Tuesday, January 27, 2009

finally another one

Like comics? I do, so here's a link to a bunch of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle comics that you can read, for free. Including the very first one.

Friday, January 23, 2009

The ADL: Evil, courrupt, dishonest, pernicious, portentous, threatening, inauspicious, harmful, and a whole load of synonyms for a load of bullshit

Fuck the Anti-defamation League!

I found this compendiary documentary on YouTube not to long ago and I felt it was on target and well worth the time to post it here. It's in line with most of the research that myself and some of the other bloggers here at MercuryToona (mainly MisterGoldbug) have done on the ADL.

I would like to take a moment to affirm that nor myself or anyone else here at MercuryToona are racists or anti-semetic. We're honsest truth-seekers and as we've come to realize, the truth is ugly.

The ADL is nothing more than a smokescreen to domino the
flagitigious, Zionist actions of the Israel Lobby and it's constituents. Zionism in of itself is a racist ideology. You can learn more about it here.

I urge you to do the reseach and see the information for yourself and form your own opinions on the matter.



Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Abraham Delano Messiah Obama

Abraham Delano Messiah Obama?
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

The political Left (which includes almost all journalists in America) just can’t make up its mind over whether Barack Obama most resembles Lincoln, FDR, Jesus Christ – or some combination thereof. All during his campaign many of his supporters kept referring to him as "The Messiah"; there is much talk of how he will immediately propose the re-adoption of many of FDR’s government interventions (that only made the Great Depression worse); and we are told (constantly) that he intends to make use of Lincoln’s rhetoric, especially in his first inaugural address. He has been studying Lincoln’s speeches, we are told by his handlers. If so, we are in for a lot of doubletalk and lies bordering on the psychotic.

There has been so much "spin" attached to Lincoln’s speeches by the Lincoln Cult, which often produces entire books instructing us all on how to "properly" interpret a single short speech, that it is almost impossible for the average person to understand what was actually said. (The speeches are all online, so all interested parties are able to read them for themselves without the spin.)

The May 25, 2004 edition of the Washington Post included a story about how Hillary Clinton joined a number of neo-conservatives at the home of the Heritage Foundation’s James Swanson to "celebrate" a new book by Hillary pal Harold Holzer entitled "Lincoln at Cooper Union: The Speech that Made Abraham Lincoln President." I agree with these left-wing and right-wing neoconservatives that it did indeed provide a big boost to Lincoln’s candidacy. In order to understand why, one must understand that in the speech Lincoln promised to do all that he could, if elected, to keep black people out of the new territories and isolated in the Southern states. He pledged to keep them as far away as possible from the Northern population, in other words, which was very pervasively racist. That’s why the speech was so well received in New York City, which had just ended slavery in 1853 (see the book Slavery in New York). A key paragraph of the Cooper Union speech is one where Lincoln refers to the founding fathers:

As those fathers marked it [slavery], so let it be again marked, as an evil not to be tolerated and protected only because of and so far as its actual presence among us makes that toleration and protection a necessity. Let all the guarantees those fathers gave it, be, not grudgingly, but fully and fairly maintained. For this Republicans contend, and with this, so far as I know or believe, they will be content.

Speaking to a New York City audience, Lincoln stated here that the federal government’s protections of Southern slavery should be "fully" maintained. The reason for this, he said, was that, well, slavery exists! The audience reaction was reportedly quite enthusiastic, for most Northerners wanted slavery – and black people – to remain in the South.

In his October 16, 1854 speech in Peoria, Illinois, Lincoln first explained his (and the Republican Party’s) position on the extension of slavery into the new territories. "The whole nation is interested that the best use shall be made of these territories. We want them for the homes of free white people" (emphasis added). Lincoln’s secretary of state, William Seward, explained that "the motive of those who protested against the extension of slavery had always really been concern for the welfare of the white man, and not an unnatural sympathy for the Negro" (James McPherson, The Struggle for Equality, p. 24). Illinois Senator and Lincoln confidant Lyman Trumbull declared that "we, the Republican Party, are the white man’s party" (Eugene Berwanger, The Frontier Against Slavery, p. 133). Historian Eugene Berwanger noted in The Frontier Against Slavery (p. 154) that "Republicans [in 1860] made no pretense of being concerned with the fate of the Negro and insisted that theirs was a party of white labor. By introducing a note of white supremacy, they hoped to win the votes of the Negrophobes and the anti-abolitionists who were opposed to the extension of slavery." And Lincoln was the man they chose to accomplish this task.

The "spin" that the Lincoln Cult has put on Lincoln’s (and the Republican Party’s) opposition to the extension of slavery into the new territories is that that would somehow magically lead eventually to the destruction of slavery everywhere. They were "picking the low-hanging fruit" is how it is often explained. This of course is complete nonsense.

