a slight rewording, replacing words invented by Orwell with their equivalents in American usage in early 2011.
“It is intended that when narratives acceptable to the MSM have been adopted once and for all and all the intolerant narratives forgotten, a hateful thought — that is, a thought diverging from the liberal principles of a diverse and progressive society — should be literally unspeakable in public, at least so far as hate is dependent on words.”
Does that sound as uncomfortably close to today’s journalism to you as it does to me?
Orwell’s 1984 ‘newspeak’ has become 2011 ‘narrative journalism’ with a liberal/progressive values bias.
Wikipedia definition: “Narrative journalism is the interpretation of a story and the way in which the journalist portrays it, be it fictional or non-fictional. In easier words, it tells a story.”
Fisher’s Narrative Paradigm, the foundation of narrative journalism, is composed of three main tenets: 1) narrative fidelity, or a story’s correspondence to reality, 2) narrative probability, or a story’s internal coherence, and 3) good reasons, or a story’s values.
Fisher recognized that there are two paradigms available to the journalist : the narrative and the rational. He claimed that the rational paradigm fails to properly inform the public because the common man lacks the training, education, and/or background to grasp an adequate understanding based on rational facts alone. Hence, the third tenet of the narrative paradigm, good values, must be added by the journalist. IIRC, approximately 90% of American journalists today consider good values to be liberal values.
So, its only for the good of the common man that the paradigm of truth, facts and rationality is out, and the paradigm that encourages each journalist to inject MSM-vetted ‘good values’ is in.
The literature is huge, here is one source I used:
http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/1/2/3/8/pages112385/p112385-2.php
Neighsayer: Love those “News Flashes.” Add: “Shot down” shot down, and “cut” cut. The irony of all this is that the first definition given in the dictionary for “campaign” is a series of military operations in a stage of war. Whatever shall we name future political or advertising campaigns?
Since “campaign” evokes images of Patton’s ruthless imperialist drive across France and Germany and could lead to violence against public speakers, the term shall henceforth be replaced with “activity”. The Obama Administration no longer has a “campaign manager” but a “re-election activity co-ordinator”.
Also banned is the word “occupation” (as in one’s career, sounds too anti-Palestinian).
Here’s my challenge to you, Richard. Take a picture of any American political adversary you personally disapprove of, paste their picture up in your column right now, and put the benign surveyors symbol over them with the message don’t retreat, reload.
Why would I do that unless I wanted to impart the same message as an old time Wanted Poster? I might if I were law enforcement, but I’m not.
How about this alternative challenge? Use the word “crosshairs” in a political context, as it applies to focusing on “targeting” a voter group, in a political “campaign” in order to win the electoral “battle” and see how many people think it is about elections.
I can think of one famous picture in which a threat was conveyed: Oswald’s snap holding a rifle in one hand and a clutch of Marxist newspapers in the other. And as to examples, some are unfortunate. Lincoln was a Republican, John Kennedy was shot by a self-avowed sympathizer of Castro and Bobby was killed by Sirhan Sirhan for the crime of supporting Israel. Can it be Sarah Palin’s fault?
But that is not even remotely related to the word “crosshairs”, which no has shown that Loughner even read. What he was interested in was drugs, and social engineering and conscience dreaming.
The best method is to simply understand messages for their plain meaning, in the context they spoken. There will always be some who project or mirror image their own fantasies, but words cannot be outlawed simply because a small minority abuse them. Words are all we have to talk to each other. By twisting them or abolishing them altogether we hasten the day when each person has a separate, private, political vocabulary, truly alone in his confusion.
w, Loughner was mostly interested in trying to find why his head was crossthreaded on his neck, it’s barely reasonable to say he had “ideas” at all, he could not tell cause from effect or his head from his hat. you can quote his words, but at his level of schizophrenia the only reasons to list his ideas are for clinical analysis.
meanwhile some dipshit Jewish congressman is (that is should be) arrested for public violation of godwin’s law:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/01/abc-news-jonathan-karl-reports-the-newfound-civility-didnt-last-long-political-rhetoric-in-congress-doesnt-get-much.html
tell me this guy is a whole lot saner than Loughner? that’s what makes the study of the mind so much fun.
65. Larry J: Were they being punished for speaking their native tongue at home or in school? If the intent of the schooling was to teach English language then they were not following the intent of the lesson and deserved to be called out. (I seriously doubt they were being beaten- unless of course the teachers were nuns) There is a difference between belligerantly refusing to follow the lesson and being “re-educated.” I know plenty of Cuban born, American citizens who speak English in public and Spanish at home, nearly exclusively. They have not “lost” their culture.
70. hallmonitor
Well that didn’t work.
You hoo, Wretchard.
Can you tell me why my posts are not making it to the thread.
I already did my chores, milked the cow, etc…why?
67. Habu
Wretchard,
Any reason why my offerings aren’t getting posted?
Thx
Habu
Anyone know where Buddy Larsen is posting?
OK, I can take a hint. Enjoy.
Misandry
Fred: Three men robbed the bank.
Mike: Thankfully, eight police personnel caught them.
02/26/10 – Classical Values by Eric, (video 7:35)
=== ===
[edited] “The word “misandry” was flagged in red, unknown to the spell-checker, even though it is hardly a new word. Misandry is the hatred of men.”
“Men do not exist unless they commit crimes or do bad things. Men are “people” or “personnel” when they do good things. They are “men” when they do bad things.
There is a connection between misandry and feminism. This has been slipped by me, over the years. I’m pissed off. I don’t take kindly to being manipulated.”
=== ===
On the front of #72. Teresita’s 1977 Time Mag Link:
“Beyond Detente:
Why We Can’t Beat the Soviets”
—
Liberals Seek Ban on Metaphors
Ozzy 68.
