Click on Image to Download

Featuring:

1. Ben Fade – Fade it or love it (germany)
2. M-Rode – Let me spin da Turntables – (france)
3. N-Tone & Maxijazzzz – Must return (russia)
4. WSQ – Always Drunk (russia)
5. S-Trix – Singularity (germany)
6. Kingtragic – Skratchsploitation (usa)
7. Fong Fong – Instable (france)
8. Nobodi da Vinylist – Move the Vinyl (germany)
9. Supaphonik – The shinning Shadow (france)
10. Spores & That Kid named Cee – 2012 Nefarious Contact (ToxikWasteKuttz 2) (usa)
11. Scratchtastic – Skratch Connection vol. 2 (usa)
12. Cutsneak – You wanna fresh Style (germany)
13. 3ck – Till my style is no Limit (Slovakia)
14. Kalif – ? (Czech Republic )
15. 5L – Desolandia (italy)
16. Jay de Large – D.N.E.(germany)
17. Jimmy Penguin – Brrain F (ireland)
18. NST & Nobodi da Vinylist & Hypa Aktiv – 3 the hard way (germany)
19. Celsius & dissonance -Try This (usa)
20. Phar One – Phadermelancholie (germany)
21. Turkey Pastry & Sysiphus – EyeFoughtMyDog(usa)
22. Avana – Namia (Dominican Republic)
23. T-Kut – Chicha Scratch (Spain)
24. Giobbe – Scratchtrack (france)
25. Luk Scratch – WestScratch (spain)
26. Needlz – Adrenaline Rush (usa)

~ Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea, The Eye in the Pyramid, 1975

The Eagle Tribune runs a “This Day in History” type story today titled ‘Dynamite plot backfires on mill owners’.

On this day 100 years ago, the newspaper headlines screamed about a ‘Plot to blow up mills,’ leading to the arrests of seven people suspected of planting sticks of dynamite around the city in an effort to harm citizens and bring fear to thousands of striking workers.

Unfortunately, the plot backfired, as it was eventually discovered that the dynamite had been planted by people affiliated with the mill owners in an attempt to discredit union organizers.

The plot came hot on the heels of the Bread and Roses textile strike just days before, which had united a diverse group of immigrant communities against the textile mill owners of Lawrence. Seven leaders and participants in the strike were quickly arrested based on the “evidence” of several sticks of dynamite stashed and planted around the city of Lawrence. If it hadn’t been for an honorable judge they very well may have been sent to prison or worse on trumped up charges.

During a court hearing on Jan. 22, a judge noted during the proceedings that there were “indications to show that the men and women arrested … are innocent victims of a plot, and dupes of some persons interested in maintaining a reign of terror in this city.”

This was a False Flag plot to destroy the lives of strike leaders and discredit the movement. There had to have been conspiracy between the mill owners, the police and the newspapers to so quickly have evidence planted, have the police know the exact location of the planted evidence, and the newspapers ready to run a story blaring accusations of terrorism on the front page. 100 years ago Capitalists/Corporations, the Police and the Mass Media colluded against the people. Yet if you suggest this type of thing is happening today many would label you a “conspiracy theorist” as if the idea of conspiracy is absurd.

Luckily for the innocent citizens of Lawrence the conspirators didn’t have the stomach to actually murder people by setting the dynamite off. In fact one of the conspirators was so haunted by the plot that he later took his own life:

Later in 1912, Ernest Pitman, the contractor who built the Wood and Ayer mills, killed himself on his front lawn in Andover after allegedly confessing to having procured the dynamite for Breen.

Over 100 years later not much as changed, except maybe stomach for this type of plot has grown more iron clad. Now the FBI plants the evidence, but the results are very real, and the judges are corrupt.

There are those who use the word “conspiracy theory” as a bladed weapon dripping with venom, simultaneously stabbing holes through valid ideas and poisoning the very idea itself. Conspiracies are very real though, and a the rich evidence of history has plenty of support for that. So the next time you hear “conspiracy theory” in a negative way, remind yourself who is truly ignorant. Most likely it is those who ignore history, and they are doomed to repeat it.

