Why do Britain and America have LESS press freedom than just a year ago?

we don’t have a free press anymore cos the people that own the banks as well as our governments and large corporations also own most of the press.
– mike smith, guantanamo bay, 26/1/2012 20:30

The MSM and Government collude to prevent the REAL issues from being brought to proper attention. It’s all about CONTROL. The Governments want it, the MSM support it.
– Dave, Oban, 26/1/2012 20:18

It’s not the only thing that shows Britain’s “Democracy” is not as strong as the Politicians like us to believe. Britain has had two undemocratic Governments during the terms of the last two Governments. First we had the change of Prime minister from Tony Blair to Gordon Brown by a shake of hands behind the door of 10 Downing St and secondly the present “Coalition” which was not elected but knocked together by the Tories who did not get enough vote to govern but made a undemocratic alliance with the Liberal Democrats who otherwise would never get into power. Of course these little arrangements have happened before but we are now in the 21st Century and still have loopholes in our undemocratic system. Isn’t it about time we demanded better “DEMOCRACY” and stop accepting this fake one?
– Rob , Stockton-on-tees,UK, 26/1/2012 20:12

Oh stop bleating. If you brainless hacks hadn’t so abused the privilege perhaps we’d still be top of the press poll.
– Timeandtide, London UK, 26/1/2012 20:01

We are probably falling down the scale of press freedom because we have found so many new and hitherto unused ways to abuse the concept!
– billwallace Ex Pat now living in, Vancouver Canada, 26/1/2012 19:53

Uk placed just above Niger I see……ooops am I allowed to say Niger????
– James, Bristol, 26/1/2012 19:41

As well as the recent ACTA sign-up (by the UK & US), the NDAA (National Defense AuthoriZation Act) passed in the early hours of Christmas Day that allows any citizen to be arrested without charge, legal-aid, warrant and then imprisoned indefinitely, without trial, ANYWHERE in the world – including US citizens (thus bypassing US LAW)… USUKing TYRANNY was more mass indoctrination, infiltration and confusion based but over the last 20 years has been LEGALISED – Yes, LEGALISED TYRANNY…
– PrivateSi, Watch: National Security Alert, 26/1/2012 19:31

I buy the UKColumn which gives me the REAL NEWS.
Phone hacking is just a tiny part of a much larger story- The DM won’t cover that area!

The triblelists still argue whether it’s right or left wing- IDIOTS!!

Freedom of the press and especially the internet isgoing to get worse. The Dark Powers who are beginning to control everything will be stopping us commenting before long..The MSM are all ready under their thumb. for example where are the stories about the massive strikes. fuel and food shortages that are happening today in Italy ?. Not a mention…
– Dan away from la xxxxx, Brittany, 26/1/2012

because we live in an orwellian police state that was predicted many years ago?
– jason, wales, 26/1/2012 21:59

If you really believe in freedom of speech, why don’t you print our comments which contradict what you say even when they have no offensive or illegal content? – Avana Beach, London, UK, 27/1/2012 0:11 ————————————————————- too have had many many comments not printed, so don’t try to be on the side of Free speech DM – Paul, Well out of it, 26/1/2012 19:11 ———————————————————— Well ! How about it DM ? You should know>>>>Are you going to admit it ? – Dave, Sutton Coldfield, Birmingham. UK., 26/1/2012 19:05 Any article that’s not one of the DM favorites has a few chosen comments and taken down a lot sooner than others. – Sally, Ibiza, 26/1/2012 22:28 ———————————————————— This probably wont make it into the comments section but to the person who ‘moderates’ the comments. Why when the comments are not abusive etc do you not print our comments?
– Scouse, UK, 27/1/2012 8:33

Happens to me all the time- mention zionism – Israel- or the Talmud-Israeli Lobby, the DM Deletes all comments!

Press Freedom went along time ago- Elizabeth Beckett- not a peep from the UK Press. just one of many!!

Britain has for far too long,listened to the “do-gooders”,the politically correct,and all the trash that has arrived on this island,spouting what we should do and what we should say.Let us return to the sensible country we once were…FREE SPEECH,and let us all say what we really think,and what we really feel,without these stupid people telling us we cannot !
– Richards, Milton Keynes,England., 27/1/2012 15:00


Why do Britain and America have LESS press freedom than just a year ago? Countries which pride themselves on free speech slide down international league tableBritain slides from 19th to 28th place on back of phone hacking, Leveson Inquiry and ‘libel tourists’
America falls from 20th to 47th after heavy-handed approach to Occupy demonstrators
Mixed fortunes for Arab Spring countries with Tunisia and Libya rising up the ranks
But Syria, Bahrain and Yemen fall as dictators use suppression to cling to power

By Daily Mail Reporter

Last updated at 5:45 PM on 26th January 2012

Comments (73) Share

Britain and the United States have dropped down a league table which rates the freedom of the press across the world, it emerged today.

