Stupid Government Policy Is More Dangerous than Terrorism

The Shocking Reasons that Americans Are Right to Be More Afraid of Bad Government Policy than Terrorism

Preface: I am not so much anti-government as anti-stupid policy. (Moreover, the problem is not solely “bad government” or “corrupt corporations”. The deeper problem is that the two have become intertwined in a malignant, symbiotic relation.)

Multiple polls show that Americans are more afraid of our own government than of terrorists.

Sure, the government – not Al Qaeda – is taking away virtually all of our Constitutional rights. And that includes reserving to itself the right to assassinate or indefinitely detain American citizens.

But stupid government policy is threatening us in other ways, as well.

The Police

You are approximately 9 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist. [UPDATE: make that 55 times more likely.]   This is a result of bad policy: the over-the-top militarization of American police forces.

Financial Crisis

The financial crisis will also lead to quite a few early deaths. The government – together with Wall Street – caused the financial crisis … not Al Qaeda.

Government policy has also redistributed wealth from the average American to the super- rich.    (Indeed, the government and big banks – not Osama – have destroyed free market capitalism in the U.S.)


The number of deaths by suicide has skyrocketed recently, and many connect the increase in suicides to the downturn in the economy.

Around 35,000 Americans kill themselves each year. Indeed, Americans are 2,059 times more likely to kill themselves than die at the hand of a terrorist.

And more American soldiers die by suicide than combat (the number of veterans committing suicide is astronomical and under-reported).

The wars that are causing the soldiers so much grief were planned 20 years ago … and are being fought for oil (and here) and gas.

Killer Drugs

According to a 2011 CDC report, poisoning from prescription drugs is one of the leading cause of death. Indeed, the CDC stated in 2011 that – in the majority of states – your prescription meds are more likely to kill you than any other source of injury. So your meds are thousands of times more likely to kill you than Al Qaeda.

After drug companies were busted for using fraudulent data for drug approval, the FDA allowed the potentially dangerous drugs to stay on the market.

And when one of the most respected radiologists in America – the former head of the radiology department at Yale University – attempted to blow the whistle on the fact that the FDA had approved a medical device manufactured by General Electric because it put out massive amounts of radiation, the FDA installed spyware to record his private emails and surfing activities (including installing cameras to snap pictures of his screen), and then used the information to smear him and other whistleblowers.

Contaminated Food

Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control show that Americans are 110 times more likely to die from contaminated food than terrorism. And see this.

Yet the government is working hand-in-glove with the giant good companies to dish up cheap, unhealthy food.

The government’s response to the outbreak of mad cow disease was simple: it stopped testing for mad cow, and prevented cattle ranchers and meat processors from voluntarily testing their own cows (and see this and this).

The EPA recently raised the allowable amount of a dangerous pesticide by 3,000% … pretending that it won’t have adverse health effects.

In response to new studies showing the substantial dangers of genetically modified foods – they’ve already been tentatively linked to obesity, cancer, liver failure and all sorts of other diseases (brief, must-watch videos here and here – the government passed legislation more or less pushing it onto our plates.

When BP – through criminal negligence – blew out the Deepwater Horizon oil well, the government helped cover it up (and here). As just one example, the government approved the massive use of a highly-toxic dispersant to temporarily hide the oil. The government also changed the testing standards for seafood to pretend that higher levels of toxic PAHs in our food was business-as-usual.

Environmental Poisons

In fact, the government has long covered up environmental risks.

For example, the Centers for Disease Control – the lead agency tasked with addressing disease in America – covered up lead poisoning in children in the Washington, D.C. area.

The Bush administration covered up the health risks to New Orleans residents associated with polluted water from hurricane Katrina, and FEMA covered up the cancer risk from the toxic trailers which it provided to refugees of the hurricane.

And then there’s nuclear power. The American government has:

Indeed, the archaic nuclear design used at Fukushima and throughout the United States was chosen solely because it helps to make nuclear bombs.

