- Please send as far and wide as possible.
Editor, The Konformist
The Dark Side of Aquarius
Two highly recommended films to watch:
The New Age Infiltration of the Truth Movement
which You Tube yanked but can be found @:
Aquarius: The Age of Evil
which you can find @:
Truth be Known! Enjoy!
The buffoonization of Hugo Chavez
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Jun 23, 2010
"We were always cautious about the triumph of President Obama. Early on, we began to take note of the truth, that the empire is here, alive and more threatening than ever." --Hugo Chavez Frias
It is said when you can't beat 'em, that you might as well make common cause with them, but in the case of President Hugo Chavez and the government of Venezuela this doesn't seem to be the logical choice of the U.S. State Department, and the corporate `mainstream' media at all.
Since, the Obama State Department and its auxiliaries are incapable of debunking the unequivocal success of the Bolivarian revolution, and since the CIA's forays into the Bolivarian Republic have been far from a success, the corporate MSM seems to be employing the strategy, that if you can't beat 'em, then you might as well throw a whole bunch of mud in their eye.
Craven, and seemingly incapable of a fair fight, the corporate `mainstream' media egregiously goes for the low blow, each and every time. The propaganda and half-truths, levied against the sitting Venezuelan president, at times veers into the realm of classifying Chavez as a dictatorial strongman -- which has never stopped the U.S. government before -- but I think the lion's share of the effort to impugn and delegitimize Chavez, is to make him out to be playing with something far short of a full deck.
Perhaps most recognizably, we have seen the baseness of the coverage of President Chavez in colorful remarks that he has made about George W. Bush being the devil, or in his referring to Sarah Palin as a confused beauty pageant contestant. These comments have been made out to be the zenith of President Chavez's intellectual powers. And although the Venezuela leader, may -- at times -- make these sort of flip, off the cuff remarks and comments, his raising of serious and incisive points about the United States empire and belligerent `hegemonic' power generally go unnoticed by a media seemingly looking to do nothing other than lampoon and skewer the Bolivarian president.
Presumably, anyone who opposes -- and has a coherent critique -- of U.S. neocolonialism and imperialism is some kind of a buffoon or imbecile. History, of course, ended long ago, and anyone opposing the straitjacket that the wealthiest countries want to affix upon the rest of humanity must be hopelessly misinformed and/or wildly out of touch. Never do the so-called mainstream media's `reliable sources,' focus on figures like a drop in poverty from 71 percent in 1996 to 23 percent in 2010, or that Venezuela, long ago, met its UN Millennium Development targets. Instead, slander, invective, and a generalized muddying of the waters are the tools of the `diligent reporting' of the `venerable' corporatist press.
Time Magazine, for example, in an article in 2007, referred to Chavez as a budding movie mogul for funding a project on Toussaint L'Ouverture with the veteran American actor and activist Danny Glover. Time opined, in that piece of incomparable `journalism,' that this would probably be just the beginning, of Chavez's forays into socialist propaganda films. One would think that the apropos question for Time's reportage, would be why would such a seasoned and respected actor of Hollywood need to go outside of the U.S. to fund this kind of project of such an important figure of Haitian history and even the history of the world? And one can only imagine the coverage of L'Ouverture, by the Western media of his day; he was probably the Hugo Chavez of his era, and almost undoubtedly accused of being something like an inciter of riots for realizing that people born in chains might want some modicum of freedom.
The Los Angeles Times devoted critical resources recently to informing their audience that Hugo Chavez had opened a Twitter account. The Times -- in a testament to their abilities of `objective' news-making -- said they were glued to Chavez's tweets, because of the man's "sometimes unpredictable actions." Moreover, they erroneously reported that Chavez had a tight grip on the media in his country; when the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Venezuelan media is rabidly anti-Chavez and firmly in the hands of the Venezuelan elite.
Progressive commentator Mark Weisbrot, has even likened the Venezuelan private media's coverage of Chavez to Fox News' coverage of Barack Obama in the United States. Though Weisbrot went even further, saying that the Venezuelan private media is more politicized, more prone to hyperbole, and less rooted in facts compared to Rupert Murdoch's virulent propaganda operation in the U. S. In concluding the LA Times article, unequivocally a Pulitzer level, erudite piece, the Times talked to U.S. State Department spokesmen Philip Crowley. Crowley, soberly told the Times reporter he spoke with that he simply couldn't resist being a Twitter follower of President Hugo Chavez's numerous tweets.
