Author: Roy

Cut and Paste from http://anonymousconservativ.ipage.com/blog/

Islam Growing in America

This is a cut and paste from “The New English Review” which covers the waterfront as complete as I have seen. I recommend you go to the original post since I am a self made computer klutz and cannot post pictures. The picture of three dollar bill is priceless. http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/184272/sec_id/184272

As First Lady of Argentina from 1945 to 1952, Eva Perón was generally regarded as the most powerful woman in the world and referred to officially as the country’s “Spiritual Leader.” The “Cinderella from the Pampas,” was another common nickname for her idealization by many of the country’s poor who identified with her humble origins. She had grown up uneducated in a small rural town, been looked down on as an illegitimate daughter and an actress who had slept her way into fame but rapidly acquired a taste for elegance and glamorous style. When she met and married General Juan Perón, she added greatly to his support among the poor in the slums of the big cities and in the countryside.

Hillary Clinton stands poised to fill the same role in the United States. Like Evita, Hillary’s marriage to a former popular President was the stepping stone to power and although she grew up in comfortable surroundings and is a multi-millionaire today, her ridiculous claim to having been “stone broke,” and her populist campaign appealing primarily to what Democrats call the 99%, amidst multiple ultra-generous promises of social welfare, free higher education and unlimited health benefits, an alliance with powerful unions, and her voting appeal as a woman and feminist, all recall the career of Eva Perón who cultivated her own image as the heroine of the descamisados (shirtless ones – the very destitute urban slum dwellers and impoverished rural workers of Argentina). The distance to becoming “the most powerful woman in the world“ is now within her reach.

Continue reading “Hillary and Evita and their Respective Banana Republics”

I recommend you read my cut and paste, in its original form but, first read K/r Theory on the right sidebar, otherwise it will sound like Psychobabble.

http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/sjws-are-evil-incarnate-swedish-migrant-rapes/

SJWs are Evil Incarnate – Swedish Migrant Rapes

Posted on December 12, 2015 by Anonymous Conservative

You think someday that numerous Anders Breiviks will not explode in number, and murder SJWs by the boatload?

After an Algerian and a Syrian living in the same migrant Centre were jailed for raping a Swedish women multiple times, concerned locals held an anti mass-migration protest. Only then did an infuriated local social justice group hold their own demonstration… in support of more migration…

The mother of one was initially raped on her way home from the pub by the Algerian man, just a short distance from the migrant shelter. She escaped, but was raped a second time not far away, on the same night, by the Syrian man and an unidentified assailant.

According to the court judgment, one of the men convicted of aggravated rape said to her, “I’m gonna f*ck you little Swedish girl”, before he finished by spitting in her face, court documents seen by the Free Times reveal.

Continue reading “Social Justice Warriors are Evil Incarnate”

Posted without comment for the “Ladies” of TBP.

http://www.inquisitr.com/2374663/mexican-man-with-worlds-longest-penis-says-he-is-lonely-because-women-are-afraid-to-have-sex-with-him/

“Look where it is, it goes far below the knees. I cannot do anything, I cannot work, and I am a disabled so I want authorities to declare me as a disabled person and give me support.”

Cabrera, a native of “Look where it is, it goes far below the knees. I cannot do anything, I cannot work, and I am a disabled so I want authorities to declare me as a disabled person and give me support.”

Cabrera, a native of Saltillo in the northeast state of Coahuila, also wants his special “gift from God” to be recognized by the Guinness Book of World Records.
“Then, I want to go to the Guinness to get recognition.”

As part of effort to convince the authorities to register him as disabled and to have his special “gift from God” recognized by the Guinness Book of World Records, Cabrera has undergone medical examination and an x-ray at a health center in Saltillo.

According to Cabrera, who was reportedly deported from the U.S. in 2011, the x-ray proves that his penis is natural and not artificial.

Doctors said the x-ray (see image above) proves that Cabrera’s appendage is genuine. However, they pointed out that the main part of the organ was only six-inches-long and that the rest was mainly skin.

According to the U.K. Mirror, medical experts said it might be possible through surgery to reduce the size of Cabrera’s penis.

Cabrera is unemployed and lives alone. He receives assistance from relatives. He says he supplements the assistance by scavenging for waste materials. He laments that he has no friends and that people, especially ladies, avoid him.

If the Guinness Book of World Records recognizes Cabrera’s claim, he will supplant American John Falcon, who currently holds the record of the man with the world’s largest penis at 13.38 inches.

According to the Mirror, the story of Cabrera’s life will be published in a book titled “El Sordido Pudor”

Perspicuity
The quality of being clear and easy to perceive or understand.

For years one of my first reads is “Leon’s Almanac of Political History”
http://perspicuity.net/cgi/hypercal.cgi

This link gives you the month, then click on the date you want. I have been reading this for years and consider it an excellent chronology of our trip down the rabbit hole. It is an excellent way to start the day fully cocked in the pisst off position. Leon references many Supreme Court decisions which are an excellent study in hypocrisy. He also has quite a few excellent essays on the IMHO link.

Historical Political Events for June 23
(Click here for other dates — or use the Back Button to return)
Year
Event
1683 English Quaker William Penn signed his famous treaty with the Lenni Lenape Indians of Pennsylvania. Voltaire once remarked that it was the only treaty never sworn to, and never broken.

1940 The Führer, Hitler, with his own eyes wanted to see that he had conquered his enemy, France, so takes a nice tour of Paris. By the way, he travels down the Champs Elysées with far less security detail than is now enjoyed by our president routinely — in the U.S.A.!

1947 The Labor-Management Relations Act (Taft-Hartley) becomes law over a presidential veto. The act is designed to control union excesses.

