Pre-cog

By looking at patterns in the past we can come up with a good prediction of what the future holds. For example we could look at our own revolution, Algeria, and Vietnam; to understand that the occupation of Iraq was destined to evoke violent resistance, that would eventually topple the Americans controlling the country.

1. The United States will go to war with Iran, but by proxy. The US will support either Israel or Europe in intervention with Iran. Most likely under the guise of a hunt for WMD.

2. Roe V. Wade will be overturned. With newly appointed neo-con supreme court justices on the way. As well as the case recently in Illinois Federal court where the judge stated unequivocally that "life begins at conception, for the Illinois legislature". The facists in power owe all they have to the christian right for conditioning enough people with the meme that the GOP are followers of Jesus' teachings. Without that bullshit a Republican will never win a national race.

3. Systems of social control created/perpetuated by the media will only grow stronger. The events of 9/11 had an impact that very few discuss, but we can be sure it is being discussed in the executive branch. The murder of the people at the WTC and Pentagon made the entire US population one easy to appeal to demographic. Also what makes the demographic even EASIER to appeal to is the fear, fear can get reasonable people to do very unreasonable things. So marketing which we already understand is an effort at mind control(to a degree) will become more invasive and effective. The era of terror will not end soon, becuase it is very profitable to keep it around.

4.The patriot act will be either destroyed or expanded through passage of the patriot II. The law that essentially eroded the civil rights that had been afforded to us since 1776, will either see an expansion of totalitarianism, or a return to democratic priniciples.

5. If any strong left-wing leaders appear in the near future there will be an assasination. Either character assasination or bullets in the head assasination. This period is so important transformatively that it cannot be allowed for a sensible citizen leader(ex. MLK) to bring truth and compassion in to the equation. This assasination will most likely be done after the orginization supporting the individual is formed. Therefore when the person is killed the orgnization will collapse, and weaken the entire social movement hopefully crippling it. The only variable in the equation is how powerful the truth the person speaks and how charismatic the speaker. If too powerful and too charismatic, then the option of using the massive propaganda machine(the media) to slander the individual is not an option anymore.

Just throwin out some predictions, obviously fate doesn't exist, I just wanna see if I can ge a few right.
-Jimothy J. Jones

That Cog Dee

Ok so this shoulda been posted awhile ago, but its pretty funny. I just keep thinking about it and the people that i've told always suggest I tell someone else.
Both stories are related, the first one kinda lets you enter the mind of a christian-conservative/neo-conservative/facist, the second sums up the across the board assumption of all people who support war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ok so I live near Chicago and a week or two before nov. 2 I was riding the train in to school. This elderly lady with a slight east european accent(not sure what nation) walks up to me with an air of haste around her. Turns out she is a political activist and very passionate about what she is doing, probably organizing with her church.
The woman says to me "Here I have to give you this[flyer]. We have to get young people to vote for Alan Keyes and George W. Bush."
"I can't do that" came my response.
"Oh don't say tha-" she said
"-Does that say 'pro-life for George W. bush' on that flyer?" I asked taking notice of the heading.
"Yes, pro life" she replied
"Were you aware that George Bush while Governor of Texas executed more people than any governor in history and he didn't even finish his 2nd term?" I inquired
"That is not true" came the reply.
I was dumbfounded, I thought for a few seconds "how could I prove this" I realized that I could lecture her or tell her to read. Neither of which would likely help her opinion exist outside a vacuum. So I chalked it up to another individual who let faith overwhelm reason, and if a person is not reasonable, you cannot debate them.
"Well there is little I can do if you don't accept facts" I said over my shoulder as i started walking down the steps towards the train platform, as it could be heard on its' approach.




I have also been trying to drop some knowledge on the facists over at collegeconservative.com, after I heard they got hacked I went to check it out. The host put up an open letter bitching about socialism. The first thing I saw when I got to the website is an article talking about how Abu Ghraib isn't that bad and the "liberal" media blew it out of proportion. The article espouses an ideology that liberals would want to give the prisoners a room at a posh hotel(as if that is the only alternative to violating the geneva conventions).
When the debate has an attempt by a conservative to mix the colors and make it a wash(which is always the case, like the guy who responded to my post on college conservative with an ad-hom insulting this site you are currently reading for grammar or something[like i'm an english teacher or give a shit, my speech.writing is real]). The easy way is to not bombard them with all the contradictions, but stick to the central meme that has ample evidence and an aversion to conservative's moral equivocation.
So I posted it up: United States Soldiers Sodomized Children on videotape.

The answers were what i told you: an ad-hom about my site, a general bitch about socialist theory guy, and one person who quoted another's post "If torturing an Iraqi will save a GI"s life then black is positive red is negative".

Then I realized this is not an argument, this does not even apply to my abu ghraib meme. This is a general value judgment that conservatives would rather see an Iraqi die then an American(I'd like to see if we could make their head explode by changing the options to: a young black GI and a white christian Iraqi LOL).
I realized that I didn't want to see either of them die or get tortured. One thing I do know though is based on what tiny information I have: the CIA is the Michael Jordan of torture. Death would be preferable to all who will have to go through the CIA's codified torture methods.
My assumption is that GI's are given orders by those in power. GI's choose to be GI's because most of them have very little other choice(college money or second chance at life or whatever). They are killed as much by Iraqis as the Americans who send them to die.
This is the fundamental divide between a facist and republican-democrat. They see war and they ask "why did 1000 people die?" they're response is that Iraqis are animals that killed them and hate us because of 911.
My belief is that it is because they were sent there by chicken-hawks, then the chicken-hawks are responsible for their death.

the entire meme can be summed up very easily: Collective Punishment.
neo-conservatives/facists believe in collective punishment. They actually believe(this is important, because history books won't say this), they actually believe that Islam blew up the world trade center. They believe that Muslims were responsible so all Muslims should be punished. If you remember the rise of the third reich there was a strong belief in collective punishment for the jew the power to really start enforcing such beliefs from the top-down provided itself after the burning of the reichstag.

I do not believe in collective punishment. I tend to ascribe to a Benthamesque vision of justice and punishment. I think only INDIVIDUALS who are responsible for crimes should be punished.

-Jimothy J. Jones

p.s. Can anyone tell me why i'm sorrounded by so many people that are pro-torture? Do they just have no empathy? or are they androids like a Philip K. Dick novel?