Re: POLITICS: econmic disaster and gov't surveilance like we've never known before

[Guest guest]

Just when you were wondering how much worse things can get...

Here's a YouTube video of Ron discussing the Housing Bill that was just

passed by the House *overwhelmingly* - 272 to 152. yes, these are our

elected officials, both Dem and Republican, voting to plunge us into MUCH

deeper debt and to drastically increase surveillance of our financial

transactions.

http://www.infowars.com/?p=3545

1. They voted to move up the national debt by ***800 BILLION DOLLARS*

2. They voted to require that people in the mortgage business get

fingerprinted

3. And here's one that will affect just about all of us - they voted in a

provision unrelated to the purpose of the bill, and that is to force all

credit card transactions to be reported to the IRS.

Yes, I said EVERY CREDIT CARD TRANSACTION WILL HAVE TO BE REPORTED TO THE

IRS.

The government is good. It is your savior. Especially the Dems. No, the

Republicans.

Is anyone else getting tired of this false dichotomy?

Suze

[Guest guest]

speaking of false, do you know much about ?

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

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

>

>

> Just when you were wondering how much worse things can get...

>

> Here's a YouTube video of Ron discussing the Housing Bill that was just

> passed by the House *overwhelmingly* - 272 to 152. yes, these are our

> elected officials, both Dem and Republican, voting to plunge us into MUCH

> deeper debt and to drastically increase surveillance of our financial

> transactions.

>

> http://www.infowars.com/?p=3545

>

> 1. They voted to move up the national debt by ***800 BILLION DOLLARS*

> 2. They voted to require that people in the mortgage business get

> fingerprinted

> 3. And here's one that will affect just about all of us - they voted in a

> provision unrelated to the purpose of the bill, and that is to force all

> credit card transactions to be reported to the IRS.

>

> Yes, I said EVERY CREDIT CARD TRANSACTION WILL HAVE TO BE REPORTED TO THE

> IRS.

>

> The government is good. It is your savior. Especially the Dems. No, the

> Republicans.

>

> Is anyone else getting tired of this false dichotomy?

>

> Suze

>

[Guest guest]

On Jul 24, 2008, at 1:57 PM, Suze Fisher wrote:

>

> Yes, I said EVERY CREDIT CARD TRANSACTION WILL HAVE TO BE REPORTED

> TO THE

> IRS.

>

I saw this on freedomworks.org back in late June. It doesn't just

affect the big guys like e-bay/amazon/etc but all those little mom

and pop shops that have reluctantly added credit cards to make things

" easier " for their customers. This measure alone is estimated to

generate $9.802 billion over ten years... presumably by improving

compliance and enabling more audits by the IRS. A reasonable critique

at

http://techliberation.com/2008/06/23/senate-housing-bill-to-require-collecting-o\

f-online-payment-information/

-jennifer

[Guest guest]

,

> I saw this on freedomworks.org back in late June. It doesn't just

> affect the big guys like e-bay/amazon/etc but all those little mom

> and pop shops that have reluctantly added credit cards to make things

> " easier " for their customers. This measure alone is estimated to

> generate $9.802 billion over ten years... presumably by improving

> compliance and enabling more audits by the IRS. A reasonable critique

> at

>

http://techliberation.com/2008/06/23/senate-housing-bill-to-require-collecting-o\

f-online-payment-information/

If you don't have an online presence, it really makes no sense to take

anything other than cash or near cash, especially for service

professionals. Doctors who take only cash can opt out of all the

insurance/gov't regulation of what they do. It usually raises the

profits and allows them to treat people at reduced prices or even for

free whom legally they could not if they accepted an insurance

payment.

Its a tough sell though. I tried to convince a former Doctor

girlfriend that this was the way to go and she just couldn't quite

pull the trigger, figuring she would lose a lot of patients. But most

of her patients were well heeled, really liked her (she had an

extraordinary rapport with people), and wouldn't have gone anywhere

else. I showed her testimonials of others doctors who had done the

same thing and how it had literally changed their practice. I

suggested test marketing, surveys, etc.,.but she wouldn't do it.

As far as the IRS, I use gift/pre-paid debit cards with anything that

leaves a record. If you are buying anything even remotely

controversial it is the only way to go. Short of cash, its the only

way to keep some sort of privacy intact. You can use an alias and in

some instances use nothing at all, although I'm sure the IRS will try

to put a halt to the " web secret " cards.

