Fists Of Fury
Several weeks ago, before the London bombings, I remember walking into my local 711 store. As I was leaving I was very surprised to see that the two guys at the register were openly talking to each other about the insanity of the Iraqi war and how Bush is a megalomanic rivaling that of that vain-glorious greek Alexander of Macedon. Now THAT surprised me since this is the first time I ever heard anyone talk against Bush, ESPECIALLY in the workplace. At least, it was a first for me.
It did surprise me. After all, we're not supposed to talk about religion and/or politics in the work place. That's what many people say. That's the impression I always got.
Interesting how we never talk about religion and politics in the workplace. It is indeed verboten.
I wonder why?
Maybe its because religion and politics are really the same thing for us Americans?
Think about that.
But don't think about it too much if you scare easily.
It seems to me that the bombings in London were designed by the Powers That Be to make those necessary adjustments to squelch the kind of talk that those two workers were having in that 711 because there might be more people breaking away from the psychotic hypnotic spell that all of America seems to be under at the present time. Reality might be changing within the mass mind. And it might be due to those brave few who risk themselves to inform others of the Truth.
Kahlil Gibran said:
"The human heart cries out for help; the human soul implores us for deliverance; but we do not heed their cries, for we neither hear nor understand. But the man who hears and understands we call mad, and flee from him."
Maybe more people are now starting to hear the truth and their consciousness is shifting?
Maybe objective news reporting sites such as The Signs Of The Times, who have all the necessary checks and balances to keep their outlook objective, are contributing
to this positive shift within the mass consciousness and this recent news article concerning a grieving mothers loss and her righteous FISTS OF FURY is but an example?
Maybe a trend?
But wait! For every positive shift there is a negative counter shift.
As consciousness of the truth grows, the fear of that same truth will grow as well, both within and without. The government spreads fear so the people will lose their consciousness. Then it's easier for the people to reject the truth that their greater consciousness reveals to them.
Energy must go somewhere. If consciousness decreases then that energy must go somewhere. Right? Where does it go? It ain't magic. Just science. That energy of consciousness will have to go somewhere. Well, that energy of consciousness will just feed our unconscious fears when our fear makes us more unconscious. Makes it worse. We lose our consciousness from fear and the consciousness now just feeds the fear.
We now become even MORE unconscious, more fearful, more paranoid. This is what the Powers That Be are counting on. They are trying to use our own consciousness to work against us. They create a more and terrible magician, this evil "Al-Qaeda," to work our fears against our greater consciousness. Then our fears grow even more.
Pretty smart I'd say.
Make sense?
Looks like the recent bombings are trying to increase our collective fears and "herd us up" against that unseen bogeymen that they call Al-Qaeda.
As Red Elk said, "Girdle up yur loins."
It ain't getting much better out there.
Now the neo-cons on the radio are talking about even tighter security
within the US infrastructure. It's just unbelievable to me. The following article from the SIGNS OF THE TIMES makes this quite clear on where things are headed, in the US.
PM reveals foreign extremist plan
Friday, 5 August 2005
Insane at the Helm
Tony Blair is outlining plans to extend powers to deport or exclude foreigners who encourage terrorism.
The UK can already exclude or deport those who pose a threat to security.
On Thursday al-Qaeda's number two threatened new attacks on London and blamed the prime minister for the 7 July bombings, which killed 56.
Ayman al-Zawahri also threatened the US were broadcast on an Arabic news channel. President George Bush said his policy remained the same.
'Indirect incitement'
Mr Blair's news conference on Friday will be his final media grilling before he departs for his summer holiday.
It will provide a chance for an update on the latest terror situation and other issues.
London has been nicknamed "Londonistan" - centre for militant Islam - by some critics who believe the UK has been too liberal towards radical clerics.
Mr Blair is expected to reveal the precise details of the planned new powers.
Home Secretary Charles Clarke has already said he wants to extend his existing powers to cover those who "seek to provoke others to terrorist acts".
Mr Clarke said he wanted to be able to exclude an individual from the UK if their presence is deemed "not conducive to the public interest".
There would be consultation before the final list of "unacceptable behaviours" was decided upon, he said.
Anyone wanting to enter the UK would then be checked against this list - and if they are on it they may be refused permission to enter the country.
'Mood shift'
Mr Clarke also said he planned a new offence of "indirect incitement to terrorism" to add to the current offence of direct incitement.