The corporate media are, of course, replete with this kind of shoddy, trivialized, and half-baked `journalism.' And apparently one needs to be a highly celebrated and Academy Award winning filmmaker to get any kind of substantive, reasonably fair coverage of Venezuela in the U.S. corporatist fourth estate. A recent piece on Oliver Stone's newest documentary, in the New York Daily News, actually raised some sober-minded points about Venezuela -- things that are regularly redacted from most of the mainstream accounts. Things like that the `bad guys' in this narrative are really the U.S., the International Monetary Fund, and colonial powers, such as Britain and Spain. And also that there is widespread popular support for Hugo Chavez in his home country; he's not just some clownish Svengali who has a nation by the horns.
The article also quotes Stone's accurate contention that there's been virtually no change whatsoever emanating from the administration of Barack Obama. Reading this sort of information in the American mainstream media is almost not to be believed, because it is just the kind of thing that is perennially missing from the one side of the issue that the `mainstream' choose to support. And as George Orwell famously noted in his seminal work of fiction, 1984, "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." It's no wonder Venezuela could surely be just another potential territory ripe for invasion, and the spreading of `freedom' and `democracy' and `nation-building' one day on the not all too distant horizon. Especially, when considering a media that succeed in redefining up as down, and rewriting history according to the worldview that it is self-referentially operating from.
One would think, if s/he puts any stock in the MSM's egregious, slanderous actions, that a dictatorial, oafish, president controls the state of Venezuela. The truth of the matter is, undeniably, that making progress there -- on the fronts where President Hugo Chavez has been successful -- would, of course, be impossible if Venezuela were being shepherded by just another one of the stewards of U.S. imperial mandates. And it would, irrefutably, be nothing more than a vassal, wholly-owned subsidiary of the United States.
Sean Fenley is an independent progressive, who would like to see some sanity brought to the creation and implementation of current and future, U.S. military, economic, foreign and domestic policies. He has been published by a number of websites, and publications throughout the alternative media.
Rally of '09 the Last Like That in Our Lifetime: Strategist
Friday, 18 Jun 2010
Last year's stock-market rally won't be repeated for the foreseeable future and likely not for decades, Sean Corrigan, chief investment strategist at Diapason Commodities Management, told CNBC Friday.
In addition, the European Union's decision to publish stress test results on all of its banks is merely "window dressing," Corrigan said.
"I can see clear signs that the second half is going to produce much less positive headlines," he said. "We've already had an enormous rally."
Looking at previous economic collapses in the 1920s and 1930s, "the first 12-to-15 months a huge rally occurred when the monetary spigots were turned back on and people got back into the market and thereafter it became much more choppy," Corrigan added.
"You're not going to see what we saw last year," Corrigan said. "I think we've probably seen that for our lives unless we destroy the monetary system and stocks roar away on that basis."
The EU's move to present stress-test results is only adding redundant regulation, Corrigan said.
"Do banks not present quarterly accounts, are there not stock market regulators and banking regulators, why do we not know what's on their balance sheets?" he said. "Because there was complicity at the top to hide the problems two years ago."
"I think this is window dressing," Corrigan said. "I don't see what's in this that's not in existing regulation, which should have been applied not just to the banks but to every other company."
Future Poll: World War III, Cancer Cure Are on the Way
AOL News (June 22) -- On the plus side, by the year 2050 there will be a cure for cancer, bionic limbs will perform better than mere flesh-and-bone arms and legs and cloning will be used to bring back extinct animals. Oh, and computers will be able to converse among themselves like human beings.
On the downside, those same computers might be responsible for the expected third world war, won't be able to thwart a terrorist nuclear attack on the U.S. and will utterly fail to stop the major energy crisis that will play havoc with the world.
These are among the predictions made for the next 40 years by majorities of Americans, according to a poll released today by the Pew Research Center.
The survey of more than 1,500 adults taken in late April also suggests that Americans' world view has darkened a bit over a decade that opened with a recession and the worst terrorist attack in history, featured two wars that stymied U.S. military prowess and ended with a full-blown global financial crisis.
In April, 64 percent of respondents said they were optimistic for their lives and families over the next 40 years, and 61 percent were optimistic for the future of the U.S. But that's down from responses of 81 percent for respondents' lives and families and 70 percent for the country when the same survey was conducted in 1999. Pessimism for lives and families has climbed to 31 percent from 15 percent in that time, and for the U.S. future to 36 percent from 27 percent.
But the survey suggests Americans remain confident in a future filled with wonders that today are the stuff of fiction.
