Erstwhile Urban Wanderer

June 28, 2009 – Is the “right” of human reproduction beyond question?

By Dave Eriqat

This post may rile some people, perhaps many people, who thoughtlessly regard human reproduction as an innate right, although antagonism is not my intent. My goal is to provoke thought and encourage human beings to use their intellect to evolve for the better. Although I honestly prefer the company of animals, I genuinely like people, even children in small doses :-), and harbor no animosity toward those who reproduce, even those who reproduce to excess. I simply wish people would be a little more thoughtful when reproducing, particularly when it comes to planning how they’re going to support their progeny. Furthermore, I’m not using the word selfish contemptuously, but as a precise clinical term.

Selfish Genes

People often speculate on the meaning or purpose of life. I’ve long believed the meaning and purpose of life is exceedingly simple: to propagate our genes. That’s it. Anyone believing that humans exist for some lofty, noble purpose is mistaken. We are gene factories, nothing more, as is every other organism on the planet. Every human being, every fish, every bird, every insect, every plant, every bacterium is competing against every other organism and species in a race with no finish line to propagate its genes.

There can be no more selfish an act than propagating one’s genes, as genes are the most fundamental essence of the physical self, which is the primary reason why I call reproduction a selfish act. We are programmed by our genes to reproduce, programmed, for example, to respond viscerally to the sight of an attractive potential sexual partner. It really is not our fault that we are driven to reproduce, but unlike the lowly insects which are robotic prisoners of their genetic programming, we possess the intellect with which to override ours.

Ancient History

Mother nature, usually demonstrating uncanny wisdom, seems to have flubbed the creation of human beings. She blessed human beings with a powerful urge to reproduce – as powerful as that in any other creature – and at the same time she gave human beings an intellect that enabled the species to partially escape the constraints of nature imposed on all other species, yet not quite enough of an intellect to recognize the folly of such behavior and refrain from it. The result of this mishap of design is that human beings have been able to reproduce more or less without bound, resource limitations notwithstanding, all the while failing to concede the obvious, that such growth is impossible in the long run on a finite world.

There may have been a time, until as recently as perhaps a few hundred years ago, when unfettered human reproduction was tolerable, perhaps even desirable because all those bodies and minds working in concert enabled humans to make enormous technological advances. When human technology was immature and human beings were still largely subject to the whims and ravages of nature, maybe it made sense to procreate liberally. Yet this ancient demand to procreate seems to have lingered in our collective consciousness, and to this day all human cultures regard human reproduction as an innate right, sacred and beyond challenge. Since the dawn of recorded human history, human reproduction and population growth has been relentless, unquestioned, as if on auto-pilot, but the fact that something has always been a certain way is not a sound argument for perpetuating it.

Selfish Rationales

Besides the inherently selfish nature of reproduction embodied in our genes, every human rationale for having children is also fundamentally selfish.

In ancient times and in poor countries to this day, people had and have excesses of children to help secure resources for themselves, a purely selfish motivation. People have long had children to take care of them in their old age, an obviously selfish rationale. People selfishly have children to stave off loneliness. People have children to carry on the family line and name, in other words, for gene propagation, even though people don’t think of it in such unflattering clinical terms. People have children because they believe they possess good characters or qualities that they can impart to their children, selfishly seeking to propagate their psychological traits just like their genetic traits. Related to the previous two rationales is the rationale that one’s “inferiors” are reproducing, so one must also reproduce to keep up, which reflects both the competitive programming built into our genes and the selfish conviction that one has qualities worth perpetuating. Finally, a great many children are the result of “accidents,” but are such “accidents” not more accurately characterized as selfish indifference to the potential consequences of sexual gratification?

I cannot think of a single rationale for reproduction that doesn’t involve selfishness on the part of the parents, not that the rationales listed above are necessarily bad, but people should at least honestly acknowledge the fundamentally selfish nature of reproduction. People reproduce for their own interest, not that of the resultant children. After all, the children don’t even exist prior to reproduction, so how could any rationale possibly be aimed at benefiting the children? If procreation were truly about “the children” instead of selfish personal interest, then we would show a heck of a lot more interest in taking care of the multitudes of neglected children already suffering around the planet.

I have occasionally dreamed of having children of my own, but have always ended up recognizing that my motivations are ultimately one or more of the above. Besides, I honestly admit to myself that I don’t want to assume the responsibility of supporting and caring for children, which, ironically, is also an attitude borne of selfishness! But at least my “selfish” decision to not have children does not encumber the planet with another mouth to feed, making it the less “selfish” choice of the two.

Conclusion

The issue of uncontrolled human reproduction is an important philosophical one that needs to be raised, because something that cannot continue forever will not. We are seeing proliferating indications – increasing pollution, depleted fisheries, spreading food and water scarcity, accelerating species extinction – that there are simply too many human beings on the planet. There was evidently a time, perhaps hundreds of years ago, when the planet was capable of renewing itself at least as rapidly as humans were exploiting it, but today the earth is clearly losing the battle with man.

