The Demonic in OK: a beheading

[LaramieHirsch]

You used "fear" three times in your first reply. 

You paint speculators with this nail-biting, sweating, wide-eyed paranoid image of fearmongers. 

Heaven forbid that people form a calm and collected opinion that can be adjusted later on.

Not everyone who distrusts the princes of this world has a storage container bunker in their backyard loaded with dry goods and weapons. 

Shall I counter the stereotyping, and state that: to accept the mainstream headlines for what they plainly say is pollyannish?

If I'm right about our intentions towards Syria, then I'm right.  It won't make much difference.  If I'm wrong, I'm wrong then.  I've been wrong before.  I'm sure I'll make another incorrect political prediction in the future. 

There is no need to demean the character of someone who considers these things.  I think there is a possibility that supra-national government players plan broad global moves that extend beyond the daily headlines.  I'd be willing to bet that most on this forum think this. 

[Greg]

You're wrong.  That is why your predictions have never come good.  Of course nobody, especially Alex Jones, ever reviews all the things he told us would happen which never did.

If government ministers are this stupid then there is no meaningful conspiracy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2772489/I-complete-fool-admits-Tory-minister-Brooks-Newmark-forced-quit-sending-explicit-photos-Paisley-pyjamas.html

Politicians are continuously getting caught with their trousers down because they are egotistical sex-maniacs who crave power but have very little wisdom and common sense.  How could such people organise and persist in a decades long conspiracy?

There is not a secret school of very clever determined people who are pulling the strings, for the simply reason that if there was, idiots like this and their political colleagues would give the game away.

The truth is we are ruled by power crazed, class president types who are obsessed by sex and money.  That is why the world is so screwed up.

[LaramieHirsch]

You're wrong.  That is why your predictions have never come good. 

Which ones?

[mikemac]

Well Greg for over 25 years now we have been told that there is no alternative to the libertarian policy of neoliberal globalization, and that no such alternative is needed.  We have been confronted with the TINA-concept: "There Is No Alternative!".  The "iron lady", Margaret Thatcher, was one of those who reiterated this belief without end.  Yet globalization is the hallmark of the New World Order, the strike force for the global corporatists.  So it does seem that the princes and princesses of this world are conspiring to force globalization on the world.

[Greg]

Maybe globalisation is simply a natural by-product of freedom.

I am currently doing a consulting job for a firm in London, run by an Australian entrepreneur who was introduced to me through a German entrepreneur who is backed by the same US investment capital firm (early stage VC).

They need sales staff and technical Java developers to expand.  They cannot hire developers in London because the people they need are the same skillset as the banks need and the banks keep outbidding them or poaching them if they are hired in London.  So they've hired someone in Minsk, another developer in Romania and two Indians who lived in the UK have moved back to India where they have a much better lifestyle.  They run a virtual team of developers all over the world.

Unless you restrict cross border trade with tariffs and duties, which is difficult to impossible in an interconnected world (people would find workarounds) then globalisation is the natural result of people being free to employ who they wish, contract with who they wish and purchase products from the cheapest possible source.

In short, I don't think anyone is conspiring to force globalisation on the world.  I think they've simple removed trade barriers, currency controls, work-to-rule, compulsory union membership, tariffs, government monopolies and command economies and globalisation is the natural outcome.  The internet and near-free communications help a great deal also.

You are free to buy your goods from American made factories, if you wish, as are other Americans.  The Chinese are free to make their own jet engines instead of buying them from Rolls Royce.

[mikemac]

Yeah good for multinational corporations, as you described Greg.

With just a quick search I found this.