Sadly, radiation from Fukushima and U.S. reactors will kill some Americans. The National Journal reports:

“Look at what’s going on now: They’re dumping huge amounts of radioactivity into the ocean — no one expected that in 2011,” Daniel Hirsch, a nuclear policy lecturer at the University of California-Santa Cruz, told Global Security Newswire. “We could have large numbers of cancer from ingestion of fish.”

Indeed, one doctor claims that Fukushima had already killed 14,000 Americans 9 months after the accident. We doubt her numbers … but it is clear that even low levels of radiation can damage human health. Whatever the number, this was caused by the government … not Al Qaeda.

(The government also created a computer virus which threatens nuclear plants world-wide.)

Bad Government Policy Is Increasing the Risk of Terrorism

Ironically, the government’s actions are so idiotic that they are actually increasing the chance of a terrorist attack.

This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • colinjames71

    I can’t remember the last piece of good legislation that was remotely important, federal or my home state. Just a series of assaults on rights and gifts to big-something at the expense of joe q. And with the exception of LGBT rights, a series of insults in the courts on top of it.

  • Euro-BRICS

    Yes. But then the problem for the people is

    1) to understand the root cause of all this mess. This can only be done using a socio political analysis like here:

    2) from this analysis, to rationaly anticipate the socio political movement, like in the last chapter (link above)

    3) to anticipate others disrupting short term events, like here:

    4) from these disrupting events, to rationaly anticipate what could be the impact on key supply chains in the country (food, drugs, gazoline…). Do not expect all this fundamental organisation from the government. They have already shown you how efficient they can react when the storm is obviously predicted and recognized (Katrina, Sandy…). Imagine when they deny the storm.

    Anticipate the role of the DHS, and of the US Army too. Separately.

    At the end, we must not forget all people have to eat each day. And this means they should have to help each others. No other alternative is viable. And history learn us this surely cannot be taken for granted.

    “Sauver ou périr” : devise des sapeurs-pompiers de Paris.

    • Tonto

      I went to the links, Euro-BRICS. I found a couple of propaganda tracts. One was entitled, “The inevitable counter-revolution of the American people”. The other was in French, and seemed to be extolling the virtues of the de-Americanization of world economy, and pumping the gold fever that has gripped a foolish world. My French is more than a bit musty. And I didn’t have the patience to load the link into Google-Translate, in part because of the cartoonish image of a self-destructing house, meant I believe, to indicate the shape of our American Republic. Why, I can only imagine you have bought-into some of the common hype on the net.

      The first tract in English had a subsection entitled, “A thought unsuited to the 21st century”. This section went on to state the following-

      “The dynamic of morals is that which evolves the slowest. The creation and especially the airing of ideology in society require decades. Neoliberalism is dominant, and an environmental policy is still in its infancy in the US. In the corridors of power, the ideology of a strong executive has obliterated any other idea.

      The progressive forces are disorganized and in the babble major media is reduced to only produce individual resistance strategies at best, otherwise warnings or wake-up calls for comfortably numb minds, but not political organizations to spread fundamentally new ideas of social justice. Religion only has a role as custodian, unlike what occurred in South Africa. Citizens are reduced to accumulating rations and ammunition whilst waiting for worst, and that’s why it’s what will happen.”

      First of all, you do not state anything about morals, beyond briefly mentioning what you call “the dynamic of morals”. You seem to assert that this dynamic is wrapped up in “environmental policy” and “ideas of social justice”, which you assert by stating that the U.S. has a deficit in each populist arena, favoring instead, “a strong executive”. You have not made the case that either “environmental policy” and “ideas of social justice” are moral causes, nor that “a strong executive” somehow precludes fostering a moral dynamic of either of your chosen variety.

      So, I guess I do not know what it is you are trying to make as a point, other than that you seem to favor what can only be described as a revolution. Hooray for all those who want to bust windows, set fires, and in turn, get their noggins reshaped by the riot police? How does that help?