1969 In Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969), the US Supreme Court held that police officers could search only within the immediate area of the suspect who was being arrested, without a search warrant.

1972 “Education Amendments of 1972” becomes law. Prohibits any discrimination at Educational institutions based on sex.

1988 James E. Hansen, NASA scientist, tells the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources that “Global Warming” threatens mankind. {pdf} Thus the demonstration of the power of “memes” (blind beliefs) is begun. For the population, the news media, and the politicians, all seem to accept that this is a fact even when scientists find the evidence very doubtful.

2005 The U.S. Supreme Court decides (5-4) in the case Kelo v. New London that local governments can seize residential and commercial property for private development projects against the will of property owners as a “public use” and to increase the tax income.

1997 Today’s Example of a Most Interesting Government Purchase: Army, Transportable decontamination system used to apply high-pressure, hot soapy water to vehicles, other equipment, and potentially personnel in the case of chemical or biological incidents., $14,446,206. [Some sort of portable car wash?

and . . .
Quote of
the Day

Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism. . . . I can, with a lot of time, give you the factual basis for these views, and I can cite the appropriate journal articles not in whacko magazines, but in the most prestigious science journals, such as Science and Nature. But such references probably won’t impact more than a handful of you, because the beliefs of a religion are not dependent on facts, but rather are matters of faith.
— Michael Crichton, author of State of Fear, in “Environmentalism as a Religion”

The “Current Tax Payment Act”, passed on 9 July 1943 by Congress, provides for income taxes on wages and salaries to be withheld by employers from paychecks. The purpose stated was that it was an emergency provision for the War. Sure — but it is still with us today. This act accounts for the uncontrolled growth of government more than any other event!!!

“Far more important, without a system of current collection, it would have been impossible to collect the amount of income taxes that we collected during the war. At the time, we concentrated single-mindedly on promoting the war effort. We gave next to no consideration to any longer-run consequences. It never occurred to me at the time that I was helping to develop machinery that would make possible a government that I would come to criticize severely as too large, too intrusive, too destructive of freedom. Yet, that is precisely what I was doing.”

Milton Friedman, who was a key player in implementing the “tax withholding” system

This is the same Milton Friedman who advised Nixon to abandon the gold standard in 1971.
I agree it would have been impossible to collect the amount of taxes collected during the war without a revolution. WWI was financed with four Liberty Bond issue which were paid off. Virtually all wars have been financed by fiat “money” debt provided by bankers. Prices doubled during the war or the legal tender dollar lost half its value.

By withholding income tax rather than billing directly as Counties and School Districts do. Government is able to raise taxes slowly with little noticed. I believe at least 95% of what Government does is unnecessary but it creates jobs to provide employment for people displaced by increased efficiency and labor arbitrage. These government wage recipients seek to increase their position in the hierarchy by increasing more nonproductive activity.

Government can now raise taxes to meet the wage demands whereas productive workers in the private sector have to increase productivity through efficiency or poorer quality. This is one reason why nonproductive work pays better than productive work. Counterproductive work pays better, Lawyers, regulators etc.

JFK issued an Executive Order allowing Government workers to unionize. PA was first. Firing a union worker is a 7 step process damn nearly impossible to fire a union worker.

The following is a Post by Tom Lewis who IMO is a Green Luddite but does occasionally get something right.

http://www.dailyimpact.net/2015/03/05/holding-accountants-accountable/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailyimpact%2FGIfx+%28The+Daily+Impact%29

After reading the first paragraph be assured Jim will always tell you exactly how many beans are I the jar. It should be interesting to see how the Government tries to twist this to make you believe all is well.

“It’s on account of accountants that we can’t count anymore, and someone should hold them accountable. We call them bean counters not to disparage them — honestly, I mean no disrespect — but to remind us and them of their purpose: to tell us how many beans are in the jar. When instead they tell us how many beans were in the jar last year; or how many beans would be in the jar if we had only put more in; or exactly how many beans are in a jar we don’t have and can’t get, they are not just failing to do their job, they are doing a great deal of harm to the people and companies and system they serve.

For example: Phase Two of the collapse of the fracking oil business is going to kick in with a vengeance a few days into April, not because economic conditions in that industry will suddenly get worse on the last day of March (they could hardly get worse, as it is) but because an accounting “rule” is going to kick in.

Continue reading “Oil and Holding Bean Counters Accountable”

Post by Tom Lewis

http://www.dailyimpact.net/2015/02/09/the-worlds-most-sustainable-country-what-cuba/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailyimpact%2FGIfx+%28The+Daily+Impact%29

After 50 years of pretending that Cuba is not there, the United States government this year admitted that, well, it is still there (even Fidel Castro is still there) and we may as well deal with it. This is seen in some quarters as progress. But it is widely assumed that American business will swoop in there and upgrade them from their 1967 DeSoto cars, re-mechanize their agriculture, build fast-food restaurants, and stamp out Communism. It’s what we do.

What we should do is recognize that Cuba confronted in 1991 precisely the kind of Apocalypse that looms before us today — the sudden loss of external inputs to the economy — things such as oil, heavy equipment, cars, and did we mention oil? — and handled it. We have more to learn from them than there is likely time to learn before we are in the soup, but we should do the best we can, because there is no better example in the world for meeting and besting such a crisis.

The World Wildlife Fund in its 2006 Sustainability Index Report cited Cuba as the only sustainable country in the world.

Continue reading “The Worlds Only Sustainable Country”

The following is by Tad Patzek at http://patzek-lifeitself.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/prancing-in-davos.html.