Obama, the “Hope and Change” president, is vowing to overthrow the Syrian government

“We continue to see unacceptable levels of violence inside that country,” Obama said.

I wonder why that could be? Maybe it’s because an armed and organised separatist group is fighting the government for control of the country? We only hear about protester deaths but there is the beginning of a civil war going on as we speak, and only a fool could believe that civil wars in the modern world aren’t manipulated by outside nations from both sides.

Enter one royal manipulator: Qatar. Scourge of Libya and Friend of Israel. This is the country that secretly armed and trained Libyan rebels before NATO used their insurrection as an excuse to go obliterate the country and murder Muammar Gaddafi.

it appears that Doha has set its sights on dethroning Bashar Al-Assad in Syria. Qatar’s ruler, speaking to CBS’s ’60 Minutes’ on Sunday, called for military intervention by Arab forces.

It looks like all the pieces are in place. We have the American president, and thus NATO, announcing their intention to overthrow the Syrian government. We have a regional state player who has already leveraged their national military to overthrow their neighbor also openly announcing they will be doing the same to Syria. All we need now is some cheerleader of war to use cheap “humanitarian” ploys to convince the country to use our vastly superior military technology to murder and destroy a foreign country.

There you are, Mainstream Media!

Ragtag defectors from the Syrian Army, joined by civilians, have had to fight back. Yet these unorganized protesters have fought Assad’s loyalist troops and militias nearly to a standstill with only light arms, obtained locally.

Providing them with more sophisticated gear, including RPGs, night vision goggles and better communication equipment, would likely enable them to neutralize Assad’s tanks and possibly free entire towns. Implementing a no-fly zone could also prevent Assad from laying these towns, once free, to waste. A naval blockade of Syrian ports would help prevent arms shipments to the regime. These are all measures the protesters themselves have forcefully and uniformly requested.

That’s right Obama, the level of violence in Syria is absolutely unacceptable. It should be much, much higher! I’m thinking lets put rocket launchers in the hands of teenagers, lets give guns and night vision goggles to violent separatists, and of course lets drop more and bigger bombs than ever before on a defenseless nation!

Then maybe we’ll reach what Obama feels is just the right amount of violence for that country.

Read the story about how a law abiding citizen was arrested and charged with a crime based on the direct orders of the Mitt Romney campaign who was employing police as a private security force.

This isn’t really about Mitt Romney, this is about how any group or person can pay for your local police to become a private security force taking orders directly from them.

They can hold a public function open for anyone to come onto their private property, then wait for you to come onto their property and instruct their private police force to arrest you for trespassing.

You are then handcuffed and taken in police custody to a police station as a criminal where you are prosecuted for whatever crime they come up with. If you resist or question them they will threaten you with further charges like “inciting a riot”. The more you question the police the more charges they levy against you. You are now booked and in the system, you must face charges before a judge and your mugshot and fingerprints are going into a government database permanently.

All of it is worth reading. Here is the highlight of the horror story:

At the police station, an officer put me in a cage and asked to remove my shoes, belt, and sweatshirt and place them on the floor between us. He asked me to lift my feet so he could inspect them. He did so tentatively, from a distance.

An officer named Manni and another officer processed my paperwork. As they did so, they told me not to go back to “that area” when I was released. I indicated that I understood I wasn’t permitted to be on the company’s land or in their facilities, but surely I could go back to the street if I so chose – it’s public property, after all. Don’t go back to that area, they said. If you go back, you might cause a disturbance or a riot, and you could be arrested for disorderly conduct.

I tried to keep calm and ask even-keeled questions. Were they telling me I wasn’t even permitted in the street near the facility? And if so, on what grounds? (I wondered, Is the Romney campaign just permitted to cordon off a whole neighborhood?)

And then the following exchange took place. I began to ask, “If I express my First Amendment freedoms –

And Officer Manni interjected, “You’ll probably be arrested.”

by:  Faris Al-Hashmi

The recent rise in popularity of American Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has given way to a possible re-orientation of the 2012 election paradigm. What his rise represents is the willingness of American voters to support an anti-establishment candidate in opposition to years of reliance on mainstream politicians. It shows that no longer a minority, but a serious block of the American people have given up on traditional party politics and are seeking a truly independent president. And it could remake the 2012 election into one that truly represents class struggle.