      Admittedly, the GW article we’re both commenting on does go long on citing faults and comes up commonly short, prescribing a better course.

      I think the solution you would be better off prescribing, and the solution the GW article begs for, is out of reach given the common misunderstanding between each. That solution is still out of reach because humanity has been led down a path, the scientific path, so far, everyone is dependent upon the meager rations science does offer, so dependent, that they cannot begin to fathom that the scientific-ness of our societies is at the root of every single one of the faults that are generously, though surely not exhaustively, cited in the GW article. And therein is the moral argument you vacuously fail to create in the first of the linked articles in your comment.

      I am an American, Euro-BRICS.

      You are correct when you say in your linked article, that moral ideas [logic] evolve slowly. The evolution of moral ideas is also, never entirely fault free, when common populist moral theories are converted into political ideology. (Hegel is wildly credited with having justified two world wars.)

      This much we can all know about what is moral. -The moral imperative of life, is to live a life that detracts not at all from the lives available to those who will follow us into this world.-

      And let me suggest, this categorically true moral statement, says nothing about making a better world in any progressive sense. The emphasis of this moral statement is all about not allowing our selfish conceptions and desire to make change, take hold and make the world worse off for those who will inherit the world in our fading future.

      Progressives have the appalling idea that they have the right to experiment with the world in order to see if it is somehow possible to make the world better. In that sense, all progressives aspire to play God with the world, as do all scientists too. It is folly.

      Get over that idea. It’s never worked in the past. It’s not going to work in the future. The reason rushing to change the world for the better does not work is wrapped up in another categorically true statement.

      Reality is infinitely complex.

      There will be no de-Americanization of the world. That is impossible, and even laughable. The alternative to American hegemony is never going take hold, because the promise of making a better world is never going to be realized by such a ridiculous populist idea arising as it has in the midst of a worldwide depression. The idea is like, the boat is taking on water, so let’s sink it! Who would anyone have replace the Americans, or the Federal Reserve, on the world stage? The Chinese slaves? Don’t make me laugh. A BRICS central bank? I’m still laughing. A yet-to-arise world wide messiah-like Napoleon? Again the thought makes me charitably laugh.

      The American ethic is changing slowly, and irrevocably toward a more categorical logic, which is a more moral logic. And there, we will find the only viable battleground where the future will be determined. -It will not be a better future.- That is a long way off, perhaps a thousand years off. For the time being there can only be a future less worse than any of the wild-eyed alternatives being proposed.

      • Euro-BRICS


        Thanks for this comment.

        I will start by a winning point : I’m definitly not proposing, in my articles, an alternative.

        The first article is using the political anticipation method. I will explain you what it is, because you missed the point.

        But I’m sure you did not read the whole article in the PDF, but only the introduction on the web page. Otherwise, you would have made much more remarks. Or would you?

        The second article is based on New Austrian Economics theory, and the actual way the COMEX gold market is organized. Sorry I’m still not have finished to translate it, but I know it is important to be translated because for people like you, to click on the upper right button of the page in order to obtain a google translation is too tiring, as you said. But google translation quality is even worse than my own, and because people like you are my primary readers, I will publish the translation when ready.

        Back to the first article :

        I will develop my ideas behind moral only the day when you will have caught what the political anticipation method means and what for it is used.

        Political anticipation method is used to describe trends in the socio-political field. Its goal is not to help to trigger different possible alternatives, like propective does. It is more about observing a path, recognizing the breaking events or powerful but still emerging ones, and evaluate on this basis the location of the resulting impact. The use of references in the articles is crucial in this respect (you could have found them in the PDF). You could learn more about the method in this book:

        There are a lot of philosophical assets behind this method too, but it’s another story. You could find some evidences here (yes there are some sentences in english if you browse the page).

        Back to your final argument:

        “Get over that idea. It’s never worked in the past. It’s not going to work in the future. The reason rushing to change the world for the better does not work is wrapped up in another categorically true statement.