Tad’s profile is linked to the site. This is not some lightweight filling column space. He is/was head of ASPO {Association for the Study of Peak Oil}.

Tonight, I switched from al Jazeera International to BBC World Service. It took about twenty minutes before I quit with disgust and switched back.

Here’s what I saw. Somewhere at the World Economic Forum in Davos, there was a stage lined with eight armchairs ready for a live BBC program. Seated on the stage were Christine Lagarde, the current IMF director, a pretty African woman, likely representing the developing world, and several very important looking white men.

I started watching the BBC Davos report when Ms. Lagarde made her points: IMF is now anything but business as usual. Three IMF economists did a lot of analytic work and arrived at the following conclusions: (1) Extreme income inequality is bad for economic growth, (2) income redistribution is good for growth, and (3) jobs for the masses keep people engaged and are good for sustainable growth.

She told us that these points were met with great disbelief and scorn by her IMF colleagues, who told her: “This is not main stream. This is not what IMF does.” Well, now, Ms. Lagarde assured us, her thinking is main stream at IMF. OK, so far so good.

Of course, Ms. Lagarde needs to check her definitions: Any growth that lasts for a while, leads to an exponential increase of economy and its resource needs, and this cannot be sustainable in the long run. A well known property of exponential growth is that each next doubling creates more needs than the sum of all needs before the doubling. For example, 1+2=3 is less than 2×2= 4, 1+2+3=6 is less than 2×4=8.

Continue reading “Prancing in Davos”

From rt/uk Men make up 90% of stupid deaths biased on Darwin awards. I think it’s the testosterone which peaks in males at 19 years of age. This is why a 19 year old male with a two digit IQ makes the perfect government bullet stopper. Expect females to close the gap.

It has finally arrived: concrete evidence to support Male Idiot Theory (MIT), which states that men are especially prone to serious accidents and fatal mistakes because “they are idiots and do stupid things.”

A recent study into the 20-year history of the Darwin Awards, doled out for particularly stupid and unnecessary self-inflicted deaths, found that 90 percent of accolades were given to men.

The awards, first distributed in 1994, draw inspiration from Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, which states that species develop characteristics by self-selectively weeding out members of the community with undesirable characteristics.

In this case, the undesirable characteristics include extreme stupidity and the ability to remove one’s self from the gene pool by performing an unprecedented accidental snuffing.

There have been 332 Darwin’s awarded since the prize’s inception, but when analyzing the statistics, 14 were ruled out as they were jointly given to men and women – mostly couples trapped in adventurous and compromising positions.

Of the 318 remaining fatal blunders, 282 were awarded to men – a staggeringly high proportion. Just 36 were given to women.

Previous winners of the Darwin Award include a terrorist who opened his own letter bomb.

A thief, who attempted to steal cables from a lift shaft, cut the wires supporting the elevator beneath his feet. Although he plummeted to an untimely end, he earned a posthumous honor.

The extraordinarily high proportion of males killing themselves in banal ways directly supports Male Idiot Theory (MIT), a highly scientific theory which theorizes that men are more accident prone because they are idiots Dr.Dennis Lendrem of the University of Newcastle discussed the definitions of the proverbial male “idiot.”

“Idiotic risks are defined as senseless risks, where the apparent payoff is negligible or non-existent, and the outcome is often extremely negative and often final,” he said.

“According to ‘Male Idiot Theory’ (MIT) many of the differences in risk seeking behavior, emergency department admissions, and mortality may be explained by the observation that men are idiots and idiots do stupid things.

“There are anecdotal data supporting MIT, but to date there has been no systematic analysis of sex differences in idiotic risk taking behavior,” he added.

The British Medical Journal said it was “puzzling” that men felt the need to perform such hazardous feats for social status or “bragging rights.”

They made a special mention of the man who lost a testicle by attempting to use a belt-sander as an auto-erotic device. He narrowly missed out on a Darwin Award as he managed to save his crown jewels (or one of them at least), using a stapler.

Lendrem said intelligence levels and alcohol consumption could be to blame.

“Despite these limitations there can be little doubt Darwin Award winners seem to make little or no real assessment of the risk or attempt at risk management. They just do it anyway. In some cases, the intelligence of the award winner may be questioned,” adding that it would be “naïve” to rule out the effects of alcohol.

Lendrem made a special reference to the collective Darwin winners who played a version of Russian roulette, alternately drinking shots of alcohol and standing on unexploded land mines. One of the mines eventually exploded, killing all three men.

Sponsored Links

More From The Web

The following cut and paste article is from “RUSSIAN INSIDER” and is part of an article titled “Peak Oil: does the CIA know?” Based on my experience I concur and my son who is an O5 in the Dept. of Homeland Security says it is spot on.

“During my career in a NATO country’s military establishment I had interactions with the Central Intelligence Agency often and some of the other US agencies occasionally. The characteristics of the CIA, as I saw them, are the subject of this essay. I think they are applicable across most of the forest of US intelligence structures.

The CIA is a very large organization and the result, bureaucratically speaking, of all these bodies and money is that it is very fragmented. Time and time again our guys would be talking to their guys about some country. Their political section would give us their views of who was in, who was out, power struggles and so on. We would then ask a question about how the economy fitted into this. A pause, well you’ll have to talk to our economy guy, and from the back of the room, blinking in the unaccustomed light, their economy guy would mutter something and then return into his dark burrow. Clearly, the political guys were the stars and economic guys were not: almost an afterthought. But in most countries the economy is the most important driver of politics most of the time; in some countries, it is almost the whole story. How can you possibly separate the two? I will confess, by the way, that we sometimes provoked this response for our amusement.

