The Corporate Media and Critical Thinking in Education

In the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell’s hapless protagonist Winston Smith is required to iterate the Party slogan: “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”1 Orwell adumbrated a world where past and present are controlled by the message. The corporate media, marketing world, and others also realized the power of the dominant message. Hence, it is not surprising that those with a vested interest would seek to control the message. One way of doing this is to control the media for, as Marshall McLuhan popularized decades ago, “The medium is the message.”2

In the case of Palestine/Israel, the Zionist-owned or -controlled media will attempt to control the discourse. The Lobby and Zionist media have controlled discourse most effectively. To assure future control, the message reaching the next generation must also be controlled.

In Toronto, one alternative public school, TheStudentsSchool (TSS), studies the occupation of Palestine and the war crimes committed in perpetuating the occupation. That was too much for the manifestly Zionist National Post newspaper.3 An indignant article was published, and an investigation of TSS teacher John Morton was launched.

Barbara Kay, whose disinformation I have covered before,4 is zealously vigilant against education about the Zionist occupation – something she views in a bizarre reversal.

Kay uses George Orwell’s Animal Farm as a metaphor: teachers are “pigs” and high school students are “newborn puppies.”5 Kay charges that TSS is indoctrinating the high school students.

Some of Morton’s colleagues within the Toronto District School Board (TSDB) reacted “with dismay” at his possible censure from “a misleading and possibly libelous article which appeared in the National Post.” Morton’s colleagues labeled Kay’s Animal Farm analogy “preposterous” and “the opposite of what is alleged to be happening at TSS and other schools – i.e. repression of open discussion and debate of the Israel-Palestine conflict…”

The TSDB communique argued that making students critically aware was a moral imperative:

For teachers and school administrators to ignore this situation, especially as conflict in the region assumes proportions of a humanitarian crisis, would be pedagogically unsound, morally irresponsible and contrary to principles of inclusive curriculum and the TDSB’s Equity and Foundations Statement. Moreover, as citizens of a state that is a signatory to the Fourth Geneva Conventions, we have the obligation to educate our students about International Law and how to think critically about states which are in violation of it.

Indoctrination?

Kay advocates debating “both sides of the story.” This is reasonable. However, long after facts have been established, the demand for “balanced reporting” becomes disingenuous and is, itself, a bias. For what is meant by “balance”? Does balance mean that when confronted by 100 verifiable facts of war crimes that 100 specious and mendacious factoids from the perspective of the war criminals must be presented? What does the application of critical thought hold for a universal balancing of views?

I took Kay up on her penchant for discussion and emailed her asking for clarification/substantiation of eight points.6 First, I questioned whether Kay was implying that high school learners lacked sufficient critical thinking ability, and I asked what evidence she had that the learners were indoctrinated and that their critically thinking was being suppressed?

She went off on another tangent:

*Implying* that high school students have not yet mastered critical thinking? My dear, most adults with university degrees in my opinion have not mastered the art of critical thinking, for critical thinking is not so much a matter of basic IQ as it is exposure to a wide variety of *objective* facts, a wide variety of opinion around those facts and a great deal of practice in analysis and interpretation – not to mention a certain historical referential depth that no high school student can be expected to have.

Critical thinking might well be an underutilized skill. But my query was not about whether high school students had “mastered critical thinking.” I asked whether she denied that students have “critical thinking ability.”7

Kay took extreme exception to students being presented the film Occupation 1018 in a room without any adults present:

It is the role of a high school to prepare its students to think critically, which involves exposure to thinking, not memorizing. The school in question is shutting down critical thinking and presenting one side of a story as though it were settled fact, which is not the case at all. The story they are being fed is being presented by advocates and activists in a political cause, not by history teachers. That is why I call it indoctrination and it is indoctrination by any definition of the word.

Indoctrination according to Dictionary.com: “to instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., esp. to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.” Critical here is “biased belief or point of view.” Facts are not partisan or biased, and hence, the presentation of facts is not indoctrination. Ergo, to label something as indoctrination requires that the critic refute the facts, thereby exposing them as biased beliefs or falsehoods. Kay did not do this, and she ignored my invitation to refute the facts. Kay merely asserts. Abraham Lincoln compellingly argued that “assertion” is an inexcusable falsehood: “I believe it is an established maxim in morals that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him.”9

Kay states, “Gaza is not occupied – Israel left in 2004 – and you make no mention of the provocations that caused this war.”