Metaphors and similes, my friend. Look ‘em up. Figures of speech. The English language is full of them. What I am seeing is a deliberate “suspension of reason” that assigns unreasonable literal meanings to metaphors, similes and such-like figures of speech. The purpose of this exercise is create a provocative, emotionally charged “I’m right and better than you, you are wrong and evil” (the classic ‘one up one down’) dichotomy. It is a way to polemicize an argument (a polemic is an argument designed to shed more heat than light). Polemical arguments are a means to achieve victory at the expense of truth. I’ve noticed that they are chiefly used by the party who feels certain that by escalating the fight to a higher level of violence the foe can be forced to concede defeat.
Habu
So impatient. Can’t W go the the head in the middle of the night in peace? I’m sure there’s a perfectly incomprehensible explanation. The eDog ate it.
conventional wisdom –> undocumented worker [must have left his id at home]
true wisdom –> foreign invader [don't need no stinkin' id you racist]
W @ 77 How about this alternative challenge? Use the word “crosshairs” in a political context, as it applies to focusing on “targeting” a voter group, in a political “campaign” in order to win the electoral “battle” and see how many people think it is about elections.
Ok, how about this one: Put ‘em in the crosshairs and nuke gay whales for Jesus!
SpeakEasy
65. Larry J: Were they being punished for speaking their native tongue at home or in school? If the intent of the schooling was to teach English language then they were not following the intent of the lesson and deserved to be called out. (I seriously doubt they were being beaten- unless of course the teachers were nuns) There is a difference between belligerantly refusing to follow the lesson and being “re-educated.” I know plenty of Cuban born, American citizens who speak English in public and Spanish at home, nearly exclusively. They have not “lost” their culture.
I’m thinking of stories I’ve heard and read about the Indian boarding schools that operated for generations. There are several articles about these schools and the effects they had, with this one being an easy find on Google.
The federal government began sending American Indians to off-reservation boarding schools in the 1870s, when the United States was still at war with Indians.
An Army officer, Richard Pratt, founded the first of these schools. He based it on an education program he had developed in an Indian prison. He described his philosophy in a speech he gave in 1892.
“A great general has said that the only good Indian is a dead one,” Pratt said. “In a sense, I agree with the sentiment, but only in this: that all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him, and save the man.”
Transforming People, Inside and Out
Fifty years later, Pratt’s philosophy was still common.
In 1945, Bill Wright, a Pattwin Indian, was sent to the Stewart Indian School in Nevada. He was just 6 years old. Wright remembers matrons bathing him in kerosene and shaving his head. Students at federal boarding schools were forbidden to express their culture — everything from wearing long hair to speaking even a single Indian word. Wright said he lost not only his language, but also his American Indian name.
“I remember coming home and my grandma asked me to talk Indian to her and I said, ‘Grandma, I don’t understand you,’ ” Wright says. “She said, ‘Then who are you?’ ”
Wright says he told her his name was Billy. ” ‘Your name’s not Billy. Your name’s ‘TAH-rruhm,’ ” she told him. “And I went, ‘That’s not what they told me.’ ”
According to Tsianina Lomawaima, head of the American Indian Studies program at the University of Arizona, the intent was to completely transform people, inside and out.
“Language, religion, family structure, economics, the way you make a living, the way you express emotion, everything,” says Lomawaima.
Lomawaima says from the start, the government’s objective was to “erase and replace” Indian culture, part of a larger strategy to conquer Indians.
Yep. Crosshairs will become just like swiftBoating.
W@76: “The best method is to simply understand messages for their plain meaning, in the context they spoken …Words are all we have to talk to each other. By twisting them or abolishing them altogether we hasten the day when each person has a separate, private, political vocabulary, truly alone in his confusion.”
CNN would respond that the common man is incapable of understanding events without the narratives provided by the MSM. In their context, narratives and individual words belong to the broader class of symbols which must be controlled by the media elites for our good, to assure that we are all properly enlightened. I tried to keep my post @75 short, but everything said there applies to all symbols, including individual words.
In addition to the general case of narrative journalism as equivalent to Orwell’s newspeak, there is a special element in this particular issue. In this particular incident, the MSM has embarrassed itself by revealing its bad character in public with its early narrative on the Loughner affair. So, at this moment, there is some urgency felt by the MSM to rewrite this small bit of history.
CNN is taking one approach, redefining “good values” by editing “crosshairs’ out of our vocabulary. This may be the most moderate of the various proposals on the table. Others in the MSM will raise the stakes – having already pronounced Palin guilty, the open question for them is now “guilty of what?”
For a certain faction on the left, the issue is way beyond Loughner now — Palin has been found guilty of no less a sin than heresy. In their logic(?), her refusal to fully embrace the ‘good values’ defined by the progressive MSM is the root cause of disorder. By this logic(?), it matters not that individuals who act out in response to Palin’s heresy are left-wingers or apolitical. Its the existence of the heresy which, in and by itself, is destabilizing.
Hence, this logic(?) goes, the MSM was entirely correct in its early recognition of her guilt — recent history is rewritten — and what appeared to be displays of bad character were found to be fundamental insights. Not only is the bad character problem solved, but a new narrative has been added.
Unfortunately for CNN and its allies, history will not be so easily redefined. Their display of bad character cannot be erased.
#76 Teresita said:
Also banned is the word “occupation” (as in one’s career, sounds too anti-Palestinian).
January 19, 2011 – 11:55 am
…wrong again…Israel has every right to occupy its own property. Your Muslim friends have repeatedly attempted to halt Israel’s right to peaceful possession, per UNR 242; but they have failed miserably each time.