The UK’s slide from 19th to 28th place is partly blamed on fallout from the phone hacking scandal at the News Of The World which prompted the Leveson Inquiry into press ethics.
Researchers from watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RWB), who compiled the World Press Freedom Index, also highlighted liberal libel laws which allow claimants of any nationality to sue in its courts. Libel ‘tourism’ is seen as a way for the richest to clamp down on freedom of expression.

There were also concerns that the police had attempted to extract information from a number of private companies – including Blackberry – to identify looters during the London riots.
League table: This map of the world shows countries with the most press freedom coloured white and the least coloured black
America’s performance was even worse. It dropped from 20th to 47th position on the back of heavy-handed police tactics at a string of demonstrations against corporate greed.
A number of journalists – as well as protesters – were arrested as the Occupy movement swept across the country.
Heather Blake, from RWB, described the statistics as a worrying trend.
‘The West prides itself on supporting the principles of free speech and freedom of expression,’ she said.
‘If we are going to promote these principles across the rest of the world, then we’ve got to make sure that we uphold them ourselves.’
In the UK’s case, there are fears that the Leveson Inquiry could have further-reaching consequences than anyone initially envisaged.

Long-overdue reform of archaic libel laws would make it more difficult for foreign nationals to sue through British courts However, there is some suggestion that Parliament could delay enacting them into law because of Leveson.

There is also the possibility that the press could face formal regulation for the first time.

The Press Freedom index reflected a year of upheaval, protest and revolution worldwide – though participation in the Arab Spring was no guarantee of an improved rating.
While Tunisia (up to 134 from 164) and Libya (160 to 154) fared well, Egypt dropped from 127 to 166 after a wave of detentions by the army in the wake of the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak.
Syria, Bahrain and Yemen – where dictators clung to power by brutally suppressing protesters – racked up their worst-ever ratings.
Of the 179 countries on the index, Syria came in at 176 (173 in 2010) while Bahrain ranked at 173, a drop of 29 places.
Bottom of the table were Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea. Finland, Norway and the Netherlands claimed the top spots.
The biggest fall was by Malawi, which dropped 67 places to 146 after the suppression of protests last summer.
Niger, meanwhile, leapt spectacularly to 29th place – just one spot below the UK.
‘This year’s index sees many changes in the rankings, changes that reflect a year that was incredibly rich in developments, especially in the Arab world,’ RWB noted.
‘Many media paid dearly for their coverage of democratic aspirations or opposition movements.
‘Control of news and information continued to tempt governments and to be a question of survival for totalitarian and repressive regimes.
‘Crackdown was the word of the year in 2011. Never has freedom of information been so closely associated with democracy
‘It is no surprise that the same trio of countries, Eritrea, Turkmenistan and North Korea, absolute dictatorships that permit no civil liberties, again occupy the last three places in the index.
‘This year, they are immediately preceded at the bottom by Syria, Iran and China, three countries that seem to have lost contact with reality as they have been sucked into an insane spiral of terror, and by Bahrain and Vietnam, quintessential oppressive regimes.’
The index is compiled by a team of RWB researchers who use a series of questions to rank each country.
These address areas such as violence and abusive treatment of journalists, state-interference such as surveillance of members of the media and censorship. RWB revised this year’s questions to attempt to avoid a Western bias.