As for Gaza not being occupied, that is semantics. When a country’s airspace, borders, and coast are controlled and blockaded by another entity (a UN official called the blockade “devastating” for Palestinians10), then I submit that it is equally or more sinister than an occupation; it is a siege.

Kay evaded each question that I posed in our “discussion”; instead she resorted to personalized attacks:

If you knew anything of the history of the area, and of the five wars – all started by the Arab states – and of the terrorism that predated the Occupation against Israel, perhaps we could have a discussion. But your ignorance and bias and hostility are set in stone. And that is precisely why it is dangerous for young students to be listening to people like you, and not to be presented with an alternate view.

In Kay’s worldview, it is an “Occupation against Israel”!

Orwell on Democracy and Censorship in Animal Farm

Kay rails against any depiction of Israel as the aggressor without presenting the Zionist viewpoint,11 saying this endangers democracy and must, therefore, be stopped. The absurdity of Kay’s position is easily revealed by an analogy which would require that each time Nazi World War II atrocities are mentioned that a Nazi viewpoint must be presented for balance.12

Kay advocates a veiled censorship: young learners can be presented information that is disputed by another group as long as the disputing group can present its information. As I have argued, this is fine when each side substantiates its facts. However, facts must not be balanced with factoids.

While Animal Farm does depict the dangers of indoctrination, Kay has missed much of the point of Orwell’s novel. In the intended preface to Animal Farm — itself subject to censorship — Orwell argued against the suppression of uncomfortable truths: the silencing of unpopular ideas and inconvenient facts by “censorship that can be enforced by pressure groups.”13

Orwell wrote,

If the intellectual liberty which without a doubt has been one of the distinguishing marks of western civilisation means anything at all, it means that everyone shall have the right to say and to print what he believes to be the truth, provided only that it does not harm the rest of the community in some quite unmistakable way.

Orwell argued for freedom of speech; he did not advocate any fettering of speech with provisos to balance “the truth.”

Orwell held it to be a fact that “intellectual freedom is a deep-rooted tradition without which our characteristic western culture could only doubtfully exist.”

Kay concluded her article, “George Orwell said it with puppies and pigs, but the message was the same: HAIA, whose reach is extending into other high schools as I write, is dangerous to democracy and must be stopped.”

Is this really Orwell’s message of danger to democracy? He wrote,

[T]here is now a widespread tendency to argue that one can only defend democracy by totalitarian methods. If one loves democracy, the argument runs, one must crush its enemies by no matter what means. And who are its enemies? It always appears that they are not only those who attack it openly and consciously, but those who ‘objectively’ endanger it by spreading mistaken doctrines. In other words, defending democracy involves destroying all independence of thought.

I submit that Kay has twisted the thought of Orwell and the evidence for her claims is either non-existent, mendacious, or wrapped in ad hominem. Readers are invited to critically contemplate and draw their own conclusions.

I further submit that Kay and the National Post feigned a desire for both sides of an “issue” to be presented. The Zionist media is concurrently attempting to silence university professors. Dennis Rancourt, a tenured full professor and highly recognized physics professor at the University of Ottawa, is being hounded — purportedly for his “political views about the Palestine-Israel conflict” — by the CanWest Global Communications Corporation (owner of the National Post) through its Ottawa Citizen newspaper and a recently appointed pro-Zionist university president, Allan Rock.14

Education and Conscience

We live in a world ravaged by the scourge of war, a world where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, where socialism is a taboo word, where corporations have the rights of persons, and when the capitalists run their corporations into the ground, the masses are expected to acquiesce to socialism for the capitalists.

It is in the powerful nations, often built through the dispossession of the land and resources belonging to the Indigenous peoples, that capitalists, their corporations, and their private banks have grow topsy-turvy gargantuan, enriching themselves off war, looting resources, and by immiserating the workers until the workers could no longer buy what the companies made; consequently, the greed of the companies spelled their own downfall.