        Reality is infinitely complex.

        There will be no de-Americanization of the world. That is impossible, and even laughable.”

        This is indeed an amazing sample of what I described as “A thought unsuited to the 21st century”.

        You could have used a single well known word for this: TINA. There is no alternative.

        I’m sorry to say this, but you lack some basic philosophy: what is the present? What is the future? Or said differently: what does it mean to think about the actual, and to think about the future?

        You feel you know because it seems obvious but you do not know the beginning of where this leads.

        Thinking is the way future is formed. Humans are thinking continuously. Future is formed continuously.

        That’s explain why some things appear, and disappear. Why there was a de-americanized world before, then an americanized one, then again a de-americanized world. When you said “it is impossible” you only mean you cannot think about a different future, and then you would like others to think the same. Where there is only one thinking, there is only one future. TINA.

        But you cannot avoid people to think, and to think differently. This is what the political anticipation observe. This is explaining why our previous socio-political anticipation have met such excellent success rate.

        And this is why you are wrong.

        Please note our anticipation does not aim to convince anybody, and you in particular. Because we do not propose an alternative that people, once convinced, could choose. Individual choice, your choice or my choice have no deep influence on the described trend.

        Let’s discuss about this sentence now:

        “you seem to favor what can only be described as a revolution. Hooray for all those who want to bust windows, set fires, and in turn, get their noggins reshaped by the riot police? How does that help?”

        First of all, I did not described a revolution of the people, but a counter-revolution. The revolution has already occured, against the people, as explained in the PDF.

        More, I’m not “in favor”. I’m only observing and analyzing the US socio-political trend, as I explained above.
        So the relevant question is not “how does a counter-revolution help”? But “how to be prepared to the coming counter-revolution”?
        As the title said, this is inevitable.

        Another relevant question, you could have asked, would have been: “you propose a timeframe for this event, with arguments, but I would like to propose a different time frame for this event, with others arguments different than yours”. I would have read you very carefully.

        • Tonto

          Clearly, my reply was not only addressed to you, Euro-BRICS. Your response has so little that is cogent (to me), it has further convinced me, that my reply to you is more than adequate for both you and the other readers that wander here.

          My best to you in your prepping endeavors though, whatever they may be. Keep up the good spirits. It’s refreshing. There’s no reason to go postal on the world. Such an individual decision always works out very badly in the end when frustration at the world sets in. Remember that. It’s good advice for everyone. That’s my sincere advice. No matter how disillusioned you become, because you’re being ignored, or your ideas aren’t catching on, there is really never a good reason to go postal.

          Perhaps it’s just your inability to express yourself clearly, or, think with some semblance of reason and logic. Perhaps, it is my inability to see the puzzle you have figured out for yourself. That must be it. I just didn’t care to get past the first few pages of what seemed to me, like incoherent babble. The whole puzzlement obviously never came into view for me, because I got tripped up by the entirely incredible assumptions that prefaced whatever it is you are talking about.

          Again, my best.

          • Rat’s Ass


            That son of a bitch, Tonto is insulting you. He does it to everyone on this board. Just ignore him. He’s a bastard, and a creep. Dont let him deter you. You have a right to say what you want to say. Tonto is full of it.

          • Euro-BRICS


            you have shirked the discussion. I take note you were not able to catch the idea.

            Two last things:

            – no frustration, no disillusion is possible for me. Just because of the humble and iterative demarch. I do not aim to convince anybody, because I do not need to convince anybody : remember that I do not propose an alternative. And my ideas do not have to catch on to be able to change something. That’s the best side against current dominant ideas. I really do not care to be ignored, or laughed all my life long. Because, I repeat, I do not aim to convince anybody. My struggle does not take place at this level.

            – My first comment here was not just writing about prepping. That’s what you did not have caught either; or did you?

            As written in one of the links I gave above:

            [When massive information exist, and because the facts may be terrible,] Those who want to know already know. Those who cannot face the music will never be able to confront the facts regardless of what I or anyone else writes or reveals.