Lincoln’s first inaugural address may be considered his "slavery forever" speech because in it he goes to extremes to promise his everlasting support for Southern slavery. Quoting himself, he declared that "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." He then quoted the Republican Party platform of 1860 which made the exact same pledge. In what was the first Big Lie of his administration, which was barely one hour old, he repeated the statement from the Republican Party platform that said: "[W]e denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes." Within a month he would prove himself, and his party, to be liars.

Lincoln then strongly supported the Fugitive Slave Clause of the Constitution, reminding his audience that every member of Congress had taken an oath to support this, and all other parts of the Constitution. All members of Congress, Lincoln assured his audience, agreed that runaway slaves "shall be delivered up" to their owners.

Near the end of the Slavery Forever speech Lincoln pledges his support for a constitutional amendment (the "Corwin Amendment") that would have prohibited the federal government from ever interfering with Southern slavery. In his words:

I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution – which amendment, however, I have not seen – has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid minsconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far
as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

The Corwin Amendment had just passed the House and Senate and, as Doris Kearns-Goodwin details in her book Team of Rivals, it was Lincoln who orchestrated the passing of the amendment by instructing William Seward to see to it that it made its way through the Senate. (This would suggest that Lincoln lied when he said "I have not seen" the amendment.)

Lincoln literally fabricated his own personal version of American history in the Slavery Forever speech when he argued that the states were never sovereign, that the "union" preceded them, and that no state, therefore, could withdraw from the union. This was not the understanding of the founding fathers. All one needs to do to understand this is to read Article 1 of the Treaty of Paris which ended the Revolutionary War (and was negotiated by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and John Jay.) It says this:

His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states, that he treats them as such, and for himself, his heirs, and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.

Thus, King George III recognized each state as being an independent and sovereign nation, just as Great Britain and France were independent nations. They were part of a union of "free sovereign and independent states" that had joined together for a common purpose. This of course is also how Adams, Franklin and Jay, and all the other founders, viewed it.

Moreover, Article 7 of the U.S. Constitution explains that the citizens of the sovereign states are to ratify (or not) the Constitution. They created the union, not the other way around as Lincoln’s theory proclaimed.

In the Slavery Forever speech Lincoln gets down to very ugly business when he threatens his fellow citizens with "bloodshed." He did not threaten a foreign power that might contemplate invading his country, but his fellow countrymen. "[T]here needs to be no bloodshed, and there shall be none unless it is forced upon the national authority," he said. What on earth was he talking about? What could cause of the "national authority" to murder its own citizens? Failure to collect taxes, said Dishonest Abe. It was his duty "to collect the duties and imposts," he said in the next sentence, and as long as the citizens of all states continued to pay these taxes, the most important of which, the tariff, had just been doubled, "there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere." (At the time, tariff revenues accounted for over 90 percent of all federal tax revenues.)

Of course, the Southern states that had already seceded had no intention of paying any more taxes to the government in Washington. Lincoln kept his promise and delivered "bloodshed" in the form of killing some 350,000 Southerners, including about 50,000 civilians.

Lincoln cultists have been very busy recently urging Barack Obama to emulate Lincoln’s second inaugural address where he uses Biblical language to "justify" his armies’ killing of hundreds of thousands of their own fellow citizens, the burning down and ransacking of entire cities, the mass murder of civilians, and the plundering of the Southern population. There is no record of Lincoln ever having become a Christian; he never joined a church and rarely set foot in one; he was famous for ridiculing and lampooning the religious; but he was very knowledgeable about the Bible, which he skillfully used to dupe the Northern public.

By March of 1865 Lincoln’s war had resulted in the death of more than half a million Americans on both sides and unbelievable destruction of Southern cities and towns. Like the master politician that he was, Lincoln found a scapegoat for the war that he had started with his invasion of his own country (no one was even hurt, let alone killed at Fort Sumter). The scapegoat was God. The war was God’s punishment of America for the sin of slavery, he said, pretending to know what was in the mind of God. He failed to explain, however, why God did not punish Great Britain, Spain, France, The Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and other countries that were responsible for 96 percent of all the slaves that were brought to the Western Hemisphere from Africa. Only 4 percent ended up in the U.S. (Not to mention the fact that the Holy Scriptures make no mention of punishment for slavery).

The war just "came," said Dishonest Abe, as though he and his political party had nothing whatsoever to do with it. As Charles Adams wrote in When in the Course of Human Events (p. 205), "Not even the maddest of religious fanatics ever uttered words to equal Lincoln’s second inaugural address." Adams’s interpretation of the speech is that "Lincoln had to shift the blame and remove his own guilt, and he was quite willing to resort to reasoning more characteristic of a psychotic mind than a healthy mind . . . . Lincoln was guilt ridden and was close to being mentally ill at this time."