By the way, we still have some unfinished business from a previous thread. Or are you one of those girls who kisses and runs?
The Greatest….
The greatest disinformation and use of “newspeak” ever perpetuated on the U.S. population is the Federal Reserve Bank
Follow the shrinking dollar and increasing debt:
The Federal Reserve headquarters is in Washington, DC. It sits on a very impressive address on Constitution Avenue, right across from the Lincoln Memorial. But is it ‘Federal’? Is it really part of the United States Government?
Well, what we are about to show you is that there is nothing ‘Federal’ about the Federal Reserve-and there are no reserves. The name is a deception created before the Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913 to make Americans think that America’s new central bank operates in the public interest. The truth is that the Fed is a private (or, at best, quasi-public) bank owned by private national banks, which are the stockholders, and run for their private profit.
As economist Henry Pasquet noted:
“That’s exactly correct; the Fed is a privately owned, for-profit corporation which has no reserves — at least no reserves to back up the Federal Reserve notes which are our common currency.”
The Federal Reserve Act was railroaded through a carefully prepared Congressional Conference Committee meeting scheduled during the unlikely hours of 1.30 am to 4.30 am (when most members were sleeping) on Monday 22 December 1913, at which 20 to 40 substantial differences in the House and Senate versions were supposedly described, deliberated upon, debated, reconciled and voted upon in a near-miraculous four-and-a-half to nine minutes per item, at that late hour.
At 4.30 am (editorial comment…..4:30 A.M. BOHICA), a prepared report of this Committee was handed to the printers. Senator Bristow of Kansas, the Republican leader, stated on the Congressional Record that the Conference Committee had met without notifying them, and that Republicans were not present and were given no opportunity either to read or sign the Conference Committee report. The Conference report is normally read on the Senate floor. The Republicans did not even see the report. Some senators stated on the floor of the Senate that they had no knowledge of the contents of the Bill.
At 6.02 PM on 23 December, when many members had already left the Capital for the Christmas holiday, the very same day that the Bill was hurried through the House and Senate, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 into law. (editorial comment: Quick, get up Mr President , we need to perpetrate a giant hoax on the American population 6:02 pleeese)
The Act transferred control of the money supply of the United States from Congress to a private banking elite. It is not surprising that a bill granting a few national bankers a private money monopoly was passed in such a corrupted manner.
We were dead fish that night right up to today.
http://tinyurl.com/488k9b4
D.C. Anti-Walmart Protesters Plan March on Developer‘s Home With ’Target’ Flyer
A group of Washington, D.C. protesters upset about the possibility of a Walmart store coming to their area is hoping to send the potential developer of the proposed store a message. So much so that they‘re planning to march to and protest at the developer’s personal residence. The group has even gone as far as to circulate the man’s home address.
But the address may not be the flyer’s only controversial element. Ironically, it also contains a target symbol — a similar picture to the one seen on a district map created by Sarah Palin and that’s sparked outrage from the left in the wake of the shootings in Tucson.
And what‘s worrying is that the group’s symbol is connected to specific event at a private residence.
—
(Blogger has filtered “target” from HTML for years!)
Yes, and the
Progressivescommunists have been doing it right here in the United States since before Orwell wrote 1984. They’ve had a lot of practice at it, they’re very good at it, and they won’t stop doing it any time soon.SpeakEasy:
Leftists ought to thank you for giving sage advice to them.
The problem with “1984” is that IngSoc didn’t go far enough; instead of attempting to change the English language, that regime should have forced Party members and the “proles” to immerse themselves in a new language under Party control. It could be Chinese, Arabic, Welsh, or Latvian; even Esperanto would do. The key is that Newspeak was too much like English for IngSoc’s purposes; IngSoc should have banned English entirely, to the point of brutalizing children who use English.
Brilliant! Don’t ban a few words here and there; don’t create a new language out of the old. No, it works better for Communists to ban entire languages to forcibly assimilate future generations of children into Communism. The problem with the Soviet Union is that it used Russian when it could have turned Georgian into the official language; the Soviet Union was doomed when it used Russian, with all of the historical memories of pre-Communist thinking embedded within that language.
What’s more, when the hard left takes over America’s educational system, it should sneer at those “bitter clinging” traditionalists and patriots as a bunch of whining crybabies. That will do the trick! Remember, to the victor goes the spoils, so “right wing losers” have no good cause to complain if their children wind up with black eyes for speaking English in class.
Remember, North America became English speaking not merely through conquest, but more importantly through treachery and intrigue – and commerce. Okay, the treachery, intrigue, and commerce didn’t make it into the Hollywood movies, but that’s another example of how the entertainment industry can destroy any sense of history in a population. So, if Communists seek to uproot capitalism, they would do well to uproot the English language because of the capitalist ideas embedded within English.
Your recommendations are excellent for future generations of neo-Communist tyrants; their revolutions during the twentieth century didn’t go far enough, so they contained the seeds of freedom. The key is to ensure that any language future children learn must be controlled completely by a future totalitarian state. Hence, Hugo Chavez is doomed to failure because he continues to use an imperialistic and capitalistic language called Spanish, when he ought to be forcing Venezuelan schoolchildren to learn Farsi instead.
Again, leftists should thank you. I doubt they will, though.
Habu…
The Federal Reserve Bank is a Quango…
It’s half in half out of the Federal Government.
It is run as a NON-profit organization. Its monopoly rents on money creation are rebated to the US Treasury.
The critical executive positions are politically appointed.
However, the nominees for appointment are vetted by the vested special interest: the Money Trust. No one is appointed that does not meet with their approval.
The value of this Quango is total ‘capture’ of the Federal Government by making Fedsury appointments from the same Money Trust executive pool.
