RE: POLITICS: economic disaster and gov't surveillance like we've never known before

[Guest guest]

> Ron does appearances on his radio show from time to time, including

> today. Same with Kucinich in case any gets the idea that the show is

> partisan.

In fact, Kucinich was on yesterday talking about his impeachment work.

Big surprise that his impeachment initiative is not plastered all over the

corporate media as if it's an every day occurrence that members of Congress

present Articles of Impeachment against a president.

Suze

[Guest guest]

> Yes - I believe that AJ has posted false information, but as I've

> posted subsequently, I am opposed to him because of his views, i.e.

> moral grounds.

This is as I suspected. Your opposition to him is based on your different

political and moral views.

>

> The use of 'falseness' in my original post was simply a way to get to

> my question about whether people knew about . A list of

> falsehoods that he's perpetrated? Well, it's been a long time since I

> researched him a little, but I'd say that his extremist conspiracy

> theories are false, and the notion that Noam Chomsky is part of the

> New World Order is laughable, and the fact that the Bush

> Administration itself carried out 9/11 is ludicrous, and a distraction

> from real issues, etc.

I didn't hear his comments on Noam Chomsky so I can't comment on that. I've

heard plenty of his comments on 9/11 conspiracy theories and watched some of

his movies on it. All total I've heard many hours of him addressing this

issue. When I first started listening to his radio show I thought, as you

do, that he was a nut. But he had some very interesting guests and it was

worth listening to the show for the guests alone, including economists,

politicians like Ron , Dennis Kucinich and Chuck Baldwin, former gov't

officials turned whistle-blowers, peace activists, authors, and many more.

Over time as I looked into some of his claims and heard some of them

confirmed by folks with firsthand experience, or heard about his suspicions

shared by a large group of professionals on a given topic, I realized that

he's less of a nut than I had originally thought at the time when I'd only

listened to a few of his shows and read a few articles on his site.

As one example, there are hundreds of architects and engineers demanding

that a new *truly* independent investigation of 9/11 building collapses be

carried out. They have a website: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

http://www.ae911truth.org/

As of today 412 architects and engineers have signed a petition demanding

that Congress start a truly independent investigation of 9/11. This is one

group that I learned about through one of Jone's films.

Excerpt:

http://www.ae911truth.org/info/4

Why are Architects and Engineers Re-examining the WTC Collapses?

<snip>

" There is however a growing body of very solid evidence regarding these

" collapses " that has emerged in the last couple of years - gaining ground

even in the mainstream media. This new evidence casts grave doubt upon the

theories of the 9/11 building collapse " experts " as well as the official

reports by the 9/11 Commission, FEMA, and NIST.

It lays out a solid convincing case which architects & engineers will

readily see: that the 3 WTC high-rise buildings were destroyed by both

classic and novel forms of controlled demolition. You will find the evidence

here in our website as well as at the linked websites. We hope you will find

the courage and take the necessary time to review each section thoroughly.

After all, if in fact these buildings were professionally demolished with

explosives, and since it takes months of planning and engineering to place

the explosives, and since these buildings were highly secure from foreign

terrorists, then we are presented with a horrible conclusion that we cannot

deny: that this entire event must have been planned and orchestrated by a

group other than those who are blamed by our Government. The questions

raised are numerous and ominous that must be answered in the context of a

truly independent unimpeachable congressional investigation with subpoena

power. "

In order to get an accurate picture of what is promoting, you really

need to spend more time listening to him or watching some of his

documentaries or reading some of his articles. Although I'm hard pressed to

find articles written by HIM on either his infowars.com website or his

prisonplanet.com website. Most articles are written by other people and

after searching the news articles for several minutes I couldn't find a

single one with his byline. I think most of his work is done as a radio

commentator, researcher and documentary film maker, rather than web article

writer. Although obviously he probably agrees with most of the stuff

published on his websites that he didn't write.

I have no doubt he's wrong about some things, right about others, and jumps

to conclusions at times with insufficient evidence. What I've found

interesting over time is my own reaction to the globalist conspiracy theory,

which is the one central theory that always talks about, that

everything else he discusses is tied into, and how at first, when I had

little to no information about what he and other New World Order/One World

Government conspiracy theorists have been talking about, I simply dismissed

them as conspiracy theorist nuts. However, as I've read, watched and

listened to the evidence, I've become increasingly convinced that there is

definitely something fishy going on. I don't know to what extent the New

World Order/One World Government conspiracy theory as presented by and

a host of others is true, but there is quite a bit of evidence that supports

the theory, and it is, from the information I have so far, the most cohesive

theory of world events (primarily events in the West) to date.