The Lincoln Cult does not even deny that Lincoln did in fact suffer from mental illness. In his very favorably-received book, Lincoln’s Melancholy, which was made into a History Channel documentary, Joshua Wolf Shenk described in detail how Lincoln suffered from manic depression his entire life; was so obsessed with suicide that his friends once removed all knives and razors from his home; wrote poems about suicide with titles like "The Suicide’s Soliloquy"; had several nervous breakdowns; took a primitive anti-depression drug that contained a heavy dose of mercury; brooded in misery his entire adult life worrying that he would die before becoming famous; and his friends claimed that he had "gone crazy."

The "spin" that Shenk and other Lincoln cultists put on Lincoln’s mental illnesses is that it proves him to be even greater than we believed he was, for he achieved what he did despite the fact that he was mentally ill. They always have numerous excuses for everything. That’s what it means to be a "Lincoln scholar."

The great H.L. Mencken was right when he wrote that the Gettysburg Address was good poetry but bad logic. It was Lincoln’s attempt to rewrite American history in a way that would serve the purposes of the Hamiltonian nationalists, who by his time had morphed into Republicans. Nearly every claim in the speech is false. The united states were not created by the Declaration of Independence "four score and seven years" before Gettysburg; the Constitution was ratified by the sovereign states in 1789. Our forefathers did not bring forth "a new nation" but a confederacy of free, independent, and sovereign states.

Americans were not "engaged in a great civil war," for a civil war is a contest for the takeover of a nation’s central government. Jefferson Davis did not want to be president of the United States any more than George Washington wanted to become King of Great Britain. It was a war to prevent Southern independence.

The U.S. government would have "endured" had the South prevailed, contrary to Lincoln’s rhetoric. It had managed to field the largest army in the history of the world despite Southern secession. The dead at Gettysburg did not give their lives "that the nation might live." The U.S. government was never in danger of disappearing. And as Mencken pointed out, it was the South that was fighting for the principle of consent of the governed. Through numerous popular votes, Southerners decided they no longer wanted to be ruled by Washington, D.C. Government "by the people . . ." would not have "perished from the earth" had the Republican Party lost its war. Democracy was alive and well in Europe and elsewhere, and would also have existed in the Confederate States of America as well as the United States of America.

Barack Obama will have a very long way to go indeed if he is ever to imitate the tongue-twisting, logic-attacking, a-historical, and sometimes psychotic rhetoric of Dishonest Abe. Let’s hope that he never tries.

What's He Building in There- Avian Taxi

What's this? Libertarian Nazis? Fail!


When I first caught wind of this political ideology I thought it nothing more than a foggy-headed philosophy, dreamed up by some fuckbag at some university thinking him/ herself as being a progressive individual, but sure enough it's an actual political movement, maybe. Here's what Politcs1 has to say about these cocksleeves:

"Politically correct Nazis? These Libertarian Green Nazis are either the strangest conglomeration of diametrically opposed political ideologies of a political party I have ever seen -- or one of the most wry political practical jokes found anywhere on the net (I'm not certain which conclusion is correct, but I strongly suspect the latter). This party purports to be comprised of atheist, peaceful, pro-gay, pro-drug legalization, anti-racist, environmentalist Nazis who acknowledge the Holocaust likely occurred (but are neutral as to its justification) and oppose the government sponsored killing of Jews, Christians & gays and the disabled. The LNSGP "rejects Judeo-Christian moral standards, victim mentality political behavior, capital-centric value systems, and authority." While membership is open to anyone regardless of their race or sexual orientation, individuals who openly profess a belief in either Judaism or Christianity are denied party membership. Articles, platform, FAQ and graphics. Worth a visit -- even if only to decide for yourself if this is a joke or if it is serious. In the past -- and as an indicator that the LNSGP is probably a practical joke -- the LNSGP's site had sections dedeicated to claims of participation in a public service project named the "Jewish Community Brothership" (to "Communicate the modern interpretations of Nazism and its implications for Jews in today's multicultural Reich") and some links to very bizarre "news" articles (example: "Nazi Moon Bases Established in 1942")."

What's next? The Pansexual Peace Party? Too late.

Monday, January 19, 2009

Rabbi Yisroel Weiss

Rabbi Yisroel Weiss of Jews United Against Zionism, in an interview on Fox News. It was posted on YouTube August 4, 2006. This video further addresses some of the issues mentioned here on MercuryToona concerning Zionism and the illegal state of Israel, this time from the perspetive of an orthodox Jew

Thursday, January 15, 2009

Eustace Mullins: Secrets of the Federal Reserve

I posted a blog here previously about the Federal Reserve and I've always wanted to elaborate on it. I've actually wanted to post some information on it by someone who is better at explaining it than I am.

Here follows a speech by Eustace Mullins in Hawaii in the late 80s. It's an 1h½. Well worth the time.

