29 January 2016

West dissidents go after Vladimir Putin?

The Blog


As Vladimir Putin steps up his opposition to US hegemony in Syria, Ukraine and other theaters of confrontation between the powers, supporters of US global dominance demonize all their critics as supporters of Putin.


In response to the demonization, some Western dissidents are starting to focus their criticism partially on Russia and its President Vladimir Putin. Any criticism of Putin will suffice, even if it doesn't make any sense. This new behavior is based on hysteria and the intense fear of being dismissed as "apologists" for Putin.

Severe punishment is already given to Western journalists for being supportive of Russia or even for being neutral on issues to do with Russia. Journalists have been fired or denied a platform even for being suspected of sympathizing with Vladimir Putin.

Recently, new laws are being drafted in the United States to make anti-Russian propaganda the official editorial policy of all news media establishments. The hysteria produced by such moves is pushing some major dissident journalists and celebrities into issuing anti-Russian remarks, often with no idea what they are talking about.

Because these celebrated dissidents had dedicated their lives to criticizing their own governments, not Russia, they find themselves not knowing what to say to satisfy the hysterical anti-Russian media. Take a look at the different examples below, ranging from the noblest to the most sold-out dissidents.

Snowden the Russian troll?



The noblest. The example of a Western dissident who still doesn't criticize Russia at all despite the hysteria, Edward Snowden leaked information on US illegal domestic surveillance against its entire population. He is a particularly obvious victim of demonization as a pro-Putin spy, due to being lost in transit in an airport in Moscow when the US cancelled his passport and later having no choice but to claim asylum in the Russian Federation. However, Snowden (as well as former Guardian journalist who covered Snowden's story, Glenn Greenwald) has maintained his belief that the US is the primary threat to civil liberties and human rights in the world. Not Russia - and Snowden realizes it is his prerogative as an American to criticize his own "regime" in the US rather than Vladimir Putin's government.

Assange the antiPutin?



Julian Assange, who is also accused of being an agent or otherwise instrument of Putin, has made some token effort to make it look like he not only criticizes the West but also Putin. He has met with members of the anti-Putin group P***y Riot, although it isn't clear that he really supports them or the dark figures at the US Capitol who made them into celebrities.

Assange also confused many in the audience at a televised RT network anniversary discussion, when he claimed that Russia would definitely shoot down British warplanes if they were operating in Ukraine. This, despite the fact that Russia has not directly shot down any warplanes in Ukraine to date, including Ukrainian ones engaged in bombing pro-Russian rebel forces in Donetsk and Luhansk.

Assange seemed to argue that Russia is hypocritical to condemn Turkey's shooting down of a Russian bomber aircraft in Syria, as the downing was typical of the perfidy of the Russian government itself. However, the claim is ill-considered at best and tongue-in-cheek at worst. Perhaps Assange only said it to confuse some of his own critics, who might have seen him as a Russian agent. Whatever the case, Assange's anti-Russia comment was of poor quality, and not quote-worthy material for anyone who wants to actually build a case against Putin. No political ammunition was really given by Assange for attacking Putin.

Owen Jones, the universalist leftist



Although not as extreme as the next case, Owen Jones wrote a recent shallow article in the Guardian called "Putin is a human rights abusing oligarch. The British left must speak out". Again, as with the Assange remark above, there is nothing quote-worthy in the content there for anyone who really opposes Putin. It appears to be a token article, designed less to support Putin's opponents and more to make Owen Jones look like a "good boy" who the British press will still be happy to tuck into bed.

The actual content just doesn't make any sense and is a dummy case, useless to anyone who opposes Putin. Jones calls for leftists in Britain and the West in general not quite to protest against the Kremlin instead of our own government (as our next case does), but to hope for regime-change in Russia by leftists who oppose Putin. No analysis of Russian politics is given, Jones does not elaborate which "leftists" he is talking about, and the actual leftists in Russia overwhelmingly praise Vladimir Putin's record and have no desire to overthrow him. Jones did subsequently tweet something about Russia's bombing of ISIL as an example of a Russian crime to be criticized alongside Western crimes. However, Russian actions in Syria are massively different from the West in the sense of being legal and based on an indigenous request for help, which differs starkly from Western imperialism.

The level of cross-party support in the Russian political spectrum for Owens' "Putin regime" is massive, and the "embattled democrats and leftists" in Russia to whom Jones is appealing don't merit mention or consideration. Even Jones admits that they are too insignificant to mention by name, insofar as he does not mention them.