WORLD PRESS FREEDOM INDEX 2011 1. Finland and Norway
77. Armenia 144. Swaziland
3. Estonia and the Netherlands
78. Kuwait 145. Democratic Republic of Congo
5. Austria 79. Togo 146. Indonesia and Malawi
6. Iceland and Luxembourg 80. Serbia, Bulgaria, Chile and Paraguay
148. Turkey
8. Switzerland 84. Kenya and Madagascar 149. Mexico
9. Cape Verde 86. Guinea, Kosovo, Timor-Leste and Zambia 150. Afghanistan
10. Canada and Denmark 90. Congo 151. Pakistan
12. Sweden 91. Benin 152. Iraq
13. New Zealand 92. Israel (Israeli territory) 153. Palestinian Territories
14. Czech Republic 93. Lebanon 154. Kazakhstan and Libya
15. Ireland 94. Macedonia 156. Rwanda
16. Cyprus, Jamaica and Germany 95. Dominican Republic 157. Uzbekistan
19. Costa Rica 96. Albania 158. Saudi Arabia
20. Belgium and Namibia 97. Cameroon and Guatemala
159. Côte d’Ivoire and Djibouti

22. Japan and Surinam 99. Brazil 161. Equatorial Guinea
24. Poland 100. Mongolia 162. Azerbaijan
25. Mali, OECS and Slovakia 101. Gabon 163. Sri Lanka
28. United Kingdom 102. Cyprus (North) 164. Somalia
29. Niger 103. Chad 165. Laos
30. Australia and Lithuania 104. Ecuador and Georgia 166. Egypt
32. Uruguay 106. Nepal 167. Cuba
33. Portugal 107. Montenegro 168 . Belarus
34. Tanzania
108. Bolivia and Kyrgyzstan 169. Burma

35. Papua New Guinea 110. Liberia 170. Sudan
36. Slovenia 111. South Sudan 171. Yemen
37. El Salvador 112. United Arab Emirates 172. Vietnam
38. France 113. Panama 173. Bahrain
39. Spain 114. Qatar 174. China
40. Hungary 115. Peru 175. Iran

41. Ghana 116. Ukraine 176. Syria
42. South Africa and Botswana 117. Cambodia, Fiji, Oman, Venezuela and Zimbabwe 177. Turkmenistan

44. South Korea 122. Algeria, Tajikistan and Malaysia 178. North Korea

45. Comoros and Taiwan 125. Brunei 179. Eritrea

47. United States of America, Argentina and Romania 126. Nigeria

50. Latvia and Trinidad and Tobago 127. Ethiopia

52 . Haiti 128. Jordan

53. Moldova 129. Bangladesh

54. Hong Kong, Mauritius and Samoa 130. Burundi

57. United States of America (extra-territorial) 131. India

58. Malta, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Guyana 132. Angola

61. Italy 133. Israel (extra-territorial)

62. Central African Republic 134. Tunisia

63. Lesotho, Sierra Leone and Tonga 135. Singapore and Honduras

66. Mozambique 137. Thailand

67. Mauritania 138. Morocco

68. Croatia and Burkina Faso 139. Uganda

70. Bhutan and Greece 140. Philippines

72. Nicaragua 141. Gambia

73. Maldives and Seychelles 142. Russia

75. Guinea-Bissau and Senegal 143. Colombia Data from Reporters Without Borders

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2092173/World-Press-Freedom-Index-2011-U-S-U-K-drop.html#ixzz1mLs68BoT

As well as the recent ACTA sign-up (by the UK & US), the NDAA (National Defense AuthoriZation Act) passed in the early hours of Christmas Day that allows any citizen to be arrested without charge, legal-aid, warrant and then imprisoned indefinitely, without trial, ANYWHERE in the world – including US citizens (thus bypassing US LAW)… USUKing TYRANNY was more mass indoctrination, infiltration and confusion based but over the last 20 years has been LEGALISED – Yes, LEGALISED TYRANNY…
– PrivateSi, Watch: National Security Alert, 26/1/2012 19:31

Orwell’s 1984: the future is here: George Orwell believed the stark totalitarian society he described in 1984 actually would arrive by the year 2000, thanks to the slow, sinister influence of socialism

Comments | Insight on the News, Dec 31, 2001 | by David Goodman
1234Next ..

Suppose someone 50 years ago had drawn a picture of the future that looked something like this: You live under the governance of an international alliance composed of a North American Union, China and Europe. Major powers are waging permanent low-level urban warfare. Rocket bombs soar over cities to crash into buildings. There are conflicts involving armies, but they are limited to border regions. Large banners fly downtown to celebrate victory over the nation’s enemies.

This is a totalitarian state under a benevolent leader in which citizens are detained and arrested on the merest suspicion of espionage. But the benevolent leader is seen only on television; he never appears in public. Personal surveillance is unceasing and relentless: TV cameras that receive and transmit simultaneously are everywhere. The political-correctness police listen in on every conversation to match speakers to the profile of a potential saboteur. Ordinary citizens live in constant fear of arrest and imprisonment for terrorist activities.