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Monster Cables Part 1:

Being an avid guitarist for quite a few years now, spending much time outside of practicing on Ultimate-Guitar and Harmony Central, I am "in-the-know" for the newer, older, high quality, low quality gear and the companies that make them. Some of the frequent topics I see involve "What cables should I buy?", or "Who makes the best cable". Like usual, the bandwagon comes in with the typical response "Monster cable makes the best, they have a lifetime warranty, and they sound so great, they're so much better than my X brand cable". I will admit; Monster builds a decent cable, one comparable to a $25 Dimarzio cable but, no where near their $59.99+ price range. Most cables have a lifetime warranty anyway, so why pay more for Monster Cable's junk. Their quarter inch ends are slightly oversized as well; frequent use of Monster Cables bore out your input jack slightly, to the point where the only cables that you can use are DUH! DUH! DAH!...Monster Cables. My personal recommendation are Planet Waves if you're trying to keep the cable below $40, Cobalt Cables for less than $100, and Solid Cables for premium sound quality for around $150-$250.

Further comparisons of Monster Cables vs. a coat hanger:
http://gizmodo.com/363154/audiophile-deathmatch-monster-cables-vs-a-coat-hanger

I would like to add; with guitar sound quality is more important than a home stereo system because it is not only about the sound quality but also the amount of signal getting to the amplifier. This can change the overall feel of an amp and how it responds to your playing. Monster does build a superior cable to many of the lower end brands; however, most of their pricing comes from their name and their gimmicks to lure people into buying their product.

Anthony C. Sutton: Skull and Bones Secret Society





Anthony C. Sutton: Wallstreet and the Rise of Hitler









Cynic- The Space for This

Eustace Mullins on the Fed

I realize there are many posts here on MercuryToona concerning the Federal Reserve, its functions and implications, but the other contraptionists including myself, feel that it is absolutely necessary to do so since its operations lay in obscurity in the minds of most Americans.

Here, Eustace Mullins elaborates further on the subject.

Barren

It has been a a good long while since I've posted anything worthwhile or edifying. I've been working on several editorials simultaneously and it has been irksome. For now I'll continue to throw up "filler" posts just to maintain a presence here on MercuryToona.

Monday, January 12, 2009

Old banks further my confusion

Apparently the Bank of England has cut interest rates to 1.5%, reminiscent of the US Fed dropping rates to nothing. I understand what dropping the interest rate is supposed to accomplish, but why the hell isn't it working. Our economy is still in free fall, and it appears that the BoE is ready to further drop rates in the next quarter. If it didn't work the first time why bother trying again. Maybe try a different tactic to free up lending or maybe just suck it up and realise we are in a worldwide depression and start saving what little money you may have. The rate cuts seem to be completely ineffective at stimulating lending, much like the bailouts which have accomplished much of nothing aside from furthering our own indebtedness. Maybe business should start slashing prices to an amount that's actually a good deal for people with no money, clearing out a lot of inventory and rejiggering their business models to account for a crippled economy. Currently we don't make much of anything and if you want work you had better be looking in the crap pay service sector, businesses need to be prepared for that and start catering to the paycheck to paycheck demographic if they expect people to buy their shit. For some reason I can't get my head around the need for people to borrow money when they won't likely have a job in which to pay it back. Lending really shouldn't be critical point in a sustainable economy. Good jobs and healthy savings seem much more important to me.

One of my favorites

At least one person in Congress is bucking the trend to blindly support the murderous over reaction in Gaza by Israel. Dennis Kucinich has his head on a bit more squarely than most in this regard.

"In Gaza, the United Nations gave the Israeli army the coordinates of a U.N. school, and the school was then hit by Israeli tank fire, killing about 40. The U.N. put flags on emergency vehicles, coordinating the movements of those vehicles with the Israeli military, and the vehicles came under attack, killing emergency workers. The Israeli army evacuated 100 Palestinians to shelter, and then bombed the shelter, killing 30 people.

"Emergency workers have been blocked by the Israeli army from reaching hundreds of injured persons. Today's Washington Post (reports): '100 survivors rescued in Gaza from roads blocked from Israelis. Relief agencies fear more are trapped, days after neighborhood was shelled.' Today, the U.S. Congress is going to be asked to pass a resolution supporting Israel's actions in Gaza. I'm hopeful that we don't support the inhumanity that has been repeatedly expressed by the Israeli army. The U.S. abstained from a U.N. call for a cease-fire. We must take a new direction in the Middle East, and that new direction must be mindful of the inhumane conditions in Gaza."

Found, again, on Alternet.

Boycott Israel

Some good stuff at Alternet today. Naomi Klein has a piece up that makes the argument that similar tactics used to defeat apartheid in South Africa could be used against Israel to curb the violence against Palestinians. I don't really know if that is possible, but it sounds better than doing nothing. Israel seems pretty committed to increasing violence against Palestinians lately. I'm not sure monetary punishments would sway the Israeli leadership on this, and it's not like it would be some sort of official sanctions against Israel, that will never happen, through the UN at least. The US will continue to support her right to defend herself( I like the way that's always phrased, in the feminine, so as to reinforce that fact that 'she' is never the aggressor and only defending 'herself', such bullshit psycho propaganda) to the very end, with weapons and money if need be. So from this point onward, I'll continue to never buy kosher products, except maybe pickles, but only if they are on sale. If I actually had money and investments I would consider divestment as well.