The economic benefits for the Money Trust is that their risk of failure is entirely off loaded to the Government/ all of society.
At the same time, this structure permits monopoly rents to be rebated to the executive pool as ‘performance bonuses.’ If you mean performance as acting like they earned it… Okay.
If you mean that they actually were performance superstars in acumen and judgment, there’s a bridge over the East River up for sale.
—–
Gold and silver: buy the dip, especially silver. There are very few silver mines, per se. The vast bulk of silver comes to the trade as an ancillary production of lead, zinc, gold and copper mining. That such is true is an indicator as to how far below the norm silver has been trading at.
When Weimar Germany kicked hyperinflation it did so by minting SILVER Marks. Gold does not trade — it gets vaulted. That’s why collectors have so many examples of near new gold coins dating back 150 years. Not so with silver. ( Exception: silver dollars were vaulted — gold dollars were traded. Western outlaws wanted only the gold dollars — portability. )
Hyperinflation/money printing is a financial NARCOTIC. It provides a way for Benny and the Press to EXPORT TAXATION.
Because of this Benny is destroying the fabric of modern life. Once the margin of faith is lost — the ENTIRE planet goes into crisis mode. When Weimar Germany blew up she was merely a European power — and defeated at that.
But America is the underpinning for the entire world — including her enemies. Neither Red China nor Putin & Co realize that they are wandering inside an ammo bunker with a highway safety flare. They can’t handle any such transformation, either. Both know what food riots bring. China has constant riots — all the time. Russian riots are suppressed by Putin’s media.
By comparison Canada, Australia, America, New Zealand, Japan and Europe just don’t have food criticality.
And it’s food riots that terminate political regimes, and very quickly, too.
Benny and the Press are about to trigger world wide food riots. You’ve only seen the leading edge. The third world can’t handle food withdrawal. Yet that is exactly what corn to ethanol must trigger. That’s what a dry San Joaquin Valley triggers. ( California )
This hyper stressful stage will necessarily kill millions. When one remembers the history of political starvation — well, it’s not something I want on my head.
Because the ummah practices essentially zero population control and survives on ‘mining’ water and oil — Araby and the Maghreb must hit the wall. A mega-die off is right at hand.
Their population exponential is beyond anything the West can imagine/ solve. Somalia has a TFR of 7 ish ! Similar numbers occur all over the ummah. This is peak islam.
The ONLY solution is to stop ummah immigration. Any attempt to absorb this ignorant society will merely replicate at home the same tragedy on a vaster scale.
Malthus is going to ‘win’ this round. Oxfam is a major perp. Free food carries a terrible price: a ‘bubble’ in food resources. Such bubbles MUST ALWAYS be followed by a horrific bust.
( c.f. Easter Island, Petrie dishes, algal blooms )
BTW, such stressed societies are ripe for the Four Horsemen. I’ll go with all of them.
You’re worried about that word with the invention of the words and meanings the Democrats are inventing?
Caucasioning is soon to become worse than bamboo shoots under the fingernails;
Anglo-Saxon will become synonymous with pagan.
White will be the new definition for incurable disease.
Paranoid-schizophrenic will be the new term for editor in chief.
Until we learn, and accept the fact, that we have to get dirty fighting these psycho’s, they’ll get the front page with their insane drivel every day.
I am neither on the Left’s side nor the Right’s side.
I am on Americans side.
Bravo, Mr. Fernandez – the thing itself, and eloquently rendered.
The point missed by many contributors to this thread is that of course “politically correct” speech preceded Orwell. It shouldn’t take a great deal of reading comprehension to see that this was the inspiration for 1984 itself.
The least perusal of George Orwell’s work by the literate will reveal that there is nothing new under the sun at all, and that your elders were aware of this cancer well before your birth. Read, for that matter, Sinclair Lewis or H.L. Mencken. The unutterable absurdity, as Fernandez here expresses so well, is that modern-day “conservatives” have allowed, yea even colluded in, the ascendancy of this lunacy over the last 40 years.
Learn to read, young folks. Learn to write, and to spell, and to speak eloquently. Learn and absorb the true intentions and significance of the ideas of the great thinkers of your culture’s history – and employ them at your every opportunity to demolish the idiotic baby-talk foisted upon you daily by Your Betters. Manhood (and need I say Womanhood) demands no less.
The manipulation of ideas through neologisms has been going on for some time, and the recent absurdities have finally brought the issue of progressive assaults on American vocabulary to the forefront.
I wrote a while back about the importance of a shared understanding of the meanings of the words we say for communication. I often find that people for whom English is their second language share more vocabulary with me than bright rising stars whose education was primarily 16 years of staying abreast of the latest marketing and academic jargon.
A few years ago we moved to a small house and in making space, I decided our dictionaries could probably go, since we could look a word up online if necessary. But that was a mistake: the internet dictionaries in the past couple of years seem to be falling prey to the same revisionism that afflicts Wikipedia. We’ll be returning to using a real dictionary.
On the up side, one of the beauties of the English language is that any fluent speaker is entitled and fully qualified to coin a new word for any thing at any time. It is this coinage that keeps English fresh and alive while also enabling us to retain the fine analogies and metaphors that our forebears bequeathed us.
But that was a mistake….
Indeed.
And one shudders to think what might well happen if/when all of printed literature goes “on-line” with the consequent destruction of the printed originals (won’t need ‘em no more…).
“Who controls information controls….”
File under: “Kindle-nacht”?
99. blert
”
It is run as a NON-profit organization. Its monopoly rents on money creation are rebated to the US Treasury.
The critical executive positions are politically appointed.”