Moreover, serious critics of Western foreign policy know that the anti-Putin groups in Russia are all funded by the US State Department. Jones knows it would be insane for him to support those groups and also maintain his role to "criticise Western foreign policy".

Peter Tatchell, lunatic who attacks the anti-war left for not supporting Western regime-change



The most extreme example. Even Owen Jones made a small jab at this guy in his aforementioned article, saying "there is something rather absurd about the baiting of the anti-war left for not protesting against, say, Putin or North Korea". Peter Tatchell's case is already covered by us. Read our special report on his warmongering and advocacy for "no bomb zones" which would require bombing Russians, Syrians and anyone else who gets in the West's way.


The clubof.info Blog

Global injustice as an existential threat

The Blog


A Beliefnet blog points to "injustices, prejudices and other ailments of global society" as a greater priority than "humanity-threatening disasters" of the kind addressed by the Lifeboat Foundation think tank.


Appealing to the utilitarian philosophy of Jeremy Bentham, the L'Ordre blog, also authored by another Bentham, talks of the "happiness of the greatest number" being preferable to any small minority evading fallout or potential extinction in a global war or disaster.

In the brief semi-review of the Willard Wells book Prospects for Human Survival, the blog attacked the teleology of humanity wanting to avoid genetic-cultural extinction (as opposed to human suffering) at all:
...if the goal in life was to avoid extinction, in a genetic sense, then it is not only impossible (because all lines eventually die out, even the entire human species), but would lead to the absurdity of encasing human DNA in probes and sending them out into space to ensure the maximum possible survival of our genetic material for the longest possible time...
Read more: http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/lordre/2016/01/needs-of-the-many-against-survival-of-the-few.html#ixzz3ySVD7TXJ
Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/lordre/2016/01/needs-of-the-many-against-survival-of-the-few.html#tRH9ZokXciROlysP.99
If we consider that humans voluntarily go "extinct" using contraceptives and abortion everyday, the call for making sure humanity still exists in the distant future appears destined to fail because the notion of human survival already has no appeal in modern society. The only reason nuclear war and other sources of suffering are resisted by most people is due to them being unpleasant, and not due to them erasing humanity's DNA.

Even more strongly rejecting the idea of the super-rich saving humanity by saving themselves from a global disaster, the blog argues the super-rich would be to blame for any potential global nuclear war, therefore should get killed in the war rather than being tempted to retreat into bunkers. However, the blog acknowledges the negativity of such speculation, and urges more optimistic attitudes towards the future.

The small semi-review at Beliefnet appears ahead of a full-size review of the Willard Wells book, to be published separately.


The clubof.info Blog

26 January 2016

Govt, media ignore suffering in Yemen

The Blog


Government and media in Britain are too focused on the Syrian Civil War to notice the greater scale of the suffering in Yemen.


In fact, as Steve Topple writes in an opinion piece at Common Space, the UK has even taken sides in the Yemen conflict, supporting the Saudi-led forces who imposed mass killings and starvation in the country after pro-Saudi President Hadi was driven from power.

The violence and displacement reported in Yemen, in what reports are available amid the pro-Saudi media blackout, is "a humanitarian disaster of even more catastrophic proportions " than anything seen in Syria. Topple writes that the war in Yemen is driven by Saudi Arabia's decline, as is found in recent events such as the lifting of anti-Iran sanctions, projected depletion of Saudi Arabia's oil fields in future years.

Noting that sectarianism suits Saudi Arabia and is part of its strategy, Topple criticizes the UK government's role in supporting the Saudi regime. "We, as a nation, need to take a long, hard look at our current government, its seemingly morally-bankrupt foreign policy and its preference for the pound over human life", he wrote.

The loss of the sanctions against Iran diminishes Saudi Arabia's position as a leading global oil supplier, and with this might reduce its political influence on other powers including the US.

In Syria, much like Yemen, all the violence is driven and funded by Western-backed forces who refuse to tolerate the government and are using terror against the general population to force their way to power.


The clubof.info Blog

Sanders biography recommended

The Blog


Thomas Knapp, head of the Garrison Center and a member of the small Mont Order* from where this blog makes many reports, recommends a major biographical book on US Democratic Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.


Knapp posted the recommendation on his KN@PPSTER blog on Wednesday, including a link the Amazon purchase page.

Bernie, authored by Darcy Richardson who is a friend of Thomas Knapp, is an immense 400-page work. Knapp encourages followers of Sanders and of the US Presidential race in general to read the book, because "You think you know Bernie Sanders, because you've half-attentively followed the Democratic presidential horse race. But you probably don't know Bernie Sanders at all."