What will it take to prevent The Great Depression II?

Over at Alternet, Paul Krugman has a piece detailing some dire facts about our current economic situation. His forecast is yet again not rosy or optimistic, but unfortunately quite plausible. Krugman thinks that a large spending spree by the government on public works type infrastructure will be a hard sell, even to a Democratic congress. I tend to agree, but hard sell or not, it may be the best way to pump some money into the economy and still get some value for it. Much better than stimulus checks or tax cuts for the top rich-as-fuck %. Krugman also kinda throws some shit into the face of Bernanke and the Fed in general and makes claims that Keynes was right all along. It seems like a much better deal to get some nicer roads, maybe a new school or even a sturdy bridge or two, than whatever it is you get when the government throws $600 checks at poor people. Granted, I could use one of those checks and I wouldn't complain to the bank teller when I cashed it, but I don't see where it helps much in the long run. So I guess the question is, do we throw prayers at the approaching storm in hopes that it will change course, or do we employee the unemployed on the government dime and build a shelter that will withstand the storm and be of use well into the future?

Thursday, January 8, 2009

Uncut Chun Li Shower Scene from Street Fighter II: The Animated Movie




Street Fighter II: The Animated movie, was and is possibly the most successful and most well articulated animated adaptation of a video game ever. It's all encompassing, including: violence, blood, crude language, a fairly well constructed plot, and brief sexuality( i.e. compromising images of Chun Li), that is if you don't live here in the states. It was released in America to VHS and the basketball sized Laserdisc in 1995 with all the trimmings of a postulant, with tamer dialog and a certian excommuicated scene, but still not quite as bridled as the version availible on the PlayStation 2 and Xbox versions of the Street Fighter Aniversy Collection. An uncut version of the film wasn't released until nearly eleven years later. And if you are unfortante enough not to own the uncut version of the film, I give you the infamous Chun Li shower scene. Enjoy!

Warning: Following video contains content that may be objectionable to some viewers.

Barack Issues Dire Warning on Economy

http://news.aol.com/main/obama-presidency/article/obama-issues-dire-warning-on-economy/269859


FAIRFAX, Va. (Jan. 8) President-elect Barack Obama warned of dire and long-lasting consequences if Congress doesn't pump unprecedented dollars into the national economy, making an urgent pitch Thursday for his mammoth spending proposal in his first speech since the election.

"In short, a bad situation could become dramatically worse" if Washington doesn't go far enough to address the spreading crisis, the Democrat said as fresh economic reports showed an outlook growing increasingly grim.

Someone should tell Barack Obama that you cannot save a sinking ship by throwing buckets of water onto its decks! Oh, wait, Ron Paul already did that. But he not only told Barack Obama this inconvenient truth, he told this to his fellow legislatures in Congress and also to Ben Bernanke, Greenspan, and Paulson.

We're now 16 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT, and perhaps beyond that -- the numbers begin to blur and run together once you lose count of the mammoth debt toll -- but America doesn't recognize this burden for the reason that the debt clock hasn't caught up yet.

Something tells me -- I don't know... perhaps its LOGIC AND REASON... that the request made by the auto industry to be bailed out was evidence enough to support the argument that the bailout of the banking industry failed at meeting its stated aims. I realize the two industries are different, but the relationship is, after all, symbiotic.

Tuesday, January 6, 2009

No Angel at the Fence

A US publisher has cancelled publication of a Holocaust memoir after its author revealed that he had made up crucial parts of it.

Herman Rosenblat did survive a German concentration camp, but he did not fall in love with a girl who threw him food over the fence, as stated in the book.

Instead, he met her on a blind date in New York and married her 50 years ago.

His book, Angel at the Fence, came under public scrutiny after a number of scholars questioned important details.

The fabricated story says that when Rosenblat moved to New York after the war he met Roma Radzicki by chance and discovered she was the girl who had thrown apples and bread to him.
They fell in love and married.

But some questioned Rosenblat's descriptions of Schlieben - a sub-camp of Buchenwald - and said it was impossible to throw food over the fence there.

'I wanted to bring happiness'

The book was due to be published by Berkley Books, part of the Penguin Group, in February.
Advance publicity had included a couple of appearances by Rosenblat on the chat show hosted by Oprah Winfrey.

In a statement, Rosenblat, 79, said: "I wanted to bring happiness to people.
"I brought hope to a lot of people. My motivation was to make good in this world."

His agent Andrea Hurst told the Associated Press: "I question why I never questioned it. I believed it; it was an incredible, hope-filled story."

A statement from Berkley said Rosenblat and his agent would be required to return "all money that they have received for this work", Reuters news agency reported.