Metropolitan Police chief Sir Ian Blair argued it would have been better to bring in the new measures at an earlier date but said he was glad action was being taken now.
"One of the difficulties has been this idea about how can we deport people to places where they may suffer oppression," he told GMTV.
"Well, I think the public mood is shifting. I'm sorry, but this is England, Britain, and we don't want this fomenting of terrorism to go on." [...]
Comment from the Signs Team on above article:
According to Police Chief Blair, the effect of the London bombings has been to make the British people immune to human rights abuses, specifically the deportation of potentially innocent people to countries where they will probably be tortured. In a broader sense, it signifies the inoculation of the British public to the continued crimes of their leaders. Mission accomplished?
On a separate point: we see here that Al-Zawahri has made it explicitly clear that the the London bombings were carried out in retaliation for the British participation in the aggressive war against the Iraqi people, yet Tony Blair has refuted this allegation, saying that the goal of the terrorists is terrorism for its own sake and the destruction of "freedom and civilisation". So who are we to believe? Is it possible that Blair does indeed know the real reasons for the London bombings and who the real perpetrators are?
If we are to believe Blair, where is the sense in the "terrorists" making a false claim about the reasons for their attacks? Can anyone imagine the IRA claiming that their 30 year war was for anything other than the withdrawal of British interference in Northern Ireland? Any organised military group that ever waged a campaign against the forces of a nation state have always had a goal that was understandable and potentially achievable, at least to a significant portion of the public. Yet we are now being asked to believe that the "Islamic terrorists" have no real identifiable or realistically achievable goal, other than to wipe out freedom and civilisation. Exactly who do they expect to support them in such a fantastical endeavor? What portion of humanity would espouse the eradication of basic freedom and civilisation that every human being benefits from? [...]
Then there's this article below that speaks of how things will be changing in America to mirror the changes that will be occurring in Blair's government.
London Bombings Bring Call For Tighter Security On NYC Subways
by john toscano
In the wake of the London subway bombings last week, the MTA came under sharp attack for not spending funding it already has to make the subways safe from terrorist bombings.
There also were calls on Washington to provide more anti-terror funding to tighten security for surface transit facilities.
In response to the criticism lobbed at the MTA for not putting security programs in place, the authority repeated its past responses: that rushing solutions or just throwing money at the problem would not be prudent.
At a press briefing at MTA headquarters in Manhattan on Monday, spokesman Brian Dolan stated: “You can’t go into a Kmart or Home Depot and pull these [security] systems off the shelf.”
Another MTA security official, Ashok Patel, said, “We need to put basic infrastructure in place in order to deploy these kinds of projects.”
Previously, when charges were leveled at the transit agency for failing to implement a major security system since 9/11, City Councilmember John Liu, chairman of the Transportation Committee, who has been prodding the MTA to try to get some action, declared: “The MTA can’t take forever to get its act together.”
On Monday, Mayor Michael Bloomberg stated that the London bombings were a stark warning to the giant transit agency to put subway security in place by spending the $591 million in federal anti-terrorism funding it had budgeted for that purpose.
“I don’t know how far along some of their plans are, but clearly they’re not far enough along,” said the annoyed mayor. But Bloomberg assured reporters he felt safe in the subways, which he rides regularly.
Responding, MTA officials said they planned to spend about $400 million of those funds by the end of the year.
Meanwhile, New York's United States Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized the Homeland Security Department for concentrating its spending mostly on aviation security and virtually ignoring transit system security, despite the Madrid train bombings in March of 2004.
Clinton stated, “We have invested since 9/11 only $300 million in public transportation security, compared to over $18 billion for aviation security. We need an estimated $7 billion to do what is necessary for our rail and transit security.”
Schumer proposed spending $50 million for the development of bomb detectors to be placed in mass transit facilities. The devices are already in use at John F. Kennedy International Airport and are expected to be installed shortly at LaGuardia Airport.
At a press tour of Grand Central Station staged by the MTA on Monday, officials showcased several types of devices that detect traces of explosives and also chemical detectors that can spot contaminants and activate surveillance cameras.
Officials said the agency expects to award about $200 million in contracts by later this year for an electronic security system. [...]
So you see, the worm slowly turns. The more aware we become the more the Powers That Be will try to correct it by making us unaware through fear and self pity. For every weight there is a counterweight, for every positive there is a negative, for every twist there is a turn and for every shift there is a counter-shift.