The politics people were completely obsessed with personalities. I will never forget the leader of their delegation in one of our meetings proudly handing out a piece of paper with the people around the Boss divided into several groups, each with a neat name: his Tribe, Security organizations, the previous Boss’s relicts I think they were. Imagine what that had cost the American taxpayer, the hours of discussion as to whether the Minister of Whatever was more of a Tribe than a Relict. I asked the CIA guy what was the point? What had we learned? How did this help us understand or predict? Of course it was all rubbish, the truth was that the Boss had put together a team; it was what that team did that was important, not from where he’d plucked its members. In another case we were all invited to make predictions about the future of a country. The CIA’s entry was a point series – if this guy becomes Boss, then this; if that guy gets in, then that; if somebody else, then something else. As it turned out, the new Boss wasn’t even one of the people on their list. But note their assumption that everything depended on who the new Boss would be. This obsession with personalities seems to be a built-in characteristic of American thinking for some reason and you see it in the political leadership, the media and intelligence all the time. Milosevic is the problem, Saddam Hussein is the problem, Ahmadinejad, Qaddafi, Assad, bin Laden, Putin. If we can only get this guy out, all will be well. No it won’t, all the objective local conditions that carried him to the top will elevate somebody similar. It’s not a person, it’s a whole country. But the Americans never learn, they force the Bad Guy out and they get either total chaos or a new Bad Guy who turns out to be rather like the old Bad Guy.

A third characteristic was illustrated by a presentation from the Defense Intelligence Agency. The author proudly presented a chart of combat missions by a certain country’s air force. The air force was said to be decaying with poorly maintained aircraft and untrained pilots. And yet his data showed numerous sorties in mountains in bad weather and no crashes. The obvious deduction was that the air force was in much better shape than we thought it was. But the author was so impressed with the data itself that this escaped him. And an impressive collection effort it would have been too, one that few intelligence structures could have carried out: that little chart had cost a great deal of money and involved some impressive and expensive technology. But I suspect that they are so often impressed by the collection technology that they forget why they are collecting it.

I mentioned these characteristics to a neighbor who had also had a lot of dealings with US intelligence and security structures. She agreed with my three and added a fourth: you never meet the same people twice. Indeed, I don’t recall ever meeting the same person twice either (and at her level and the nature of what she was doing – common security issues – the constant changing of the team would have had a much greater consequence). I don’t know how many people work in the US intelligence and security megalopolis but it surely is in the hundreds of thousands if not a million or two. A lot of turnover, cross-postings, promotions and so on. So maybe it’s not surprising that the teams do change quite a bit from year to year. Which raises the question, of course, of how much time on the job the average analyst has.
Another fact, emphasized in the book on the Dulles brothers, is that, from the beginning, the CIA combined intelligence with operations. The British warned them against doing this because the operational requirements will come to shape the intelligence and you’ll start confirming what you want to believe. No wonder the CIA has been surprised so many times.

(Speaking of Allan Dulles, I hope the level of knowledge in the CIA is higher today than his. When asked why he was supporting the Pakistan Army he replied that we need the only real fighters in the area to be on our side and we couldn’t do it without the Gurkhas. But the Gurkhas aren’t Pakistani, no, but they are Muslims. Well, they’re not Muslims either; Dulles is reported to have then changed the subject.)

I passed this to a former colleague who has had much more experience with the CIA than I and he added yet another problem: It’s known in the military as SOPO – senior officer present’s opinion. He told me that in numerous private conversations CIA analysts had complained to him that their assessments were frequently sent back to them to be re-written to fit the conclusions the higher-ups had already come to. And that, of course, is fatal because it creates a closed loop in which you only hear what you already believe and worse, think it’s confirmed by the intelligence. I am always amused how much people are impressed by that phrase “confirmed by the intelligence”. If they only knew.

The purpose of intelligence is to minimize surprise and you can’t expect to do that if you compartmentalize things, obsess about personalities, get carried away by the collection mechanics, change your personnel all the time and confirm what you want to believe.

I’m not going to say, by the way, that my group got it all right: in this business 50% is a pretty good score and too many analyses fall back on the “maybe this, maybe that, time will tell” school of waffle. But we did try to look at the whole picture, regarded individuals as important but embedded in a context, didn’t have a lot of collection technology and therefore went more for what is now pompously called OSINT (open source intelligence) and didn’t do operations at all. And, thanks to one former boss who was still setting the style in my time, we were encouraged to stick our necks out. But we – and all other intelligence organizations – do suffer to some degree from SOPO.

Even without the bosses demanding the “correct” answer, getting it right is very difficult – imagine trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle when you don’t know how big it is, what the actual picture is and have a random selection of pieces some of which may be from another puzzle altogether. I used to amuse myself by asking old intelligence guys when in peacetime in the Twentieth Century had the intelligence guys got it right and convinced the politicians (not much point in the first if you can’t do the second). Personally, I can only think of Richard Sorge. Intelligence is much easier in wartime, by the way, because then you have a very good idea of what the picture is and how big the puzzle is.

Which, come to think of it, seems to be another defect of American intelligence – if you convinced that Russia is a permanent enemy, then everything it does will be interpreted either as an openly hostile act or hostile in some cunning, sneaky, back-handed, barely detectable way.

So, in my experience, the US intelligence structure has made a difficult job almost impossible with these self-imposed handicaps. ”http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/

“You don’t need a God to have a mass movement but you do need a devil” Eric Hoffer “The True Believer”

The following cut and paste article is from “RUSSIAN INSIDER” and is part of an article titled “Peak Oil: does the CIA know?” Based on my experience I concur and my son who is an O5 in the Dept. of Homeland Security says it is spot on.
During my career in a NATO country’s military establishment I had interactions with the Central Intelligence Agency often and some of the other US agencies occasionally. The characteristics of the CIA, as I saw them, are the subject of this essay. I think they are applicable across most of the forest of US intelligence structures.