I’m not advocating eugenics or involuntary prohibitions on reproduction. I’m just hoping to get people to think before they act. Perhaps, though, expecting people to regulate their own behavior is expecting too much. Perhaps the human species is not capable of overriding its genetic programming after all. However, it’s crystal clear that we can choose to voluntarily moderate our behavior or mother nature, in her eternal, patient wisdom, will do it for us, unceremoniously erasing her previous mistake.

We human beings like to think of ourselves as the most important creatures on earth, if not the entire universe, possessing a “divine” right to procreate at will, blissfully ignorant of the problems ensuing from our feckless procreation. Perhaps it’s time we took a long, hard look at our behavior and maybe started taking some deliberate steps toward voluntarily reducing our numbers on earth, not only for the benefit of the earth and its myriad other species, but for the sake of our own species as well. Fear not for the planet, however, for should we humans succeed in extincting ourselves, life on this planet will happily continue and thrive without us.

June 23, 2009 – The death of the U.S. dollar has been “imminent” countless times in the past. Is it “different this time”?

By Dave Eriqat

For a long time I’ve recognized that the death of the U.S. dollar is inevitable. It is so thoroughly debauched that it should be worthless right now, but it’s also such a vital instrument that nobody can afford to let it die, at least not yet. Moreover, as I’ve learned over the years, while it’s easy to predict what is going to happen – that’s usually just a matter of logical deduction – it’s nearly impossible to predict when it’s going to happen. I have to admit that I’ve been awed by the acumen of the powers-that-be to keep levitated the corrupt system we have today. I guess when you own the world’s reserve currency, the world’s most powerful military and have a media empire in your back pocket you can do pretty amazing things, for a while anyway.

Nevertheless, the other day I ran across an article titled, Bank Holiday Coming? Prepare?, that contained a quotation that left me sort of shaken. The quotation, attributed to Bob Chapman over at The International Forecaster, read,

Some US embassies worldwide are being advised to purchase massive amounts of local currencies; enough to last them a year. Some embassies are being sent enormous amounts of US cash to purchase currencies from those govts, quietly. But not £’s. Inside the State Dept there is a sense of sadness & foreboding that ‘something’ is about to happen, unknown re a date—just that within 180 days, but could be 120-150 days.

As I said, for a long time I’ve accepted as inevitable the death of the U.S. dollar, and I have also anticipated an eventual nationwide “bank holiday,” so stories along those lines don’t work me up into a lather anymore. The above quotation, however, is something completely new. The only reason U.S. embassies would be instructed to purchase massive amounts of other countries’ currencies is if someone was anticipating that the U.S.’s own currency was going to become worthless, and as indicated in the above quotation, soon. I contacted Mr. Chapman, for whom I have great respect and trust, and he confirmed that the quotation cited above is his own and that he stands behind it, even a month after writing it.

I read hundreds of articles a week, particularly about international financial matters, and I’ve been developing a growing gut feeling (not just a growing gut) that Fall, 2009 is shaping up to be a momentous period. Fall, 2007 was a turning point, when the housing bubble audibly popped. Fall, 2008 was when the banking crises became manifest and the U.S. stock markets peaked. It’s increasingly looking as though Fall, 2009 may yield the biggest blow up of all, the acknowledged bankruptcy of the U.S. Government itself and the destruction of its currency.

Among the myriad tiny clues pointing to Fall, 2009, a few specific, intriguing ones are noteworthy. The first is from a guy named Benjamin Fulford, who, while not exactly inspiring trust and confidence, claims to be in contact with some of the elites running the world, and much of what he says sounds credible. In one of his recent posts he wrote,

The US financial system may not collapse until September 30th of this year, according to our latest intelligence. A new, precious-metals backed system is in place but a split at the highest levels of the US secret government in preventing its implementation.

Note the date he cites: September 30. Bob Chapman’s quote – I don’t believe Bob and Benjamin travel in the same circles, making their statements independent – was from his May 20 newsletter. One-hundred-twenty days from Bob’s May 20 newsletter is roughly September 20. At the outside, one-hundred-eighty days from May 20 is roughly November 20. In addition, I have long speculated that a gold-backed currency might be introduced to replace the U.S. dollar, so Benjamin’s inclusion of that tidbit concurs with my own speculation, giving it more credibility in my opinion.

Then there is a group named LEAP/E2020, independent from both Bob Chapman and Benjamin Fulford, which cites September/October, 2009 as the date of inception of “major upheaval”:

On the contrary, because the origins of the crisis remain unaddressed, we estimate that the summer 2009 will be marked by the converging of three very destructive « rogue waves » (2), illustrating the aggravation of the crisis and entailing major upheaval by September/October 2009.

Specifically, they anticipate debt defaults by the U.S. and U.K. governments and a “Wave of terminal crisis for the US Dollar, US T-Bond and GBP.” (Recall from Bob’s quote above that the U.S. embassies are not to buy British pounds.) Since the U.S. Government must borrow one half of its annual budget today, amounting to $1.8 trillion of borrowing in a single year, what will happen if it is unable to raise that sum? The U.S. Government currently spends approximately half a trillion dollars annually on debt service. If it cannot borrow the money to service that debt, then a default will occur. If it resorts to printing money to service the debt, then that’s simply a disguised form of default which would hasten the U.S. dollar’s demise. The formerly inconceivable notion of a U.S. Government debt default is no longer inconceivable.