Hmm, maybe that explains why I've recently been listening so much to an old Moody Blues tape while driving my car (I gotta fix that oil leak). I couldn't explain it. Now I think I know why. Maybe.
It's a question of a balance...
It did surprise me. After all, we're not supposed to talk about religion and/or politics in the work place. That's what many people say. That's the impression I always got.
Interesting how we never talk about religion and politics in the workplace. It is indeed verboten.
I wonder why?
Maybe its because religion and politics are really the same thing for us Americans?
Think about that.
But don't think about it too much if you scare easily.
It seems to me that the bombings in London were designed by the Powers That Be to make those necessary adjustments to squelch the kind of talk that those two workers were having in that 711 because there might be more people breaking away from the psychotic hypnotic spell that all of America seems to be under at the present time. Reality might be changing within the mass mind. And it might be due to those brave few who risk themselves to inform others of the Truth.
Kahlil Gibran said:
"The human heart cries out for help; the human soul implores us for deliverance; but we do not heed their cries, for we neither hear nor understand. But the man who hears and understands we call mad, and flee from him."
Maybe more people are now starting to hear the truth and their consciousness is shifting?
Maybe objective news reporting sites such as The Signs Of The Times, who have all the necessary checks and balances to keep their outlook objective, are contributing
to this positive shift within the mass consciousness and this recent news article concerning a grieving mothers loss and her righteous FISTS OF FURY is but an example?
Maybe a trend?
But wait! For every positive shift there is a negative counter shift.
As consciousness of the truth grows, the fear of that same truth will grow as well, both within and without. The government spreads fear so the people will lose their consciousness. Then it's easier for the people to reject the truth that their greater consciousness reveals to them.
Energy must go somewhere. If consciousness decreases then that energy must go somewhere. Right? Where does it go? It ain't magic. Just science. That energy of consciousness will have to go somewhere. Well, that energy of consciousness will just feed our unconscious fears when our fear makes us more unconscious. Makes it worse. We lose our consciousness from fear and the consciousness now just feeds the fear.
We now become even MORE unconscious, more fearful, more paranoid. This is what the Powers That Be are counting on. They are trying to use our own consciousness to work against us. They create a more and terrible magician, this evil "Al-Qaeda," to work our fears against our greater consciousness. Then our fears grow even more.
Pretty smart I'd say.
Make sense?
Looks like the recent bombings are trying to increase our collective fears and "herd us up" against that unseen bogeymen that they call Al-Qaeda.
As Red Elk said, "Girdle up yur loins."
It ain't getting much better out there.
Now the neo-cons on the radio are talking about even tighter security
within the US infrastructure. It's just unbelievable to me. The following article from the SIGNS OF THE TIMES makes this quite clear on where things are headed, in the US.
PM reveals foreign extremist plan
Friday, 5 August 2005
Insane at the Helm
Tony Blair is outlining plans to extend powers to deport or exclude foreigners who encourage terrorism.
The UK can already exclude or deport those who pose a threat to security.
On Thursday al-Qaeda's number two threatened new attacks on London and blamed the prime minister for the 7 July bombings, which killed 56.
Ayman al-Zawahri also threatened the US were broadcast on an Arabic news channel. President George Bush said his policy remained the same.
'Indirect incitement'
Mr Blair's news conference on Friday will be his final media grilling before he departs for his summer holiday.
It will provide a chance for an update on the latest terror situation and other issues.
London has been nicknamed "Londonistan" - centre for militant Islam - by some critics who believe the UK has been too liberal towards radical clerics.
Mr Blair is expected to reveal the precise details of the planned new powers.
Home Secretary Charles Clarke has already said he wants to extend his existing powers to cover those who "seek to provoke others to terrorist acts".
Mr Clarke said he wanted to be able to exclude an individual from the UK if their presence is deemed "not conducive to the public interest".
There would be consultation before the final list of "unacceptable behaviours" was decided upon, he said.
Anyone wanting to enter the UK would then be checked against this list - and if they are on it they may be refused permission to enter the country.
'Mood shift'
Mr Clarke also said he planned a new offence of "indirect incitement to terrorism" to add to the current offence of direct incitement.
Metropolitan Police chief Sir Ian Blair argued it would have been better to bring in the new measures at an earlier date but said he was glad action was being taken now.
"One of the difficulties has been this idea about how can we deport people to places where they may suffer oppression," he told GMTV.
