Free To Die? Yeah!

Topher Morrison
PurpleSerf.com

Tyler Durden, played by Brad Pitt from the movie
Fight Club.  Image Source: FoxMovies.com

"On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero."

- Tyler Durden, Fight Club

          A few days ago I linked to the bizarre reaction of the CNN/Tea Party Debate crowd to Wolf Blitzer's question of Ron Paul (R-TX), what we should do if a 30-year-old man who chose not to purchase health insurance suddenly found himself in need of six months of intensive care?  Paul's reaction was unremarkably honest as usual, "that is what freedom is all about - taking your own risks."  Blitzer followed up, as if the conclusion wasn't already clear to everyone, "society should just let him die?"  To this, the audience cheered "Yeah!"  (and so Topher Morrison records what thousands of writers have already covered since Monday)

          Words have meaning.  At a certain point when their definitions become obfuscated by emotion and ignorance we cease to be able to use them effectively.   

So·ci·e·ty (noun)

        A community of people living in a particular country or region and having

        shared customs, laws and organizations.

Mr. Blitzer knowingly used the word society to bind our laws (compulsory rules) and by extension our government (agent of compulsion) with both customs and organizations of which do not necessarily have anything to do with law or government.  Furthermore, Mr. Blitzer by utilizing this rhetorical sleight of hand damned both customs and organizations to undue ineptitude without concern or debate!  

          Milliseconds later, the audience after not musing on these facts as audiences invariably do not and in reactionary mob rage, embarrassed themselves in front of God and country.  Essentially the American public heard: "Yeah, society (our customs, laws, and organizations) should not help this man!"  

          To the contrary, Dr. Paul briefly touched on the fact that society, properly defined, engenders thousands of charities, private organizations, foundations, research groups, doctors, friends, families, etc. which may be able to lend a hand, when and if, this situation arises.  The headlines, however, were not about Mr. Blitzer's pillaging of the English language, nor were they about Paul's measured response, but about the Tea Party's naked gaff.   

          Paul Krugman wrote about this today in the New York Times and proffered a new theory (at least to me) about F.A. Hayek, the esteemed economist with veritable super powers within the libertarian and conservative circles Dr. Paul frequents.  Mr. Krugman posited that Hayek "supports" (Krugman's words) a "comprehensive system of social insurance" (Hayek's words) when Hayek merely claimed the "the case for...social insurance is very strong."  Hayek after writting "Road to Serfdom" (from which these quotes were pulled) in an interview with two socialist economists Krueger and Merriam from the University of Chicago, clarified his position on social insurance: "It might well be made optional, which is not in contradiction to its being government assisted, but why it needs to be made compulsory I do not see in the least [my emphasis added]."

          Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Barack Obama's new Affordable Health Care (snore...) Act are all riddled with mandates and obligations, not to mention more pages than anyone would care to read.  To put it kindly, it is at this point government ceases to be a help and begins to be a burden.  Krugman cannot afford to use Hayek in support of the current paradigm on these grounds.  Considering all the directives stemming from Washington and with all the love and largesse our government showers upon us it is amazing the rest of American society continues to feel charity is needed at all.

          In the end Mr. Blitzer's question centered on a 30-year-old man who made the decision not to insure against future travesty, a right he theoretically exercised and if not helped out would undoubtedly pay dearly for.  Yet Paul Krugman like many liberals and progressives tirelessly proffer the red herring: "So would people on the right be willing to let those who are uninsured through no fault of their own die from lack of care?"

          Two things Krugman obviously refuses to understand: insurance is by definition to insure against future calamity; if you are already sick (preexisting condition) you can't possibly expect to get coverage, other options must be sought or created.  Moreover, insurance doesn't necessarily save lives, nor does it lower costs immediately or in the long term and most importantly not one insurance company, hospital or government for that matter promises an endless amount of care and for the obvious reason stated succinctly by Mr. Tyler Durden.

          The reaction by the Tea Party Expressers is why the original Tea Party vied for representative government rather than direct democracy.  We need professional leaders, men and women who can see passed the distortions, understand how to improve liberty and guard against tyranny mild or aggressive.  The most important reasons why we need these sentinels of liberty is to consistently remind Americans, with a cool head, that while life is a right and that government was erected to protect it, our government is not here to perpetuate it.  As far as nature is concerned, we are all star dust; it is up to us to remain human for as long as possible. 