Another point re 9/11, you probably know that and others believe it to

be a " false flag " event and this is how the theory ties 9/11 into the New

World Order.

From Wiki:

" False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments,

corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear like they

are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the

military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a

country other than one's own. False flag operations are not limited to war

and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for

example, during Italy's strategy of tension. "

The going theory is that rogue elements of the US gov't (not necessarily

Bush himself, who is thought to be primarily a puppet of the globalists)

either knew about or staged 9/11 in order to scare the American people into

quickly accepting massive gov't control over our lives (loss of civil

liberties) in exchange for " security " from terrorists. And of course, this

did come true with the passing of the Patriot Act, the FISA Ammendments Act

and now the new Housing Bill as well as various and sundry " police state "

actions being undertaken in regions around the country. And possibly other

bills or acts I'm not remembering. The point of this, according to the

theory, is to accelerate the power elite/illuminati's control over the

American population and thus accelerate their goal of One World Government.

The North American Union is a major step towards that goal as is the

European Union. All of these things are interrelated, as the theory goes, in

that they all work toward centralizing power into the hands of a few and

those few are not just folks we elect, but also International bankers and

other power elite. And no, International bankers is not code for Jewish

bankers or Zionist bankers for anyone other than anti-Semites and I don't

think is among that group. For instance he often tries to

painstakingly point out that when he lambasts gov'ts such as the Israeli

gov't he is not lambasting the Israeli *people* any more than he is

lambasting the German people when lambasting their gov't although he gets a

lot of emails and such accusing him of being anti-semitic whenever he says

anything about the Israeli gov't. The fact is that he rails against almost

ALL rogue governments, constantly.

It's vague in my mind now, but there's all of

> this occult conspiracy stuff, secret ceremonies, Zionist bankers, all

> mixed in with anti-feminist and homophobic articles. I don't take him

> seriously - he reminds me a bit of Rush Limbaugh, but obviously with a

> different political stench.

I strongly disagree with your characterization of him and think it's one

that a liberal might have of him when being only vaguely familiar with his

work. He's anti false feminism to be sure, but not anti women's rights or

anti gay rights from what I've gathered listening to him over the past month

or so.

> Essentially, I think that he's a demagogue, and I've found that people

> who are really into him tend to use the same kind of illogical, rather

> distasteful logic - if you don't agree that the government itself

> perpetrated 9/11, well then you trust the government, if you don't

> believe in this great World Banker occult conspiracy, well, t hen

> you're part of it. Of course he's right about some stuff - that's what

> makes him dangerous. He sucks in people from the left who are too

> naive to see through his bullshit.

I think it's just the opposite - that those who don't look deeper into the

issues he raises about civil liberties, New World Order, centralization of

power, etc, are naïve, whether from the left or the right. Much of the

naivete, IMO, comes from some myopic vision that our government, and/or

those with the most wealth and power in the current Western World, are

exceptions to the historical rule of the corruption of governments and power

brokers. Why would our government officials, on the whole, be any different?

And don't take this to mean I'm saying they are ALL corrupt because I don't

believe that and neither does promote that idea.

I don't have time to rebut all your mischaracterizations, but I will say

that does not on the whole contend that anyone who doesn't agree with

him is part of the conspiracy. He mostly thinks we are too dumbed down by

fluoride in the water, GMOs in the food and too much time watching t.v. to

be able to think for ourselves and thus we are sheeple just going along with

whatever new tyranny the gov't and/or globalists force on us. Since most

Americans are NOT out protesting in the streets at this time when our

liberties are being stripped from us at an alarming rate, I think he's got a

point.

Suze

[Guest guest]

There is a big difference between believing that the government knows more than

they are telling, and even believing that there should be an independent

investigation into what happened ... and believing that the Bush administration

planned and executed the whole thing. I'm not a scientist/architect/etc, and I

can't validate claims made by some of these people - in that context it always

seems plausible when someone cites knowledge that I can't question, and don't

have the time to research, or the time to get another degree, etc....

I do find the notion that they planned the whole thing to be ludicrous. I do

believe that they are great opportunists, and took advantage of the opportunity

to get a bunch of stuff done. I also don't think that Cheney et all are above

killing people to gain their objectives, but I think that they are into doing it

in ways that are less risky than this.

The more I listened to the more of a crackpot I thought he was. There

is some truly reprehensible stuff on his sites. For instance, search under

'homosexuality' on prisonplanet. If you can't find this stuff, I can probably

dig it up again.