He acknowledges, however, that the biography is only likely to reinforce whatever people have thought about Sanders, whether good or bad. This particular book stands out from other works relating to Sanders, due to its length and its detail.

* The Mont Order itself does not actually embrace any political figure, as its code requires it to only support critiques and narratives in the media rather than any electoral platform


The clubof.info Blog

22 January 2016

Mont: Oregon militants should go home

The Blog


Members of the Mont Order society offered their theories on the actions of political militants who took control of a US Federal-owned Wildlife Refuge in Oregon and are holding it "by force of arms".


In sum, the Mont Order denounces the militants and believes they need to "go home". While members are not necessarily standing with the US government if it eventually detains or eliminates these militants, as some members of the political left seem to be, Mont bloggers and activists see the militants' actions as unjustified.

Wave Chronicle Editor Mike Dodd was strongest in condemning the Oregon militants, stating there is nothing noble or worthy in the cause these militants claim to represent. What they are doing amounts to "dumb white hicks being dumb white hicks", he stated. The Wave Chronicle has already made its opposition to the militants clear in a post, which refuted the less condemning posts at The clubof.info Blog and the KN@PPSTER blog.



Thomas L. Knapp, Garrison Center Director, clarified that he doesn't know enough background on the militants and their prior activities to justify their specific actions. They "have done more than "protest"", he wrote in to the Mont Order. Clarifying where he stands, he stated, "In order to decide whether or not I could support that, I'd need to get a better understanding of their grievances, and of what steps prior to this they took to seek redress of those grievances."

Perhaps closest to the actual events was NaughteeisMaxim, a news media curator and Mont Order member. He agreed with the Wave Chronicle's judgment, writing "dumb fight, dumb issue, wrong time", and emphasizing the fact that the militants are not even from Oregon, but are outsiders and are harming the local community, causing unnecessary tensions. He ridiculed the militants, who are ranchers, and their grievances by arguing, "Personally I'm not for some freaken cow rights to graze in Wildlife Refuge Areas and it should be fenced off to keep the cows out of the wet lands, they can graze everywhere else around the area but ranchers must pay for the privilege to graze on BLM land."

The Wave Chronicle wisely points out that the issue of lead poisoning of children by the authorities in Michigan is a "worthy battle" rather than any issue of farmers' property rights, as appear to be at the heart of the bizarre Oregon standoff.

NaughteeisMaxim argued that the militants should "go home", which is also the name of a campaign aiming to evict the occupying militants from the public-owned Wildlife Refuge.


The clubof.info Blog

'Criticize, don't support' - L'Ordre

The Blog


The last L'Ordre commentary on the new code of the Mont Order is available, talking about "the power of information" and urging bloggers to exercise maximum independence.


Political parties and leaders create vulnerabilities in potentially strong movements and causes, while powerful institutions tend to play along with other power structures rather than remaining effective critics, the commentary states. It is advised that bloggers should not become defenders of some popular political figure or movement, but rather pursue an independent course in criticizing states, institutions and corporations.

Some political figures appear to be better than the others to many alternative media commentators and bloggers on the political sidelines, as Jeremy Corbyn in the UK and Bernie Sanders in the US may seem. However, it is important to stay aware that such politicians can create false hopes, disappointments, and ultimately discredit not just themselves but the people who had zealously supported them.

If they are a magnet for support and they actually get elected, they would only vacuum up the future attention of (former) dissident writers who could have spent their time better criticizing the established state and its unpopular policies.



Look into our five earlier reports on the Mont Order code commentaries below:

On the first point
On the second point
On the third point
On the fourth point
On the fifth and sixths points

The sixth commentary addresses only the seventh point in the Mont Order code, and aimed to declare the Mont Order's official neutrality in democratic political campaigns, debates and disputes. The Order, as stated in the quotes below, is completely invested in the power of online information and other circulating products of modern technology rather than political organizations and careers.

  • "If alternative media simply tie themselves to political alternatives, such as Corbyn or Sanders, they are sacrificing themselves for these men and their political careers rather than seeking out their own type of power. The power of information, like the power of money, may, in fact, be greater than the power of politicians."
  • "Someone who has squandered their credibility and the demographics of their readership by backing a political candidate will not be able to see the full extent of the power of information."
  • "There is a tendency [in the youth] to instead support campaign issues [rather than political parties], as is enabled through internet searches and campaign groups dedicated specifically to these issues that can be found rapidly online."
  • "While Julian Assange and Edward Snowden are icons of this organic campaign emerging from society, they are not leadership figures. They preside over no organization. And yet, if we look at those men and the issues associated with them, we see forces much greater than the political opposition parties in some countries."
  • "They [political parties] need to win elections, whereas pressure groups can get what they want without capturing state power."
  • "Politicians and parties are transitory as always, but the will to power – the will of the hungry and the oppressed to get what they need — is something that can crash through to the halls of power without ever declaring a formal organization at all."
  • "People are bigger than their parties and their leaders, and should think bigger."