--

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]

> speaking of false, do you know much about ?

I don't know what you mean by " much " but that has zero to do with the video

I posted of Ron explaining what's going on with the Housing Bill.

Suze

[Guest guest]

Suze,

> The government is good. It is your savior. Especially the Dems. No, the

> Republicans.

>

> Is anyone else getting tired of this false dichotomy?

What I find most troublesome this week is that the Democrats are

totally railroading Kucinich's impeachment hearing tomorrow and doing

virtually everything in their power to protect Bush. For example,

Pelosi and Conyers have created the non-impeachment impeachment

hearing process where no one is allowed to discuss anything that Bush

has done that is potentially illegal, and so on. And Obama's campaign

is saying, basically, it makes no difference if Bush is the first

president to grant preemptive pardons because an Obama administration

would make sure only to go after Bush's most " egregious " crimes,

whatever those are.

As to the surveillance, the Pentagon has already stated that it is

imperative for the war on terror to have a national database of all

transactions, so this should be expected and is, quite obviously, the

first step towards banning all non-digital transactions.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Gene,

> speaking of false, do you know much about ?

This is guilt by association brought to a whole new level! The source

of information had nothing to do with except that his site

embedded the link to a youtube video.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On Jul 24, 2008, at 4:00 PM, wrote:

> ,

> If you don't have an online presence, it really makes no sense to take

> anything other than cash or near cash, especially for service

> professionals. Doctors who take only cash can opt out of all the

> insurance/gov't regulation of what they do. It usually raises the

> profits and allows them to treat people at reduced prices or even for

> free whom legally they could not if they accepted an insurance

> payment.

>

Husband's barber offers services to a lot of university faculty, staff

and students and definitely does not have a web presence. He's only

been accepting credit for the past 3-4 yrs and only because he felt

that he would lose clientele (especially the drop-ins) without that

change. Most of his clients don't carry anything but plastic or

" Campus Access Cards " (a money card that gets " filled up " on campus

and can be used at a variety of places in town - I guess those cards

will be subject to this law if passed by the Senate). He is none too

happy about it and still grouses about it but still offers it because

he likes being in business... This town relies heavily on students to

run the local economy - all 40,000 of them. Rumor has it that many of

them were offered the opportunity from their parents, go to this

school and get a nice car, or go to that school and not get a nice a

car. There are a lot of really nice cars in the student lots. The

average GPA around here sucks but the parties are apparently quite

good.

-jennifer

[Guest guest]

,

> I saw this on freedomworks.org back in late June. It doesn't just

> affect the big guys like e-bay/amazon/etc but all those little mom

> and pop shops that have reluctantly added credit cards to make things

> " easier " for their customers. This measure alone is estimated to

> generate $9.802 billion over ten years... presumably by improving

> compliance and enabling more audits by the IRS. A reasonable critique

> at

>

http://techliberation.com/2008/06/23/senate-housing-bill-to-require-collecting-o\

f-online-payment-information/

I suspect we will start to see these stores stop using credit cards if

that happens. The food coop here has a sign asking people to politely

use cash or debit card because of the fees the cc's are charging them,

and to use cash for over $21 because of the different fee structure

the debit cards have. They've restricted checks to members because

since the prices have been going up the last couple of months, they've

had a rapidly growing rate of checks that bounce and the people who

wrote them just disappear. I would think a more efficient way of

implementing this would be to have the credit cards do the reporting?

Either way, this is kind of scary because like I said before, this is

clearly an backdoor into creating the national database of ALL

transactions that they said they needed, and that would ultimately

require banning non-digital transactions.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Well, except that it was on his site....

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

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

> > speaking of false, do you know much about ?

>

>

> I don't know what you mean by " much " but that has zero to do with the video

> I posted of Ron explaining what's going on with the Housing Bill.

>

> Suze

>

[Guest guest]

Well, obviously the video was not produced by , and as far as I know

Ron has no direct association with him.

However, if a video of someone that you liked came from a site associated with

someone that you considered unsavory, I think that you might mention something

also. that's what I did.

for instance, if someone posted a Ron video pulled from a neo nazi site,

would you mention something? (note - I'm not implying that one exists with Ron

videos, I'm just pointing out that I'm not the one who is trying to

establish guilt here).

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

From: " Masterjohn " <chrismasterjohn@...>

> Gene,

>

> > speaking of false, do you know much about ?