Then there is this article, titled The Hammer Drops, by Douglas McIntosh, who also cites Fall, 2009 as an ominous date. Referring to a coming wave of state and local government fiscal crises beginning after July 1, 2009, he writes,

The Feds will follow them starting on October 1st, the beginning of the new Federal fiscal year 2010.

Then there is the mystery of the Japanese couriers carrying $134.5 billion in “U.S. bonds,” which certainly seems consistent with an imminent demise of the U.S. dollar. I mean, if you were an “insider” and knew that the dollar was about to expire, wouldn’t you take steps to protect yourself by quietly getting rid of your dollars? Additionally, the article that referenced Bob Chapman’s newsletter cited above included this interesting sentence, also relating to Japan,

Bob quotes another source that “Panasonic has told their people to be back in Japan by Sept 09.”

In my reading, I have run across many diverse clues from independent sources, most of them tiny, but collectively creating an ominous pattern that appears ready to visibly emerge in the fall of 2009, between the end of September and the end of November. To tell the truth, I honestly hope I’m wrong and that things just keep going the way they are going, for even I have no idea how to cope with a currency that suddenly becomes worthless.

Update – 25 June 2009

Here’s a reasonable alternative explanation from Karl Denninger for the U.S. embassy currency story, even though it does not address the other points cited above.

Update – 30 July 2009

Another respectable voice, that of Lyndon LaRouche, has weighed in on the financial fireworks show that may erupt this fall. Since I wrote this piece, a number of reputable authors have expressed their view that this fall will usher in “interesting times.”

Update – 2 September 2009

This very interesting, six part series of audios of Jeff Rense interviewing Benjamin Fulford reinforces the above hypothesis that earthshaking events are coming this fall. It also did much to enhance Benjamin’s credibility in my eyes, since he sounds like a levelheaded guy and not some kind of wingnut. In the interview Benjamin shared a particularly fascinating nugget of information, at least to me, that there are three million empty houses in aging Japan and the government is tacitly permitting foreigners to settle in the country. That’s interesting to me because I’m presently looking for another country in which to live, and although I’ve never considered living in Japan, I’ve always harbored a deep admiration for all things Japanese. (To those in Japan who may have a say in my status, I say, I may not be a very good taxi driver right now, but I learn quickly.)

Of course, the way things are going in this country – the U.S. – what with the people finally starting to locate their misplaced backbones, improvements in the living conditions here may not be far in the offing. I see glimmers of hope for this country. Why, even my mother is talking about ripping out her decorative plants and replacing them with a vegetable garden, which is intriguing to me since I never discuss my dark outlook about the future with her, nor have I encouraged her to plant a vegetable garden. Something in the ether seems to have inspired her.

June 21, 2009 – Purely speculative musings on a couple of trendy topics.

By Dave Eriqat

$134.5 Billion In Bonds

It’s been about two weeks now since this story broke, which sounds like a plot from a thrilling novel. Two “Japanese” men are caught in Italy, attempting to enter Switzerland with $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds hidden in the false bottom of a suitcase (or suitcases).

My gut feeling when I first read about this story was that the bonds were authentic. I based that conclusion primarily on my belief that nobody would attempt to pass that quantity of counterfeit bonds. (I have since learned that people have attempted to pass considerably larger quantities of bogus securities.) Nevertheless, a buyer of such bonds, which have serial numbers and provenances, would surely make every effort to authenticate them before shelling out $134.5 billion, would they not? And the circumstances of this mystery conformed to a long-held observation of mine, which is that major lenders to the U.S. are trapped in a Catch-22 situation. They are already on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars worth of loans to the U.S., yet as the U.S. debases its currency through spending and trade deficits, those loans diminish in value, resulting in certain losses for the lending countries. However, if those lending countries attempt to openly sell the debt they already hold, the value of that debt will plummet even faster. So the only way a large holder of U.S. debt can escape this trap is to sell that debt covertly.

It just so happens that Japan is one of the three or four largest holders of U.S. debt in the world, with something like $800 billion of it. Thus, a covert sale of $134.5 billion of that debt would not be an outlandish figure, especially if such a sale were merely the first of several planned sales.

In addition, the nationalities of the couriers were purportedly Japanese, although I have my doubts about that because I saw purported passport photographs of the two men and neither looked particularly Japanese.

Since this story broke it has only become more mysterious, with increasing numbers of questions and still no trustworthy answers. Some people claim the bonds are authentic, while others, including a spokesman for the U.S. Treasury, claim they are counterfeit. I’ve seen purported photographs of the seized bonds, which I don’t trust.

Here’s the most interesting part. There has been no publicly acknowledged effort by U.S. authorities to examine and authenticate the bonds. Nor have any counterfeit charges been levied against the couriers. Nor has Italy claimed any sort of penalty from the smuggling of the bonds, even though its law permits such a recourse if the bonds are indeed authentic. If the bonds are counterfeit, then the couriers should be charged with a crime; if authentic, then Italy is entitled to a windfall; yet neither has happened.

Moreover, it now appears that both the bonds and the couriers have vanished, along with any further news on the matter, as if the whole mystery is being deliberately “disappeared.”