The CIA is a very large organization and the result, bureaucratically speaking, of all these bodies and money is that it is very fragmented. Time and time again our guys would be talking to their guys about some country. Their political section would give us their views of who was in, who was out, power struggles and so on. We would then ask a question about how the economy fitted into this. A pause, well you’ll have to talk to our economy guy, and from the back of the room, blinking in the unaccustomed light, their economy guy would mutter something and then return into his dark burrow. Clearly, the political guys were the stars and economic guys were not: almost an afterthought. But in most countries the economy is the most important driver of politics most of the time; in some countries, it is almost the whole story. How can you possibly separate the two? I will confess, by the way, that we sometimes provoked this response for our amusement.

The politics people were completely obsessed with personalities. I will never forget the leader of their delegation in one of our meetings proudly handing out a piece of paper with the people around the Boss divided into several groups, each with a neat name: his Tribe, Security organizations, the previous Boss’s relicts I think they were. Imagine what that had cost the American taxpayer, the hours of discussion as to whether the Minister of Whatever was more of a Tribe than a Relict. I asked the CIA guy what was the point? What had we learned? How did this help us understand or predict? Of course it was all rubbish, the truth was that the Boss had put together a team; it was what that team did that was important, not from where he’d plucked its members. In another case we were all invited to make predictions about the future of a country. The CIA’s entry was a point series – if this guy becomes Boss, then this; if that guy gets in, then that; if somebody else, then something else. As it turned out, the new Boss wasn’t even one of the people on their list. But note their assumption that everything depended on who the new Boss would be. This obsession with personalities seems to be a built-in characteristic of American thinking for some reason and you see it in the political leadership, the media and intelligence all the time. Milosevic is the problem, Saddam Hussein is the problem, Ahmadinejad, Qaddafi, Assad, bin Laden, Putin. If we can only get this guy out, all will be well. No it won’t, all the objective local conditions that carried him to the top will elevate somebody similar. It’s not a person, it’s a whole country. But the Americans never learn, they force the Bad Guy out and they get either total chaos or a new Bad Guy who turns out to be rather like the old Bad Guy.

A third characteristic was illustrated by a presentation from the Defense Intelligence Agency. The author proudly presented a chart of combat missions by a certain country’s air force. The air force was said to be decaying with poorly maintained aircraft and untrained pilots. And yet his data showed numerous sorties in mountains in bad weather and no crashes. The obvious deduction was that the air force was in much better shape than we thought it was. But the author was so impressed with the data itself that this escaped him. And an impressive collection effort it would have been too, one that few intelligence structures could have carried out: that little chart had cost a great deal of money and involved some impressive and expensive technology. But I suspect that they are so often impressed by the collection technology that they forget why they are collecting it.

I mentioned these characteristics to a neighbor who had also had a lot of dealings with US intelligence and security structures. She agreed with my three and added a fourth: you never meet the same people twice. Indeed, I don’t recall ever meeting the same person twice either (and at her level and the nature of what she was doing – common security issues – the constant changing of the team would have had a much greater consequence). I don’t know how many people work in the US intelligence and security megalopolis but it surely is in the hundreds of thousands if not a million or two. A lot of turnover, cross-postings, promotions and so on. So maybe it’s not surprising that the teams do change quite a bit from year to year. Which raises the question, of course, of how much time on the job the average analyst has.
Another fact, emphasized in the book on the Dulles brothers, is that, from the beginning, the CIA combined intelligence with operations. The British warned them against doing this because the operational requirements will come to shape the intelligence and you’ll start confirming what you want to believe. No wonder the CIA has been surprised so many times.

(Speaking of Allan Dulles, I hope the level of knowledge in the CIA is higher today than his. When asked why he was supporting the Pakistan Army he replied that we need the only real fighters in the area to be on our side and we couldn’t do it without the Gurkhas. But the Gurkhas aren’t Pakistani, no, but they are Muslims. Well, they’re not Muslims either; Dulles is reported to have then changed the subject.)

I passed this to a former colleague who has had much more experience with the CIA than I and he added yet another problem: It’s known in the military as SOPO – senior officer present’s opinion. He told me that in numerous private conversations CIA analysts had complained to him that their assessments were frequently sent back to them to be re-written to fit the conclusions the higher-ups had already come to. And that, of course, is fatal because it creates a closed loop in which you only hear what you already believe and worse, think it’s confirmed by the intelligence. I am always amused how much people are impressed by that phrase “confirmed by the intelligence”. If they only knew.

The purpose of intelligence is to minimize surprise and you can’t expect to do that if you compartmentalize things, obsess about personalities, get carried away by the collection mechanics, change your personnel all the time and confirm what you want to believe.

I’m not going to say, by the way, that my group got it all right: in this business 50% is a pretty good score and too many analyses fall back on the “maybe this, maybe that, time will tell” school of waffle. But we did try to look at the whole picture, regarded individuals as important but embedded in a context, didn’t have a lot of collection technology and therefore went more for what is now pompously called OSINT (open source intelligence) and didn’t do operations at all. And, thanks to one former boss who was still setting the style in my time, we were encouraged to stick our necks out. But we – and all other intelligence organizations – do suffer to some degree from SOPO.