Yes there are political appointees but the power behind the FED resides with the shareholders who many of whom are foreign.
And as far as “vetting” goes in DC, well tou might as well just opn up Club Fed and reach for a few inmates .. the vetting is a show. The entire FED process is a hoax, run for frofit by those who established it..
The Fed generates profits for its shareholders.
The power at the time of the FED was establish and the Aldrich Plan birthed was the financial power of England, centered in the London Branch of the House of Rothschild. The fact was that in 1910, the United States was for all practical purposes being ruled from England. The ten largest bank holding companies in the United States are firmly in the hands of certain banking houses, all of which have branches in London. They are J.P. Morgan Company, Brown Brothers Harriman, Warburg, Kuhn Loeb and J. Henry Schroder. All of them maintain close relationships with the House of Rothschild, principally through the Rothschild control of international money markets through its various economic machinations. The sharesholders DON’T sell their shares, i.e. very powerful foreign interests are the power behind the FED, not the “cover bill” pressed through Congress in the middle of the night. And the foreign money comes from?
The interest on bonds acquired with its newly-issued Federal Reserve Notes pays the Fed’s operating expenses plus a guaranteed 6% return to its banker shareholders. A mere 6% a year may not be considered a profit in the world of Wall Street high finance, but most businesses that manage to cover all their expenses and give their shareholders a guaranteed 6% return are considered “for profit” corporations.
In addition to this guaranteed 6%, the banks will now be getting interest from the taxpayers on their “reserves.” The basic reserve requirement set by the Federal Reserve is 10% (now upped) The website of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York explains that as money is redeposited and relent throughout the banking system, this 10% held in “reserve” can be fanned into ten times that sum in loans; that is, $10,000 in reserves becomes $100,000 in loans. Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.8 puts the total “loans and leases in bank credit” as of September 24, 2008 at $7,049 billion. Ten percent of that is $700 billion. That means we the taxpayers will be paying interest to the banks on at least $700 billion annually – this so that the banks can retain the reserves to accumulate interest on ten times that sum in loans. Of xourse due to recent events the dollar amount is stratosphereic comapared to the paltry amounts listed above, but we don’t have those figures because Berneke isn’t talking. We do know that trillions beyond what we were told went to foreign bankers…..wonder who they could be?
Perhaps some of you are familiar with this. Oh yea the acronym Quango is of English derivation..imagine that.
Fed Stockholders:
Examination of the charts and text in the House Banking Committee Staff Report of August, 1976 and the current stockholders list of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks show this same family control.
N.M. Rothschild , London – Bank of England
______________________________________
| |
| J. Henry Schroder
| Banking | Corp.
| |
Brown, Shipley – Morgan Grenfell – Lazard – |
& Company & Company Brothers |
| | | |
——————–| ——-| | |
| | | | | |
Alex Brown – Brown Bros. – Lord Mantagu – Morgan et Cie — Lazard —|
& Son | Harriman Norman | Paris Bros |
| | / | N.Y. |
| | | | | |
| Governor, Bank | J.P. Morgan Co — Lazard —|
| of England / N.Y. Morgan Freres |
| 1924-1938 / Guaranty Co. Paris |
| / Morgan Stanley Co. | /
| / | \Schroder Bank
| / | Hamburg/Berlin
| / Drexel & Company /
| / Philadelphia /
| / /
| / Lord Airlie
| / /
| / M. M. Warburg Chmn J. Henry Schroder
| | Hamburg ——— marr. Virginia F. Ryan
| | | grand-daughter of Otto
| | | Kahn of Kuhn Loeb Co.
| | |
| | |
Lehman Brothers N.Y ————– Kuhn Loeb Co. N. Y.
| | ————————–
µ
| | | |
8
| | | |
Lehman Brothers – Mont. Alabama Solomon Loeb Abraham Kuhn
| | __|______________________|_________
Lehman-Stern, New Orleans Jacob Schiff/Theresa Loeb Nina Loeb/Paul Warburg
————————- | | |
| | Mortimer Schiff James Paul Warburg
_____________|_______________/ |
| | | | |
Mayer Lehman | Emmanuel Lehman \
| | | \
Herbert Lehman Irving Lehman \
| | | \
Arthur Lehman \ Phillip Lehman John Schiff/Edith Brevoort Baker
/ | Present Chairman Lehman Bros
/ Robert Owen Lehman Kuhn Loeb – Granddaughter of
/ | George F. Baker
| / |
| / |
| / Lehman Bros Kuhn Loeb (1980)
| / |
| / Thomas Fortune Ryan
| | |
| | |
Federal Reserve Bank Of New York |
|||||||| |
______National City Bank N. Y. |
| | |
| National Bank of Commerce N.Y —|
| | \
| Hanover National Bank N.Y. \
| | \
| Chase National Bank N.Y. \
| |
| |
Shareholders – National City Bank – N.Y. |
—————————————– |
| /
James Stillman /
Elsie m. William Rockefeller /
Isabel m. Percy Rockefeller /
William Rockefeller Shareholders – National Bank of Commerce N. Y.
J. P. Morgan ———————————————–
M.T. Pyne Equitable Life – J.P. Morgan
Percy Pyne Mutual Life – J.P. Morgan
J.W. Sterling H.P. Davison – J. P. Morgan
NY Trust/NY Edison Mary W. Harriman
Shearman & Sterling A.D. Jiullard – North British Merc. Insurance
| Jacob Schiff
| Thomas F. Ryan
| Paul Warburg
| Levi P. Morton – Guaranty Trust – J. P. Morgan
|
|
Shareholders – First National Bank of N.Y.
——————————————-
J.P. Morgan
George F. Baker
George F. Baker Jr.