But what could keep such a system charging along head on until its own predictable doom? Why would the people not solidarize, withdraw their labor, demonstrate in the streets, and refuse to be killers and cannon fodder for the government’s military? I submit that the answer lies largely in the controlled worldview presented to the masses via the corporate media.

Propaganda and disinformation are mighty tools. It is said that information is power, so if one controls information, then one would, according to the aphorism, be powerful. The media are a preponderant source of information. There is an inherent bias in that the corporate media have the money to dominant the presentation and propagation of information in the world.

There is also another adage which holds that power corrupts, absolute power corrupting absolutely. Thus the masses are presented a worldview that conforms to the parameters set by the capitalists and their desire for money, control of information, and power – which, ultimately, will lead to the greater corruption of capitalists and their eventual downfall (unless or until bailed out by socialism).

How to escape the onslaught of propaganda and disinformation? Certainly not by censorship; because who will be entrusted with the responsibility to censor? It is necessary that people be empowered to think for themselves, to be open-minded and sufficiently skeptical to information presented to them, to research, discuss, analyze, and draw conclusions – what is commonly referred to as critical thinking.

Consequently, unfettered critical thinking is not something one would expect to be encouraged within a capitalist society, and certainly it wouldn’t be expected in the corporate media except as a mere buzzword or ethereal concept, something designed not to draw too much serious attention.

The Foremost Task of Education

What should be taught in society’s schools? In a statement to a Brooklyn church minister on 20 November 1950, the renown physicist Albert Einstein put forward his thought:

The most important human endeavor is the striving for morality in our actions. Our inner balance and even our very existence depend on it. Our morality in our actions can give beauty and dignity to life.

To make this a living force and bring it to clear consciousness is perhaps the foremost task of education.15

The ways of the past have not eliminated inequality, poverty, racism, and warring. It seems obvious that a new direction is called for.

Within the education system, social justice entered the high school curriculum last September in the province of British Columbia. Opening the doors to social justice issues and inviting critical thinking pose powerful challenges to the old power structure.16 A better way lies in exposing (not indoctrinating) young minds to the ethical paucity of capitalism; the alternatives of anarchism, socialism, and communism; the ravages wrought by imperialism, colonialism, and Zionism – including arguments for and against. Preparing learners for critical thinking is crucial, but critical thinking alone is insufficient. Learners must be exposed to issues of life, morality, and social justice and be encouraged to analyze, draw their own conclusions, and defend them. When the ground is prepared, a potential arises for an increasingly enlightened and sophisticated younger generation. The world needs a generation that can organize, plan, demand, and build a better society where social justice has meaning beyond academic discourse – where social justice might become a reality.

  1. George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four. Available at The Complete Works of George-Orwell. []
  2. Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media: the Extensions of Man (Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1964): 7. []
  3. The National Post even deigned to publish a story wherein the Simon Wiesenthal Center evoked the WWII Holocaust for the fraudulent news of Iran requiring labeling of its Jewish citizens. See “Iran eyes badges for Jews,” National Post, 19 May 2006. Removed from the Post site, but available online at Free Republic. []
  4. See Kim Petersen, “Defining Racism,” Dissident Voice, 26 November 2007 and Kim Petersen and BJ Sabri, “Defining Israeli Zionist Racism,” Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12Dissident Voice, December 2007-January 2008. []
  5. Barbara Kay, “Barbara Kay: Teaching hate at Toronto’s alternative school puppy mill,” National Post, 4 March 2009. []
  6. Kay, to her credit responded to this writer, neither John Morton nor anyone from with TSDB responded. []
  7. The entirety of the email correspondence is readable here. []
  8. Occupation 101 is highly recommended and viewable online. []
  9. Roy P. Basler (ed.), Abraham Lincoln: His Speeches and Writings (Cleveland, OH: World Publishing, 1946): 187. Limited availability online. []
  10. Reuters, “UN to Israel: Ease ‘devastating’ Gaza blockade,” Haaretz, 3 April 2009 []
  11. This is fine because the Israeli viewpoint often corroborates the abuses of the Jewish state that Kay denies. For example, see Amos Harel, “Testimonies on IDF misconduct in Gaza keep rolling in,” Haaretz, 22 March 2009. []
  12. Kay, however, poses on the issue of balance in education as she knows well — or should — that it does not exist within the corporate media. Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky have meticulously documented this in their Propaganda Model. See Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (New York: Pantheon, 2002). []
  13. See George Orwell, “The Freedom of the Press” (Proposed Preface to Animal Farm). []
  14. See “Statement by Dennis Rancourt Regarding His Dismissal by the University of Ottawa,” Academic Freedom, 10 April 2009. []
  15. Heklen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Albert Einstein — The Human Side: New Glimpses from His Archives (Princeton University Press, 1979): 83. It should also be noted that the editors in their book make the argument that Einstein was a Zionist. It is debatable. []
  16. One school board in southern BC sought to censor the teaching of the Social Justice course in its district causing demonstrations by the students. Catherine Rolfsen, “Gay-friendly course halted by Abbotsford school board,” Vancouver Sun, 21 September 2008. []
Kim Petersen is a former co-editor of the Dissident Voice newsletter. He can be reached at: kimohp@gmail.com. Twitter: @kimpetersen. Read other articles by Kim.