Even without the bosses demanding the “correct” answer, getting it right is very difficult – imagine trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle when you don’t know how big it is, what the actual picture is and have a random selection of pieces some of which may be from another puzzle altogether. I used to amuse myself by asking old intelligence guys when in peacetime in the Twentieth Century had the intelligence guys got it right and convinced the politicians (not much point in the first if you can’t do the second). Personally, I can only think of Richard Sorge. Intelligence is much easier in wartime, by the way, because then you have a very good idea of what the picture is and how big the puzzle is.

Which, come to think of it, seems to be another defect of American intelligence – if you convinced that Russia is a permanent enemy, then everything it does will be interpreted either as an openly hostile act or hostile in some cunning, sneaky, back-handed, barely detectable way.

So, in my experience, the US intelligence structure has made a difficult job almost impossible with these self-imposed handicaps.

http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/

By Max Keiser on the RT web site. I consider this prima fascia evidence that Hillary will be the Democrats candidate for President. Gigolo John Kerry is the only person who could make Hillary’s tenure as Secretary of State look competent.
http://rt.com/op-edge/155120-living-behind-cnn-curtain/

Good Bye, Lenin! is a 2003 German tragicomedy film. Directed by Wolfgang Becker captures the confusion inhabitants of East Germany (the GDR) had after the Berlin Wall came down and the West suddenly flooded in.

What the East Berliners didn’t appreciate, to comic effect, was how incredibly behind the times they had become. Consumer culture and technology had leaped dramatically during the preceding Cold War years in ways that were unimaginable.

I am reminded of this film whenever I hear Secretary of State John Kerry or presumptive Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speak. Their words appear to come from a time warp from a previous era before the US middle class fell behind Canada’s when measured in terms of standard of living; before America’s press freedom dropped to 46 on the Reporters Without Borders league table, and before the America’s prison population skyrocketed to over 2 million to swell the profits of private prison operators like Corrections Corp. of America.

What those living behind what I call the ‘CNN Curtain’ in America, a population that represents 5% of the world’s population miss, is that the other 95% has been busy these past 15 years (post China entering the World Trade Organization) inventing a post-America future. Many think that the past 15 years has been notable for an uptick in globalization but I would posit that the modern growth of financialization is more important; and the commensurate gapping of wealth and income that we’ve seen – resulting in the most extreme concentration of wealth amongst the new robber barons of Wall St. and the City of London in history.

In many ways, since China joined the WTO, we’ve witnessed a de-globalization in terms of a breakaway from the dominant ideology of the 20th century that drove American soft power and global hegemony. Instead of a unipolar world, we’ve seen a fracturing and a move away from the ‘freedom and democracy’ meme emanating from Washington D.C. and the rise of the so-called BRIC nations of the East and ‘Global South’ who see the world quite differently and have the resources and capital to shape their own destinies.

This is why, at the moment, we are witnessing a gross caricature of America’s previous global ideological grip – in the persons of Kerry and Clinton – who appear remarkably out to touch with the times; their news conferences attempting to justify America’s latest incursion into Ukraine, become instant verification for the world’s ‘other 95%’ that the US is clueless.

Living behind the CNN curtain

Just like the people living in East Germany pre-Berlin wall coming down, gradually lost touch with the outside world to the point of a comical disconnect, as portrayed in “Good Bye, Lenin,” so too Americans and their leaders appear comically out of the loop. The reason being: they watch CNN and actually believe CNN’s narrative about Russian advances into Ukraine, the sanctity of Wall St., and the wholesomeness of American culture as a ‘shining city on a hill’ as Ronald Reagan called it.

Living behind the CNN curtain means that 330 million Americans are gradually seceding from the rest of the world – that is now happily moving on – creating their own financial system, their own culture, their own destiny.

There’s John Kerry again talking as if America just landed on the moon and the USD is the unimpeachable stalwart and world reserve currency backed by a growing economy with little debt and lots of gold. HAHAHAHAHA! Sometimes the effect is even more detached. Sometimes it’s as if John Kerry’s words have been broadcast from a planet 20 or 30 light years away and are now just reaching us.

Will the US ever, ‘tear down that CNN wall’ as Reagan may have put it, and rejoin the world community?

I would like to see America once again be a thought leader and lead by example. It would be great if the U.S. didn’t resolve all their disputes with drones and autocratic fiat dictates that authorize summary executions of political enemies in the U.S. and abroad; including US citizens.

It would be nice to not feel embarrassed every time a John McCain, John Kerry or Hillary Clinton speaks in public. I hope that day comes again. IN the meantime, watch RT and see what the other 95% are up to.

Article 8 of the Geneva Convention to which the US is a signatory defines War Crimes. Reading Article 8 below can anyone find any the US may have inadvertently omitted? Not only do the winners get to write History they get determine who are War Criminals.

Article 8

War crimes

1. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as a part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes.

2. For the purpose of this Statute, “war crimes” means:

(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

(i) Wilful killing;

(ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;

(iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health;

(iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;

(v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power;

(vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial;

(vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement;

(viii) Taking of hostages.

(b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:

(i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities;

(ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives;

(iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict;

(iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated;

(v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives;

(vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion;

(vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury;

(viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory;

(ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives;

(x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons;

(xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army;

(xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given;

(xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy’s property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;

(xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party;

(xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent’s service before the commencement of the war;

(xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;

(xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons;

(xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;

(xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions;

(xx) Employing weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict, provided that such weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare are the subject of a comprehensive prohibition and are included in an annex to this Statute, by an amendment in accordance with the relevant provisions set forth in articles 121 and 123;

(xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;

(xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions;

(xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations;

(xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law;

(xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions;

(xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities.