            Again, my best.

          • Tonto

            So, you are a soothsayer, then. You claim to predict the future, right?

            So did all these learned analysts who predicted $5000 gold in 2011.


            Let me tell you something. The government has been behind the -rise- in gold. And the U.S. government is the one who set-up the Bitcoin too. These are both tools being used to set traps for fools, traps intended to take money from people and sovereigns.

            When one buys Bitcoins, they should be a taxable item subject to a state’s sales tax. But they’re not taxable in Maine, or any other state in which I am aware. Maine is a state that is all over everything for sales tax receipts. But somehow, Bitcoins are exempt and -not- subject to the Maine’s state sales tax.

            Golly, gee! Guess why.

            Nothing is as it seems, Euro-BRICS. Right now the “alternative media” is being played like a chump. My point is, you are on the wrong side of that equation. Your views are so commonly “alternative media” friendly, you’re like a one-man walking parody what’s going on online, and, not going on in reality. And, like I said to begin with, it’s all garbage in garbage out all the time online.

            If, as you declare, you are not in danger of going postal, then, you are feeding the hunger and thirst of plenty of moronic individuals who are in danger of going postal. My suggestion is that you go back and read my initial response to your post. Try to read it with an open mind, and not as a response to your original post. I state some categorical truths.

            I am presuming you are clever enough to know what categorical means, or look it up, and to begin to fathom the logical effect of having known categorical truths upon which we can all rely in our search for the truth.

          • Euro-BRICS

            Wrong again, I’m not a soothsayer. I do not predict the future.

            As I said, I anticipate the future based on an published, iterative and proven method. What don’t you understand in “political anticipation method” ?

            I don’t see why you’re speaking about Bitcoins. I’ve never mentioned Bitcoin in my works or here, for good reasons.

            “Nothing is as it seems”: yes I agree very much. Much more than you I guess.

            It seems we totally disagree about what the reality is. I do not expect to convince you, neither to do any effort in this direction as long as you stay in the “what you wrote with plenty of references is full garbage just because I don’t want to read it – try to comment my few lines of categorical truths instead” mood. This would be nonsense.

            About feeding other people, I’m not different than a journalist like Greenwald who only exposes facts. Do you mean he is feeding the hunger and thirst of plenty of moronic individuals who are in danger of going postal, and then he should stop?

            Once again, the choice is quite obvious:

            “In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.”
            (A.I. Solzhenitsyn ; The Gulag Archipelago, 1958-68)

          • Tonto

            You speak of justice. I have never met with her. I suspect she has always been a myth, like Tinkerbell.

            You speak of evil. So did “W”. “They’re evil,” when he was in on the plans for the new Pearl Harbor event in American history.

            There was evil and justice in the Stone Age too. Unfortunately, these terms have no meaning without faulty logic to bolster their populist mystique.

            The preponderance of evidence, upon which you base your anticipation of the future, “anticipation” that is supposedly not predicting the future, is a small pile of the typically, steaming bullshit, when it is placed against the infinite complexity of reality.

            Your problem is you think the Zeitgeist is something that is real. It’s not real. It’s the fabrication of soothsayers like yourself, who use it to “prove” the credibility of their omniscient predictions.

            You’re the next Nostradamus, right?

            Like a stick in the mud, I’m going to tell you again. You are typical of the sort of wagging tongue that strolls through the Internet looking for someplace to deposit personal wisdom, like the epiphany birthed from watching far too much Star Trek on TV, reading too many Discover magazines, or listening to the monkey-suited evangelist, Pat Robertson, day and night on TV tell everyone the end of the fucking world is at hand…

            You will not find reality in scripture, Pat. Reality is not scientific. And neither is reality political. These are just populist notions of a small subset of the myth of the Zeitgeist. It’s just more garbage in and garbage out.