Ron Paul is not a new face in American politics. He ran for president in 1988 and 2008 and has been serving in Congress for decades. His ideas are not new. In fact his remarkable trait has been his consistency and willingness to put principles ahead of what seems ‘popular’. But what is so unique about the year 2012 is that world circumstances and American attitudes have joined together to demand exactly what Paul has stood for all along. The American people have finally come to him.

To trace this alignment, one can start with the Iraq war. American skepticism of government leading the nation to war began in Vietnam but then relapsed in the following decades. Especially after 9/11, Americans put faith in the government to protect the nation against terrorism. But Iraq started to change that again, as anti-war sentiment was reflected in the 2006 congressional elections that saw anti-Iraq war Democrats win. Suddenly an anti-war stance in the post-9/11 world was feasible as the people saw through the government’s lies and manipulation of the terror threat.

Ron Paul ran in the 2008 elections but was still seen as too radical for his anti-establishment, anti-war and anti-corporatist stance. He gained somewhat a name for himself, but the likes of McCain, the traditional big defense, main-stream Republican was still preferred. And then came the financial crisis of 2009. The government bailout of large corporations the major car companies, as well as the leading financial institutions. The government-instituted health care reform bill- so called Obama-care. A movement was born.

The Tea Party was a very conservative movement, but also very anti-establishment. At least elements of it were more libertarian than Reagan conservative. They took economic frustrations and blamed it on the government. They resented the bailouts, the economic stimulus plans that seemed just like a lot of misused taxpayer money. The healthcare bill symbolized a government expanding its reach. Most importantly, the Tea Partiers represented a move within the Republican Party against the main-stream establishment.

The liberal mistrust of government was strengthened after Obama took office, due in large part to the campaign that got him their vote. The emphasis on ‘change’ created expectations that haven’t been fulfilled. Obama did not close Guantanamo, has escalated the Afghanistan War, as well as the drone war in Pakistan. His ‘liberal’ healthcare bill arguably ended up benefiting pharmaceutical companies. His macroeconomic policies have not resulted in hoped for gains.

In the latest show of liberal anger, the Occupy movement protested against economic inequality in addition to the traditional anti-war stance. Most significant about Occupy Wall Street was a dissociation with the Democratic party, and in fact association based more on class lines than party ones. The liberals became anti-establishment just as the Tea Party had. They are both angry. Angry about the economic situation, angry about the establishment. The Tea Party is angry about the government’s role, the Occupy movement is angry about the upper elite and inequality. They both hated the bailouts.

So, on the one hand a liberal anti-war, mistrust of government was renewed following the Iraq War. On the other hand a conservative mistrust of government’s involvement in the economy was born following the financial crisis. The Tea Partiers and now Occupy Wall Street have each given up on the establishment. What’s left is the Republican and Democratic institutional elite, that alliance between government, Wall Street, and defense.

Where does Ron Paul come in? Paul represents all the Tea-Party stands for domestically in reducing taxes and limiting government. What his rise within Republican ranks and the Tea Party represents is a willingness of Republicans to rethink the big defense establishment after years of wars. Now, they have become warm to a Ron Paul Republican. On the other hand, he stands for liberal issues as anti-war and anti-bailout, as well as championing civil liberties. Indeed, Paul’s positions cross party lines and instead unite both Republicans and Democrats on an anti-establishment line.

The question becomes, are voters willing to identify themselves according to their class, or will they stick to their party? Rather, how many would? Is the 2012 election going to be anti-establishment vs. establishment? Trust in government vs. lack of trust? How many Independent Democrats would look at Obama not as a Democrat, but as an institutionalist, and thus prefer Paul as representing the anti-establishment? How many Democrats would back a ‘conservative’ domestic policy and how many Republicans would back a ‘liberal’ foreign policy?

Rather, how many Americans would identify positions on foreign and domestic policy not as ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’, but as ‘establishment’ and ‘non-establishment’, ‘institutionalist’ and ‘non-institutionalist’, ‘elitist’ and ‘non-elitist’?