"Well, I think the public mood is shifting. I'm sorry, but this is England, Britain, and we don't want this fomenting of terrorism to go on." [...]
Comment from the Signs Team on above article:
According to Police Chief Blair, the effect of the London bombings has been to make the British people immune to human rights abuses, specifically the deportation of potentially innocent people to countries where they will probably be tortured. In a broader sense, it signifies the inoculation of the British public to the continued crimes of their leaders. Mission accomplished?
On a separate point: we see here that Al-Zawahri has made it explicitly clear that the the London bombings were carried out in retaliation for the British participation in the aggressive war against the Iraqi people, yet Tony Blair has refuted this allegation, saying that the goal of the terrorists is terrorism for its own sake and the destruction of "freedom and civilisation". So who are we to believe? Is it possible that Blair does indeed know the real reasons for the London bombings and who the real perpetrators are?
If we are to believe Blair, where is the sense in the "terrorists" making a false claim about the reasons for their attacks? Can anyone imagine the IRA claiming that their 30 year war was for anything other than the withdrawal of British interference in Northern Ireland? Any organised military group that ever waged a campaign against the forces of a nation state have always had a goal that was understandable and potentially achievable, at least to a significant portion of the public. Yet we are now being asked to believe that the "Islamic terrorists" have no real identifiable or realistically achievable goal, other than to wipe out freedom and civilisation. Exactly who do they expect to support them in such a fantastical endeavor? What portion of humanity would espouse the eradication of basic freedom and civilisation that every human being benefits from? [...]
Then there's this article below that speaks of how things will be changing in America to mirror the changes that will be occurring in Blair's government.
London Bombings Bring Call For Tighter Security On NYC Subways
by john toscano
In the wake of the London subway bombings last week, the MTA came under sharp attack for not spending funding it already has to make the subways safe from terrorist bombings.
There also were calls on Washington to provide more anti-terror funding to tighten security for surface transit facilities.
In response to the criticism lobbed at the MTA for not putting security programs in place, the authority repeated its past responses: that rushing solutions or just throwing money at the problem would not be prudent.
At a press briefing at MTA headquarters in Manhattan on Monday, spokesman Brian Dolan stated: “You can’t go into a Kmart or Home Depot and pull these [security] systems off the shelf.”
Another MTA security official, Ashok Patel, said, “We need to put basic infrastructure in place in order to deploy these kinds of projects.”
Previously, when charges were leveled at the transit agency for failing to implement a major security system since 9/11, City Councilmember John Liu, chairman of the Transportation Committee, who has been prodding the MTA to try to get some action, declared: “The MTA can’t take forever to get its act together.”
On Monday, Mayor Michael Bloomberg stated that the London bombings were a stark warning to the giant transit agency to put subway security in place by spending the $591 million in federal anti-terrorism funding it had budgeted for that purpose.
“I don’t know how far along some of their plans are, but clearly they’re not far enough along,” said the annoyed mayor. But Bloomberg assured reporters he felt safe in the subways, which he rides regularly.
Responding, MTA officials said they planned to spend about $400 million of those funds by the end of the year.
Meanwhile, New York's United States Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized the Homeland Security Department for concentrating its spending mostly on aviation security and virtually ignoring transit system security, despite the Madrid train bombings in March of 2004.
Clinton stated, “We have invested since 9/11 only $300 million in public transportation security, compared to over $18 billion for aviation security. We need an estimated $7 billion to do what is necessary for our rail and transit security.”
Schumer proposed spending $50 million for the development of bomb detectors to be placed in mass transit facilities. The devices are already in use at John F. Kennedy International Airport and are expected to be installed shortly at LaGuardia Airport.
At a press tour of Grand Central Station staged by the MTA on Monday, officials showcased several types of devices that detect traces of explosives and also chemical detectors that can spot contaminants and activate surveillance cameras.
Officials said the agency expects to award about $200 million in contracts by later this year for an electronic security system. [...]
So you see, the worm slowly turns. The more aware we become the more the Powers That Be will try to correct it by making us unaware through fear and self pity. For every weight there is a counterweight, for every positive there is a negative, for every twist there is a turn and for every shift there is a counter-shift.
Hmm, maybe that explains why I've recently been listening so much to an old Moody Blues tape while driving my car (I gotta fix that oil leak). I couldn't explain it. Now I think I know why. Maybe.
It's a question of a balance...
posted by Capricious Mad Hatter @ 10:17 AM
1 comments
