Wednesday, December 28, 2011

SEX DRUGS AND MAGICK: Robert Anton Wilson

SEX DRUGS AND MAGICK: Robert Anton Wilson.
From the PREFACE:

The 1973 author of this book never could have imagined a State so crazily totalitarian, or a population so brainwashed into sheep-like submissiveness, that such absurdities could occur. But then, only Kafka and Orwell in their most eerie satires on bureaucracy-gone-bonkers could imagine an obscenity like our Piss Police. The State in which we live can only accurately be called Urine Nation.

How can this happen in a once-free Republic where searches of the person are forbidden except by court order after probable cause has been shown? Urine Nation, posing as the representatives of you and me, is engaged in an alleged "War on Drugs." That justifies trashing the Constitution.

Now this is, on the face of it, absurd.

1. Wars on drugs or other insensible things (objects, sub-stances) can only be carried on by lunatics. The Con cannot be accused of insanity: of ignorance, yes, and of fear, greed and zoning laws, but not of being batshit crazy. They are not making war on chemicals—or on the laws of physics, or anything of that sort. They are making war on the American people—on all of us, although only a few of us know that yet.

For instance, as you may read in Pissing Away the American Dream (Pissing Away the American Dream, edited by David Ross, Digit Press), on January 1989 the Minneapolis police smashed down the door of the home of an elderly Black couple, using "flash bang" grenades which accidentally set the house on fire and killed both old people.

The cops were looking for "drugs," but never found any. The chief of police justified the murders of two innocent citizens (and the total violation of the Fourth Amendment) by saying, "This is war."

The war is being waged against people, not chemicals, and it is people who get killed.

2. Even within the off-kilter logic of its own rhetoric, the "War on Drugs" is nonsense.

If you go out your door and drive a few blocks, they say, you will find at least one store boldly declaring that they sell DRUGS, although some say PHARMACY, which can only be deciphered by those who know Greek roots; and in these stores, hundreds of drugs are available. Nearby is a supermarket where you can buy cigarettes, containing nicotine, a drug more addictive than heroin according to former Surgeon General Koop. Next door is a BAR where you can buy dozens of varieties of C2H30H, a heavily addictive substance, statistically linked to wife and child battering, divorce and violent crime.

Urine Nation, thus, is not making war on all drugs, or drug- users, but only on some. The government asserts that the drugs on their taboo list are the worst ones; skeptics like me say they are merely the ones that are either (a) cheap and effective, like herbal medicines, and/or (b) not easy to monopolize, like marijuana or (c) better than the higher priced drugs manufactured by the large pharmaceutical corporations that financially support both political parties.

The only people literally "at war" with drugs—all drugs—are the Christian Scientists. Eight of them are currently appealing their convictions for refusing to give their children the drugs ordained from on high by the Con/MMAO.

As Count Bismarck once said, "Laws are like sausages: you have much more respect for them if you haven't actually seen how they're made."

Many of the chemicals and herbs forbidden by the Con are not only harmless, but are widely believed to be beneficial. The war against the users of these substances is just as vicious as the wars against all other substances on the taboo list.

Over the past 10 years, the Food and Drug Administration has engaged in raids on alternative health companies - companies operating openly and, they thought, legally - that more and more tend toward the violence of DEA raids on suspected crack dealers. In every case, the companies were selling vitamins and herbs that a growing minority of the medical profession approves but which MMAO and the FDA do not approve.

For instance, in 1990, the FDA raided the offices of Dr. Jonathan Wright, a fully qualified physician with an M.D. from the University of Michigan Medical School, terrorized the staff with drawn guns, and seized all the vitamins and herbs they could find. They never did file criminal charges against Dr. Wright for the heresy of giving his patients cheap medicines instead of expensive ones, but this raid was only one of hundreds of similar Gestapo-style operations, creating what libertarians call "a chilling effect" on scientific freedom.