>

> This is guilt by association brought to a whole new level! The source

> of information had nothing to do with except that his site

> embedded the link to a youtube video.

>

> Chris

[Guest guest]

,

> Husband's barber offers services to a lot of university faculty, staff

> and students and definitely does not have a web presence. He's only

> been accepting credit for the past 3-4 yrs and only because he felt

> that he would lose clientele (especially the drop-ins) without that

> change. Most of his clients don't carry anything but plastic or

> " Campus Access Cards " (a money card that gets " filled up " on campus

> and can be used at a variety of places in town - I guess those cards

> will be subject to this law if passed by the Senate).

I would guess where customer loyalty is not much of an issue, and the

item is price sensitive, or a true commodity, you might need to take

cards. On the other hand, the barber I used for many years only took

cash, and had a line out the door nearly always waiting for him. It

was one of those things that nobody trusted anyone else to cut their

hair but him, including me :-) He was that good.

My brother finally convinced to let him do my hair and he has been

cutting it ever since.

I know more and more businesses also have a cash machine on site or

nearby, so the folks with cards can get cash to pay them. It works and

keeps the walk-in plastic business from going elsewhere.

> He is none too

> happy about it and still grouses about it but still offers it because

> he likes being in business...

Well the reason I brought up the cash only idea to my girlfriend was

because she was grousing about all the red tape she had to go through

for the various insurance payments, gov't and otherwise, and the legal

limitations on her practice as a result.

So my guess is if you have the ability to build a loyal customer base

then cash is the way to go. It is counter intuitive but there are lots

of folks thriving in all kinds of business doing just that. It is one

of the things that marketing genius extraordinaire Jay Abraham teaches

in his seminars.

http://www.abraham.com/

> This town relies heavily on students to

> run the local economy - all 40,000 of them. Rumor has it that many of

> them were offered the opportunity from their parents, go to this

> school and get a nice car, or go to that school and not get a nice a

> car. There are a lot of really nice cars in the student lots. The

> average GPA around here sucks but the parties are apparently quite

> good.

LOL!

--

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 Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Suze Fisher <suzefisher@...> wrote:

> 1. They voted to move up the national debt by ***800 BILLION DOLLARS*

I was listening to Jim the other day and he said in a single

weekend (the Bear Stearns weekend) the gov't matched the amount of

debt it had accumulated in its first 230 years of existence. Wow!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6KLtm7-O4z8 & feature=related

> 2. They voted to require that people in the mortgage business get

> fingerprinted

Yeah been following this one for awhile. Oh well, they have my

fingerprints several times over anyway.

> 3. And here's one that will affect just about all of us - they voted in a

> provision unrelated to the purpose of the bill, and that is to force all

> credit card transactions to be reported to the IRS.

>

> Yes, I said EVERY CREDIT CARD TRANSACTION WILL HAVE TO BE REPORTED TO THE

> IRS.

>

> The government is good. It is your savior. Especially the Dems. No, the

> Republicans.

" We were good Democrats and the government was nothing if not an agent

for good in bringing about social change. Like so many Americans I

believed in salvation by government, and for all intents and purposes,

our Father, to whom we prayed every Sunday and thanked for every meal,

resided in Washington, not heaven. "

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/miles3.html

> Is anyone else getting tired of this false dichotomy?

As you know I have been tired of this false dichotomy for a

loooooooooooooong time, LOL!

--

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]

Gene,

> for instance, if someone posted a Ron video pulled from a neo nazi

> site, would you mention something? (note - I'm not implying that one exists

> with Ron videos, I'm just pointing out that I'm not the one who is

> trying to establish guilt here).

I think this is much ado about nothing. It is a you tube video that

can be embedded in any website in the world. Whether or not

is unsavory he certainly seems to have a clear handle on the housing

crisis. Ben Bernanke and the Fed is unsavory too as far as I am

concerned, unelected officials bailing out the rich and connected on

the backs of every day Americans, but I would sure welcome this video

on the Fed's site.

--

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]

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

From: <slethnobotanist@...>

> Gene,

>

> > for instance, if someone posted a Ron video pulled from a neo nazi

> > site, would you mention something? (note - I'm not implying that one exists

> > with Ron videos, I'm just pointing out that I'm not the one who is

> > trying to establish guilt here).