(c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause:

(i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;

(iii) Taking of hostages;

(iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable.

(d) Paragraph 2 (c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature.

(e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:

(i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities;

(ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law;

(iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the law of armed conflict;

(iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives;

(v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;

(vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions;

(vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities;

(viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand;

(ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary;

(x) Declaring that no quarter will be given;

(xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons;

(xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict;

(f) Paragraph 2 (e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups.

3. Nothing in paragraphs 2 (c) and (d) shall affect the responsibility of a Government to maintain or re-establish lhttp://humanrights.law.monash.edu.au/instree/Rome_Statute_ICC/Rome_ICC_part2.htmlaw and order in the State or to defend the unity and territorial integrity of the State, by all legitimate means.

The rest is here:
http://humanrights.law.monash.edu.au/instree/Rome_Statute_ICC/Rome_ICC_part2.html

This is as good a synopsis of our trip down the drain I have found. I have corresponded with Leon over the years since we are of like minds.

Individual Rights and Freedoms v. The Common Good

By S. Leon Felkins
October 10, 2004

We would hope that if government must promote anything, it would be the common good[1]. Most of us are not too happy with the government specifically giving help to private individuals, although it is obvious that this occurs routinely.

The common good is a close cousin to the Fascist idea of “total devotion to the state” as promoted by such regimes as the Nazis and the Communists. Nevertheless, while supporters of “democracies” often denigrate such concepts and are quick to blather about the freedom of the individual, as our present rulers do when promoting the war and the PATRIOT Act, most visible actions by the government are nominally for the “common good”.

Unfortunately, many forcefully imposed actions for the common good have done great harm to our republic. I will list a few:
•Income Tax
The one action by our government obstensibly for the common good that has been the most disastrous over all, is probably the imposition of the Income Tax in 1913 by means of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. However, as destructive as that amendment was, the major damage to the Republic came by the 1943 legislation that implemented “withholding”.

“Withholding” of income tax throughout the year is a diabolical scheme that allows the apathetic public to be heavily fleeced without generating any complaint. If the citizens still had to annually pay their taxes in one lump sum out of their savings, there would not be a massive federal government; there would not be a military budget nearly as big as all the rest of the world combined; there would not be a terribly wasteful and inhumane “Drug War” that destroys the lives of so many young people every day; and there would not be the pervasive Orwellian, “Big Brother is Watching You”, invasion of privacy.

•Compulsory, Government Funded and Controlled, Education.
How is it possible that the government’s fleecing of over 50% of our earnings[2], necessary to support a huge, self-serving, government — which wastes billions of dollars every year, oppresses its own people, harasses nearly every other country in the world, creates so many laws that no one can go through a day without breaking several, and incarcerates more of its people that any other country in the world — is mindlessly but enthusiastically supported by over half of its citizens?

Government controlled education! Particularly, centralized control. When schools were managed and funded locally, there was a fair chance that most students would get a realistic, life-enhancing, and somewhat honest education. However, the trend has been to centralize control; first to the state level, and then to the federal level. Which is where we are today.

History demonstrates that if government can control education, it will create mindless serfs. By means of laws, regulations and grants (including the supplying of teaching materials[3]), the Federal Government dictates what and how our children will be taught. Since the populace has already been brainwashed to accept this tyranny, there is hardly a whimper of complaint.

Harry Browne opines in “Does the Constitution Contain a Right to Privacy?”, that “Perhaps the greatest mistake made in American history was in allowing government to educate our children.”

•Government Takings
The original draft of the Declaration of Independence, as written by Thomas Jefferson, listed “forfeiture and confiscation of our property” as one of the reasons that justified the American Revolution. Yet today, billions of dollars of property are taken annually by state and federal governments without due process. By means of a series of statutes put on the law books, starting with the RICO act and the “Comprehensive Drug Abuse prevention and Control Act”[4], both passed in 1970, our governments can seize properties worth millions, including homes and life savings, without making an arrest or filing any charges. It is up to the victims to take action to get it back by proving they did not commit a crime — in spite of our Constitutional promise that we are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

By two other means the public is shown that it really has no right to private property[5]: eminent domain takings and the destruction of land value by means of such laws as the “Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969.” While spouting the justification as the “public good”, our various governments forcibly take property from one individual and give to another for such things as “increasing the tax revenue,” and destroys hundreds of jobs and local industry by such actions as declaring that a forest must be preserved to protect the “Spotted Owl.”

•Other Horrors created by the “Drug War”
In addition to the damage done to the right of private property, the efforts of our government to protect the citizens from the evils of unapproved drug use managed to create the following disasters:

◦Incarceration of millions of young people who have done no harm to anyone but, possibly, themselves.
◦Destruction of respect for the police and other “authorities”
◦Allowing the military to get involved in policing of citizens — in spite of the provisions of the “Posse Commitatus” act of 1878.
◦Establishment of the much abused principle that there were “exigent” situations that create exceptions to the “Bill of Rights”.
◦Providing a fertile environment for political and government corruption. For example, secret paid informants. Yes, in spite of the Constitutional guarantee that the accused has the right to face their accusers, paid, secret, informants are used routinely in drug cases to get convictions.

•The 10th Amendment is now Non-functional
In spite of the promise of the 10th Amendment[6], the Federal government now rides roughshod over all, citizens and states alike. There is no aspect of our life that is immune to Federal control and interference. How can this be? Trouble started with the Supreme Court decision, McCulloch v Maryland (1819). That precedent established the superiority of the federal government. It was downhill from there. Also see “Gibbons v Ogden (1821)” where the supremacy of Federal powers over states in matters of commerce was established.