Edith Brevoort Baker
US Congress – 1946-64
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders – Hanover National Bank N.Y.
——————————————
James Stillman
William Rockefeller
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders – Chase National Bank N.Y.
—————————————
George F. Baker
Coincidence? NOT
The Rothchilds and Warburgs
This is a summary of family ties between the Rothschilds and Warburg families. These two families ties are critical to understanding the flow of investment capital between Europe and the U.S. Their growth and power is interwoven with the historical changes that were taking place in Europe during the 19th century.
Royalist control over European countries started to die out as the shift to nationalist based democracy gained support. However, the kings and their emperial allies still held the stolen wealth of it colonial past in their bank vaults.
The Rothschild family could go where no representative of the English crown dared to step. If the English couldn’t rule over its former colony outright, it would secretly finance and control America’s fiancial empire.
The skills of the tightly controled Rothschild and Warburg family business gained the trust of their “private” investors. In the process of carrying out the interests of the royal families, they in turn have become very powerful.
One of the telltale signs of their bosses was the practice of intermarriage that both the Rothschilds as well as the Warburgs took on.
The immense economic power of just a couple jewish families soon became the focal point of an anti-jewish movement that impacted the politics from Russia to Germany. From the wierd conspiracies swirling around the Freemasons and Iluminati, the general public were always being driven by the divide and conquer tactics of former kings and queens of Europe.
What follows is an analysis of the Warburg family and their connections to the Rothschilds.
M. M. Warburg of Hamburg
The Warburg family of Germany has been around for a long time, but I will start with the family as it stood in 1860. Abraham and Sarah Warburg (note the biblical connotations in family names) had three children: Moritz, Siegmund and a daughter (unnamed in ref) who married Paul Schiff. Schiff was a director of Vienna’s Creditanstalt Bank, which was controlled by Baron Albert Rothschild. The Schiff’s and Rothschild families used to share the same house in Frankfurt.
Siegmund developed close ties to Baron Lionell von Rothschild of the London family. While Moritz worked with Baron Alphonse Rothschild of Paris, Baron Leopold of London and Baron Albert of Vienna.
Moritz had five sons that were later dubbed the Hamburger 5. Two of them, Felix and Paul moved to the U.S. and intermarried with the leadership of Kuhn and Loeb. Paul married the daughter of Mr. Soloman Loeb and Felix married the daughter of Jacob Schiff.
Jacob had come to the U.S. in the 1870′s and with his family connections to the Rothschilds of Vienna gave the financial connections necessary to make Kuhn and Loeb the 2nd largest investment bank in the U.S., just behind J.P. Morgan. In 1905 government hearings, Kuhn and Loeb acknowledged making $1.5 billion in investments between 1900-5.
Paul Warburg, with the help of Senator Aldrich, went onto become the primary architect of the U.S. privately operated central bank called the Federal Reserve Bank. I have not yet confirmed the story that Warburg made threats to american financiers in 1905, that unless they started a central bank, there would be hell to pay. The story goes onto claim that Wall Street insiders refused Warburg, at which point the U.S. stock market suffered a fairly severe crisis.
The Rothschilds and Warburgs also had agreements between each family that the children of the other family would gain their initial banking experiences in each other’s bank.
The next generation of Warburgs included Siegmund G Warburg, of Hamburg. He received his initial training at the Rothschild bank in England. When the Nazi’s started their takeover, he migrated to England. He started S.G. Warburg of London in 1939. It merged with the Seligman Brothers firm in 1957.
By 1874 biographers claimed that the Rothschild, Seligman, Belmont and Morgan alliance had a monopoly in European investments. They were certainly the largest investors in the U.S. as well. August Belmont was Rothschild’s front man in the U.S. Belmont was rumored to be a bastard child of the Rothschild family.
On the New Jersey seashore the town of Elberon lays out just how tightly knit these families were. Prince Poniatowski, nephew to the King of Poland visited Elberon and described his experience in the town. House next to house were the families of the key financial players. Starting out with the Seligman house, Isaac Seligman’s wife is one of the daughters of Soloman Loeb (the co-founder of Kuhn and Loeb). In another house next door is Soloman’s other daughter who married Jacob Schiff. Then next door again, is the youngest of the three daughters, Nina who later married Paul Warburg. Nina is living in her father and mother’s house, Mr. and Mrs. Soloman Loeb. Next to Isaac’s house was Mrs. Hellman. Her brother was heading the Seligman firm in Paris. Some of Mrs Hellman’s other relatives just happened to be living in Los Angeles.
Not all the families of Elberon were mentioned in the Prince’s biography. But the summer town houses on the Jersey shoreline likely had other members of this extended group of families that the Prince never spoke of. Felix Warburg’s daughter Carola married Walter N. Rothschild of Brooklyn. Her cousins names are mostly Seligmans or Lewisohns, some of the other neighbors at Elberon.
What the Prince did see had great importance to what happened to the massive Southern Pacific empire in California.
The finacial power of the Warburgs and Rothschild clans is worshipped by capitalists the world over. Yet, this empire continues to hide its true patriotic allegiance to the former rulers of Europe. With the Senator Gram’s removal of the 1933 Steagal act, the U.S. insiders have been given the powers to reunite the old empire of the past.
As a result, investment and commercial banks started to recombine, with one of the first being JP Morgan Chase. Next was the purchase of Paine Webber by Switzerland’s largest bank, Union Bank Suisse. After the new company was reorganized, one of the two new operating entities was named UBS Warburg.
Do you think that there is reason to keep an eye on companies that have names like Warburg, Lehman or Rothschild?