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Linguistic Relativity (From Wikipedia)

"The principle of linguistic relativity holds that the structure of a language affects the ways in which its speakers are able to conceptualize their world, i.e. their world view. Popularly known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, or Whorfianism, the principle is often defined as having two versions: (i) the strong version that language determines thought and that linguistic categories limit and determine cognitive categories and (ii) the weak version that linguistic categories and usage influence thought and certain kinds of non-linguistic behavior.

The idea was first clearly expressed by 19th century thinkers, such as Wilhelm von Humboldt, who saw language as the expression of the spirit of a nation. The early 20th century school of American Anthropology headed by Franz Boas and Edward Sapir also embraced the idea. Sapir's student Benjamin Lee Whorf came to be seen as the primary proponent as a result of his published observations of how he perceived linguistic differences to have consequences in human cognition and behavior. Harry Hoijer, one of Sapir's students, introduced the term "Sapir–Whorf hypothesis",[1] even though the two scholars never actually advanced any such hypothesis.[2] Whorf's principle of linguistic relativity was reformulated as a testable hypothesis by Roger Brown and Eric Lenneberg who conducted experiments designed to find out whether color perception varies between speakers of languages that classified colors differently. As the study of the universal nature of human language and cognition came into focus in the 1960s the idea of linguistic relativity fell out of favour among linguists. A 1969 study by Brent Berlin and Paul Kay claimed to demonstrate that color terminology is subject to universal semantic constraints, and hence to discredit the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis."

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

December TSOG BLOG Update

Hi, it's been a busy few months, or a busy year you could say for Global TSOG activities, and I am happy to say various counter-movements to combat the dictatorial and corrupt actions of authorities world-wide.

From the classic old school Police brutality, with the usual militaristic strategy and violent excessive force in the USA, Egypt, Britain, Italy, Greece, to the more sophisticated LAW making, surveillance (The Murdoch phone hacking scandal) and banking Tsarist like activity. (Tsar: Divine guided/deluded king and dictator of whatever one feels like dictating).

Please see Hagbard Celine's LAWS for more insights. 

1. National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity.

2. Accurate communication is possible only in a non-punishing situation.

3. An honest politician is a national calamity.


The Occupy movement is an international protest movement which is primarily directed against economic and social inequality.[7][8] The first Occupy protest to receive wide coverage was Occupy Wall Street in New York City, which began on September 17, 2011. By October 9, Occupy protests had taken place or were ongoing in over 95 cities across 82 countries, and over 600 communities in the United States.[9][10][11][12][13] As of December 20 the Meetup page "Occupy Together" listed 2,751 Occupy communities worldwide.--


"The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012 is a controversial bill that has been passed by both houses of Congress separately, and a final version approved by the Senate on December 15, 2011.[1][2][3] Though the White House[4] and Senate sponsors[5] maintain that the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF) already grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act legislatively codifies[6] the President's authority to indefinitely detain terrorism suspects, including American citizens, without trial as defined in Title X, Subtitle D, SEC 1031(a-e) of the bill.[7] Because those who may be held indefinitely include U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, and because that detention may be by the military, the Act has received critical attention by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and media sources --

 On the draconian and wrong-headed SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act)

"These bills, and the enforcement philosophy that underlies them, represent a dramatic retreat from this country's tradition of leadership in supporting the free exchange of information and ideas on the Internet. At a time when many foreign governments have dramatically stepped up their efforts to censor Internet communications, these bills would incorporate into U.S. law a principle more closely associated with those repressive regimes: a right to insist on the removal of content from the global Internet, regardless of where it may have originated or be located, in service of the exigencies of domestic law.--

On the EURO Crisis:

"Mayhem. Catastrophe. Apocalypse. Chaos. A hail of brimstone. The end of the (consumerist) world. Years of misery … And that's just the more optimistic parts of the media, as they contemplate the breakup of the eurozone. Politicians wring their hands as they contemplate the changing world of ever-lower expectations.--