L'Ordre, "Nonpartisan Media Power", Dissident Voice, 19 January 2016


The clubof.info Blog

19 January 2016

US accepts reality in the Persian Gulf?

The Blog


Confusing and angering many American neocons, the American regime did not use the arrest of its sailors in Iranian waters as an excuse to start a war.


The US deep state, in line with the incumbent Democratic Party platform, seems committed to abandoning the idea of military aggression against Iran, after years of threats (the threats themselves were criminal acts, banned explicitly by the United Nations Charter).

The wiser experts at the Pentagon never really wanted war with Iran, and didn't want the 2003 Iraq War either, but are being constantly pushed by a clique of neocon political illiterates, now considered criminals to many. Media commentators have a big share of blood on their hands for the war on Muslims, like US television host Sean Hannity, who insisted that the US should violate all its obligations, agreements and the UN Charter by bombing Iran at a time of delicate negotiations.

This is a sensitive time for US-Iranian relations already. Recent news items have covered how the US government and Europe now accept that Iran has already met its obligations under the nuclear accord JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action).

Download: clubof.info's founding thesis, Catalyst (2013)

According to analyst Shahzad Masood Roomi in an op-ed piece at Pakistan's Voice of East online magazine, the US seems quite close to an exit strategy from its role as a destabilizing, irrational actor in the Middle East. However, Saudi Arabia is largely fulfilling that role itself, with the consequence of causing dangerous divisions in the Islamic world. The analyst wrote on 16 January:
US-Iran rivalry is not a bilateral issue any more but US partnership with Saudi Arabia acts like a catalyst perpetuating Iranian enmity with the US
On other sensitive disputes in the world, including Crimea's accession to the Russian Federation and North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons, the US regime still refuses to accept reality. In the below video, US State Department spokesperson John Kirby answers "no" when asked if the US will stop living in a fantasy world. This referred to the US making statements that it "will never accept" the fact Russia rules over Crimea and North Korea has nuclear weapons, both defying the US's arrogant demands for them to stop.



It is possible that the US will come around to accepting reality in other conflict zones too, but this may require a change of leadership. A future US President may eventually be able to back down from asinine denials of the reality that Russia rules Crimea and North Korea is in the club of nuclear-armed states. It must be remembered that the US eventually accepted communist China and even Cuba as valid governments it must work with, despite years of denying their legitimacy.

Petition: tell Google to stop ad revenue sanctions against YouTubers

What is likely to be more consequential than the removal of sanctions on Iran is the fact that the West now considers Iran a civilized, normal country. This is a big step for countries who spent so long demonizing the Iranian people and their 1979 Revolution.


The clubof.info Blog

Referendums can prevent war: L'Ordre

The Blog


Covering both the fifth and sixth points in the relatively new Mont Order code, which was crafted in late 2015 for the internet age and its new forms of voluntary cooperation, the fifth commentary from L'Ordre has been made available.


Appearing at Dissident Voice, the Mont Order website and the Wave Chronicle, the written commentary talks about imperialism and national liberation movements seeking irredentism, contrasting the two sides' different ethics in international territorial disputes.

According to the commentary, which represents the views of the L'Ordre accounts online and not the Mont Order society itself, the borders of states are not sacred and can indeed be legitimately changed if there are popular movements and referendums approving such changes. This, the commentary says, is what really happened between Russia and Crimea despite the protests of Washington and its allies.



Please read our earlier reports on the Mont Order code commentaries by L'Ordre:

On the first point
On the second point
On the third point
On the fourth point

The fifth commentary addressing points five and six of the code can be read at an unofficial Mont Order website, lordre.net, sometimes used by Mont members to post content. The site seems to be a prime source for people researching background information on the Order, which is a subject of various paranoid suspicions and conspiracy theories among some opponents.

