Archive for December, 2007

Decadent Worker #99 - 16Dec87

Published on December 16, 2007 in Mind Control. 0 Comments

Decadent Worker 99ATTITUDES

Supposing you found me in your home, uninvited. If you shot me dead, in many states it would be justifiable homicide.

Or imagine that someone, say the Queen of England, plants a bugging device on you — up inside your sinus, say, or near your inner ear. And then suppose this same individual or organization invites individuals they have recruited in one way or another, any number of them, to monitor your movements at all times, in your home and out. Is the second outrage better than the first?

Are not both instances of intrusion? And isn’t the second, if anything, worse — to have to deal not with ust one prowler in your house, but with numerous intruders in your life.

That is the situation in which, since 1976, I have gradually found myself. You Masons and Jesuits and Elks and whatever, you initiates in secret societies, recruits of the Neighborhood Justice Centers, you disciples of mediums and pawns of Nixon, Howard Hunt, Griffin Bell and/or whoever else — you infufferable Lights (as one faction dedicated to making themselves into living high-pressure advertiseents is called) — all you who surveil me regardless of how or why — you are intruders in my life. Were the facts known or provable in court, most juries would not blame me for killing you.

Does it never occur to you that you are in violation of your own laws and of Natural Rights as well as of every commonsense conception of justice?

In my particular circumstance, battling a clique of genocidal Nazis as I am — though precious few of you seem to comprehend that much about it — I am glad there is an audience. You happened to intrude uninvited into a life where great crimes were happening already, greater than yours, and I want someone around afterwards to tell the world what happened.

So even though you arrived in my life uninvited and by the most despicable of means, I prefer to tolerate you as guests rather than to rent about your spying per se.

However, yhou are, at best, guests — not gracious hosts. I am the host. You are tromping around in my life. Try to remember your manners.

Especially, do not expect you are in any position to tell me how to live my life. Do not try to tell me, for example, which cafes I may or may not frequent or which radio stations I should or should not listen to. For arrogance like that is not in any way called for by the nature of the situation. If you want to enlist my cooperation, allow me to suggest that cooperation breeds cooperation. Tell me who escalated the Indochina War and how they went about it and the composition of that conspiracy now, instead of bombarding me with your totalitarian demands, your annoying gossip and your thought policing. Think about what you will tell your grandchildren when they ask, as the young in German do the old, why you heedlessly tolerated — in fact aided and abetted — a holocaust far worse than Hitler’s. So far it’s been of what asinine, trivial thing to say next time you see me so as to continue your desperate imperialist filibuster about anything and everything but crimes against humanity. — Kerry Wendell Thornley

Decadent Worker #98 - 11Dec87

Published on December 11, 2007 in The Decadent Worker. 0 Comments

Decadent Worker 98WHO KILLED JFK?

Charles de Gaulle and the Royal Arch Masons is my guess. (You thought I was going to say Castro; it was people who supported Castro because he is Caucasian who utilized the assassination conspiracy at the time.) But why de Gaulle?

How often have U.S. Senators speculated that when the CIA tried to assassinate Castro, he turned the conspiracy around to kill JFK, instead. Where did they get that idea? Why not say he sent his own assassins after Kennedy? How many other conspiracies in history have been turned around? I’ve been trying to turn the conspiracy persecuting me around for more than twelve years, with no luck at all.

“Guy Bannister (of 544 Camp St., New Orleans) dispatched Maurice Brooks Gatlin, Sr., on behalf of Permindex, with $100,000 in cash of the FBI’s money and delivered it to the Fascist French generals plotting against de Gaulle. Gatlin was the general counsel of the Anti-Communist League of the Caribbean. In 1964 Gatlin was thrown, pushed or fell from the sixth floor of the El Panama Hotel in Panama during the middle of the night,” wrote Jay Pound. Accounts differ as to which country Gatlin was in when he plunged to instant death; my opinion is that there was no Gatlin, that Maurice Brooks Gatlin was simply the name E. Howard Hunt used to infiltrate pro-Castro U.S. groups, one of which may have included some of LBJ’s racist cronies in Texas — who may have co-opted Hunt. And/or Hunt-Gatlin may have been, by 1963, working for de Gaulle. Listing contentions of the Torbitt manuscript, Jay Pound also said in “Who Told the Truth About JFK?” in Critique #21/22: “Maurice Gatlin, who the FBI tied in with Jack Ruby — involving the sale of army surplus jeeps to Fidel Castro in the spring of 1959.” Misinformation? Disinformation? The FBI reports its own agents? Or a CIA man unknown to the FBI under that cover name?

Whose war did we take over as a result of the assassination? Whose political style did the sophistication and diplomacy of the Kissinger era most resemble? We Americans have never been able to match the Europeans for political realism. Consider Woodrow Wilson at Versailles. Our naivete must have annoyed the French during WWII and thereafter. With Kissinger, it became a thing of the past. And I’ve heard many rumors linking both Henry Kissinger and Jean-Paul Sartre with Royal Arch Masons.