26 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. greybeard said on April 20th, 2009 at 11:48am #

    Tragically this kind of “debate” is common among Zionists, apparently because they do not separate their allegiance to Israel from their allegiance to truth. The Unabomber’s brother, having discovered the Unabomber’s identity, exposed him to legal authorities–presumably because his commitment to justice was stronger than his filial commitment. Hanna Arendt was “excommunicated” from “proper Jewish society” for having exactly that same commitment to truth. Whether it is the slogan, “My country, right or wrong” or some other commitment, placing any dogma above truth and justice (they are not separable) is what the old preachers called idolatry. Today it’s very fashionable!

  2. Michael said on April 20th, 2009 at 3:53pm #

    Great article, but we have to remember the Zionist’s strategy of confusing and distracting us. The Denis Rancourt case is the perfect example. While he claims to be anti-Zionist, he has refused to answer basic questions about his true relationship with Allan Rock. Google ‘rockourt’ if you want the full story about that.

  3. George Thompson said on April 20th, 2009 at 8:11pm #

    Let’s just come out and say it because it’s a fact anyway. We are controlled by a small number of Jewish converts that are also Zionists. These people are not actually Jewish as Minister Farrakhan has told all of us many times. They are Khazars and Ashkhenazis. Note the nazi on the end of that word. Bush and many others have used their playbook as well including Bush’s grandfather Prescott Bush.

    These people have conspired for centuries to overthrow all of mankind. Hitler did not kill six million of them. Hitler was a pawn and a fall guy. The false Euro-Jews had bankrupted Germany. They had no money for a Holocaust. The wealthy Euro-Jews actually financed the Holocaust themselves to garner worldwide sympathy so they could go about ravaging the planet and now they control our government 100%. Add that to the fact that only a third of that many actually died and many of those in service to Germany. Once again this is a documented historical fact that has been hidden by the very people that own the media and control public education and discourse.

    This is a battle between humanity and a small group of subhumans that consider themselves a superior species to the rest of us. We are the goyim and the Gentiles and they believe the Talmud gives them the right to exterminate the rest of us. They used the same tactic to turn poor whites against blacks with white privilege. Whites fell for it and America has been torn asunder ever since. These people cannot be reasoned with. They are not real Jews so stop calling them that. Real Jews are Black Hebrews. These people of Khazar converted to Judaism hundreds of years ago and now claim to be descendants of David. Honestly I think all of religion is a load but their version is a double load.

    They manipulated Christianity for their own personal gain and now have blacks and many whites believing that blacks are victims of the curse of Ham. That is utterly ridiculous. These fake Jews are not the children of Israel. Black Americans are more Jewish in blood than they any EuroJew. Look at their skin. How could they possibly be from Palestine? They have not had time to evolve to become white. They are imposters, charlatans, psychopaths and megalomaniacs.