  • "There is, however, no hypocrisy in criticizing the Western powers and their allies exclusively while supporting foreign powers such as Russia, Iran and the Syrian Arab Republic. This is a very consistent position, and has to do with the difference between imperialism and national liberation."
  • "Today, the only power using force against civilians near Crimea is the Ukrainian central government, which rejects what it calls separatism."
  • "Whether or not one thinks of Russia as a democracy, the right to self-determination via a referendum like the one in Crimea is supposed to be the cornerstone in the legitimacy of a modern democratic state."
  • "In the audio version of the discussion this point is based on, postcolonial nationalism is deemed to be sufficiently different from imperialist nationalism and exceptionalism that it is worth all people supporting it as a form of freedom struggle."
  • "The answer is simply that one type of identity politics, the one driving imperialist policy and racism, is founded on the theory of superiority rather than the theory of liberation."
  • "People such as the Palestinians, the Kurds and the people of Kashmir have been denied their political rights for a prolonged historic period and the only possible conclusion to the territorial disputes in question can be democratic referendums."
  • "In respected Western media sources, we hear constant justifications of “territorial integrity” and “the right to defend itself” in territorial disputes and the suppression of national liberation struggles. Such language is designed to maintain the status quo"

L'Ordre, "Imperialists or Irredentists", Dissident Voice, 12 January 2016


The clubof.info Blog

15 January 2016

Madaya: 'opposition is starving us'

The Blog


According to residents of the besieged town of Madaya in Syria, which is home to around 9000 civilians, the US-supported "opposition" gunmen are starving the local population to death.


In much of the mainstream media, Madaya has been portrayed as one of the latest atrocities of the Bashar al-Assad government. On closer inspection, it appears that the cruelty in the town does not exist on the scale reported in the media, and that whatever cruelty does exist in Madaya is clearly being perpetrated by the criminal opposition supported by the lying Washington regime.

Although food supplies have successfully entered the besieged town of Madaya in Syria, they are promptly confiscated by the gunmen supported by the US and British regimes to overthrow the Bashar al-Assad government. The food is then sold to the local population at extortionate prices including '5000 Lira for chocolate', according to one witness, so the criminals can buy more weapons to continue the war.

Petition: Google must end its censorship

The situation in Madaya is discussed in depth in a video from a Syrian Sunni activist below, who argues that the US-backed terrorists are keeping the food for themselves, starving children and filming and photographing the emaciated bodies as propaganda to deceive some media outlets. She points out that some photographs used in stories about Madaya have been altered to look worse, and are not even from Syria. Furthrmore, accounts in Western media claim 40,000 people live in Madaya, whereas the population is known to be 9,000 according to the most recent census.



One Lebanese child's image was stolen from Facebook and used by extremists as a Syrian girl allegedly being starved, with all blame again being placed on the Damascus government. This is while the entire country is under economic sanctions by the West, aimed at preventing all food entering the country, much as they previously starved a million innocent Iraqis to death.

The actions of US-backed criminals in Madaya match the behavior of ISIL, refusing to allow civilians to leave urban areas so they can be used as props in their propaganda videos, human shields in the battlefield, or just butchered so the government can be blamed for their deaths.

Catalyst: A Techno-Liberation Thesis (book)

The renewed interest in blaming atrocities on Damascus is also consistent with the growing military defeats suffered by the foreign extremists, who increasingly retreat to the Turkish border to get safety from the Erdogan regime. The illegal groups are reported to be demoralized and under constant aerial attack since Russia entered the war against them. It is not surprising that they resort to more daring lies and forgery to get sympathy when they are losing.


The clubof.info Blog

Obama rants 'US is not in decline!'

The Blog


US President Obama used his recent State of the Union Address to make laughable errors, issue arrogant judgments, and offend the international community.


Obama described the theory of the US economic and strategic decline - something that Britain, the European Union, most of Asia and South America, and many leading Western economists accept to be a fact - as "hot air" from political enemies.

In addition to this, Obama made rabid proclamations that the US regime is better than everyone else because it has stronger armies:
The United States of America is the most powerful nation on Earth, period! Period!... We spend more on our military than the next eight nations combined... Our troops are the finest fighting force in the history of the world... No nation attacks us directly or our allies because they know that’s the path to ruin... people of the world do not look to Beijing or Moscow to lead.
Would you believe someone who keeps saying "period"? If Obama is so sure of these statements about his country's superiority, it is strange that he feels the need to shout them out loud like Hitler. The level of contempt shown in Obama's arrogant Bush-like speech towards other countries is astonishing and should be offensive to all foreigners, not just Russian and Chinese people, who are especially degraded and cited as enemies in the speech.

To quote one character in an Isaac Asimov novel, "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent". Everything in Obama's speech was about violence, and how America's violence is the most powerful. He wants to scare you.