No, this is not the implementation of the antiterrorist USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, which Congress just passed in the throes of the anthrax attacks without even reading it (see “Police State” Dec. 3), and whose very name evokes the memory of the late George Orwell’s sci-fi masterpiece, 1984. It is the scenario of Orwell’s book itself, written in 1948 and published in 1949. It is ironic that the character he calls Big Brother was not meant as a symbol for a U.S. administration but likely for the future of Britain under progressive socialism. What gives pause is that the book clearly satirizes the consequences of Fabian socialism exactly 100 years after its birth in the salons of London.

If Orwell’s totalitarian state seems to be arriving about 20 years late, it is not because he mistargeted the book by naming it 1984. A careful review of the literary evidence reveals that he was aiming at the period immediately following the year 2000 but wanted to memorialize the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Fabian Society.

With Orwell’s stark vision of a totalitarian society having for more than half a century sent shivers down the collective spine of the prestigious Western intelligentsia, one might assume in the roil of current events that scholars worldwide would be combing the pages of 1984 for triggering incidents of a kind that might lead to the predicted Orwellian world. Yet literary and social critics long have avoided coming to grips with the implications of Orwell’s profound insight that socialism, despite its claim to benevolence, would deliver Orwell’s 1984 by A.D. 2000.

The major facts about Orwell and the origins of 1984 lay as enshrouded in mystery as when his London publisher, Secker and Warburg, first brought out the book in 1949. In the beginning, he is supposed to have been a committed socialist, a close observer of the founders of the socialist Fabian Society, Sidney and Beatrice Webb, and of the famous socialist futurist H.G. Wells. Taking as a theme the strategy of the Roman general Quintus Fabius Cunctator, who famously delayed battle with the Carthaginians while exhausting them with endless harassments, the Fabians argued that the grand aim of socialism could be achieved bit by bit, through moderate increments, making small changes in society so as not to alarm the defenders of individual responsibility.

The Fabian Society was founded in 1884, according to its Website, and continues to play a prominent role through the Socialist International in developing the policies of the Labour Party in Britain, of which Orwell once was an active member, and of allied Clintonian liberals in the United States.

But when Orwell wrote 1984, it was more than a show of dislike for the Fabian socialists; it was humorous, biting, Swiftian satire against the socialist and liberal intellectuals. The leftist elites, then as now, praised the book for the wrong reasons. They applauded Orwell’s resistance to the loss of civil liberties but refused, and continue to refuse, to see the book as a mirror held up to the totalitarian face of the left-wing intelligentsia. They tiptoe away from such questions as: Why choose the year 1984 as the title? Is it really just a science-fiction fantasy or is it political satire; and, if so, against whom is it directed? Finally, what are the likely sources of Orwell’s dystopia?

The critics try to explain away the hot spots. The title, 1984, is said to be simply the reversal of the final two digits in 1948, the year he was writing the book. Some critics say it is not even a serious book but just derivative science fiction on par with Soviet writer Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We, a book Orwell had read in translation and reviewed for literary journals.

Indeed, even the latest of Orwell’s authorized biographers get it wrong. Orwell led a much fuller, richer life than is acknowledged in, say, Peter Davison’s 1996 biography, George Orwell: A Literary Life, or in Peter Huber’s 1993 book, Orwell’s Revenge. They see in 1984 both melodrama and a touch of satire. The satire, they say, is aimed against the Soviet Union (a safe target, now, even for socialists). They assert that Josef Stalin is Big Brother and that Stalin’s Five-Year Plans buttressed by concocted statistics are other satirical targets of the book.

The esteemed professors writing the major interpretive biographies of Orwell identify the character Emmanuel Goldstein, the book’s traitorous leader of the Brotherhood, with Soviet apostate Leon Trotsky. Another dubious theory is that Orwell got the material for the melodramatic novel from his personal experiences while writing and producing programs for the Overseas Service of the government-run British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) and as a journalist during the war, working for the press baron Lord Astor. These low-level journalistic jobs, they intimate, never gave him access to classified information.

At first glance, the just-a-writer-working-for-the-wartime-BBC explanation appears credible; but on examination it may reveal the real truth. The biographers ignored the research of W.J. West, which puts an end to the dumb-journalist theory. West rummaged through the BBC archives and found 11 scripts for a show hosted by Orwell and broadcast by short-wave to the Indian subcontinent. It was called “A.D. 2000.”