Here’s what I think. I still believe those bonds are authentic, but I don’t believe the photographs shown of the bonds are genuine. I still believe that those bonds emanate from Japan and that Japan may have been trying to sell them quietly. Just days before this story broke, Japan reaffirmed its confidence in the U.S.’s fiscal health and its bonds. It’s not uncommon for people and nations to say one thing while their actions reflect the exact opposite of that they say.

I think that Italy may have concluded that the bonds are authentic and belonged to the government of Japan. I cannot imagine Italy asserting its law to confiscate 40% of the value of those bonds, which would amount to $53.8 billion, from another nation, especially a powerful one like Japan. That would border on an act of war. Instead, I can imagine that Italy might have sent the couriers and their bonds back home.

The last thing the U.S. needs right now is a lot of news suggesting that either countries are covertly selling their U.S. debt, or that counterfeiters are manufacturing hundreds of billions of dollars of phony debt certificates. The wisest strategy, especially in today’s climate of reflexive official secrecy about everything, is to say nothing, which is pretty much what has happened in the U.S. The U.S. politicians and media, both of which are on the same team today, have remained utterly silent about this mystery.

But there is one final mystery that doesn’t quite fit into my speculation outlined above. Less than three months ago, in March, the U.S. Treasury announced that its TARP (bailout) fund had $134.5 billion remaining in it. That is the exact same value of the bonds seized in Italy. I’m not sure how that coincidence fits into this mystery, but it seems too significant to be a mere coincidence. I mean, the numbers involved are identical to four significant figures!

Iranian Election

The faux uproar over the “fraudulent” Iranian election strikes me as so contrived and choreographed. I don’t know any more about that election than anyone else. It may have been rigged or not. It doesn’t really matter to me. But there are some compelling points to consider before jumping to the conclusion that the election is fraudulent.

• We know that both Israel and the U.S. dislike Ahmadinejad, and both countries have the means to orchestrate an intense media campaign against the election results if they choose.

• We know the U.S. has been acting covertly in Iran for years, a fact admitted by the Bush Administration.

• We know the U.S. has recently orchestrated revolutions in other countries, such as in the former Soviet countries.

• We know the U.S. played a key role in overthrowing Iran’s elected leader in 1953.

• A former Pakistani general claims the U.S. CIA has spent $400 million fomenting discord in Iran over this election, hoping to instigate another revolution.

• It also appears that Ahmadinejad’s percentage of the recent vote (62.6%) was comparable to both pre-election polls and the percentage of the vote he received in the last election (61.69% in 2005).

Again, I don’t know much about the election in Iran. What astounds me is the facility with which the powers-that-be have been able to whip up the U.S. and European populations into a frenzy of protest against the “fraudulent” Iranian election, when the protesters have no more proof than do I that a fraud has been perpetrated. Indeed, they are acting like wind-up marionettes, not unlike all the “patriotic” Americans who were whipped up into a frenzy of anti-Iraqi sentiment after 9/11. (Even Mr. Cheney now admits that there was no connection between Iraq and 9/11.)

What is particularly ironic and hypocritical is that the U.S.’s elections are far from pristine. The U.S. and its citizens are hardly on morally firm ground from which to declare an election on the opposite side of the world to be fraudulent.

Update – 22 June 2009

Well, according to this piece, the “official” story now is that the U.S. bonds are counterfeit, but since the couriers were merely carrying them and not attempting to perpetrate a fraud with the bonds, they and their bonds were set free, whereabouts now unknown. Yet, in April a similar attempt was made to smuggle bonds from Italy into Switzerland (is a pattern emerging?), but on that occasion the bonds were seized, as reported in this news snippet,

In the incident of April this year, an Italian man tried to carry forged Japanese treasury bonds worth a total of 20 billion dollars into Switzerland, on the request of a Japanese person. The bonds were seized by the Italian Financial Police.

It appears that sometimes Italy seizes forged bonds and sometimes it does not. Oh, those whimsical Italians! With the revelation of the April incident, this story just became even more intriguing. There seems to be a lot of concealing smoke being introduced into the air.

Update – 10 July 2009

Well, in his latest post, Mr. Benjamin Fulford seems to agree with my suspicions about the “U.S. bonds.” When I saw the purported passport photos of the couriers, I thought to myself that one looked Filipino and one looked Chinese – neither looked Japanese. Mr. Fulford says the exact same thing! Moreover he insists the bonds are authentic, which I have believed all along, and he even provides a credible photo of, if not one of the bonds itself, a letter attesting to their authenticity, shown below.

Update – 4 August 2009

According to this article, the U.S. has officially recognized Ahmadinejad as Iran’s duly elected president. Despite the CIA’s efforts to undermine the election, the U.S. has not challenged the results, which I view as a tacit admission by the U.S. that the election was trustworthy, even if heavy-handed.

Update – 10 August 2009

Information surrounding the Iranian election is slowly emerging. According to this article, agents for the U.S. and France have apparently admitted being ordered by their superiors to stoke unrest following the election.

June 16, 2009 – Is it just me, or do others think our world has never been more chaotic than it is today?