Eighty-one percent said computers will probably or definitely be able to converse like humans by 2050, 71 percent said there will be a cure for cancer, 66 percent expected artificial limbs that outperform natural ones, 63 percent predicted astronauts will land on Mars, 53 percent said ordinary people will travel in space and 50 percent said we will find evidence of life elsewhere in the universe.
While 51 percent said an extinct animal will probably or definitely be brought back by cloning, only 48 percent said humans will be cloned -- the same share that expected computer chips to be embedded in Americans for identification. And 42 percent said scientists will be able to tell thoughts from brain scans.
Among the threats to the country in the coming decades, another world war still seems probable to the most respondents (58 percent), followed closely by a major terrorist attack with a nuclear weapon (53 percent), while only 31 percent said an asteroid probably or definitely will hit the earth by 2050.
Among other menaces just over the horizon, 72 percent of Americans said there will be a major world energy crisis, and 66 percent expect the Earth to warm. Tellingly, younger people are more pessimistic about global warming (77 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds versus 61 percent of Americans 65 or older), and Republicans are much less worried about it than Democrats (48 percent versus 83 percent).
Americans are also divided on another subject that many associate with the end of the world, according to Pew: the return of Jesus Christ. Just over four in 10 respondents expect the Christian version of the messiah to show up by 2050, while 46 percent said this will probably or definitely not happen in that time.
Stoner Cooking: The Lee Brothers' Dirty South Burger
Wednesday, Jun 16, 2010
The Lee Brothers' Dirty South Burger
Your new favorite words are "cheese relish." Don't look at us like that
By J.M. Hirsch
Chefs Matt and Ted Lee created a Cheese Relish Burger
A classic cheese on a classic burger -- Southern style.
No slab of American would suffice for Matt Lee and Ted Lee, brothers who have made careers out of sharing the flavors of the South.
"A thick slab of melting cheese has always been our favorite addition to a burger," Matt said in an e-mail. "But our cravings these days also run to snappier, spicy-sour sensations that temper the richness of the cheese-topped burger and speed us toward a second helping."
So they reached for that classic Southern food, pimento cheese, albeit with an update.
"Our favorite new variation on pimento cheese uses Swiss (instead of the traditional cheddar) and banana peppers (instead of roasted red peppers)," said Matt Lee, who with his brother wrote the recent "The Lee Bros. Simple Fresh Southern."
"We add capers, chives and chili flakes to torque the flavor up to 11 and to reinforce the crumbly, relish-like texture of the spread," he said.
The result is a pleasantly piquant Southern take on the classic burger.
Start to Finish: 10 minutes
Makes 2 cups (enough for 16 burgers)
10 ounces Swiss cheese, finely grated
12-ounce jar banana peppers, drained (1 tablespoon of the liquid reserved) and finely minced
2 tablespoons minced fresh chives or scallions
2 tablespoons drained capers, rinsed
1/4 teaspoon red pepper flakes
1/4 teaspoon ground black pepper
Kosher salt, to taste
Cheese Relish Burger
Start to Finish: 30 minutes
8 tablespoons cheese relish
1 pound ground beef
1 teaspoon canola oil
4 hamburger buns, lightly toasted
4 leaves iceberg lettuce, optional
1 onion, thinly sliced into rings, optional
Condiments, as desired
1.In a large bowl, combine the cheese, banana peppers, reserved banana pepper liquid, chives or scallions, capers, pepper flakes and black pepper. Use your hands to knead the mixture together until evenly blended. Season with salt, then mix again. The relish can be refrigerated for up to 2 weeks.
Cheese Relish Burgers
1.Divide the cheese into 4 balls, 2 tablespoons each. Flatten each ball into a thick patty. Set aside.
2.Form the ground beef into 4 balls and flatten into 3/4-inch-thick patties.
3.Heat a grill to high and brush the rack with the oil. Alternatively, heat a large skillet over high and add the oil to coat the bottom of the pan. Heat until the oil shimmers and begins to smoke.
4.Reduce the heat to medium, and cook the burgers for 3 minutes on each side. With a spatula, flip again and cook for another 1 ½ minutes on the first side, then for another 1 ½ minutes on the second side for medium-rare.
5.Top each burger with a patty of the cheese relish, cover the grill or pan, and cook for 1 minute.
6.Transfer the burgers to the buns and let rest for 2 minutes. Top each burger with lettuce, onion and condiments, as desired.
22 June 2010 | Nature
AIDS researcher cleared of misconduct
Berkeley cites academic freedom and lack of evidence as it wraps up investigation over contentious paper.