Obama even made flat-out wrong and stupid statements in his speech, saying "Russia is pouring resources in to prop up Ukraine". Russia is still propping up Ukraine? Obama seems to have forgotten Ukraine's government was overthrown by the US two years ago, and now the failing Ukrainian government is being propped up him.

By bragging to the whole world that his country is better than others, Obama is not only sending a signal to Russia and China that his regime is unstable and possibly delusional, but is sending a deeply negative signal to NATO allies that the US looks down on them and they are inferior.


The clubof.info Blog

12 January 2016

Ukraine gets same medicine as Libya?

The Blog


The deadly track record of the US regime's neoconservative hardliners irrationally attacking countries has, unsurprisingly, found no exception in Ukraine.


Despite a large number of Ukrainians welcoming US neocons as liberators to their country, the international criminals have only proved how destructive they are. Ukraine is in financial ruin and projected to get worse, bringing unprecedented poverty to its people as the price they must pay for becoming another Western fake "democracy".

This was the analysis presented at the small investigative publication Consortiumnews, which has been active since 1995, in a recent January 6 post authored by Robert Parry. Many Ukrainian politicians today can rejoice that their country has successfully joined the club of impoverished military dictatorships controlled by Washington as puppets against its enemies. The rest of the Ukrainian people will not get any more cookies from the US regime.

Petition: Google must end its censorship

Parry writes as follows:
Nearly two years since U.S. officials helped foment a coup in Ukraine – partly justified by corruption allegations – the country continues to wallow in graft and cronyism as the living standards for average Ukrainians plummet, according to economic data and polls of public attitudes.
While noting "the Ukraine crisis represents just another failure of neocon-driven “regime change,” which has also spread chaos across the Middle East and northern Africa", Parry speculates that the neocons' real target for regime change is Russia. He warns that, considering the degree of direct violence the US must commit in order to effect such regime change elsewhere, its irrationality would simply start a nuclear war with Russia.

Catalyst: A Techno-Liberation Thesis (book)

Bizarrely, devoted supporters of US foreign policy are incapable of accepting the fact that regime change and democracy-promotion abroad has failed every time. Not a single example exists of the US actually bringing democracy or any kind of positive development to a country with regime change. Whether the case is Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011, or Syria and Ukraine in the present day, the forced and inorganic wars of "democracy" that Americans are still asked to die and pay for have always failed.

Thinkers at the Mont Order believe state destruction is not an accident but is actually the goal of US international criminals, whereas bringing "democracy" is a fiction used to justify their aggression.


The clubof.info Blog

'Libertarian President' vs the burqa?

The Blog


US Libertarian Party Presidential candidate Gary Johnson withdrew his statements that he would ban the burqa. He earlier justified his argument by saying this type of Islam-associated attire exists to cover up injuries to support violence against women.


According to Johnson, his comments were a "kneejerk response" given to Reason. However, he also gave the same response to two other publications, Politico and the New Mexico Journal. Given his consistency on the position earlier, his dishonesty is clear and there can be little doubt about his Islamophobia.

Antistatist writer Thomas L. Knapp commented on Johnson's dishonesty in a recent blog post, remarking "He wanted to dog whistle to Donald Trump's supporters." Knapp added that Johnson "thought that libertarians (and Libertarians) either wouldn't notice or wouldn't care", alluding to the obvious clash between banning the burqa and the US Constitution as well as libertarian values, establishing that freedom of religion and conscience must not be violated by the state.

Petition: Google must end its censorship

The right-wing publication Daily Beast held an op-ed by Andrew Kirell, concurring that "For 24 hours, the leading Libertarian Party presidential candidate seemed like he was to the right of Donald Trump when it comes to Muslims". Trump himself has sparked significant controversy by saying he wants to ban Muslims completely from migrating to the United States.

Catalyst: A Techno-Liberation Thesis (book)

Banning items of attire associated with Islam in the West, including the hijab and also the burqa (which are often confused by many Westerners who do not know the difference) is a common demand used by known racist organizations and political movements in the US and Europe.


The clubof.info Blog

8 January 2016

Oregon militiamen vs the 'worse guys'

The Blog


Antistatist writer Thomas L. Knapp, also a Mont Order society member, wrote on 4 January on the stand-off between militia members and Federal authorities at a facility in the US state of Oregon.


Knapp sympathized with the militia members in his short commentary, but stopped short of declaring any support for their actions. He contrasted them with law enforcers, seeing Federal officers as somewhat more arbitrary and dangerous than the militiamen themselves.