12 Negative Aspects of Globalization
http://oilprice.com/Finance/the-Economy/12-Negative-Aspects-of-Globalization.html

1. Globalization uses up finite resources more quickly.
2. Globalization increases world carbon dioxide emissions.
3. Globalization makes it virtually impossible for regulators in one country to foresee the worldwide implications of their actions.
4. Globalization acts to increase world oil prices.
5. Globalization transfers consumption of limited oil supply from developed countries to developing countries.
6. Globalization transfers jobs from developed countries to less developed countries.
7. Globalization transfers investment spending from developed countries to less developed countries.
8. With the dollar as the world's reserve currency, globalization leads to huge US balance of trade deficits and other imbalances.
9. Globalization tends to move taxation away from corporations, and onto individual citizens.
10. Globalization sets up a currency "race to the bottom," with each country trying to get an export advantage by dropping the value of its currency.
11. Globalization encourages dependence on other countries for essential goods and services.
12. Globalization ties countries together, so that if one country collapses, the collapse is likely to ripple through the system, pulling many other countries with it.

[Greg]

Yeah good for multinational corporations, as you described Greg.

I own a multinational corporation.  I employ people around the world and work for clients on three different continents.  What is wrong with that? 

With just a quick search I found this.

12 Negative Aspects of Globalization
http://oilprice.com/Finance/the-Economy/12-Negative-Aspects-of-Globalization.html

1. Globalization uses up finite resources more quickly.

So does progress, not to mention population growth.  Are you against that too?


2. Globalization increases world carbon dioxide emissions.

So do volcanos.  To a much larger extent in fact.

3. Globalization makes it virtually impossible for regulators in one country to foresee the worldwide implications of their actions.

So what?  Given time they will learn to foresee them.

4. Globalization acts to increase world oil prices.

Why is that a bad thing?  I thought according to 1 above you did not want finite resources used up so quickly.  Make your mind up for goodness sake.

5. Globalization transfers consumption of limited oil supply from developed countries to developing countries.

So, Americans and Europeans can drive cars but the Chinese have to ride bikes and live like peasants?

6. Globalization transfers jobs from developed countries to less developed countries.

Why is that a bad thing?  Nobody owes you a job and in a developed country there are LOADS of other opportunities to educate yourself and/or start a business.  In a developing country far less so.

7. Globalization transfers investment spending from developed countries to less developed countries.

Why is this a bad thing?  Developed countries are developed.  Surely less developed countries need the investment don't they? Truth is, of course, that investment goes to where it gets the best return for the lowest risk.

8. With the dollar as the world's reserve currency, globalization leads to huge US balance of trade deficits and other imbalances.

That has far more to do with Americans being lazy consumers and profligate spenders and it is entirely your fault.  The Chinese did not force you to buy their stuff.  Moreover if you hadn't forced the world to accept the dollar as the reserve currency you'd be even poorer.

9. Globalization tends to move taxation away from corporations, and onto individual citizens.

If you tax a corporation ultimately citizens pay anyway, because corporations are simply logos and nameplates.  They don't need to be fed or watered.  Corporations are simply legal structures ultimately owned by individual citizens.

10. Globalization sets up a currency "race to the bottom," with each country trying to get an export advantage by dropping the value of its currency.

Nonsense.  This happened long before globalisation.  Any cross border trade can cause competitive devaluation.


11. Globalization encourages dependence on other countries for essential goods and services.

Why is this bad?  If France is dependent on Germany for a vital product and Germany dependent on France for another vital product, it might very well stop them going to war with each other and cause them to pursue diplomatic or peaceful means for much longer.

12. Globalization ties countries together, so that if one country collapses, the collapse is likely to ripple through the system, pulling many other countries with it.

It also ties them together so that they gain from bailing out their neighbours.  Would you prefer that Germany had let Greece, Portugal and Spain simply burn?  Perhaps elect fascist dictators, build nuclear weapons or become pariah states?

What happened in 1918 to 1933 in Germany when there was no "globalisation" in the modern sense of the word.

Sounds very much like "I'm alright Jack".