By Dave Eriqat

I suppose everyone who’s ever lived has felt their world was chaotic at some time during their life, but honestly, I feel that the world has never been more chaotic in my lifetime than it is today. From my own perch of tranquility, observing collectively the vast number of news stories I read, I get a sense of a world that’s flying apart at the seams. And the worst of it is that “leaders” and governments, loathe to be seen as not “doing something,” are making matters a whole lot worse.

It seems as if everything is in flux today; nothing is permanent or stationary. Nothing can be counted on anymore: not law, not men, not loyalty, not currencies, not jobs, not retirement plans, not even the arrival of tomorrow. About the only thing we can count on for certain is that if human beings disappear from the planet, it will continue to exist and thrive for millions of years without us. What sort of chaos have our “leaders” wrought?

Institutional Malfeasance

I hardly need belabor the financial system bailout activity, which was so clearly intended to benefit the profits of corporations and politically connected elites, as well as the politicians responsible for the bailouts, who unsurprisingly held financial interests in the corporations they were bailing out. But have the “bailouts” fixed anything? Aside from “fixing” the balance sheets of a handful of elites, the bailouts have actually made things a lot worse, which will become clearer in the fullness of time.

Now they are about to embark on a similar “bailout” of the health care system which will undoubtedly leave us all poorer in both money and health care. Yet, just as with the financial bailouts, the corporations, insiders and politicians will profit. And just as with the financial system, politicians have a large financial stake in maintaining the status quo in the health care system.

Not content to merely bail out the health care system, the government is flirting with making participation in it mandatory. This is how flawed the health care system has become, that it must resort to gun barrel medicine to force people to participate. And if my gun barrel metaphor seems outrageous, just wait until mandatory “swine flu” vaccines are imposed on us, which will no doubt bring immense profits to the suppliers of those vaccines, regardless of whether the vaccines are efficacious or even safe. If that comes to pass, I will be afraid to open the door, lest I be confronted by a gang of black-clad, heavily armed, masked “authorities” wielding syringes. Some people believe that such mandatory vaccination programs will have a secondary purpose beyond corporate profits, which will be to harm the populace. Given what I’ve seen for the last few decades, I can’t say I disagree with such views.

Under the cover of “law,” police today indiscriminately break down doors, even the wrong ones without apology. They steal money from innocent people who have utterly no recourse. They taser people needlessly, evidently to satisfy some prurient urge to dominate, and even if a victim of such an attack dies, the police department declares the officer’s actions to be “in policy,” leading me to believe that the official policy of police departments today includes murder.

The government allows illegal immigrants to flow unimpeded into the country and even to collect social benefits, while making it more difficult for U.S. citizens to leave the country. For the first time, passports are now required for U.S. citizens to cross borders with Canada and Mexico, which seems counterintuitive since the SPP/NAU agenda aims to relax border controls for corporations and “guest workers.”

The people continue to vote in earnest, failing to recognize that they have no voice anymore, which is why corruption and thievery are conducted so brazenly today. And the perpetrators have the gall to claim that their corrupt behavior is necessary for the benefit of society, the contemporary code words for such being “national security.” Everything, it seems, from disease pandemics, to financial crises, to “terrorism,” to environmental problems threatens “national security,” or the “children.”

Misguided Wars

What could be more inane than a broke nation expanding its war fronts from Iraq and Afghanistan to Pakistan and perhaps Iran? The U.S. has been covertly active in Iran for a long time already, a fact admitted in the past by the government itself. So it’s reasonable to assume that the U.S., through its CIA, is also involved in the current election turmoil in Iran, fanning the flames and exploiting the turmoil as an opportunity to destabilize the country. Should those efforts fail, how long before the U.S. resorts to “shock and awe,” and then, “boots on the ground” in Iran? I hope never, but with its “ally” in the Middle East uttering threats against Iran on a daily basis, the U.S. may be sucked into a war with Iran anyway.

Of course, nothing could be more perverse than that same “ally,” a country founded on the promise of never tolerating genocide again, being today’s biggest perpetrator of genocide. Yet to point out such an obvious, undeniable fact makes one vulnerable to a charge of indulging in “antisemitism.”

Massive Economic Dislocations

We hear about $134 billion in U.S. bonds being spirited through Italy, still uncertain whether the money is “real” or “counterfeit,” as if there’s much distinction any more.

But those billions are chump change compared to the trillions of dollars lavished by governments in Europe and the U.S. on their respective financial sectors. I don’t know about Europe, but in the U.S. that money is literally being stolen from the public and handed over to the elites, a form of reverse Robin Hoodism.

Meanwhile, one of the only genuine means of wealth creation, manufacturing and its associated jobs, continues to hemorrhage from the country, destined for Asia.

Asia, to its credit, is finally waking up to the dilemma it faces, that by continuing to prop up the U.S. in order to preserve the value of its prior investments, it’s digging itself into a deeper hole. The emergence of Asia as a dominant player in the global financial realm is underscored by its denial of a U.S. request to participate in a recent financial meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

The writing is on the wall as far as I’m concerned, but our “leaders,” instead of scaling back their future expectations in accord with reality, seem intent on doubling down and accelerating their harebrained initiatives, perhaps in order to achieve “mission accomplished” before the sheople wake up.