    They orchestrated the Transatlantic slave trade and built their trillions off African blood and suffering and now we worship their god which is really Lucifer. If you do not think they want to kill you by dumbing down your kids, giving you toxic medications for profit, putting fluoride in our water to make you a zombie, poisoning our air, etc then don’t believe it. You will perish anyway because your belief in this conspiracy is the only thing that will save you from it. Not all white Jews are Zionists but many of them are openly or tacitly. Listen to Daryl Bradford Smith every Tuesday and read the literature at his site http://www.iamthewitness.com. If you want to deny the facts of history it’s up to you. It will spell your own doom. It may be too late now anyway.

  4. Anti-Racist said on April 20th, 2009 at 9:31pm #

    Anti-Semitism is an odious form of racism that has long afflicted the body politic. It is like Herpes in that periodically there are big outbreaks.

    It is a 100% detrimental to the very important work of fighting for social justice in Palestine/Israel. For this reason, we should absolutely reject commentary like that from the two posters above.

  5. Laser said on April 20th, 2009 at 10:33pm #

    George thinks that “We are controlled by a small number of Jewish converts that are also Zionists.”

    I presume he believes that Jews control the world. Not “Zionists,” but Jews. He claims that “They orchestrated the Transatlantic slave trade and built their trillions off African blood and suffering and now we worship their god which is really Lucifer.” Unless you think that the Zionists were involved in slave trade.

    These are anti-Semitic canards that are older than George. That he expects any sane person to believe them is not testimony to his clear thinking.

    But it stinks and makes impossible any sort of rational discourse.

  6. Hue Longer said on April 21st, 2009 at 1:56am #

    Laser,

    With George perhaps (I don’t think so… pointing out a flaw in reasoning can always be a beginning)…but not with Kim or many others here who have engaged with you. Are you saying, “what about George”? in response to this article or Kay?

  7. Laser said on April 21st, 2009 at 4:16am #

    The George to whom I referred was “George Thompson said on April 20th, 2009 at 8:11pm.”

    The difference between what he wrote and what the others wrote has no real significance. The diatribes do not become any more factual when the author replaces “Jews” with “Zionists.”

    Martin Luther King was aware of that before many of you were even born.

    .

  8. Hue Longer said on April 21st, 2009 at 6:08am #

    Laser,

    I know the George to whom you referred

    I even made mention of a possible error in logic that you found in what George had to say (Specifically and off point, you made a claim saying he suggested that Zionists were around during a time that included pre-Zionist but nonetheless Jewish converts—He didn’t actually say Zionists did this but that converts who later became Zionists did).

    I found fault with much of what he said but am again asking that YOU stick with the matter at hand. Does George’s take render you incapable of addressing the topic? I too like to point out flaws in reasoning and my problems with you and George aside (viable as discussion on their own- no matter how off they may be), let’s get to the meat. What is your take on the article concerning Kay and the media removed from George?

  9. Max Shields said on April 21st, 2009 at 6:57am #

    I am completely convinced that the gov’t is owned by two factions, financial sector and AIPAC. I would have said corporte, but there are exceptions such as the auto industry.

    The power structure is bought and owned, and even a slight sway this way or that will bring down the so-called “mightiest”. It seems this strangle hold is stronger now than ever before.

    Spitzer was perhaps the best AG in the country, praticularly when it came to the shysters on Wall Street, and he was politically destroyed in an instant even after he had gained incredible support in NY and became the Governor. His replacement, who was suppose to be a progressive, has sworn allegiance to AIPAC and Israel and it’s murderous ways.

    As much as I find our corporate owned President an empty suit with a mouth, even his slightest of overtures toward the Palestinians (so-called moderate ones, whatever that means) is being touted by Israeli “intelligence” as endangering the state of Israel. Such maddness makes attempts at critical thinking a joke.

    We have a president who kisses APAIC’s collective ass, and ensures the continued flow of arms and billions to the Zionist state, boycotts international talks on racism at APAIC/Zionists’ demand and twists the arms of “allies” to do the same, and he (Obama) is endangering Israel????

    And this asshole, laser, posts endlessly on Dissident Voices his vile comments. We know him. He is on the news in one form or another. Must we have his shit posted over and over and over and over on this “critical thinking” blog.

    To respond to laser is to be complicit with his and the Zionist agenda.

    This is the one and only post that I will ever refer to “him/her” comments or “name” again. I would implore others to do likewise. Stop feeding hate and murder!!!