[King Wenceslas]

Belloc maintained that, though based on the army, Islam did have a cultural (and dark spiritual, ed.) force. 'The success of Mohammedanism had not been due to its offering something more satisfactory in the way of philosophy and morals, but, as I have said, to the opportunity it afforded of freedom to the slave and debtor, and an extreme simplicity which pleased the unintelligent masses who were perplexed by the mysteries inseparable from the profound intellectual life of Catholicism, and from its radical doctrine of the Incarnation" (103). This position is not unlike that of Eric Voegelin, who argued that the susceptibility of western Christians to modern ideology was due to the practical disbelief of many Christians in the ultimate transcendent goal of the faith.7

Belloc, in fact, saw a relation between the failure of the Crusades and the rise of modern Europe which at first turned in on itself before finding the technological means of bypassing Islamic lands with the discoveries of America and the sea route to Asia. Belloc even held that the success of the Reformation in part was due to the defeat of Catholic and papal policies in the Crusades (107-09). Belloc's book on The Crusades remains one of the most poignant accounts of a failed enterprise. "Had the crusaders' remaining force at the end of the first Crusading march been a little more numerous, had they taken Damascus and the string of towns on the fringe of the desert, the whole history of the world would have been changed. The world of Islam would have been cut in two, with the East unable to approach the West."(114) North Africa, the old Roman lands, was not recovered. "They failed ... but they made modern Europe" (115). The Reformation was due to the weakness at the Center (115).

What Belloc was most conscious of, however, was that, unlike Islam, that Christianity did not retain its inner coherence, its faith. "Christian Europe is and should be by nature one; but it has forgotten its nature in forgetting its religion" (116). Belloc connected this loss of inner coherence in the West to the opportunity for Islam to rise again. It is partly the downplaying of the importance of religion in the West that it has been unable or unwilling to understand the attraction of Islam in its own inner coherence. "It has always seemed to me possible, and even probable," Belloc wrote,

that there would be a resurrection of Islam and that our sons or our grandsons would see the renewal of that tremendous struggle between the Christian culture and what has been for more than a thousand years its greatest opponent.... The future always comes as a surprise but political wisdom consists in attempting at least some partial judgment of what that surprise may be. And for my part I cannot but believe that a main unexpected thing of the future is the return of Islam. Since religion is at the root of all political movements and changes and since we have here a very great religion physically paralysed but morally intensely alive, we are in the presence of an unstable equilibrium which cannot remain permanently unstable (127-28).

It is interesting that even with the return of Islam to the forefront of our consciousness, we do not want to see this return as a religious thing explained in terms of Islam itself.

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=3437

[King Wenceslas]

So as the Church receeds Islam and Talmudic Jewdism fills the void. The great dark spiritual force of Islam will continue to attack the West without the West knowing what to do. I believe that if the prophecies of Fatima are not fulfilled in the next several years that eventually a war of religion will be the great battle of this Century and with the West being totally unprepared.

[Habitual_Ritual]

2nd Oklahoman ISIS-Supporter Arrested For Threatening To Behead Co-Worker

It appears the appeal of ISIS-supporting beheadings in Oklahoma is growing. In what can only be described as an uncomfortable coincidence for the state, a 2nd Oklahoma man was arrested Friday for threatening to behead a co-worker. As The Oklahoman reports, Jacob Mugambi Muriithi, 30, who was recently fired from his job at a nursing home, threatened a female christian co-worker that he "represented ISIS and that ISIS kills Christians." When she asked him why, he replied, "This is just what we do," according to the affidavit.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-29/what-we-do-warns-2nd-oklahoman-isis-supporter-arrested-threatening-behead-co-worker

[Heinrich]

I own a multinational corporation.  I employ people around the world and work for clients on three different continents.  What is wrong with that? 

Don't believe you unless you provide company's URL. 

[Recovering NOer]

I own a multinational corporation.  I employ people around the world and work for clients on three different continents.  What is wrong with that? 

Don't believe you unless you provide company's URL.

[Elizabeth]

Holy cow, that didn`t take long after the demonic satanic mass.

My sentiments exactly.