“De Gaulle had real professionals after him for years and they didn’t succeed, because his bodyguards knew what they were doing. That’s the point — they would never have let anyone get that close to Le General… De Gaulle’s bodyguards were up against army officers with money and weapons and knowing how to use them — not .22 pistols! And they tried and they tried but they never got him… Of course, the protection from a rifle with a telescopic sight is not easy. But de Gaulle’s men — they covered all the buildings on the route… That Ruby and Oswald thing stunk to high heaven, the whole thing…” — William S. Burroughs, Re/Search p. 26

Royal Arch Masons are a branch of Masonry as well as the name of the 13th Degree. Contary to popular belief, I am not an initiate. I believe, however, they comprise a Satanist secret society within Masonry. Cover-up artist G. Gordon Liddy is also much linked with them. Working through the RAMs, de Gaulle could have far more easily turned an assassination around than could have Castro. (c) Kerry Thornley, 1987

Decadent Worker #97 - 9Dec87

Published on December 9, 2007 in Marx. 0 Comments

Decadent Worker 97PROPERTY AND PRIVILEGE

“Property is theft.” — P.-J. Proudhon
“Property is liberty.” — P.-J. Proudhon
“Property is impossible.” — P.-J. Proudhon

…Proudhon, by piling up his contradictions this way, was not merely being French; he was trying to indicate that the abstraction ‘property’ covers a variety of phenomena, some pernicious and some beneficial. Let us borrow a device from the semanticists and examine his triad with subscripts attached for maximum clarity.

‘Property(1) is theft’ means that property(1), created by the artificial laws of feudal, capitalist and other authoritarian societies, is based on armed robbery. Land titles, for instance, are clear examples of property(1); swords and shot were the original coins of transaction.

‘Property(2) is liberty’ means that property(2), that which will be voluntarily honored in a voluntary (anarchist) society, is the foundation of the liberty in that society. The more people’s interests are commingled and confused, as in collectivism, the more they will be stepping on each other’s toes; only when the rules of the game declare clearly ‘This is mine and this is thine,’ and the game is voluntarily accepted as worthwhile by all parties to it, can true independence be achieved.

‘Property(3) is impossible’ means that property(3) (= property(1))creates so much conflict of interest that society is in perpetual undeclared civil war and must eventually devour itself (and properties (1) and (3) as well). In short, Proudhon, in his own way, foresaw the Snafu Principle. He also foresaw that communism would only perpetuate and aggravate the conflicts, and that anarchy is the only viable alternative to chaos.

It is not averred, of course, that property(2) will come into existence only in a totally voluntary society; many forms of it already exist. The error of most alleged libertarians — especially the followers(!) of the egregious Ayn Rand — is to assume that all property(1) is property(2)/. The distinction can be made by any IQ above 70 and is absurdly simple. The test is to ask, of any title of ownership you are asked to accept or which you ask others to accept, ‘Would this be honored in a free society of rationalists, or does it require the armed might of a State to force people to honor it?’ If it be the former, it is property(2) and represents liberty; if it be the latter, it is property(1) and represents theft. — Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson, Leviathan, Part III of the Illuminatus! Trilogy, Appendix Zain

Former guests include Eugene V. Debs and Alexander Berkman. Recently scene of an instance of spontaneous combustion, these historic accommodations are now back to business as usual. Debs maintained he could not himself be free as long as anyone else was in prison. Berkman said: “I had to leave.”

“As we shall see, secret societies did play a far more important role than is commonly realized in the life of Karl Marx as well as in the birth of communism generally,” says David Tame in “Secret Societies in the Life of Karl Marx,” Critique #25. Marx seems to have belonged to so many secret societies that the problem is determining which, if any of them, were relevant.

Decadent Worker #96 - 4Dec87

Published on December 4, 2007 in Anarchism. 0 Comments

Decadent Worker 96A sense for the potential of… leadership among the ranks of anarchist/Left SR forces arrayed against Bolshevism can be found where the Cheka had little influence. One of the peasant revolts during this period that was more than a mere revolt occurred in the Ukraine under the leadership of the anarchist, Nestor Makhno. The Ukraine had been ceded as an independent national territory by the Brest-Litovak treaty and the Ukrainian Nabat Confederation organized as an independent government for the region, its first proclamation being the redistribution of landed estates by the peasantry. The German/Central Powers occupation of the Ukraine until November 1918 served to foster both the ‘White’ counterrevolution of Denikin and Mahkno’s anarchist insurgents….

Return of the Ukraine to Russia with the nullification of Brest-Litovak did not prevent Makhno from militarily securing a broad area in the southern Ukraine within which the peasants were encouraged to form libertarian communist communes. The Bolsheviks were not outlawed, but their commissars were stripped of all their powers. Denikin’s ‘White’ armies soon threatened. From March to December of 1919 Mahkno fought Denikin, finally defeating the ‘White’ general with superb guerrilla tactics. His forces mixed extreme democracy with a tight-fisted discipline by Makhno and his personal commanders. Burying arms in strategic locations, his troops would disguise themselves as peasants to move freely through enemy lines to rearm and regroup. He used horse carts to transport guerrilla infantry for lightning attacks. Makhno’s anarchist conception of partisan peasant guerrilla warfare and peasant communism in many ways foreshadowed much of early Mao’s revolutionary experiences.