I will end this brief introduction to the New World Order with an interesting note that showed up during the depression. At the height of the NWO’s darkest decade, a survey was taken of blue bloods in New York of whether they favored democracy or royalist governance. The vast majority of these New Yorkers said they prefered the royalist idea. Isn’t it likely that they still do today?
http://www.energy-net.org/1OVN/NWO-H.HTM
Who received the bailout and TARP money? COuld it be any of the Rockefellers interlocking directorates?
Please, by all means check it out.
The David Rockefeller chart shows the link between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Standard Oil of Indiana, General Motors and Allied Chemical Corporation (Eugene Meyer family) and Equitable Life (J. P. Morgan).
DAVID ROCKEFELLER
—————————–
Chairman of the Board
Chase Manhattan Corp
|
|
______|_______________________
Chase Manhattan Corp. |
Officer & Director Interlocks|———————
——|———————– |
| |
Private Investment Co. for America Allied Chemicals Corp.
| |
Firestone Tire & Rubber Company General Motors
| |
Orion Multinational Services Ltd. Rockefeller Family & Associates
| |
ASARCO. Inc Chrysler Corp.
| |
Southern Peru Copper Corp. Intl’ Basic Economy Corp.
| |
Industrial Minerva Mexico S.A. R. H. Macy & Co.
| |
Continental Corp. Selected Risk Investments S.A.
| |
Honeywell Inc. Omega Fund, Inc.
| |
Northwest Airlines, Inc. Squibb Corporation
| |
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. Olin Foundation
| |
Minnesota Mining & Mfg Co (3M) Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. of NJ
| |
American Express Co. AT & T
| |
Hewlett Packard Pacific Northwestern Bell Co.
| |
FMC Corporation BeachviLime Ltd.(Beachville, Ontario)
| |
Utah Intl’ Inc. Eveleth Expansion Company
| |
Exxon Corporation Fidelity Union Bancorporation
| |
International Nickel/Canada Cypress Woods Corporation
| |
Federated Capital Corporation Intl’ Minerals & Chemical Corp.
| |
Equitable Life Assurance Soc U.S. Burlington Industries
| |
Federated Dept Stores Wachovia Corporation
| |
General Electric Jefferson Pilot Corporation
| |
Scott Paper Co. R. J. Reynolds Industries Inc.
| |
American Petroleum Institute United States Steel Corp.
| |
Richardson Merril Inc. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
| |
May Department Stores Co. Norton-Simon Inc.
| |
Sperry Rand Corporation Stone-Webster Inc.
| |
San Salvador Development Company Standard Oil of Indiana
Habu,
I am with you on most of that Federal Reserve stuff. If I had their _authority_ to create money out-of-thin-air, I should either be rich beyond measure or a dolt.
The inverted pyramid of this _air_ is what essentially the entire world’s finance sits. The capstone, the pin-point. Successive layers or hypothication growing, growing to wasn’t it? hundreds of trillions of dollars of derived derivatives and other, what? mush
It is plain to see that there is nothing to worry about; the last three years are not a wakeup call. Our tettering at the edge does not mean we need to move away from the edge, find reality, reject the hoax of this _money_
BTW, sometimes the posts don’t appear until a refresh…
Best regards, from I’m sure all of us, Veracious and the BC.
Couple points I have about the Fed before thread closure.
RE: Glass-Steagall
The rebuttal position is that the reality of integrated banking and investment services made the continued existence of G-S moot. IOW, repeal of G-S was a formality; however, one that brought undue attention to the much stealthier developments that preceded it. I’m agnostic on G-S, but a dyed in the wool bible-thumper when it comes to aggressively prosecuting civil and criminal misbehavior in financial services. My understanding, however, is that the prosecutions are tough, beyond the charge of mail fraud, and the attorneys walk away with their 30%.
RE: Fed Ownership
What is the relationship among the owners of the other central banks, such as Bank of Canada, ECB, Australians and others? Is the ownership a matter of public record and are they audited? I think the answer is yes to the former and no to the latter, but I am far from sure.
RE: Fed audit
Fuggeddiboutit. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) was for it before he was against it. He was probably the last credentialed person of requisite authority to abandon ship. I don’t think think that either Ron or Rand Paul can make it happen.
RE: The vast majority of these New Yorkers said they prefered the royalist idea. Isn’t it likely that they still do today? (The Rothchilds and Warburgs)
Doesn’t that put you in Desert Rat’s Russell Company camp of Skull and Boners? (Consider that a too familiar tweak, but d@mn if the message doesn’t sound identical.)
RE: the ultimate sustainability of QE via central banks (Josh’s point, IIRC)
Intriguing concept, if I understood correctly.
110. YBR
That’s the point. There should never have been the integration in the first place. The removal of G-S invited just what happened. Analysts with no independence to look at a company and issue an honest evaluation on it’s current market worthiness.
Instead pressure developed on them with no relief valve to issue only glowing reports so that XYZ brokerage firm could sell more product, all done under a false report turned in by intimidated analysts….the investors were from the day G-S came down lied to MORE than usual given the huge wire houses could point to the bogus reports and say their analysts were spot on.
I worked in brokerage for 15 years with Smith Barney and Merrill Lynch and I saw it with my own eyes. I wouldn’t trust a brokerage firm to read the telephone book without lying.
Barry, nice coinage for the curious situation we find ourselves in with regard to disappearing digital files(“File under: “Kindle-nacht”?” Barry Meislen @ January 20, 2011 – 5:58 am). I’ve saved the link to your post. It’s a strong connotation but given the potential for harm as the bowdlerization & erasure become pandemic, perhaps strength of reference is essential to properly name the thing for what it is.
H@111: That’s the point. There should never have been the integration in the first place.