West reports that Orwell, who had served in the imperial police in Burma and chronicled his adventures in Burmese Days and in the essay, “Shooting an Elephant,” enjoyed a distinguished reputation in India. As a result, the BBC asked him to produce programs about the glorious future of A.D. 2000 under British rule. For this series, Orwell interviewed celebrated futurists, scientists and technologists, getting live responses to questions about the future of agriculture, science and technology. For another BBC broadcast, Orwell produced an analysis of one of his favorite books, Jack London’s 1908 novel, The Iron Heel, a fanciful description of the perfect fascist state, Asgard, which reaches its full power to crush the people in … 1984.

A further source of information for the book 1984 that appears never to have been adequately examined is the matter of Orwell’s job during the war. Another Orwell biography, Bernard Crick’s George Orwell, A Life, accepts at face value his claim that he got bored in September 1943 and just up and left BBC. Or was that an official cover story?

Certainly the account does not ring true. Orwell was a skilled writer and a supreme patriot who wrote the stirring, down-home narrative The Lion and the Unicorn to describe the plight of the British nation struggling against Adolf Hitler. What patriot could just leave in the middle of a war? It seems more likely that for years he worked for a branch of British intelligence (as did his second wife), was working undercover and had signed an oath never to reveal operations in which he participated.

The question to ask then is whether Orwell all along was an undercover participant in Britain’s secret propaganda effort against communists and fascists. At the beginning of the war the BBC for which Orwell worked was part of the British Ministry of Information, which produced both “white” and “black” information services. After internal fights, most “black information” was put into another unit, the Political Warfare Executive (PWE). Orwell’s friend Richard Crossman, a Fabian socialist and later a prominent postwar Labour Party minister, was head of the German division of the PWE propaganda-warfare unit.



2 responses to “Why do Britain and America have LESS press freedom than just a year ago?

  1. Monday, April 25, 2011

    The Totalitarian Tiptoeing of the Fabian Socialist Revolution sweeping the UK and the rest of Europe

    By Mike Smith
    25th of April 2011

    On the 9th of November 1989 the Berlin Wall came down and it marked the so-called end of Communism and the Cold War.

    In South Africa, we were told, that it also marked the end of our fight against Communism.

    Today we know this is nonsense and that the Communist SACP and the Marxist terrorist ANC have firmly imbedded themselves in South Africa pushing their Gramscian model of Communism called “Cultural Hegemony” on the South African public.

    In Europe the wall came down and opened the gates for the implementation of Socialism across Europe.

    In the UK, immigrants from Poland and other former communist states always had to work 12 months before being eligible for social benefits.

    From next week onwards, this will be lifted and these eastern European Communists will be eligible for the dole, immediately…as soon as they set foot in the UK.

    It means that it will take them about a week to register and sort out the paperwork before they start drawing 250 quid a week in unemployment benefits. All they have to prove is that they could not find a job in their home country either.

    Kamil Lesniak, a 20-year-old barman from the south-west Polish town of Taenobrzeg, said he would be on his way to the UK ‘tomorrow’ if the British benefits system could match his monthly income of £450.
    Eva Katona, 22, is considering moving to Britain from the Hungarian capital, Budapest, to work as a nanny or carer.
    ‘The unemployment benefit in England is higher than a salary here and I have been told I can go on the dole as soon as I get there,’ she said.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1380204/Bar-benefits-lifted-East-European-migrants-able-claim-250-week.html#ixzz1KYy9sLt2

    That is nothing. Read how A Family of 12 Ethiopian asylum seekers land in UK – and are handed a £6,000-a-month home paid for by you

    The Ethiopian couple and their ten children are receiving a staggering £1,460 a week in housing benefit alone. The jobless couple will also be eligible for other handouts such as unemployment and child benefits, which could potentially add up to an additional £1,300 a week.

    All courtesy of the white taxpayers of the UK.

    This absurdity is also to be found in Germany. For those who can understand German this will be a shocker

    These immigrants receive benefits calculated daily for everything from bus and train fare to internet and cell phone access and money for the cinema. All in the name of making them integrate quicker…which are all fine if the immigrants are Muslim or from Africa…but do not for one moment think that a WHITE African is eligible to the same benefits.

    No ways! White Africans from South Africa, Namibia and Rhodesia are in a different class…the Persona Non Grata class…For them there are other norms and standards.

    Whites from Africa are “Kaffirhaßer” (haters of blacks)…they need to take their Anti Racist Pills before they are allowed into Europe.