Historical records prove that Rosenblat was an inmate at Buchenwald and other camps.

But Rosenblat's agent said the love story involving meeting his future wife through the fence when he was a teenage prisoner at Schlieben was invented.

Brought to book

The Angel at the Fence is the latest in a series of high-profile literary fabrications.

Earlier this year, a Belgian woman revealed she had invented her tale of survival as a Jewish girl searching for her parents with a pack of wolves in Nazi-occupied Europe.

Monique De Wael, who adopted the pseudonym Misha Defonseca, admitted she was not Jewish and had lived in Belgium.

And a memoir by a white woman that claimed she was raised in poverty by a black foster mother and sold drugs for a Los Angeles gang was also exposed as a lie after her sister contacted the publisher.

Margaret B Jones, the author of Love and Consequences, actually grew up in a well-off area of California's San Fernando Valley.

Meanwhile James Frey, another author championed by Oprah Winfrey, admitted he "embellished" his bestselling memoir about his battle with drug addiction, published in 2003.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7802608.stm

____________________________________________

*sigh*. This gives credence to those questioning the Holocaust.

Despite the halt of the publication, Hollywood plans to go ahead with the story anyway, at least that's the last this author has heard about it. Has the Holocaust Industry not made enough money from this misery? They're really milking the tragedy for all that it is worth.

Monday, January 5, 2009

Nazi Israel: "Hamas Hit Us First" Lie.

The Israeli government should build a statue to Hitler, the size of which should be comparable to the one that was built for Saddam Hussein. After all, it is the Zionists who have Adolf Hitler to thank for Israel's existence today, for without the Hitler Administration there would be no Israel.

But they're not going to do that.

The recent events that transpired in Gaza are not shocking. Israel has been talking about invading Gaza for some time now. But it's interesting how the mainstream media of both Israel and America are reporting the story. Gordon Johndoe, spokesman for the National Security Council, called the actions of Hamas-controlled Gaza "completely unacceptable." In reference to the allegation that Gaza attacked Israel, provoking Israel into a military response, Johndoe describes the allegedly guilty Gazans as follows: "These people are nothing but thugs, so Israel is going to defend its people against terrorists like Hamas that indiscriminately kill their own people."

The following article reprinted here for this blog was written by Charles E. Carlson. For purposes of being terse, the author of this blog is only posting what he feels is the relevant parts. The link to the article is provided below.

Israel cannot kill all three or four million Palestinians, although it has been officially considered. And, Likud politicians will do it if they can. Past Prime Minister Ariel Sharon actually stated he was capable and willing to kill all Palestinian Arabs if the Zionists could handle the world heat it would generate. Israel’s objective, instead, is to eliminate Hamas, so they can once again control the Palestinians, as they have in the past, by controlling its leaders.

Israel with the help of the USA, trained Yassar Arafat to be its kind of Arab leader and helped him to become a billionaire. In exchange Arafat created a terrorist image for his peace-seeking people, but he never attacked Israeli political figures, as he would have done if he was their enemy.

On the first day of 2009 Israel bombed a 4 story apartment building in Gaza to kill one Hamas leader. They were willing to kill eight members of his family, all women and children, plus four more non-family members who lived in the same building! The USA networks did not report the event. And, the US Administration supports these Zionist acts of terrorism, as the President’s press release indicates. Unfortunately many Americans, especially evangelical Christians, choose to believe him.

Those who have been inside Gaza know Israel struck first, and Hamas’s response is only a token for lack of serious armaments. On December 29, 2008, on CNN, A united Nations official in Gaza, an English woman named Karen, stated she has lived in Gaza for six years, and whose job it is to organize distribution of UN purchased food. She set a Zionist friendly reporter straight. His loaded question was, “do the Gazans know that only Hamas is to blame for their sufferings?”
Answering from her office in Gaza, Karen, the UN official, stated that her assistant, a Gazan, was killed that very day by an Israeli bomb while doing his job delivering food, and that it was Israel, not Hamas, who broke the six-month peace truce by keeping the border entrances sealed for months after the “truce” began.

She put the reporter in his place about who bombed first, noting she was in Gaza under attack several hours before Hamas retaliated with some sixty homemade rockets. She affirmed that Israel has destroyed Gaza hospitals, mosques, schools, police stations, and private homes, all based on the excuse of one lone homemade rocket the week before that hit no one, and did no damage. Our leaders know all this but the truth does not further their agenda. The “Hamas hit us first” lie does.

Israelis often refer to Palestinians as “animals” in private conversation. Israel’s military started the slaughter by starving the Gazans in hopes the victims would blame and reject Hamas. When this did not work Israel trumped up a homemade, one rocket excuse to start bombing the Gaza City, and is still trying to blame Hamas. In summary, there are a few simple truths that Israel cannot stand, and that US politicians and the press never recognize.