•Federal interference in the free market
Even the government’s SBA admits that the cost of regulations is about 1 trillion dollars per year; others say that it is at least 1.5 trillion dollars per year — maybe twice that (see the “Cost of Government Day® Report, Calendar Year 2004”.)

On this one, the “camel got its nose in the tent” way back in 1877 in the Supreme Court case of “Munn v. Illinois” case where it was decided that “that the general welfare requires that business interests be reined in by governmental authority” and that businesses “must submit to be controlled by the public for the common good…”

•The Deterioration of the Right to Privacy
Sadly, the “Right to Privacy” is not explicitly delineated in the Constitution, but is implied by Amendments 9 and 10, according to Harry Browne, “Does the Constitution Contain a Right to Privacy?”, and 4 and 5 by others. Nevertheless we have enjoyed this right for the first 200 years of our existence as a nation. But, out of the needs of protecting the public from Terrorists, Marijuana smoke, and sex toys, our government has found it necessary to severely cripple this right.

The 342 page “PATRIOT act”, passed by Congress in just a few days after the 9/11/01 terrorist attack and without any one of them reading it, has significantly reduced privacy and protection against government abuse. There is not room here to discuss the extraordinary reduction in our freedom that this and related acts have imposed. The best analysis I have found is on the web is the comprehensive article, “EFF and EPIC Analysis Of The USA PATRIOT Act”.

This brief outline has attempted to show the dangers of using the common good as a basis for laws, decrees, and court decisions. While it is acknowledged that the common good is the primary purpose of most laws and government actions, it should never the soul basis for such laws and actions.

For if that were allowed, then we could have situations in which some humans would be sacrificed for the common good. As an example, we might have a leader or brilliant scientist that is dying of liver disease. A case could be made that we could sacrifice some “worthless” person or persons in order to obtain a liver transplant for the “greater common good” of saving this great person’s life.

Another example would be that a situation might come to be that it would be in the US’s “national interest” to invade another country and destroy it because it posed a threat to our people. Hmm, well, on second thought, maybe not.

Mr. Felkins is a retired former military officer, college professor, and computer systems engineer. He maintains a web page on Political Philosophy, “A Rational Life”, and another on the history of politics, “The Political Almanac”. Email is welcome.

Notes:

1. The “Common Good” is also known as or is closely related to “Public Good”, “General Welfare”, “National Interest”, “Good of the Country”, “General Welfare”, etc.
2. Total tax burden in the US depends on where you live and your income, of course, but on average, according to the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI) in their report, “Hidden Taxes: How much do you really pay?” it is about 56 percent.
3. See “Subverting the Constitution in high school” by Alan Caruba at http://www.eco.freedom.org/el/20040902/caruba.shtml .
4. The RICO act and subsequent acts that implemented the seizing of private property through forfeiture is discussed in the comprehensive article “Policing for Profit: The Drug War’s Hidden Economic Agenda” by Eric Blumenson and Eva S. Nilsen.
5. “The sacred rights of property are to be guarded at every point. I call them sacred, because, if they are unprotected, all other rights become worthless or visionary.” — Judge Joseph Story, 1852
6. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

I excerpted parts of a very long article from Salon with the link at the bottom for anyone who wants to wade through the whole thing. The last paragraph talks about a study of the situation which has been delayed by Agribusiness for thirty six years. One of Parkinson’s Laws, “The Law of Delay” is “Delay is the Deadliest Form of Denial” and is SOP for lobbyists and government. I am aware Salon is ultra Liberal publication but a stopped clock is right twice a day.

This article applies to livestock but also applies to vegetation. Twenty acres of the land I rent from the County and local School District is tillable which I sublet to a neighbor who uses a no till crop rotation of corn and soy beans. I am on a South sloping hillside so there are different fields with some in corn and some in soy beans. One particular weed developed a resistance to Roundup so he is using another herbicide. Salon article excerpts start below.

There is a near consensus among public health experts that the bulk antibiotics produced by AHI’s member companies are accelerating the approach of a post-antibiotics nightmare scenario, in which superbugs routinely emerge from our farms and wreak havoc on a human population living among the ruins of modern medicine. The bloc of skeptics who view AHI’s mission with mounting anxiety includes Pet Night party poopers like the World Health Organization and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Not long ago these authorities joined the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics in pressing their concerns on Congress in the form of a letter. “The evidence is so strong of a link between misuse of antibiotics in food animals and human antibiotic resistance,” it stated, “that FDA and Congress should be acting much more boldly and urgently to protect these vital drugs for human illness. Overuse and misuse of important antibiotics in food animals must end.”________________________________________

Even before getting to the relationship between animal antibiotics and human health, the very need for bulk drugs in factory farms points to the inherent unhealthiness of penning industrial numbers of pigs, cows and chickens in filthy, high-density and stressful conditions. “If your production system makes animals sick in a predictable manner, then that system is broken,” says Lance Price, an epidemiologist at George Washington University who studies the spread of forborne bacteria. Price is at the forefront of researchers whose work is illuminating how Big Ag’s answer to its own brokenness — sub-therapeutic levels of antibiotics mixed in with daily feed — is fueling the spread of treatment-resistant bacteria through meat and produce tainted by bug-infused feces and fertilizer. Superbugs can also leave farms through the soil, air and water, threatening everybody, irrespective of their diet.In recent years, a series of pathogenic outbreaks has generated loudening public chatter about agricultural antibiotics. The problem boils down to simple evolution: we are assisting in the mutation of bacterial defenses that make them resistant to our antibiotics.”

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/big_ags_big_lie_factory_farms_your_health_and_the_new_politics_of_antibiotics/