None of this contradicts that he has had interesting people on his show. Noam

chomsky, whom I've already mentioned, for one....

-------------- Original message ----------------------

From: " Suze Fisher " <suzefisher@...>

>

> > Yes - I believe that AJ has posted false information, but as I've

> > posted subsequently, I am opposed to him because of his views, i.e.

> > moral grounds.

>

> This is as I suspected. Your opposition to him is based on your different

> political and moral views.

>

> >

> > The use of 'falseness' in my original post was simply a way to get to

> > my question about whether people knew about . A list of

> > falsehoods that he's perpetrated? Well, it's been a long time since I

> > researched him a little, but I'd say that his extremist conspiracy

> > theories are false, and the notion that Noam Chomsky is part of the

> > New World Order is laughable, and the fact that the Bush

> > Administration itself carried out 9/11 is ludicrous, and a distraction

> > from real issues, etc.

>

> I didn't hear his comments on Noam Chomsky so I can't comment on that. I've

> heard plenty of his comments on 9/11 conspiracy theories and watched some of

> his movies on it. All total I've heard many hours of him addressing this

> issue. When I first started listening to his radio show I thought, as you

> do, that he was a nut. But he had some very interesting guests and it was

> worth listening to the show for the guests alone, including economists,

> politicians like Ron , Dennis Kucinich and Chuck Baldwin, former gov't

> officials turned whistle-blowers, peace activists, authors, and many more.

> Over time as I looked into some of his claims and heard some of them

> confirmed by folks with firsthand experience, or heard about his suspicions

> shared by a large group of professionals on a given topic, I realized that

> he's less of a nut than I had originally thought at the time when I'd only

> listened to a few of his shows and read a few articles on his site.

>

> As one example, there are hundreds of architects and engineers demanding

> that a new *truly* independent investigation of 9/11 building collapses be

> carried out. They have a website: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

> http://www.ae911truth.org/

>

> As of today 412 architects and engineers have signed a petition demanding

> that Congress start a truly independent investigation of 9/11. This is one

> group that I learned about through one of Jone's films.

>

> Excerpt:

> http://www.ae911truth.org/info/4

> Why are Architects and Engineers Re-examining the WTC Collapses?

>

> <snip>

>

> " There is however a growing body of very solid evidence regarding these

> " collapses " that has emerged in the last couple of years - gaining ground

> even in the mainstream media. This new evidence casts grave doubt upon the

> theories of the 9/11 building collapse " experts " as well as the official

> reports by the 9/11 Commission, FEMA, and NIST.

>

> It lays out a solid convincing case which architects & engineers will

> readily see: that the 3 WTC high-rise buildings were destroyed by both

> classic and novel forms of controlled demolition. You will find the evidence

> here in our website as well as at the linked websites. We hope you will find

> the courage and take the necessary time to review each section thoroughly.

>

> After all, if in fact these buildings were professionally demolished with

> explosives, and since it takes months of planning and engineering to place

> the explosives, and since these buildings were highly secure from foreign

> terrorists, then we are presented with a horrible conclusion that we cannot

> deny: that this entire event must have been planned and orchestrated by a

> group other than those who are blamed by our Government. The questions

> raised are numerous and ominous that must be answered in the context of a

> truly independent unimpeachable congressional investigation with subpoena

> power. "

>

> In order to get an accurate picture of what is promoting, you really

> need to spend more time listening to him or watching some of his

> documentaries or reading some of his articles. Although I'm hard pressed to

> find articles written by HIM on either his infowars.com website or his

> prisonplanet.com website. Most articles are written by other people and

> after searching the news articles for several minutes I couldn't find a

> single one with his byline. I think most of his work is done as a radio

> commentator, researcher and documentary film maker, rather than web article

> writer. Although obviously he probably agrees with most of the stuff

> published on his websites that he didn't write.

>

> I have no doubt he's wrong about some things, right about others, and jumps

> to conclusions at times with insufficient evidence. What I've found

> interesting over time is my own reaction to the globalist conspiracy theory,

> which is the one central theory that always talks about, that

> everything else he discusses is tied into, and how at first, when I had

> little to no information about what he and other New World Order/One World

> Government conspiracy theorists have been talking about, I simply dismissed

> them as conspiracy theorist nuts. However, as I've read, watched and

> listened to the evidence, I've become increasingly convinced that there is

> definitely something fishy going on. I don't know to what extent the New

> World Order/One World Government conspiracy theory as presented by and

> a host of others is true, but there is quite a bit of evidence that supports

> the theory, and it is, from the information I have so far, the most cohesive

> theory of world events (primarily events in the West) to date.