1. Hamas is the lawfully elected government of Gaza and the West Bank as well. It still has the respect of the people. It not only has the right to lead but has the responsibility, which Hamas recognizes.

2. Israeli and American officials lie about Hamas routinely, it’s strictly business to lie, and they are not ashamed when they are caught. A recent official Israeli statement claimed “Hamas came to power in a bloody coup.” In fact, the Palestinian election was supervised and certified to be fair and free by an international team lead by a former US President, James Earle Carter.

3. Gazans do not train their children to be suicide bombers anymore than Americans do; “Human Bombs” are the product of lost dreams and the frustrations of 40 years of occupation. Some children who grow up without hope become dangerous adults. Anyone who goes to Gaza, as I did, will learn they are not trained to hate us, nor to carry bombs. They learn to hate by being bombed.

4. Gaza children are considered a blessing. Most families have lots of them and half the population is sixteen or under. As an example, abortion is practically unknown in Gaza; but in Israel it is a government provided utility. It is fair to say the Gazans practice a life culture; Israelis practice a death culture.

5. Gazans co-exist side by side, race and religion, Muslim and Christian, church beside mosque. Their Children often go to the same school, Hamas and Muslim kids with Catholic, Orthodox, and a few Baptists, until Israel bombs the school with US weapons. I have seen it and talked to the parents. A massive USA/Israeli propaganda campaign has the objective of convincing Christians that Muslims hate them.

http://whtt.org/index.php?news=2&id=2770

No doubt subscribers of the international state religion known as Zionism will spin this story through misrepresentation to successfully convince people this story is just another antisemitic conspiracy theory peddled by crackpots who should be living in mental institutions.

Sunday, January 4, 2009

Green Thinking: Waste Produced From X-mas

First of all I would like to state that I'm glad to now be onboard Mercury Toona, and I shall be posting topics based on environmentalism.

Over the holidays I witnessed how wasteful we can be. One receives a boxed gift also wrapped in paper, only for it to be ripped open and thrown away. I began to wonder how this adds up across America.

I found this article, which shows roughly how much waste is produced and a few tips on reducing the waste.

Don't waste rubbish, urges recycle drive

By Charles Clover, Environment Editor
Last Updated: 12:25AM GMT 24 Dec 2006

Recycling

Each person will throw away an average of 110lbs of rubbish this Christmas - the equivalent of nine average-sized turkeys or more than 60 leaves of bread, according to official figures.

Christmas will result in around three million tons of waste, which is enough to fill 400,000 double-decker buses, and equates to around a tenth of all domestic waste generated in a year, according to Recycle Now, a government-backed recycling campaign.

Although nine out of 10 households in England now have access to a curbside recycling scheme, a study by the government-funded Waste Resources Action Program has shown that 41 per cent of the population admit to lapsing on recycling over Christmas and consigning everything to the bin instead.

This will result in extra demand for holes in the ground to dump the waste in, and extra emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas generated by landfill sites.

The potential for extra waste is considerable given the shopping list for an average Christmas. This includes, in an average year in England, 15,000 tons of Brussels sprouts, equivalent in weight to 37 jumbo jets and 175 million mince pies, nearly 600 times the height of Everest.

Recycle Now has been trying to encourage people to shop in a way that generates as little waste as possible and to plan meals to use what is left over.

It says that more than half the waste generated at Christmas could be recycled into other products.

Recycle Now is advocating "drop when you shop" or taking waste back to supermarket drop-off points when you return for more.

It is promoting the Christmas card recycling scheme which benefits the Woodland Trust and has drop-off bins at Tescos, TK Maxx and WH Smith.

And it advises opening presents carefully so that the wrapping paper can be recycled for another year.

Gareth Lloyd from Recycle Now said: "The good news is that nine out of 10 homes now have a doorstep recycling service for a range of materials including paper, card, glass and metal cans.

"This has an impact. Current recycling in Britain saves greenhouse gases equivalent to taking 3.5 million cars off the road."

In addition, I would like to add a couple more ideas to help one reduce and reuse.

- As stated, carefully opening the wrapping paper instead of tearing it open will allow more uses from it; however, using newspaper works fine as wrapping paper, and it is more widely accepted at recycling centers.

- Using gift bags instead of wrapping paper. Again, they can be reused multiple times.

Noam Chomsky on Obama's Cabinet Selections

Saturday, January 3, 2009

Barack Obama Is A Fraud. Cabinet Appointees are all Bilderbergers

by Victor Thorn.

FOR TWO YEARS, Americans have heard an unrelenting mantra of change emanating from the campaign trail. But now that President-elect Barack Obama has begun forming his cabinet, we’re seeing a cadre of more deeply entrenched insiders than any administration that has preceded it.