            There’s so much buy-gold, revolution, doomsday crap on the Internet, it’s starting to be hysterically stereotypical. Nothing is true, Euro-BRICS, just because someone said it on the Internet, not even close.

          • Euro-BRICS

            You’ve lost Tonto.

            You said “reality is not scientific” : means you cannot apply a scientific method to progressively understand the reality. You just imagine to erase 2500 years of wisdom with this.

            You said “neither reality is political” : means reality of relations between humans is not at the hand of humans. They are not even slaves, neither animals, they are robot, all of them and not only the 99.9%. I choose to live in a different reality, you know.

            You said “nothing is true” : means nothing is false. Not even a robot think like this. One day with a lot of luck you could heard about quaternions.

            You imagine reality is just what you imagine being the reality. In your next life you could find some books which help you understand how poor you were. Take the list in the page I mentioned previously. A large part of them are available in english, and they were translated by people who were thinking very differently than you now, will you thank them?

            You’ve just tryed a poorly old game when you have sought to conflate my works with any other “hysterically stereotypical crap” just because you only succeeded in reading some words in capitals like “gold”. You not even succeeded to make a difference between a revolution and a counter-revolution. It’s the same word for you.

            You’re chess-mate. End of the game. You’ve lost.

          • Tonto

            Your so-called scientific method (pragmatism, and trial and error) is measured no differently from every other human superstition, when all it can reveal, and every bit of scientific literature, is placed in a great heap, next to the -infinite- complexity of reality. It has all the pretense of every other superstitious approximation of reality. Science is little more than feathered rattles and face paint. Everything science has ever discovered or ever could discover is still but a small pile of dust uncovered by an ugly, conceited, fame-seeking, and suicidal shaman, who is still only an animal, still ignorant of the reality that surrounds us all.

            I am glad to see that you read my words, “hysterically stereotypical crap”, for these are the portrait you paint of yourself, Euro-BRICS. You are but another fame-seeking soothsayer that wrings his hands, and moans incessantly, “The sky is falling, the sky is falling.”

            The sky is not falling. If America is -so- dead, then why do you bother to come here to spread your incantations about reading the entrails of the future from something you call “political anticipation method” and “New Austrian Economics theory”? Garbage, pure unadulterated empirical garbage is what you are holding up as eternal truth and immutable wisdom.

            You, like all the others who prowl and slither over the Internet repeatedly feigning omniscience enough to predict the future, are a laughable charlatan pointlessly trying to enforce some harebrained predictions made solely from what goes on inside your thick skull. It’s garbage in, garbage out from you. The logic of your checkmate is dizzying. It proves every point I have made here.

            And the most important point I’ve made is, reality is not scientific. Reality is categorical. Reality is a great long succession of one-offs. Nothing is true in the sense you mean it. You are grasping at smoke-rings for support, wallowing in your own image of yourself, which you think is like some omniscient god who can predict the future.

            You are mortal, my friend. You cannot predict the future. Your predictions are but your best guess. And your best guesses, are no better than those of all the other stereotypical best-guessers online who are telling everyone in the whole world that they have seen the future.

            Rubbish. What you have seen is your own ghostly image in a mirror.

          • Euro-BRICS

            As I said, you’ve lost Tonto.

            You’re whining and muttering you but you do propose anything. You’re intellectually void.

            But I will help you to do better next time perharps, because you ask one single important question.

            1) about what reality is, just look at what Granger has written. He could help you about logic too.

            2) you asked: If America is -so- dead, then why do you bother to come here to spread your incantations about reading the entrails of the future from something you call “political anticipation method” and “New Austrian Economics theory”?

            The answer is, once again obvious but so far from what you can imagine:
            I do bother to come here to try to help the true american people to understand the causes, and what can then be anticipated, in the current disaster occuring in their country. I’m doing that, like I wrote in my articles, because of a strong sense of empathy. But you cannot understand what empathy is, and what it is part of. You say this is gargabe, because you’re so blind, so void.