  10. ron ridenour said on April 21st, 2009 at 8:24am #

    Kim,
    This is a right on viewpoint. Thank you for your thoughts, and especially your emphasis on placing morality on top of our priorities are resistance fighters to immoral capitalism-imperialism. We also need to define our morality based upon the overall ethic of:
    an end to misery-inequality-classes and the creation of a holistic world for all humans and the planet; stop the killing, start the loving!

    Keep on truckìn, bro,
    Ron Ridenour

  11. Michael Kenny said on April 21st, 2009 at 8:40am #

    A beautiful example of “controlling the discourse”: did you know that Israel withdrew its ambassador from Switzerland yesterday? In protest at Ahmadinejad’s remarks (which natrually are all over the media!) at a meeting which the Swiss didn’t even host! The meeting is being held in UN buildings in Geneva over which the Swiss have no control. Didn’t know? I’m not surprised! It was the lead story on the Swiss TV news last night and the Swiss are furious, but not a word in the US or even British media! Google the story. It’s all over the media in Switzerland and most of the world, but not in “certain countries”, so to speak.

  12. Laser said on April 21st, 2009 at 10:12am #

    Max,

    We “all know” that the Jews run the world. But you are claiming that they “run” only half of the world.

    It sounds as though Max is getting soft. Maybe he has a Jewish girlfriend??

    And I am pleased that Max is usingthe profanity that he learned yesterday in intermediate school. It makes him so much more charming. But what would his Jewish girlfriend say?

  13. Laser said on April 21st, 2009 at 10:42am #

    Michael, you may be interested in knowing that the Swiss have their interests. Swiss businessmen with ties to Pakistan’s A.Q. Khan have been implicated in selling, on the black market, blueprints for a compact nuclear weapon. The Swiss trading company EGL is doing billions of dollars’ worth of (technically legal) business with Iran.

    When Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey was granted an audience with Ahmadinejad last year, the feminist politician, eager not to offend, donned a head-scarf.

    The Swiss Foreign Ministry explains that Berne has a “long-term strategic rationale” for its actions. Some of that rationale was already on display during World War II, in Switzerland’s erratic policies toward Jewish asylum seekers.

    When it appeared that Germany would win the war, Switzerland, for the most part, kept Jewish refugees out; but when it appeared the Allies might win, the Swiss reversed course. In the final weeks of the war, they even demanded that the Nazis stop deportations altogether.

    Back in 1938, when Berlin was ascendant, the Swiss requested that Germany and Austria mark the passports of their Jewish citizens with a “J” so that Berne could distinguish between “genuine political refugees” and fleeing Jews. A Swiss police captain named Paul Gruninger who allowed thousands of Jews to cross the border illegally was thrown off the force.

    But when it suited Swiss “rationale,” Jews were allowed in – from the Netherlands and Belgium in 1941; from Italy in 1943. And in 1944, 1,684 Jews were permitted to enter from Bergen Belen as part of the Rudolf Kastler-Adolf Eichmann deal.

  14. Laser said on April 21st, 2009 at 10:46am #

    Sorry about my typos. The last sentence should have read:

    And in 1944, 1,684 Jews were permitted to enter from Bergen- Belsen as part of the Rudolf Kastner-Adolf Eichmann deal.

  15. Deadbeat said on April 21st, 2009 at 12:42pm #

    Max Shields writes …

    I am completely convinced that the gov’t is owned by two factions, financial sector and AIPAC. I would have said corporte, but there are exceptions such as the auto industry.

    It has become more evident. Something at this point that cannot be denied — not even by Chomsky one would hope. WRT the auto industry, it is all about busting the union and driving down working class living standards. Capitalism and Zionism which is the basis of “neo-conservatism” has a tight grip on the U.S. political economy.

  16. Gary Corseri said on April 21st, 2009 at 1:12pm #

    Nice going, Kim!

    You begin by delineating the folly of the foolish; or, rather, by allowing Barbara Kay to reveal it for herself. Just what is this pervasive notion of “balance” in the realm of ideas? How has the notion been corrupted by the “balancing” of “factoids” and half-truths against the actual facts of people suffering the loss of their land, their water, their food, their living, their democratic rights?