Makhno did not permit his forces to pillage, loot or rape. He respected the Ukrainian peasantry highly and did not force grain from them in an anarchist requisition. The peasantry supported Makhno’s army, and his army in turn protected the peasantry, neither censoring the peasantry’s political expression nor obstructing their political organization. Makhno forbade anti-seminitism from the ranks of his forces, but Makhno’s army could not be eveywhere at once. Pogroms occurred against the Jews by Ukrainian peasants during this period, though Makhno’s army intervened and protected Jewish communities where possible. The Bolsheviks, who were allied with Makhno in the fight against Denikin, at first considered him a partisan worthy of leading an autonomous Ukrainian national region within an overall Russian socialist revolution. Lenin and Trotsky realized by the middle of spring, 1919 that Makhno would not accept his strategy or his orders from the Red Army command, that he would continue to ignore or abolish the political power of Bolshevik Commissars in the Ukraine and worst of all that he would have the full support of the Ukrainian peasantry in doing so.

Trotsky took the opportunity of a lull in the fight against Denikin to raid Makhno’s headquarters and send Cheka agents to assassinate him, only to renew the alliance with Makhno in the summer of 1919 when Denikin once more became a threat. Makhno defeated Denikin, Trotsky ordered Makhno to the Polish Front as… an independent unit of the Red Army, Makhno refused, and Trotsky ordered the imprisonment of Makhno and his anarchist army in December, 1919. Makhno reslated the Bolshevik Red Army militariliy for nine months until Wrangel’s invasion in October, 1920. The Bolsheviks made another alliance with Makhno, promising the release of anarchist prisoners and freedom of propaganda, and Makhno’s anarchist army was instrumental in defeating Wrangel in November, 1920.

Makhno’s personal military commanders were then invited to a victory conference in the Crimea. All except an escaping cavalry unit were arrested or shot by the Bolsheviks. — Socialism: A Brief History, UCSD, pp. 40-1

Decadent Worker #95 - 2Dec87

Published on December 2, 2007 in Ayn Rand, Clint Bolton and Dave Chandler. 0 Comments

Decadent Worker 95In February of 1968 when D.A. Jim Garrison questioned me before the grand jury in his JFK murder probe, there were names he asked me to identify that meant nothing to me, in addition to those I recognized. A few of the names that failed to ring a bell got repeated many times — insuring that I at least would remember them from then on. One of them was: Dave Chandler. Going down his suspect list, the D.A. would return every so often to Dave Chandler. At one point I said, regarding one of these recurring names, “I believe you mentioned him before.” Garrison nodded and stared accusingly. Obviously, he was sure I knew somebody named Dave Chandler.

Sometime later on, in a conversation with Lane Lake, a French Quarter friend, Dave Chandler’s name came up again. “Who was he?” I asked. “Oh, you remember — that friend of Jim and Bootsie.”

When I returned in the late summer of 1963 from California to New Orleans I became close to Jim Dyer and Bootsie Culp, ecause they were as much into Ayn Rand as I was — unlike most French Quarter bohemians. Dave Chandler, I now recalled, was also an admirer of Ayn Rand. One morning, probably in October or early November, he bought me breakfast in a small cafe near Pat O’Brien’s on St. Peter. What did we talk about? O Jesus, we were sitting there agreeing that the President should be assassinated!

When I asked Clint Bolton, who knew nearly everyone, if he knew Dave Chandler, he said, “Sure, he was a stringer for Life Magazine.”

Shortly after my grand jury appearance in 1968 I spoke to Richard Billings, who had originally contacted me for an interview for Life. When I asked him about Chandler, he answered, “I was his boss at the time, and I got the feeling then that he knew more about the assassination than he was telling me.” At around the same time, Billings quit his job at Life and went to work for the Congressional Record. “One of the reasons I quit,” he told me, “was that I got the feeling they were being less than honest about the Kennedy assassination.”

In the early eighties when I was living with Paula Petty in Tampa, Florida, I dreamt that a Time Magazine cover expanded in front of my eyes until filling my field of vision. A seductive female voice said: “Time for romance!” This cover faded and another appeared in the same way. “Time for adventure!” And so it went, just like a t.v. commercial, until I woke up, terrified. And there are people who want to trust landlords and other capitalists to investigate mind control.

A persistent intelligence community rumor says Pope John Paul II belongs to a Time Magazine secret society, in which he is solemnly sworn to murder me — in full public view with full public approval! When the deadline is and what happens if he failes is not made clear. But it sure makes a nifty contingency program for the assassinations in the meantime.

Time seems to have usurped the functions of both the State and the Mob.