          • Tonto

            Yeah, sure. Do you have any idea how long and by how many the end of America has been predicted? Since the time of King George III, that’s how long. I’m weary of debunking it, it happens so often. Every single one of those doom-saying soothsayers had cuddling empathy, and, they were all wrong too.

            You ridiculously can declare yourself the winner all day long. You can paint your face green with envy too, if you want.

            Get back to me when your predictions come true, soothsayer. Get back to me when the counter-revolution takes hold. LoL

          • Euro-BRICS

            Oh for sure I will get back, because I’m going to get back to everybody since the first day. I said my approach is iterative, remember. I need to keep updates about this trend.

            So you can just create a shorcut to these pages to be informed (when you wish to) about each step on the path I’ve anticipated:

   (=> below the article I frequently post new updates with new known facts)

   for my new articles about the US socio-politics (in french or english)

          • Tonto

            Even given that you have no clue what is going on in the present, you are still so sure you can predict the future, it’s a common banality, stereotypically Internet tripe, garbage in and garbage out, and completely laughable.

            When you get done, and hopefully learn your hard-learned lesson about predicting what will happen in the future, perhaps you will be qualified to write a tract about the perils of writing personal predictions of future events. It’s bound to be interesting, if not to people like yourself, who are too wrapped up in their belief in their own omniscience, to bother to consider reading such a truthful thing.

            And I thought you were declaring yourself a winner. Now you are hedging, saying, “We’ll see…” LoL You and all the other millions of future-prognosticators on the net should look more closely at the company you keep, both past and present. Because honestly, you are no different than any of those who endlessly predict the Second Coming based on their personal interpretation of the Bible.

            Hallelujah! Good news, chariots are a-coming!

          • Euro-BRICS


            If all this is garbage, then why do you bother to come here to spread your incantations about what we are writing? Do you enjoy to roll again and again in the garbage you’re the only one to recognize?

            Have a good bath.
            End of discussion.

          • Tonto

            I am glad you have decided to end the discussion. Keep your word.

            “If all this is garbage, then why do you bother to come here to spread your incantations about what we are writing?”

            Those writers who use the first person plural, “we”, are on shaky ground. They gain a false sense reassurance about their position, believing someone is standing behind them cheering them on. Trust me, Euro-Bricks. We are here alone. Not even Carl Herman has read all of this long thread.

            Your counter-revolution is the only thing that will prove you are the genius you pretend to be. But, don’t hold your breath.

            It’s been fun. Keep a stiff upper lip, and stick around for the rest of the show here on the GW blog. The people here are pretty decent as the Internet goes, even if there are a few flakes constantly harping about chem trails, weather modification, and, the occasional ideological twaddle about public banking schemes, extolling the virtue of North Dakota and Costa Rica (of all places).

  • LAM

    Calling a policy stupid because it doesn’t benefit most people is wrong. Dishonest….deceptive….Yes! Stupid…No. More often than not these policies achieve exactly what they were intended to achieve. It’s the people who were stupid for ever believing that these things were done with their best interest at heart. NAFTA, The Patriot Act, The Affordable Care Act, etc. all achieved exactly what they were designed to achieve.

  • gozounlimited

    Violent Suppression in Dallas: JFK 50th Anniversary Compilation …..

    Dallas Cops Try To Put Infowars In a “Free Speech Zone”……

    High-Def Video: Rampaging Feds Attack Free Speech Demonstrators …..

    Dallas Sheriff’s Dept. Lies About Assault On Peaceful Protestors ……

    • gozounlimited

      Matt Damon on Civil Disobedience……

      Matt Damon, a lifelong friend of Howard Zinn and his family, read excerpts from a speech Howard Zinn gave in 1970 as part of a debate on civil disobedience.

      • Rat’s Ass

        Really? A lifelong friend of Howard Zinn?

        Well that explain a lot.

  • Bianca

    What are you wondering? You forgot the US Government isn’t democratic (judging by its machinations).