    Next, you move into rich Orwellian territory. Your apt citation of Orwell shows just how prescient he could be about our modern times. It is worth repeating–and we may hear the echoes of our 20th Century tyrants thudding their steel boots in the background just as we hear our 21st Century prevaricators whipping up the radio frequencies now: “[T]here is now a widespread tendency to argue that one can only defend democracy by totalitarian methods. If one loves democracy, the argument runs, one must crush its enemies by no matter what means. And who are its enemies? It always appears that they are not only those who attack it openly and consciously, but those who ‘objectively’ endanger it by spreading mistaken doctrines. In other words, defending democracy involves destroying all independence of thought.”

    Last, you move into Einsteinian perspectives, exhorting us to view the quest for truth from the highest moral grounds–defining who we are, and who we can be, as humans. A bravissimo performance!

  17. Nuages de Nuance said on April 21st, 2009 at 6:12pm #

    Really good job, Kim – congratulations, kudos, general approbations.

    Re the “comments”: I wouldn’t go as far as “anti-Racist”‘s claim that absolutely nothing “George Thomson” posted had any validity whatsoever, but I do continue to be of the opinion that his rant opens the door to characters like this “Laser”. George, like Andrew Winkler, offers a mix of true, possibly true, and completely fictional propositions, poisoning the well for anybody who may want to investigate any of the more possibly factual statements by making it appear to the less-sophisticated reader that people who hold views hostile to Zionism & Federal Reservism are probably just more crackpots & white supremacists like George & Andy.

    BTW, is it just me or has Max’s thinking undergone a dramatic development over the past cpl yrs? I find myself increasingly impressed.
    With regard to the identification of AIPAC and the “Financial Sector” as the two controlling elements, my own investigations indicate that the two are really just one, AIPAC being a political instrument of the “financial community” which just coincidentally happens to be controlled by US-based Jewish Zionists.

    Lenni Brenner estimated in his “Jews in America Today” that somewhere between 20 & 30% of US invested capital was owned by Zionist Jews. Of course it is impossible to verify his calculations, but it seems unlikely given events of the decades since that the Zionist share of the Wall St pie has shrunk significantly. Whatever the facts are, it seems clear that behind all the US Zionist shenanigans must lie a big pot of do-re-mi.
    Just how big is a question to pose to our “left economist” and “left Sociologist” friends. Alas, there seems to be a general reluctance to consider such matters, even among pro-Palestine analysts.
    I have my own opinions about the cause of this reluctance, but not being a mindreader I will refrain from further speculation:)

  18. Suthiano said on April 21st, 2009 at 6:48pm #

    Deadbeat, Nuages, Max et al,

    It is very reassuring to see that here on Dissident Voice we are working towards breaking away facades of separateness to reveal underlying unities.

    Now we have to ask ‘what is zionism?’

    I don’t think that question has simply an economic or political answer.

    I believe there are deep-seeded religious, spiritual beliefs (and thus practices) at the core of these values.

    I also believe that these values are not the ‘religious’ values held and practiced by the large body of people who make up the ‘Jewish community’.

    The point here isn’t for me to tell you exactly what I believe, but rather for us to start thinking along these lines… After all PEOPLE ACT WITHIN THE PICTURE OF THE WORLD THAT THEY HOLD.

    So I ask for everyone who’s interested to help in recreating this picture as accurately as possible. By understanding the picture the ‘zionists’ are acting within, we can predict future actions and easily see through rhetoric.

    I will begin by pointing to the connection between the biggest banks and the Vatican. The Jewish Encyclopedia openly admits (boasts) that the Rothschild’s are in control of the Vatican treasury.

    Why is this important? We can start understanding that the distinctions drawn between Jews and Catholics are meant to work at the lower levels to create tension and strife, but do not apply to the heads of these pyramids.

    Again,

    this is not me professing to know anything.

    It is a open call to others on Dissident Voice to help in the pursuit should they think it worthwhile.

  19. lichen said on April 21st, 2009 at 9:04pm #

    Social justice for children and minors also needs to enter the classroom, through democratic, nonpunitive schools, and the extending of full equal, rights and protections that adults enjoy to children as well.