>

> Another point re 9/11, you probably know that and others believe it to

> be a " false flag " event and this is how the theory ties 9/11 into the New

> World Order.

>

> From Wiki:

> " False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments,

> corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear like they

> are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the

> military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a

> country other than one's own. False flag operations are not limited to war

> and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for

> example, during Italy's strategy of tension. "

>

>

> The going theory is that rogue elements of the US gov't (not necessarily

> Bush himself, who is thought to be primarily a puppet of the globalists)

> either knew about or staged 9/11 in order to scare the American people into

> quickly accepting massive gov't control over our lives (loss of civil

> liberties) in exchange for " security " from terrorists. And of course, this

> did come true with the passing of the Patriot Act, the FISA Ammendments Act

> and now the new Housing Bill as well as various and sundry " police state "

> actions being undertaken in regions around the country. And possibly other

> bills or acts I'm not remembering. The point of this, according to the

> theory, is to accelerate the power elite/illuminati's control over the

> American population and thus accelerate their goal of One World Government.

> The North American Union is a major step towards that goal as is the

> European Union. All of these things are interrelated, as the theory goes, in

> that they all work toward centralizing power into the hands of a few and

> those few are not just folks we elect, but also International bankers and

> other power elite. And no, International bankers is not code for Jewish

> bankers or Zionist bankers for anyone other than anti-Semites and I don't

> think is among that group. For instance he often tries to

> painstakingly point out that when he lambasts gov'ts such as the Israeli

> gov't he is not lambasting the Israeli *people* any more than he is

> lambasting the German people when lambasting their gov't although he gets a

> lot of emails and such accusing him of being anti-semitic whenever he says

> anything about the Israeli gov't. The fact is that he rails against almost

> ALL rogue governments, constantly.

>

>

> It's vague in my mind now, but there's all of

> > this occult conspiracy stuff, secret ceremonies, Zionist bankers, all

> > mixed in with anti-feminist and homophobic articles. I don't take him

> > seriously - he reminds me a bit of Rush Limbaugh, but obviously with a

> > different political stench.

>

> I strongly disagree with your characterization of him and think it's one

> that a liberal might have of him when being only vaguely familiar with his

> work. He's anti false feminism to be sure, but not anti women's rights or

> anti gay rights from what I've gathered listening to him over the past month

> or so.

>

>

> > Essentially, I think that he's a demagogue, and I've found that people

> > who are really into him tend to use the same kind of illogical, rather

> > distasteful logic - if you don't agree that the government itself

> > perpetrated 9/11, well then you trust the government, if you don't

> > believe in this great World Banker occult conspiracy, well, t hen

> > you're part of it. Of course he's right about some stuff - that's what

> > makes him dangerous. He sucks in people from the left who are too

> > naive to see through his bullshit.

>

> I think it's just the opposite - that those who don't look deeper into the

> issues he raises about civil liberties, New World Order, centralization of

> power, etc, are naïve, whether from the left or the right. Much of the

> naivete, IMO, comes from some myopic vision that our government, and/or

> those with the most wealth and power in the current Western World, are

> exceptions to the historical rule of the corruption of governments and power

> brokers. Why would our government officials, on the whole, be any different?

> And don't take this to mean I'm saying they are ALL corrupt because I don't

> believe that and neither does promote that idea.

>

> I don't have time to rebut all your mischaracterizations, but I will say

> that does not on the whole contend that anyone who doesn't agree with

> him is part of the conspiracy. He mostly thinks we are too dumbed down by

> fluoride in the water, GMOs in the food and too much time watching t.v. to

> be able to think for ourselves and thus we are sheeple just going along with

> whatever new tyranny the gov't and/or globalists force on us. Since most

> Americans are NOT out protesting in the streets at this time when our

> liberties are being stripped from us at an alarming rate, I think he's got a

> point.

>

> Suze

>

>

[Guest guest]

Oliver Stone's W - trailer from upcoming the movie

--

There's nothing like visiting a foreign country like China to get an

appreciation of what it's like to live under an authoritarian regime.

I was reminded of this when I arrived home and found that the TSA had

rifled through my baggage.