    Meanwhile thousands of Germans, British and other Western Europeans are going hungry and cannot find jobs…All in the name of “Tolerance , Multi Racialism and Multi Culturism”.

    Problem is that at the next election, the sheeple will all again go and vote for Labour or the Socialists.
    Posted by Mike Smith at 12:46 PM
    AnonymousApr 25, 2011 05:19 PM
    ‘Problem is that at the next election, the sheeple will all again go and vote for Labour or the Socialists.’

    ….not so sure Mike. People in Europe are slowly getting fed up with this tripe. A once extremely liberal Finland has in its recent elections shown that people are getting fed up. The ‘True Finns’ party has gained considerable support by asking the supposedly uncomfortable questions regarding immigrants and bailing out poorly performing European countries. Now Sweden is apparently afraid that the Finnish result will rub off on the Swedes. Man, I cannot wait to see how the Swedish liberals will react before their upcoming elections, which I think is next year.

    Who knows, perhaps, and hopefully, most Europeans will wake up quicker than we think. We can only hope…

    Interesting times!
    HoDDApr 26, 2011 12:11 PM
    weird. Remember reading those Adriaan Snyman interpretations of Siener. He muttered something about UK being over run by migrants seeking their “rights”
    BlougatApr 28, 2011 09:23 AM
    This multiculturalism is nothing but a deception where traditional white countries are to be changed in ethnicity and race, whites the world over will lose their countries unless they wake up now and put a stop to it! It is all a numbers game and the ethnic group with the biggest numbers is the owner of the real estate that they are living on.
    s.a. whiteApr 28, 2011 08:12 PM
    I wish more people will learn about the Cloward-Piven Strategy of manufactured crisis (eg. the global financial crisis courtesy Obama, Dems, BLTs, liberals, marxists, Black Panthers, ACORN, CAIR & co).

    This is the same thing they use every single time everywhere, with some slight customized variations.

    Please people, read up about Cloward-Piven, named after 2 students of Hillary Clinton’s mentor, Saul Alinsky who advocated that unreasonable demands on various fronts should be used to overload of the system, discrediting it, and leading to its ultimate collapse.

    Tell your friends and families all over the world about this. The only way to stop them is to expose them to the spotlight.
    s.a. whiteApr 28, 2011 08:14 PM
    UK: University campuses a hotbed of Muslim extremism claims Parliamentary security group

    AnonymousMay 7, 2011 11:54 PM
    For someone who does not like David Icke you sure like to borrow his terms. Like totalitarian tip toe and problem reaction solution. Looks like you have something in common with Alex Jones. The difference being you would accuse them of “conspiracy theories” while sanctimoniously offering your own conspiracy theories. At least give credit where credit is due. Do not claim their terms as your own. That is dishonest.
    Mike SmithMay 8, 2011 12:26 AM
    Who said I do not like David Icke? I have read most of his books and own five of his first books. Hard to say when I stopped taking him seriously. Could have been at the shape shifting lizard part or the Tales from the Time Loop book where he went to the Amazon and licked mushrooms and other hallucinating crap that made him speak to ghosts from the fourth dimension…

    BTW. David Icke did not invent “problem, reaction, solution”. It was invented by the Roman emperor, Diocletian…Also see here

    Neither did he invent “totalitarian tiptoeing”, that honour goes to the Roman General Fabius Maximus after whom the Fabian Society was named.
    AnonymousMay 9, 2011 08:13 PM
    This is ridiculous. Nowhere does it say with your sources that Diocletian coined the term Problem Reaction Solution. At any rate the whole premise is a rip off of the Hegelian Dialectic of Thesis / Antithesis / Synthesis. Plus your source on the matter is none other than Paul Joseph Watson – Alex Jone’s main British lackey / writer. When you stopped taking David Icke seriously? He kicked off his conspiracy career in 1990 by visiting a psychic! He was publicly laughed of the air in 1991 on the Wogan Show. Ironically the Reptilian part does not come from Icke but rather from taking seriously all the folks who told him of their “reptilian experiences” which were first being covered by John Rhodes. Icke is now promoting the “moon matrix” hypothesis wherein the moon is claimed to be artificial and “beaming” frequencies at the Earth affecting humans. With sources like David Icke / Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones – what more can be said. All this is rather odd since you and you past fellow bloggers have stated being against conspiracy theories yet you now source the masters of conspiracy theories.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s