Peter Duesberg has been cleared of wrongdoing.Controversial researcher Peter Duesberg has been cleared of wrongdoing following formal complaints made after he and others published a paper arguing that there is "as yet no proof that HIV causes AIDS".
Duesberg, who is well known for denying the link between HIV and AIDS, escaped censure from the University of California, Berkeley, after an investigation upheld his academic freedom and found no clear evidence that he broke faculty rules in publishing the paper.
A letter dated 28 May from Sheldon Zedeck, vice-provost for academic affairs and faculty welfare, to Duesberg effectively clears him of any wrongdoing. It states that there was "insufficient evidence" available to pursue any disciplinary action against him, although it stresses that the investigation was not concerned with the "accuracy or validity of the article".
Duesberg told Nature that he felt "officially exonerated" by the outcome but was disappointed that Berkeley had not dismissed the allegations sooner. "There was no basis for a misconduct charge," he says.
The professor of biochemistry and molecular biology, who won international acclaim for his work on cancer genes in the 1970s before focusing on AIDS, says that his detractors will now find it more difficult to make a case against him. "Now they will have to find something else ... maybe my parking permits," he suggests.
Berkeley launched an investigation last November, questioning whether Duesberg had violated the university's code of conduct when submitting an article to the journal Medical Hypotheses, which at the time did not peer review its papers.
The article argued that there is "as yet no proof that HIV causes AIDS" and described claims that the virus had killed millions as "unconfirmed". Duesberg had previously submitted the manuscript to the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, where one reviewer warned that he could face misconduct charges were the paper to be published.
The warning concerned the alleged cherry picking of results and the failure to declare a conflict of interest for co-author David Rasnick, previously an employee of Matthias Rath. Rath sells vitamin pills as remedies for AIDS. Rasnick has denied any conflict of interest and says that he has had no connection with Rath since 2006 (see: AIDS contrarian ignored warnings of scientific misconduct).
The paper's publication led to a storm of protest from scientists, and retrospective peer review later led to its being permanently withdrawn. The journal's editor was sacked and publisher Elsevier vowed to make changes to Medical Hypotheses, including introducing peer review.
Two formal complaints were also lodged with Berkeley, between them alleging that Duesberg had made false claims in the paper and accusing him of failing to declare Rasnick's alleged conflict of interest. One complaint came from Nathan Geffen, treasurer of the South Africa-based Treatment Action Campaign which campaigns for the rights of people with HIV/AIDS. The other complainant has remained anonymous.
Geffen told Nature that he submitted his complaint because he believed Duesberg had behaved unethically. "I would like them to have taken action against him but I understand their position. I am willing to accept that this is a grey area in terms of their code," he says.
He adds that having "insufficient evidence" to proceed is not the same as exoneration. "This is anything but an exoneration."
Berkeley spokesman Robert Sanders confirmed that the investigation into Duesberg had now concluded.
"Academic freedom protects a professor's right to engage in scholarly research, even if it is controversial. The university relies on the scholarly peer-review process, rather than disciplinary procedures, for evaluating the value of scientific work," he says.
Michael Jackson was murdered for his back catalogue, claims sister LaToya
Michael Jackson was murdered because he was "worth so much more dead than alive", his sister said today.
In a television interview, LaToya Jackson insisted the Thriller singer's relatives and fans now deserve "the truth" about his death.
Asked whether she believed the star was murdered, she said: "I never had a doubt. You must remember from the day that I found out that Michael was no longer with us, when my mother screamed 'he's dead' on the phone, I just went into this, 'Who did it?"'
The singer's death, on June 25 last year, sparked a litany of conspiracy theories.
But his sister insisted: "Michael was murdered for his catalogue - that's the bottom line.
"He was murdered for his catalogue and they knew that, and they knew Michael was much more, worth so much more dead than alive.
"His children deserve the truth. I think his parents deserve the truth, his family and his fans.
"Personally I think it is a slap in the face, not just to Michael but to the entire family. It's totally unfair, it's wrong and it was not an accident."
LaToya once caused a storm by publicly distancing herself from the star and condemning him for his alleged behaviour with children.
But she now claims her "management" made her read a statement out to the world's press, without knowing what it said.
This morning she told GMTV: "I always wanted the world to see Michael the way we did. He was such a good-living, caring, kind person."
Describing her mother's grief after Jackson's death at the age of 50, she added: "I could see the pain and the sorrow in her eyes. But she was strong - she chose not to cry and I think she chose that for the children."
Jackson named his mother as his first choice to raise children Prince Michael, 12, Paris, 11, and Prince Michael II, eight, in a 2002 will.