>

> I think this is much ado about nothing. It is a you tube video that

> can be embedded in any website in the world. Whether or not

> is unsavory he certainly seems to have a clear handle on the housing

> crisis. Ben Bernanke and the Fed is unsavory too as far as I am

> concerned, unelected officials bailing out the rich and connected on

> the backs of every day Americans, but I would sure welcome this video

> on the Fed's site.

>

I simply asked if the poster knew much about . Any ado is not my

adoing.

>

> --

> 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]

Nope. That still has nothing to do with the Ron You Tube video, which

my post was about. *Anyone* can embed a You Tube video on their website.

Suze

> Well, except that it was on his site....

>

> -------------- Original message ----------------------

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

> > > speaking of false, do you know much about ?

> >

> >

> > I don't know what you mean by " much " but that has zero to do with the

video

> > I posted of Ron explaining what's going on with the Housing Bill.

> >

> > Suze

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

> > Is anyone else getting tired of this false dichotomy?

>

> As you know I have been tired of this false dichotomy for a

> loooooooooooooong time, LOL!

Haha! Yes, I know....

Suze

[Guest guest]

> Well, obviously the video was not produced by , and as far as I

know

> Ron has no direct association with him.

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.

> However, if a video of someone that you liked came from a site associated

with

> someone that you considered unsavory, I think that you might mention

something

> also. that's what I did.

>

> for instance, if someone posted a Ron video pulled from a neo nazi

site, would

> you mention something? (note - I'm not implying that one exists with Ron

> videos, I'm just pointing out that I'm not the one who is trying to

establish guilt

> here).

This was in response to and I'm not but I'm going to respond

anyway and can respond for himself :-)

I find this a very amusing analogy since rails against Nazis

almost daily. I listen to his radio show regularly (at least lately) and I

don't find him unsavory and even though I got the link I posted from another

list, I know enough about AJ's radio show and website where the link was

posted (www.infowars.com) to not have any issue posting a video link from

it. I might not be inclined to post links to some of his articles, but it

has nothing to do with unsavoryness.

AJ lambasts many, many groups and individuals and I'm sure those folks would

find him unsavory including globalists, war mongers/aggressors, Bush,

McCain, Neo Cons, Obama, Nazis, fascists, socialists, communists, criminals,

drug dealers, people too dumbed down by fluoride in the water, GMOs in the

food and excessive idiot box viewing as well as blind acceptance of the

" truth " as told by corporate-controlled media...and the list goes on.

Suze

[Guest guest]

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

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

....

> > for instance, if someone posted a Ron video pulled from a neo nazi

> site, would

> > you mention something? (note - I'm not implying that one exists with Ron

>

> > videos, I'm just pointing out that I'm not the one who is trying to

> establish guilt

> > here).

>

> This was in response to and I'm not but I'm going to respond

> anyway and can respond for himself :-)

>

> I find this a very amusing analogy since rails against Nazis

> almost daily.

I find y our comment amusing because you're totally ignoring the logic of my

Nazi mention. I was not implying that is a Nazi - the analogy had to

do with whether would mention something if the video were associated with

a site that he found unsavory. I used Nazis, because pretty much everyone would

agree that they are unsavory.

>I listen to his radio show regularly (at least lately) and I

> don't find him unsavory and even though I got the link I posted from another

> list, I know enough about AJ's radio show and website where the link was

> posted (www.infowars.com) to not have any issue posting a video link from

> it. I might not be inclined to post links to some of his articles, but it

> has nothing to do with unsavoryness.

I researched him a bit at one point, and I found him to be anti-feminist, and

homophobic to the extreme...as well as using phrases in his over the top

conspiracy theories that evoked classic anti-semitic references. I've listened

to his show a few times - what I remember the most was him making an utter fool

of himself interviewing Noam Chomsky - " chomsky, I'm smarter than you with both

hands tied behind my back " - though admittedly he said that after Noam had left

the interview. Oh yeah - he called chomsky part of the 'new world order'. AJ is

a crackpot conspiracist nut of the highest order. I love the films of all the

rich folks genuflecting to the giant owl...

>

> AJ lambasts many, many groups and individuals and I'm sure those folks would

> find him unsavory including globalists, war mongers/aggressors, Bush,

> McCain, Neo Cons, Obama, Nazis, fascists, socialists, communists, criminals,

> drug dealers, people too dumbed down by fluoride in the water, GMOs in the

> food and excessive idiot box viewing as well as blind acceptance of the

> " truth " as told by corporate-controlled media...and the list goes on.

>

And then there is the other stuff....