In regard to key foreign policy advisors, all three of Obama’s selections either initially supported the Iraq war, or still do. On the economic front, each appointee maintains a close relationship with the Jewish triad of Ben Bernanke, Robert Rubin and Alan Greenspan—as well as bailout engineer Henry Paulson. Barack Obama himself is a Council on Foreign Relations member, has strong ties to Zbigniew Brzezinski, and participated in a clandestine meeting with Hillary Clinton at Bilderberg member Diane Feinstein’s house at the time when 2008 Bilderberg members were congregating only a few miles away.

Below is an overview of Obama’s top 14 selections to date. When considering their collective histories, a trend becomes clear, proving that the more things change under Obama, the more they stay the same.

1. TIMOTHY GEITHNER – TREASURY SECRETARY

Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, president and CEO of Federal Reserve Bank of New York, director of policy development for IMF, member Group of Thirty (G30), employed at Kissinger & Associates, architect of the recent 2008 financial bailouts, mentored by Lawrence Summers and Robert Rubin.

2. PAUL VOLCKER – ECONOMIC RECOVERY ADVISORY BOARD

Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, North American chairman of Trilateral Commission, Federal Reserve chairman during Carter and Reagan administrations, president of Federal Reserve Bank of New York, G30 member, chairman Rothschild Wolfensohn Company, key figure in the collapse of the gold standard during the Nixon administration, longtime associate of the Rockefeller family.

3. RAHM EMANUEL – CHIEF OF STAFF

Member of Israeli Defense Force, staunch Zionist, congressman, Board of Directors for Freddie Mac, member of Bill Clinton’s finance campaign committee, made $16.2 million during 2.5 years as an investment banker for Wasserstein Perella. His father was a member of the Israeli Irgun terrorist group.

4. LAWRENCE SUMMERS – NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL

Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, treasury secretary during Clinton administration, chief economist at World Bank, former president of Harvard University, Brookings Institute board member, huge proponent of globalization while working for the IMF, prot�g� of David Rockefeller, mentored by Robert Rubin.

5. DAVID AXELROD – SENIOR ADVISOR

Political consultant whose past clients include Sens. Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Christopher Dodd; main Obama fixer in the William Ayers and Reverend Wright scandals.

6. HILLARY CLINTON – SECRETARY OF STATE

Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, clandestine CIA asset used to infiltrate the anti-war movement at Yale University and the Watergate hearings, senior partner at the Rose Law Firm, key figure in the Mena drug trafficking affair, architect of the Waco disaster, implicated in the murder/ cover-up of Vince Foster, and many other deaths.

7. JOSEPH BIDEN – VICE PRESIDENT

Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senator since 1972, member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, current chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, strong Zionist sympathizer who recently told Rabbi Mark S. Golub of Shalom TV, “I am a Zionist. You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist.”

8. BILL RICHARDSON – COMMERCE SECRETARY

Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, former U.S. congressman, chairman of the Democratic National Convention in 2004, employee of Kissinger Associates, UN ambassador, governor of New Mexico, energy secretary, major player in the Monica Lewinsky cover-up with Bilderberg luminary Vernon Jordan.

9. ROBERT GATES – DEFENSE SECRETARY

Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, former CIA Director, defense secretary under President Bush, co-chaired CFR task force with Zbigniew Brzezinski, knee-deep in the Iran-Contra scandal, named in a 1999 class action lawsuit pertaining to the Mena drug trafficking affair.

10. TOM DASCHLE – HEALTH SECRETARY

Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, former Senate majority leader, Citibank lackey, mentored by Robert Rubin.

11. ERIC HOLDER – ATTORNEY GENERAL

Key person in the pardon of racketeer Marc Rich, deputy attorney general under Janet Reno, facilitated the pardon of 16 Puerto Rican FALN terrorists under Bill Clinton.

12. JANET NAPOLITANO – HOMELAND SECURITY DIRECTOR

Council on Foreign Relations, Arizona governor, attorney for Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas hearings, U.S. attorney during the Clinton administration, instrumental in the OKC cover-up, where she declared, “We’ll pursue every bit of evidence and every lead,” described as another Janet Reno, soft on illegal immigration (i.e. pro-amnesty and drivers licenses to illegals).

13. GEN. JAMES L. JONES – NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR

Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission, European supreme allied commander, special envoy for Middle-East Security during Bush administration, board of directors for Chevron and Boeing, NATO commander, member of Brent Scowcroft’s Institute for International Affairs along with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Bobby Ray Inman, Bilderberg luminary Henry Kissinger and former CIA Director John Deutch.

14. SUSAN RICE – U.N. AMBASSADOR

Council on Foreign Relations, Rhodes scholar, campaign foreign policy advisor to presidential candidates John Kerry and Michael Dukakis, member of Bill Clinton’s National Security Council and assistant secretary of state for Africa, member of the Brookings Institute (funded by the Ford Foundation and the Rockefellers), and member of the Aspen Strategy Group (teeming with Bilderberg insiders such as Richard Armitage, Brent Scowcroft, and Madeleine Albright).