Stating that there is nothing especially different from the Occupy movement or the Black Panthers about these members of the public who choose to defend themselves at occupation-type protests using firearms, Knapp offered the following commentary:
any time any group puts itself in opposition to the existing state, I have to root for them at least a little. And I certainly don't favor the feds moving in and murdering them over possession of a building that the feds built with stolen money on stolen land. If there are no good guys here, there can certainly be better and worse guys
Read more at http://knappster.blogspot.com/2016/01/concerning-oregon.html#BVEOpTICZASWGSi4.99
Overall Knapp backed the view of Kent McManigal in a post an another blog. However, he did object to the characterization of these militiamen as "terrorists" by some left-wing commentators, arguing "Some state leftists are making a big deal about these protesters being armed (and, for that reason, are calling them "terrorists")". Knapp pointed out that left-wing groups have also protected themselves with firearms, and it is worth remembering that "terrorist" is more commonly a right-wing slur in US politics rather than a left-wing one.

Petition: Google must end its censorship

A post at Beliefnet's Mont Order-linked L'Ordre blog also responds to the militiamen's protest actions, but focuses more on the aspect of social media commentary saying the gunmen escaped being called "terrorists" because they were white (despite an overwhelming outcry against them over social media that indeed called them terrorists). The post tried to refute this theory, saying ignorance about Islamic clothing and writing has a greater role than skin color in the public image of what a "terrorist" is in America.

Catalyst: A Techno-Liberation Thesis (book)

Other Mont Order-affiliated writers are much more critical of the militiamen, regarding them as "nut jobs" and questioning how they hoped to accomplish anything at a deserted facility in a forest.


The clubof.info Blog

The "OffGuardians" proliferate online

The Blog


At the heart of the crossroads of radicalism and technology today is the emergence of new, off-the-spectrum political forces and media sources.


These organisations or circles rapidly expand their readership, influence and credibility at a pace that alarms mainstream journalists and politicians. Because our blog is all about that irrepressible reformation at the tip of the sword of modern communication technologies, we are reporting again following our similar post last week in response to Steve Topple's predictions.

Petition: Google must end its censorship

According to the Mont-friendly L'Ordre blog based at the world-famous Beliefnet website,
What of all the tech-empowered bloggers from a background of powerlessness – that group Steve offers himself as an example of? What of media disintegration, the formation of the OffGuardian and the thousands of other OffGuardians that are tearing readers away from the Guardian? What about all the small Alex Joneses tearing people away from the real Alex Jones. These hundreds, perhaps thousands of independent radicals (the kind the Mont Order has intended to gather and support) have no real strategy but they corrode and disintegrate the more authoritarian media environment. There are no authorities on the web.

Read more: http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/lordre/2016/01/media-disintegration.html#ixzz3wSz0Yae9
Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/lordre/2016/01/media-disintegration.html#pDz6kUPtj4C0vAHS.99
The OffGuardian was a website set up to host the conversations that the Guardian would not tolerate, and preferred to delete. It is possible that the website was set up due to the Guardian's staunch support of British regime policies after its hard drives were smashed and it was forced to never displease the regime again. This spectacle followed after the Guardian printed stories from whistleblower Edward Snowden on NSA (US National Security Agency) and GCHQ (Britain's equivalent body) mass surveillance of domestic populations.

Catalyst: A Techno-Liberation Thesis (book)

Since they were threatened into submission by the British regime, Guardian journalists and editors have taken a less critical view of foreign policy, portraying Western government authorities as morally superior and taking a jingoist anti-Russian stance on the Ukrainian conflict.


The clubof.info Blog

5 January 2016

US incites global chaos: friend of Mont

The Blog


The anticipated fourth commentary from Mont friend and writer L'Ordre, is now online and addresses the corresponding point in the Mont Order code.


Like the other two articles, the L'Ordre commentary has been published to the widely circulated progressive newsletter Dissident Voice, where previous commentaries already address their points of the Order's code.



Our earlier reports on the Mont Order code commentaries by L'Ordre:

On the first point
On the second point
On the third point

You can read the fourth commentary itself at the unofficial Mont Order website lordre.net, which is sometimes used by Mont members to post content. However, if you are low on time, the best items from the commentary offering unique judgments are recorded below.

  • "This so-called new world order, for all the enemies it has attracted, could have been a good thing. The concept of uniting the whole world in a single global society, however it may be accomplished, is not a bad thing."
  • "The US saw only its own bloated image when it thought about the future of the world, and set about imposing its own will on others without asking their consent."
  • "If actions speak louder than words, then the US is not taking humanity forward to a united global polity."
  • "In the Middle East, the US strategy is even more divisive, attempting to co-opt and bribe even the smallest tribes and sects to attack the cohesion of stable governments."
  • "The worst offense of all is the devotion to the myth, as rejected in the Mont Order code, that Islam is inherently plagued with extremism and sectarianism."
  • "The claim that Syria, Lebanon and other states are experiencing mutual warfare between Shias and Sunnis is untrue."
  • "From Syria to Ukraine, the US policy consists of incitement to civil war, thereby retarding human development, subverting the goals of the United Nations and disrupting projects to unite the world in peace."