- Tabarrok

[Guest guest]

On 7/28/08, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote:

> Oliver Stone's W - trailer from upcoming the movie

>

>

It would be even more interesting if the movie offered any speculation

about whether Barbara Pierce (of the Percy/Pierce line going back to

England) was in fact conceived during the sex-magic ritual her mother

apparently attended with Allister Crowley, famous warlock and

self-proclaimed 666 beast of revelation, and thus whether, when she

married CIA Director HW Bush and became Barbara Bush, gave

birth to the grandson of the warlock-beast. It's at least amusing to

ponder. :-)

Chris

[Guest guest]

Gene,

> I do find the notion that they planned the whole thing to be

> ludicrous. I do believe that they are great opportunists, and took

> advantage of the opportunity to get a bunch of stuff done. I also

> don't think that Cheney et all are above killing people to gain

> their objectives, but I think that they are into doing it in ways

> that are less risky than this.

Personally, I don't know what they are into and can only surmise

based on the available evidence.

I dismissed these theories out of hand back in 2001, and I've yet to

make any time of intensive investigation of the evidence, but since

then I've become pretty convinced that building 7 was blown up by

explosives, and I think there is a compelling case that the

administration knew much more before-hand than it is letting on.

Someone knew building 7 would be blown up before it happened, because

the videos are available of a BBC reporter reporting that it

collapsed, with it still standing in the background (!), suggesting

that they put out the press release some 15 minutes too early. Larry

Silverstein, the leaser, is on video saying they " pulled " building 7

because of the damage the fires would do, obviously before they got

their story straight. Giuliani is caught saying he was told building

7 would collapse, and is on tape fumbling trying to explain himself

and what he meant, saying he didn't know it would collapse the way it

did, but the way all such buildings collapse when they've been

exposed to extensive fire according to historical examples... only as

far as I know it hadn't happened before and probably didn't happen

then.

The question of how on earth the explosives could be set up in the

building without active support from someone who had control over the

security of the building is a hard one to answer.

I agree with you that Cheney et al are not above killing people. As

you've pointed out, they've killed possibly over 1,000,000 Iraqi

civilians and in any case have publicly announced they don't care and

aren't counting. As to in-group/out-group behavior, most of these

people do not consider themselves Americans because they, along with

Rockefeller and others, want to create global governmental and

banking institutions that will transcend traditional state

sovereignty. So I'm sure that as far as Cheney is concerned, he is a

citizen of the coming North American Union, the IMF, and the New

World Order. His " in-group " is not Americans, but the heads of

energy companies, banking institutions, media companies, etc.

As to the risk, the ironic thing is that if most people shared your

position, there wouldn't be any risk at all, because the possibility

that they were complicit would be dimissed out of hand without

respect to the evidence.

Of course there is risk in any type of power play, but obviously

powerful people take those risks. The Bush Administration made plans

for a shadow government and underground personal protection and all

sorts of such things after 9/11, so they obviously perceived

themselves in a high-risk situation, regardless of whether that

situation was their own doing or that of others.

Moreover, even if we were to conclude that some part of the

government was complicit or played an organizing role, there is no

particular reason to assume that Bush masterminded the thing because

of his position, or Cheney because of his comparative mental

competence. If it were traced back to the administration or an

agency of it, whoever was highest in command would have ample

opportunity to use someone else with less to do with it as a

scapegoat. Even before that happens, there is money, intimidation,

and worse things that can be used to prevent leaks and maintain the

plausibility of denial.

Anyway, I don't know whether ' view is correct on this, but

there have been polls indicating that about 1/3 of Americans believe

it, so it is apparently a fairly mainstream opinion. Ultimately, it

has to be determined by an open-minded and objective consideration of

the evidence, and not dismissed because of its perceived riskiness or

absurdity.

Chris

[Guest guest]

> It would be even more interesting if the movie offered any speculation

> about whether Barbara Pierce (of the Percy/Pierce line going back to

> England) was in fact conceived during the sex-magic ritual her mother

> apparently attended with Allister Crowley, famous warlock and

> self-proclaimed 666 beast of revelation, and thus whether, when she

> married CIA Director HW Bush and became Barbara Bush, gave

> birth to the grandson of the warlock-beast. It's at least amusing to

> ponder. :-)

I would like to see stuff about his Bond style adventures

chronicled a few years back. One major rock group (I think its the

Rolling Stones) is still embarrassed that he was able to penetrate

their circle unnoticed and become friends with them in order to

determine if they were a threat to US security. His adventures in

China as a spy are more interesting.

--

There's nothing like visiting a foreign country like China to get an

appreciation of what it's like to live under an authoritarian regime.

I was reminded of this when I arrived home and found that the TSA had

rifled through my baggage.

- Tabarrok