If Ron Paul were to be the Republican nominee, it certainly could shape up to be a race determined along those lines: Paul representing the anti-establishment, lower classes, and Obama representing the mainstream establishment - the government bureaucracy, the financial elite, the Pentagon. If Americans do identify themselves along those lines, it could be an election of mainstream Democrats and mainstream Republicans backing Obama vs. anti-establishment Democrats and anti-establishment Republicans backing Paul. This could be the first class-based election since at least Jimmy Carter. There is an anti-establishment movement in America and it could determine the outcome of the elections.

Berman regards Iran as a petulant child, needing to be put in its place for talking back to its elders. First framing the conversation in a biased manner by calling this “Iran’s war of words with the West” as if the “West” (U.S. and Israel) was sitting around quietly minding its own business and Iran started saber rattling for no reason. Nevermind the fact that Israel has been openly threatening to bomb Iran to deter its nuclear program, or the U.S. government has been bullying everyone in the international community to put sanctions on Iran, or that the majority of U.S. politicians continue to brazenly provoke war with Iran with their chicken hawk threats.

Then dismissing the very real military threat Iran poses with this short-sighted statement:

The first is that any attempt to close (or otherwise manipulate) the strait will be viewed by the international community as a casus belli. Iran’s leaders need to understand that a closure or narrowing of the strait, however temporary, would lead to an assumption of control of the waterway by U.S. and allied military forces.

There is no such thing as an “assumption of control” over an international waterway, either you control it through real ships and planes and boots on the ground, or you don’t. So completely missing from this concept is how many ships and planes and boots the U.S. military is going to have to put “on the ground” to control the waterway. The author also alludes to “allied military forces” and goes on to claim that the other Arab gulf states would band together to jointly wrest control of the waterway away from Iran. Color me skeptical but I don’t see other Western states lining up to take part in military action against Iran, and somehow I don’t see – during the middle of the ‘Arab Spring’ the Western Press loves to talk about – other Arab Gulf states mobilizing their military against a neighboring Islamic state to do America and Israel’s dirty work for them.

It’s also cute, in an almost child-like way, the way the author assumes the U.S. military will be able to take control of the Straight of Hormuz as easily as moving some ships into the area. Let’s be clear, restricting access to Iran and its military of this waterway will involve nothing less than total war with Iran who will bring the utmost extent of all it’s military power to bear on foreign forces in this waterway. We are talking hundreds of ships, thousands of bombs and missiles, and millions of bullets. Casualties will easily be in the tens of thousands. You will have to invade and occupy the entire country of Iran to take control of this waterway.

I could link to a dozen articles explaining in very clear, grown up language why this simply isn’t feasible, or even possible without thermo-nuclear annihilation. But these trivial details don’t interest arm chair Zionist chicken-hawks whose only real duty is to sell the American people on a war they have no interest in. One big step in selling them is convincing them it will be a cake walk, a routine exercise of military intervention that will be over in a short period of time so we can resume life as normal.

It is a lie though, and a hundred thousand people would die for that lie, but at least we know one author who will happily get paid for repeating it.

A vote for Obama, or any of the “other” Republican candidates, is a vote to maintain the status-quo…

Blackwater mercenaries to return to Iraq

See how this works?  Obama, the Commander in Chief (Chump), tells the Iraqi citizens and US citizens that members of the US military establishment will be leaving the country before the end of the year.  While in actuality what he means is that those personnel will be replaced with mercenaries.

Further, the company that was kicked out and had their license to do business revoked pulled a quick name change from Blackwater to Xe only to be bought out by USTC Holding Group and renamed yet again, ACADEMI.  Like a change of hands and name makes the murder of Iraqi civilians magically go away.

And let us not forget the guy whose brainchild Blackwater was; Erik Prince.  The same guy that apparently worked as an agent of the CIA in Iraq and propped up dubious leaders in Africa.  How about the fact that he believes he is like a Templar Knight doing God’s work by killing Muslims?

The company this guy founded (he’s creating a new mercenary army in Abu Dhabi as I type this) is being re-tasked with protecting the very people Prince wants dead.  And what’s worse?!?!  Obama, the president who won the Nobel Peace Prize, is going to send them back in again.