  20. Laser said on April 21st, 2009 at 9:44pm #

    Suthiano repeated a libel, without checking, when he wrote, “I will begin by pointing to the connection between the biggest banks and the Vatican. The Jewish Encyclopedia openly admits (boasts) that the Rothschild’s are in control of the Vatican treasury.”

    That is not true; nor is it written in the Jewish Encyclopedia.

    What a surprise!!!

    What does that do to the insidious conspiracy theories?

    What does that do the charge that “some of my best friends are Jews and it’s just the Zionists that I despise”?

  21. Suthiano said on April 21st, 2009 at 11:18pm #

    It is indeed written there.

    “It is a somewhat curious sequel to the attempt to set up a Catholic competitor to the Roths-childs that at the present time the latter are the guardians of the papal treasure” (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=445&letter=R&search=Rothschild)

    It is not suprising, given my prounounced task, that I should come under attack.

    Look at this sophist who attacks me with false accusations after I have made such a clear attempt to differentiate between the general and the specific.

    I know the friends on DV are smart enough to see through such attack.

  22. Don Hawkins said on April 22nd, 2009 at 1:46am #

    The most important human endeavor is the striving for morality in our actions. Our inner balance and even our very existence depend on it. Our morality in our actions can give beauty and dignity to life.

    To make this a living force and bring it to clear consciousness is perhaps the foremost task of education. Einstein

    Ever now and then I watch this show on Fox called red eye to see just how far we have not come in consciousness or for the people I see on this show and there thinking unconsciousness. The last show I watched a guest said that it is to bad the kid’s today are being taught about climate change the lie and are being told they must sacrifice mankind our way of life for the natural World. The person who said that is a wall street person.

  23. Laser said on April 22nd, 2009 at 5:10am #

    Suthiano,

    Just to make sure once again, I checked the URL that you gave. I suspect that if you went there yourself, you did not understand what you read.

    To say that you have your deposited your money in a certain bank does NOT mean that that bank is in control of your treasury.

    do you think that the other people on DV have that little understnding of the written word?

  24. Suthiano said on April 22nd, 2009 at 7:31am #

    Laser,

    obviously you’ve never read anything except for how to be a giant sophist.

    “To say that you have your deposited your money in a certain bank does NOT mean that that bank is in control of your treasury.”

    “It is a somewhat curious sequel to the attempt to set up a Catholic competitor to the Roths-childs that at the present time the latter are the guardians of the papal treasure” (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=445&letter=R&search=Rothschild).

    Laser, you giant sophist, where do you see anything about making a deposit?

    “Guardians of the papal treasure”.

    The papal treasure (if you knew anything about the Vatican) REFERS TO ANY ASSETS OF THE VATICAN, WHICH ARE ENORMOUS AND UNDISCLOSED! WHY DO YOU THINK THE WRITER CHOSE TO WRITE ‘PAPAL TREASURE’ AS OPPOSED TO A DEPOSIT OF A CERTAIN AMOUNT?

    In closing: “Lieberman: US to accept any Israeli policy decision” (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1080097.html).

    That’s enough for Laser, he won’t get any further responses from me.

  25. Laser said on April 22nd, 2009 at 10:10am #

    Suthiano,

    You continue to confuse the role of a bank with the role of a treasurer.

    Why don’t you just have a talk with your high school economics teacher, who would be happy to explain certain basics to you. (He will explain to you that a guardian of a treasure refers to the bank in which the treasure is stored. He probably will explain the meaning of treasure, which is wealth — for example, money, jewels, or precious metals — that is stored somewhere.)

    He might even give you a passing grade at the end of the semester.

  26. Laser said on May 21st, 2009 at 7:30am #

    Here comes another reason for you guys to start screaming entrapment or racial profiling.

    Yesterday the FBI announced the arrest of a cell of four people, surprisingly all Muslims, in a plot to blow up a synagogue in Riverdale, NY, and shoot down an aircraft with a Stinger missile.

    According to reports, the FBI had been investigating this homegrown terror cell for a year, and when they were arrested they were sneaking around the outside of the synagogue planting the phony explosives that the FBI had sold them.

    Can Suthiano find a way to blame this on the Zionists?