Crazy Markets

I watch the markets – stocks, metals, oil, currencies, real estate – pretty closely and these days they’re just crazy. Too many big funds that rely solely on technical analysis and don’t bother with fundamentals are influencing the markets, not to mention the undeniable manipulations of governments and their operatives, which is why the markets are so volatile today.

If people paid attention to fundamentals, U.S. dollar-denominated financial instruments, including the dollar itself would be shunned. Governments across the U.S. are facing massive, unprecedented and irremediable deficits, yet people are still buying government bonds! I know people who insist that government bonds are 100% safe, unlike other “assets.” While such bonds might be 100% safe in nominal terms, what about purchasing power terms? While one’s $100,000 investment in government bonds might be returned to them, it may be a moot victory if a loaf of bread costs $100,000, which is the direction we’re heading.

Meanwhile, gold, the age-old safe haven in times of chaos underperforms, while overpriced stocks of companies awaiting a formal declaration of bankruptcy mysteriously levitate.

All I do most days is shake my head, baffled, not by the market’s behavior, but by the behavior of people who continue to play along in a rigged game.

Environmental Crises

During the “up” leg of the housing bubble, when municipalities were raking in money hand over fist from all the new housing developments and strip malls being built, those municipalities abdicated their responsibility to do any sort of “planning.” Now that cities, such as San Diego, are facing predictable water shortages, which should have factored into the “planning” process, the cities are dumping the burden on us citizens in the form of increased taxes, fees and fines, as if to punish us for our use of water. But where is the culpability of the municipal government in failing to plan for such a predictable, periodic event?

I read that as much as 80% the global wheat crop is threatened by the UG99 fungus, which is probably an example of the perils of monoclonal agriculture, a practice resulting from allowing giant corporations to dominate our agricultural system.

The oceans are dying from overexploitation and over-pollution, yet we fiddle with silliness such as using ethanol for fuel, as if it’s the solution to all our problems, and even though ethanol requires more energy to produce than it yields. But at least subsidizing ethanol production profits agricultural corporations handsomely. Similarly, we are goaded to take strident action to thwart “global warming,” despite a dearth of supporting evidence, save the claims of avaricious advocates, such as one former vice president who graciously offers to be a broker of “carbon credits.”

Conclusion

It seems that for decades, while we were busy attending to our lives and trying to maintain a standard of living quietly being stripped from us, the powers-that-be have been given free reign to shape the world to their liking. Little did we realize that we were giving out and out criminals free run of the place. As their grip on the world has tightened, so have the seeds of chaos been sown. Today those seeds are bearing “fruit,” producing predictable chaos and reminding us once again why centralized control over the world is not as resilient as a decentralized structure, the design adopted by mother nature herself millions of years ago.

June 10, 2009 – Yet another tool of oppression this way cometh, to the applause of the politically correct ignorami.

By Dave Eriqat

As H.R. 1913 wends its way through Congress, certain to be signed by the president if it emerges from the other side of Congress, it might be worthwhile to consider, albeit a tad late, just what is a “hate crime.”

First, though, the most troubling aspect of this proposed new law, perfectly consistent with other troubling recent laws, such as the Patriot Acts, is the broadness of its definitions. Under this proposed new law, almost any crime could theoretically be classified as a “hate crime.” Any act that causes or attempts to cause bodily injury, because of a lengthy list of actual or perceived traits harbored by the victim, and employing “a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce” (such as the Internet) can be classified as a “hate crime” carrying an enhanced sentence upon conviction.

As if the latitude for applying this law weren’t broad enough already, if the defendant’s behavior “interferes with commercial or other economic activity in which the victim is engaged at the time of the conduct,” that constitutes yet another circumstance in which the hate crime classification can be applied. Assuming for a moment that “bodily injury” includes “psychological harm,” it would seem that causing the “victim” to withdraw from “economic activity” because they are “upset” would be sufficient to constitute “interference” by the defendant.

Suppose, for example, one published an opinion of another person on a blog and casually included words that referred to any of the “victim’s” traits, perhaps even the words “she” or “he.” Under this proposed law, if the “victim” claims they have withdrawn from “economic activity” due to “psychological harm” caused by the defendant’s words, then the defendant’s actions would warrant a “hate crime” label. Even if the “victim” does not withdraw from “economic activity,” the “hate crime” label might still be applied because the defendant employed a “channel of interstate commerce,” the Internet, in publishing his words.

Of course, I’m sure the proponents of this proposed law will swear up and down that it won’t be abused. The same assurance was given about the Patriot Acts, after which the FBI immediately began abusing those new laws by issuing National Security Letters with abandon.

Roots Of Justice

Two provisions in the Magna Carta, one of the foundations of our modern justice system, clearly stipulate that punishment should be proportional to the “offence”:

(20) For a trivial offence, a free man shall be fined only in proportion to the degree of his offence, and for a serious offence correspondingly, but not so heavily as to deprive him of his livelihood.

(21) Earls and barons shall be fined only by their equals, and in proportion to the gravity of their offence.