Indeed. “Unscrambling the egg” seems to be the common assessment. Thank you Phil “Quit your whining” Gramm.
The end of G-S was all part of a grand bargain.
The Gorelick/Rubin/Clinton crew wanted to get Freddie and Fannie into the ghetto.
This was all tied into CRAPolicy.
The Money Trust coagulated around:
MERS and CRAPolicy and counterfeit credit that could be shunted into F & F.
The Money Trust would be made politically protected and To Big To Fail.
Dumping G-S was integral to this.
After pulling this off, Rubin quit the NEXT WEEK and jumped to Citicorp!
They then gave him $110,000,000 over then next decade as an ‘annuity.’
It wasn’t a paycheck: he had no duties and apparently no set hours. Obviously, he was a political crony go-between, if anything.
———
Habu…
The Money Trust is taking their profits RIGHT OUT THE FRONT DOOR.
Forget about deep connections. In round numbers, the monopolist elites took their gains in their paychecks. Across all firms, for the decade their ‘bonuses’ are in the many hundreds of billions.
THE NUMBER ONE concern of any banker is staying in business through adversity. ( Bank runs ) If you have a government backstop — the sky’s the limit because LEVERAGE is effectively unlimited.
While I admit that 6% is a mighty stiff dividend, that was a VERY typical rate for preferred stocks back in the day.
The syndication of government lending started with the Jews, there is no doubt about that. For the longest time Catholics would not participate in modern finance due to papal attitudes. Times change, now the Catholic Church, itself, runs one of the biggest banks in Italy. It’s even been involved in some whopper scandals. ( Godfather III dances around a real event )
The reason the Jewish families became linked goes back to chronic defaults by the King of Spain. He was both a fantastic customer/borrower and the worlds most chronic defaulter. The King never knew how much silver and gold were on his treasure ships. They only sailed once a year. From time to time, they ‘skipped’ a year. ( All lost at sea due to weather. )
The result is that the King was tapping out one Jewish clan after another. So as fat as the profits were — it was hair raising dealing with an absolute monarch. To stop him from playing one off against the other — they formed a bargaining syndicate. The rest, as they say, is history.
There is nothing evil or mysterious about the Jewish bankers spreading the risk of sovereign defaults.
As wealthy as they were, in relative terms their clout has evaporated. They have zero clout in China, Japan, etc. Exponential growth in the American economy, and the world generally has left them in the dust. Not that they’re in any way hurting.
Under no circumstances underestimate the towering advantage government protection provides. In effect the Money Trust is able to effect monopoly rents while facing essentially NO RISK. Talk about a one-way bet.
—–
Like all non-profits ( think hospitals ) the profits are taken as wages by the insiders. You see the same gambit with insurance companies. The corporate income statement is all humble pie — you have to peak under the hood to find out that management is paying astoundingly indulgent wages to themselves and their buddies.
The payola corruption between the NY Fed and Wall Street is a scandal supreme. It never gets national attention. Curious, no?
And then there’s the way the Money Trust gives politicians ultra sweet financing…
Check up on Dodd, Biden, et. al. They’re as crooked as the Clintons and Obamas. These folks never have a bad investment! Amazing!
Whenever someone resurrects the name of Bob Rubin, I am reminded of his mentor, Felix Rohatyn, who [i]n a January 17, 1997 interview on the Charlie Rose Show, Rohatyn stated that because of Wall Street’s new types of financial instruments (e.g., derivatives, swaps), to safeguard America’s businesses, America will never experience another recession. (wiki)
He wasn’t alone in his opinion.
It was no secret that as a lifelong Democrat, Rohatyn aspired to one day become US treasury secretary. But having supported Ross Perot, a former client, in his third-party bid for the presidency in 1992, Rohatyn was passed over for the post in favor of Robert Rubin when Bill Clinton was elected. He never got another chance.
Talk about making history:
Strike One: Derivatives. In 1998, Brooksley Born, chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, proposed bringing derivatives under her jurisdiction. Rubin joined forces with Greenspan and Arthur Levitt Jr., then chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, to successfully derail the proposal in Congress.
Strike Two: Greenspan … In early 1996, when Greenspan’s term as Fed chairman was due to expire, Clinton considered replacing Greenspan with Felix Rohatyn. Rubin talked him out of it. [snip] Greenspan … has since been identified as the principal architect of the economic meltdown. That’s not only because he resisted regulation of derivatives more emphatically than Rubin (“I think of him constantly cheerleading on derivatives,” Greenspan’s onetime deputy, Princeton economist Alan Blinder, recently told Peter S. Goodman of the New York Times) but also because he failed to rein in the subprime lending that created the meltdown and encouraged the housing bubble by keeping interest rates low.
Strike Three: Glass-Steagall … In his 2002 book, The Roaring Nineties, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz (an adversary of Rubin’s in the Clinton White House) identifies Rubin as a prime mover in the 1999 repeal.
Quite important, I think, but much too OT for the upper threads:
How likely is Fed insolvency from the much maligned QE?
As of Jan 6, less than what you might have thought:
**************************************************************
The change essentially allows the Fed to denote losses by the various regional reserve banks that make up the Fed system as a liability to the Treasury rather than a hit to its capital. It would then simply direct future profits from Fed operations toward that liability.
This enhances transparency by providing clearer, more frequent, snapshots of the central bank’s finances, analysts say. The bonus: the number can now turn negative without affecting the central bank’s underlying financial condition.
“Any future losses the Fed may incur will now show up as a negative liability as opposed to a reduction in Fed capital, thereby making a negative capital situation technically impossible,” said Brian Smedley, a rates strategist at Bank of America-Merrill Lynch and a former New York Fed staffer.
**************************************************************
(I wish I could do that.)