> Suze

>

[Guest guest]

Gene,

> for instance, if someone posted a Ron video pulled from a neo nazi

> site, would you mention something? (note - I'm not implying that one exists

> with Ron videos, I'm just pointing out that I'm not the one who is

> trying to establish guilt here).

Possibly, but I'm opposed to Nazis on moral grounds, whereas you

seemed to be contending that offers false information, which

doesn't seem very analogous.

In any case, I don't know much about , so if you'd like to

educate us about his falseness that might be interesting.

Chris

[Guest guest]

How you've inferred all of this from such a brief post, I'm not

entirely sure.

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. That was the basis of the analogy. OK?

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. 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.

> Gene,

>

> > for instance, if someone posted a Ron video pulled from a neo

> nazi

> > site, would you mention something? (note - I'm not implying that

> one exists

> > with Ron videos, I'm just pointing out that I'm not the one

> who is

> > trying to establish guilt here).

>

> Possibly, but I'm opposed to Nazis on moral grounds, whereas you

> seemed to be contending that offers false information, which

> doesn't seem very analogous.

>

> In any case, I don't know much about , so if you'd like to

> educate us about his falseness that might be interesting.

>

> Chris

>

>

[Guest guest]

It would be the same video if it was posted on the farting dogs webpage.

Come on - you are making a loosing argument here. The substance of the

video isn't more or less because it was on site - it is the same

regardless of what webpage/website it is embedded on......

Nanette

RE: POLITICS: econmic disaster and gov't surveilance like

we've never known before

Well, except that it was on his site....

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

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

> > speaking of false, do you know much about ?

>

>

> I don't know what you mean by " much " but that has zero to do with the

video

> I posted of Ron explaining what's going on with the Housing Bill.

>

> Suze

>

[Guest guest]

Just read what I've written. I'm not going to answer these ridiculous

'charges' over and over and over again

> It would be the same video if it was posted on the farting dogs

> webpage.

> Come on - you are making a loosing argument here. The substance of the

> video isn't more or less because it was on site - it is the same

> regardless of what webpage/website it is embedded on......

>

> Nanette

> RE: POLITICS: econmic disaster and gov't surveilance

> like

> we've never known before

>

> Well, except that it was on his site....

>

> -------------- Original message ----------------------

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

> > > speaking of false, do you know much about ?

> >

> >

> > I don't know what you mean by " much " but that has zero to do with

> the

> video

> > I posted of Ron explaining what's going on with the Housing

> Bill.

> >

> > Suze

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

Gene,

> How you've inferred all of this from such a brief post, I'm not

> entirely sure.

>

> 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. That was the basis of the analogy. OK?

Ok, sorry for wrong inferences.

> 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. 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 am only moderately familiar with him and I will say the following

from my very brief and recent acquaintance with his show:

I do think some of what he says is a little out there, and he

definitely comes to premature conclusions sometimes. However:

I doubt he thinks Noam Chomsky is part of a conspiracy. I just found

the interview on youtube, and it seemed friendly. It didn't carry out

past the interview so I don't know what said afterward:

I found this set of videos on Jone's site, where they answer his

comments on 9/11, which, so far, seem like they are fairly polite in

addressing him:

http://www.infowars.com/?p=3092

I found this article by a totally different person on a totally

different site accusing him of being a controlled asset of the New

World Order:

http://justifiedtype.wordpress.com/2008/05/27/noam-chomsky-controlled-asset-of-t\

he-new-world-order-by-dl-abrahamsom/

But that isn't .

I haven't read enough of the evidence on 9/11 to comment specifically

on the perpetrators, although I know enough to know the government is

failing to investigate and explain critical things, which is no doubt

helping to fuel the " truth " movement.

I don't understand why you would object to concerns about the

ceremonies of secret societies. It is mainstream information and as

close to established fact as you will get to regarding what goes on in

secret societies, but, for example, it is known that the Skull and

Bones society, which includes many past and present powerful people

including a founding member of the CIA (portrayed in the book/movie,

The Good Shepherd), Kerry, W. Bush, and five people in the

Bush administration, is highly cermonial with very twisted

death-related initiation rites and hold its meetings in a room called

" the tomb " that contains a real human skull of someone famous, a

pentagram, bones of people, and so on.