To this day, punishment in proportion to the offense is one of the supposed tenets of our justice system. Punishment should be based on the harm actually caused, not assumed. Harm, either physical, as in the case of a broken bone, or psychological, as in the case of mental trauma, can be evaluated by medical professionals and punishment meted out according to the degree of harm diagnosed. Hate crime laws impose an automatic supposition of harm caused to the victim, whether real or not. Our system of justice should not be based on accusation, hearsay, suspicion or supposition, but on provable, observable facts.

“Hate crimes” contain within them the assumption of harm caused to the victim, without actually going to the trouble of evaluating the harm caused. Such laws punish the accused for thoughts imputed to them rather than for the harm observably caused.

Mind Reading

Even if punishing people for their thoughts rather than their deeds were just, how can we reliably ascertain the thoughts of another anyway? How can the words or actions of a person in the midst of a physical or verbal altercation, at the height of emotional tension be considered representative of that person’s general attitude? We’ve all been in altercations in which we temporarily “lost control” and did or said things we didn’t intend to do or say, things which we later regretted. Would any one of us want our entire character to be summarized based on those regrettable deeds or words? Yet that’s precisely what hate crime laws seek to do.

Some would say we already have similar precedents, such as punishing people more severely for “premeditated” murder and “conspiracy.” Under both precedents, a crime committed may be punished more severely depending on the accused’s supposed intentions prior to committing the crime. I disagree with those precedents as well and don’t believe those existing perversions of justice justify the further perversions of justice embodied in hate crime laws. People should be punished for the measurable harm they cause to others and no more.

Real Objective Behind Hate Crime Laws

The primary appeal of hate crime laws to the government is precisely their ambiguity, affording prosecutors the capricious latitude to decide whether to employ them against a defendant in order to coerce a guilty plea bargain and maintain their 99% conviction record. After all, if a defendant is facing an extra twenty years in prison as a result of a prosecutor escalating their crime to the status of a “hate crime,” they are more likely to knuckle under and submit to a plea of guilty to lesser charges, enabling a zealous prosecutor to scratch another notch into his prosecutorial gun barrel.

Since this particular hate crime law now moving through Congress appears to have a bearing on free speech, especially conducted on the Internet, I suspect it will become a valuable tool for suppressing, or at least chilling free speech in the most popular of public forums, a wet fantasy of repressive governments everywhere.

Another reason people support hate crime laws is the same reason they support the death penalty, for retribution. People are understandably repulsed by murder, vicious acts and vile speech, and seek enhanced punishment for the perpetrators under the guise of “justice.” But is it justice or vengeance they seek?

Slippery Slope

Once we start punishing people for their thoughts, where does it stop? Who among us is pure enough of mind to not be prosecuted for their occasional thoughts? As we speak, the government is laying the foundation for a policy of “preventive detention,” locking people up because the government believes they may be a threat in the future. Is that not a logical result of sliding down the thought crime slippery slope? Would not the logical end result of prosecuting people for thought crime be the preemptive execution of such putative future murderers? Or a preemptive attack on a sovereign enemy that might “threaten” us in the future?

Proverbs 11:6. The justice of the righteous shall deliver them: and the unjust shall be caught in their own snares.

In embracing the totalitarianism of “political correctness,” codified by “hate crime” legislation, and enforced by a zealous, well-armed government, people are embracing their own intellectual and physical enslavement.

Update – 13 June 2009

How convenient for the proponents of H.R. 1913 that a “hate crime” should occur as this bile (this should read “bill,” but “bile” seems an appropriate typo) wends its way through Congress. I can’t help but suspect that these two things aren’t a coincidence, especially since the author of this rabid article cites three “hate crimes” in the last two weeks. The author combines the evil notions of “hate crimes” and “preventive detention” in logical fashion, producing the following sterling conclusion:

Isn’t it time we started rounding up promoters of hate before they kill?

By the way, I have a feeling that this author hails from the left-wing branch of authoritarianism, which goes to show that there’s not much difference between authoritarians on the left, who want to lock up “haters,” and authoritarians on the right who want to lock up “unpatriotic” people. In fact, I believe my oft regurgitated diagram below succinctly portrays the correct way to look at authoritarians of either persuasion.

June 7, 2009 – Do people ever learn from history?

By Dave Eriqat

For many years I’ve thought the “War on Drugs” (WOD) was a complete and utter waste of resources, lives and nothing but an exercise in futility. Principally, in a “free” society, what business is it of anyone else, especially government, what people put into their own bodies?

People say government should protect people, even from themselves. I strongly disagree, but even if that were a meritorious goal then why are alcohol and cigarettes legal? They are demonstrably far more injurious than any of the “illicit” drugs. In fact, I’ve come to believe that marijuana is a truly beneficial drug, yet it is one of the most demonized. Is that perhaps because it’s so efficacious and versatile?

People say that drug revenue finances “terrorists” and other such bogeymen. It does so only because the drug trade is forced underground. Were it a legitimate business it would be more difficult to conceal the flow of revenue.