L'Ordre, "On the Fourth Point of the Mont Order", Dissident Voice, 30 December 2015


The clubof.info Blog

Best reports from our club in 2015

The Blog


Here is our blog's sometimes serious, sometimes comical journey in 2015, as told in some of our most powerful and popular tweets in the year just passed!


If you're unable to browse through just now, follow us via Twitter @ClubOfInfo to be sure you receive all your future reports each week through 2016.

This blog remained in operation throughout the whole of 2015, generating unique at least four alternate media reports a week for every week throughout 2015.

Embedded below are selected tweets linking to articles that stood out on social media.

Have a fantastic 2016, and don't leave us! Keep track of all our reports for 2016 by subscribing to our alerts with the box on the right bar, and by following our page at the click of your mouse now right below.



The clubof.info Blog

1 January 2016

Transhumanists welcome basic income

The Blog


Britain's first Transhumanist Party has embraced an official study by the RSA (Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce) that is in line with the Transhumanists' futuristic, far-seeing value system.


The RSA study, titled "Creative  citizen, creative state: the principled and pragmatic case for a Universal Basic Income", is based on a full year's research and gives solid and realistic proposals of how to implement "basic income" in Britain.

Although many could easily see basic income as merely another type of unemployment benefit, it is far from this. Basic income is the idea that not only unemployed people but all citizens, including workers, should receive a sum of money from the state merely for being citizens. This sum, given unconditionally for all citizens to live on, would be used on its own or could be added to an earned income stream.

Abiding by its own principles informed by Social Futurism, the Transhumanist Party in Britain (TPUK being one of the abbreviations) expressed its support of the study and described the idea of basic income as being consistent with its own value-system. The Transhumanist Party advocates "All citizens shall have a right to sustenance, clothing, shelter, energy, healthcare,  transport, education, and access to information resources."

Head of the UK's Transhumanists, Amon Twyman, offered the following commentary as published in a recent party press release:
“A new social contract is needed, involving strong educational and economic support for  those who are left with no viable option of ‘earning a living’ due to rapid technological  change. A UBI would provide an important part of this new social contract. The RSA’s  advocacy of a UBI will help the task of the Transhumanist Party to bring about new  political thinking in the UK that champions individual and social creativity.”
Basic income, as the Transhumanists argue, will free up people to pursue more enriching activities rather than devoting all their time to a job they don't like but feel compelled to attend to raise a meager income. While it is historically factual that most work was once necessary to keep society running, increases in automation are projected to put most people out of work.

Rather than waiting for "social inequality,  disruption and alienation" to build up while we are celebrating the increases in automation and overall disappearance of semi-skilled work due to new computers and robots, the Transhumanist Party advocates reconstructing the individual and society now.


The clubof.info Blog

Steve Topple on the future of media

The Blog


Britain-based blogger Steve Topple reflected on his writing career so far and his views on the future of media, in a recent post.


The following commentary offered is of great relevance to The clubof.info Blog's mission and readership:
I do this because in the current political and socioeconomic climate we are barraged day in, day out, with lie after lie after lie – and I’m of the opinion that the more people out there shouting at the tops of their voices in any way they can to counter these lies can only be a good thing.
Our mainstream media is corrupt – we all know that
Unfortunately, our “new media” (many of the sites you can find on Twitter)... are all (still) a Russell Group, self-serving chumocracy, albeit one which tows the line of what is fast becoming the new centre-left (that is, “Corbynism”), and will not deviate from the message which they perceive will garner them the most views, followers, re-tweets – whatever. 
This is not the future of journalism. The future of journalism (in my opinion), is one where every person, if they feel inclined, can write, record or express in any way they see fit “their truth”, and share it with the world – then the world can make up their own mind.
Steve Topple can be followed on Twitter here. In addition to his writing accomplishments, he is connected up with the Mont Order society's loose coalition of bloggers. His effective role as a firebrand on the British political blogosphere is the main reason people are drawn to his work and the causes he supports.


The clubof.info Blog

Delivered by Email

Featured

Clubofinfo World Commentaries

Follow by Email

Mont Experts

Follow by Email

Follow Me on Twitter