Even CBS covers this stuff:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/02/60minutes/main576332.shtml

I believe the comment on Zionist bankers refers to the fact (?) that

some Zionists helped fund the Nazis in WWII, Zionists meaning

advocates of the creation of the state of Israel as an exclusively

Jewish state. I haven't researched this to find out if it's a solid

fact, but it should be a simple matter of evidence or lack thereof.

I've listened to a few shows and haven't heard him say anything

homophobic per se, nor misogynist, although I suppose anti-feminist is

more debatable.

Chris

[Guest guest]

I can't seem to comment inline with correct formatting....so

About his interview with Chomsky - that's kind of the point. He didn't

have the guts to debate Chomsky directly, which would have been a

disaster for him, since, well, he's really not that smart. So, he

waited until Chomsky left, and then he laid into him, including the

remark " Chomsky, I'm smarter than you with both hands tied behind my

back " . No - he didn't say, nor did I imply that he said that Chomsky

was part of a specific conspiracy, however I have a distinct

recollection of him saying that he was part of the 'New World Order'.

Basically, anyone who doesn't agree with him about his grand

conspiracy theories is the enemy ...

Again - you distort my meaning in practically every post. I didn't say

that I objected to any interest or concern in secret societies, and

especially those that continue the traditions of the rich and

powerful. However, he connects this all with his huge conspiracy of

international bankers (code word for Jews) controlling the world, and

anyone is his enemy proportionally to the degree that they don't

agree with his conspiracy theories.

I'm not entirely sure what your references to other Chomsky 'critics'

has to do with anything, other than to suggest that I'm confused.

I never suggested that the government has been forthright about 9/11,

nor have I suggested that they haven't fueled conspiracy theories

about it.

I have strong recollections of finding enough stuff on his site -

can't remember whether it was written or promoted by him, that was

indeed homophobic and anti-feminist - enough to make me feel secure in

the comment. I think that if you look deep enough you can find it,

though whether you'll agree is another matter. I'm not that interested

in doing it again - what will I learn by it exactly?

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.

> Gene,

>

> > How you've inferred all of this from such a brief post, I'm not

> > entirely sure.

> >

> > 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. That was the basis of the analogy. OK?

>

> Ok, sorry for wrong inferences.

>

> > 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. 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 am only moderately familiar with him and I will say the following

> from my very brief and recent acquaintance with his show:

>

> I do think some of what he says is a little out there, and he

> definitely comes to premature conclusions sometimes. However:

>

> I doubt he thinks Noam Chomsky is part of a conspiracy. I just found

> the interview on youtube, and it seemed friendly. It didn't carry out

> past the interview so I don't know what said afterward:

>

>

>

>

> I found this set of videos on Jone's site, where they answer his

> comments on 9/11, which, so far, seem like they are fairly polite in

> addressing him:

>

> http://www.infowars.com/?p=3092

>

> I found this article by a totally different person on a totally

> different site accusing him of being a controlled asset of the New

> World Order:

>

>

http://justifiedtype.wordpress.com/2008/05/27/noam-chomsky-controlled-asset-of-t\

he-new-world-order-by-dl-abrahamsom/

>

> But that isn't .

>

> I haven't read enough of the evidence on 9/11 to comment specifically

> on the perpetrators, although I know enough to know the government is

> failing to investigate and explain critical things, which is no doubt

> helping to fuel the " truth " movement.

>

> I don't understand why you would object to concerns about the

> ceremonies of secret societies. It is mainstream information and as

> close to established fact as you will get to regarding what goes on in

> secret societies, but, for example, it is known that the Skull and

> Bones society, which includes many past and present powerful people

> including a founding member of the CIA (portrayed in the book/movie,

> The Good Shepherd), Kerry, W. Bush, and five people in the

> Bush administration, is highly cermonial with very twisted

> death-related initiation rites and hold its meetings in a room called

> " the tomb " that contains a real human skull of someone famous, a

> pentagram, bones of people, and so on.

>

> Even CBS covers this stuff:

>

> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/02/60minutes/main576332.shtml

>

> I believe the comment on Zionist bankers refers to the fact (?) that

> some Zionists helped fund the Nazis in WWII, Zionists meaning

> advocates of the creation of the state of Israel as an exclusively

> Jewish state. I haven't researched this to find out if it's a solid

> fact, but it should be a simple matter of evidence or lack thereof.

>

> I've listened to a few shows and haven't heard him say anything

> homophobic per se, nor misogynist, although I suppose anti-feminist is

> more debatable.

>

> Chris

>

>