People say that drugs cause gang violence. Again, that’s only because the trade is underground and the gangs are battling for control of the trade and turf. Do alcohol companies engage in gangland shootouts anymore? Alcohol traffickers did engage in gangland violence, such as the Saint Valentine’s Day massacre, during the failed alcohol prohibition era, but thankfully after we regained our senses and legalized the alcohol trade the violence disappeared. Yet that lesson, which so closely parallels our contemporary WOD, seems to escape the recollection of anyone “in charge.”

People say that drugs cause harm. I agree to some extent, in that alcohol and cigarettes cause more harm than all illicit drugs combined. I’ve never read of a single case of anyone dying from marijuana use, yet hundreds of thousands die every year from alcohol and cigarettes. Most of the deaths related to the use of other illicit drugs, such as heroin, are the result of contaminants introduced by dealers who “cut” the drugs, or by variations in the concentration of the drugs, problems which could be virtually eliminated if such drugs were legally manufactured and complied with standardized regulations.

There is not one single socially beneficial argument in favor of continuing the WOD, but there are plenty of other reasons for continuing the WOD. As I’ve matured I’ve ceased being baffled by the apparent collective blindness of society to the absurdity of the WOD, and have come to recognize that the WOD very much serves the interests of a powerful few: the drug trafficking intelligence agencies who use the proceeds to finance their “black” operations; the drug producers raking in staggering profits, for whom the occasional “interdiction” is merely a cost of doing business; the “legal” drug manufacturers which seek to reduce competition from alternative products; the “prison-industrial” complex, which requires a steady stream of bodies to keep its slave labor machine operating; and all the people involved in “law enforcement,” which now relies on the WOD for probably half its funding. Even the Border Patrol now spends more effort on drug interdiction than illegal immigrant interdiction.

Considering the vested interests promoting the WOD, it’s no wonder that Mr. Obama, the perfected tool of the elite class described above, is seeking to escalate the WOD. No doubt, such escalation will increase the number of worker bodies available to the prison-industrial complex and protect the jobs of numerous “drug warriors.” It’s interesting to note that the Netherlands, which employs a much more relaxed approach to drug control than the U.S., is closing prisons and laying off prison personnel due to a lack of criminals. Could there be a connection between relaxed drug laws and a lack of “criminals”? I think so since about half of the prisoners in U.S. prisons are there for drug “offenses.” Finally, the futility of waging this costly and destructive WOD is underscored by this article about the sheer cleverness of drug traffickers, who have developed a sophisticated submarine to transport their drugs covertly through the oceans, and are working on developing a drug trafficking “drone” submarine.

Why are we so devoted to waging “wars” we cannot possibly win? I suppose besides the profit motive of the elites, the “masses” generally support the WOD because of its blooming infatuation with righteousness, authoritarianism and conformity, not to mention its Puritan and racist heritage. Clearly, the WOD will not be terminated because of its failure to reduce drug use or stem the flow of drugs. Quite the contrary, government is the only institution that rewards its own failures with more money! So what will cause the WOD to end? I don’t know. With any luck, the exigencies of economic collapse will bring an end to it. Already California is being forced to consider releasing a significant number of prisoners because of its budget problems. Hopefully, it will start with the petty drug users. I’ve always thought it insane to lock up petty drug users, transforming them from taxpayers into burdens on the remaining taxpayers. Perhaps the ludicrousness of doing that will start to become apparent to those in governments across the nation as they wrestle with budget deficits.

Update – 12 June 2009

Although this video may appear to be only loosely related to the WOD, it is, in fact, a shining example of the corruption that logically ensues from the perversion of justice that the WOD embodies. Asset forfeiture began as part of the RICO statute to steal the assets of organized crime members. Asset forfeiture then spread to stealing vehicles from people hiring prostitutes and property of people found in possession of small quantities of drugs. Now asset forfeiture is used willy-nilly, no charges or any justification required. And, as depicted in the video, everyone involved in the forfeiture scam gets a cut, from the police right up to the judge, just like in the days of witch burnings.

Update – 13 June 2009

I’ve often claimed the CIA is the biggest drug trafficker on the planet. Here’s an ex-CIA man, John Stockwell, talking about the CIA’s “war on humans,” but in this brief video he repeatedly and casually mentions CIA drug trafficking operations.

Update – 13 June 2009

How timely this article is for my post here. The author of an anti-drug book and founder of an organization to prevent drug abuse was arrested in the Los Angeles area for … selling drugs! Anyone agree with me that it’s time to throw in the towel?

Update – 14 June 2009

Here’s an excellent article that underscores the reeking injustice inherent in the WOD as well as the usurpation of states’ rights by the federal government, which I happen to think was the primary objective in this case. Imagine being tried in court for a crime but prohibited from offering any meaningful evidence in your defense. And then because of mandatory sentencing laws, the judge is forced to send you to prison. That’s what happened in this case.

Update – 21 June 2009

I’ve said for many years that the “legal” drugs, alcohol and tobacco, are more harmful than most “illegal” drugs. Well, the World Health Organization came to the same conclusion in a 1995 report that was buried under pressure from the U.S. An excerpt from the report, quoted in a newspaper article, reads,

The report notes, for instance, that health problems from “the use of legal substances, particularly alcohol and tobacco, are greater than health problems from cocaine use.”

And here’s a link to another article which contains a link to the WHO report.