(This article is way longer than I expected, I'm sorry.)

MEDIA MYOPIA: Oslo Massacres' Reports and un-Reported

Topher Morrison
PurpleSerf.com

Immediately the pictures of the Oslo, Norway bombing bring
back memories of the Oklahoma City bombing.
Image Source: Mirror.co.uk

It is important in any investigation to ascertain the facts before a narrative is woven.  This is a taste of what is being reported in the mainstream media:


New York Times


"Norwegian police on Saturday charged a man they identify as a right-wing fundamentalist Christian." 


"...a gun loving Norwegian obsessed with what he saw as the threat of multiculturalism and Muslim immigration."


"Facebook page and Twitter account set up under that name [Anders Behring Breivik] days before the rampage, suggesting a conscious effort to create a public persona."


"...a remarkably meticulous attack on Norway's current and future political elite."


"...at least 85 people, some as young as 16, were killed in an attack on a summer camp..."


"...'slaughter of young children.'"


"...many from political families..."


"...the gunman calmly and methodically shot..."


"...attacker wore a police uniform..."


"...camp has been an important rite of passage for the country's budding young liberals."


"...saw a second man, about 5-foot-11, with dark hair, holding a pistol and carrying a rifle..."


"police official, Roger Andresen..."he is right-wing and a Christian fundamentalist."


"...soldiers cordoned off the square where the bombing occcured...armed soldiers in camoflauge gear was a jarring sight."

“…questions about whether the Norwegian security services and police, which had been concentrating on threats of Islamic terrorism, missed the threat from the anti-Islamic right.”

"This is the Norwegian equivalent to Timothy McVeigh."

“’This is right-wing domestic terrorism, and the big question is to what extent Norwegian agencies have diverted their attention from what they knew decades ago was the biggest threat’ and instead focused on threats from militant Islamist groups.”


"...writings on a right-wing site, Document.no, revealed...an abiding obsesion with Marxists, Mulsims, and Norway's multicultural ideals."


“'It may make a lot of people reflect on the challenges of integration and ensuring tolerance and antiracism, so that these views can be openly rejected by everyone in Norway,' Mr. Ulrichsen [reasercher at London School of Economics] said."


BBC


"...possible another person was involved."


"suspect reported by local media to have had links to right wing extremists"


"...Norway has had problems with neo-Nazi groups in the past..."


"farm supply firm has confirmed selling six tonnes of fertilizer to Breivik."


"...tall blonde man dressed as a policeman opened fire indiscriminately..."


"...two weapons, one of them an automatic rifle."


This is what has not been reported (at least when it comes to mainstream media):


"Oslo Police Conducted Bombing Exercise Days Before Terror Blast"


DHS video framing white right-wing extremists ranked 6th biggest story in the world according to Alexa.com day before Oslo attacks.


Mr. Brievik may have been a practicing Free Mason?  At least according to his days old Facebook page he was.  


There is a massive body of evidence that government, through covert intelligence agencies, quasi-government bodies, and interested societies, have attempted to manipulate public opinion through terrorist attacks.  This has been well documented for decades.  The fact that mainstream media won't add this into their coverage should concern all of us.  


I'm sure those of you who are unaware or outright disagree with me on these facts are thinking "conspiracy theorist", but the "lone gunman" scenario currently being proffered is not copacetic with the last 50 years of geopolitical history.  Moreover, the temporal and physical proximity of this event to the current tumult being felt in Europe and throughout the world should invoke high suspicion from the fourth estate yet it has received little if no attention.  Europe and the United States are being turned upside down economically and this event is being treated as if it occurred in a vacuum.  


I am not submitting this event is an example of a false-flag, however, to immediately treat it prima facie as what it seems without allowing historical precedents to supply us with prudent questions and alternative scenarios is negligent.  Evidence is scant so far to support anything, however, there is a glaring dearth of focus on the political ramifications of this attack.  This is my point.  We live in an age of hyper-politics where one act changes everything, we have a right to be suspicious.


A great book on the history of false-flag and state-sponsored terror (and their drug connections) plus a whole lot of blowback:

Peter Dale Scott outlines a fascinating history
of covert operations and exposes the deep powers
and financial interests involved.
There are two states in this world, the one we know about
and learn in civics class and the deep state few of
us care to admit is there.