Thursday, November 30, 2006

Earth to O' Liar: There is NO war on Christmas!!!

The loofah-loving lunatic admits on his own show that so-called "war" on Christmas is "petty". Shut the hell up then, O' Liar!

by Larry Simons
November 29, 2006

I have admitted to watching The O’ Reilly Factor 2-3 times a week in order to monitor the lies that O’ Liar loves to spew onto the American public and any other country in the world unfortunate enough to carry FOX News.

O’ Liar continues his tiresome tirade about the "war on Christmas", which apparently is only taking place inside the vacuum better known as his head. It’s no mystery that O’ Liar’s ratings have dropped significantly within the past year and this Christmas "war" bullshit is an obvious outcry to win back some of the sheep that once tuned in to the Neo-con windbag, but have moved on to more truthful sources like Playboy magazine, the National Inquirer or the graffiti on bathroom walls.

Maybe this Christmas crap boosted his ratings last year and since seeing his ratings decline in 2006, O’ Blowhard is panicking and resorts now to his old tricks of trying to convince loyal FOX News sheeple that there is actually a nationwide conspiracy to abolish Christmas. Funny how O’ Liar’s brain works……TONS of evidence in a 9/11 cover-up?? NO conspiracy………1 or 2 retailers not saying "Merry Christmas"?? national conspiracy! It’s clear now that O’ Windbag is panicking and his show is about the equivalent to a 3rd class passenger on the Titanic.

On Monday’s telecast of The O’ Reilly Factor, O’ Liar trashed retailer Crate & Barrel because of a statement made by company spokeswoman Betty Kahn in a local newspaper. Kahn said, "We’re absolutely not going to say ‘Merry Christmas’". O’ Liar went on to say, "a spokeswoman for the Crate & Barrel chain pronounced that store personnel will not say "Merry Christmas, which angered The Factor. It's just so small and dumb. If you're going to annoy me like this, I am not going to your store and buy any lamps"……. "It's annoying. Isn't it? I mean, I'm not going to go there because it's annoying, for no other reason than, Betty, you're annoying!"

No, Billo, you're annoying! I guess little facts don’t matter to Billo, like the fact that the spokeswoman was asked if employees there were required to say Merry Christmas to customers. She said no, they weren‘t required. They could if they wanted to. Crate and Barrel didn‘t think it was any of their business to tell their employees what they could or couldn‘t say. Again, more SPIN from the NO FACT zone.

From the above statements, it’s clear that Miss Kahn’s meaning behind, "we’re not going to say Merry Christmas" was a general comment suggesting that employees of Crate & Barrel would not seek to offend their wide variety of clientele by exclusively saying "Merry Christmas". It was a business decision and is something that is clearly understood by anyone, except for Bill O’Reilly and his Neo-con wanna-be followers.

Also unimportant to O’ LIEly, the FACT that Crate & Barrel’s own website has the word "Christmas" all over the place. Under the "SHOP" icon, there is a link titled "Christmas". There is a Christmas browse section. On that page you can search for Christmas Entertaining or Christmas Decorating! How dare those secular progressives try to disguise their "REAL" agenda under the term "CHRISTMAS"!


It is one of the characteristics of Neo-cons to attempt to paint this false picture that liberals are taking over the country in order to abolish traditional America. Neo-cons deceive society into believing that liberals want to destroy the most sacred American traditions so the average American won’t stand for it, thus "hating" liberals, or voting conservative in order to put more people against liberalism. And yes, Neo-cons will stop at nothing to push this agenda…..even so far as to create an issue where it doesn’t exist at all, or never has existed.

Enter the "war on Christmas"….one such example of this Neo-con brainwashing. Christmas is among the top American traditions, and Neo-cons know that. So, the Neo-cons get together and "create" this conspiracy against Christmas, when in reality it’s happening in 4 or 5 places in the entire country. President Bush has abolished Habeas Corpus, has all but made our precious Constitution obsolete, and has ignored the Geneva Conventions, all things that should really be at the top of the list that angers EVERY single American….but no, will FOX News tell you this? Of course not, because it is a Neo-con President that is destroying our freedoms and shitting on our Constitution..……..yet the REAL enemy is Crate & Barrel, Best Buy or any other retailer that doesn’t say "Merry Christmas".

Psst….Billo..….I wanna whisper something in your ear…….no one cares who says "Merry Christmas" and who doesn't! O’ Liar ADMITTED on his show it’s a "petty" issue, yet he keeps running his trap about it. He’s running the oldest play in the FOX News/Neo-con handbook: When an issue doesn’t exist, create one.

Why don’t you defend Habeas Corpus Billo? Why don’t you put the same fire under your ass for our Constitution and our Bill of Rights? If O’ Reilly and the likes of him want so desperately to become the Christmas police, then they must go 100% or shut the hell up once and for all. If Billo REALLY cared about the Christianization of Christmas, then why isn’t he protesting Christmas trees, Christmas holly, mistletoes, gift giving or yule logs? All stem from pagan beliefs, but yet we all practice this, as if they come straight from the teachings of Jesus.

Personally, I celebrate Christmas with gift giving, a Christmas tree, holly, etc. but I also do not give a rat's ass either if Wal-Mart or K-Mart wants to say Happy Holidays. It won't prevent me from shopping there. The term "holidays" applies to the season, does it not? Christmas and New Year's Day are "holidays" are they not? Saying "holidays" is an accurate description of the season, is it not? You see, it’s not about Christmas at all people…..it’s about the demonization of liberalism by Neo-cons.

The real enemy here is the power of the media over the weak-minded in this country. It’s all an illusion and the illusionists are the Neo-cons at FOX News.

Monday, November 27, 2006

Charles Rangel thinks he owns you

Congressman backs a public-service draft

GINA COBB
Chicago Sun Times
November 26, 2006

If Democratic Congressman Charles Rangel gets his way, everyone in America will be the government's slave for two years. He doesn't call it "slavery." He calls it a "draft." But if you look closely at what he's demanding, it's not just military service. It's all-purpose involuntary servitude:

Rangel says having a draft would not necessarily mean everyone called to duty would have to serve. Instead, "young people [would] commit themselves to a couple of years in service to this great republic, whether it's our seaports, our airports, in schools, in hospitals," with a promise of educational benefits at the end of service.

So Charles Rangel's position is:

1. Everyone in America should be forced by law to work for the government (or for someone approved by the government) for two years -- either for no pay or for minimal pay.

2. The two years of work should be demanded, not due to any national emergency of any kind, but as a political stunt to influence national policy. A draft, he says, would deter politicians from launching wars.

3. In service of this political stunt, people should be forced to work at wherever the government dictates -- even for what should be private employers like hospitals, seaports and airports.

In other words, Rangel advocates two years of involuntary servitude -- also known as slavery -- for every adult in America.

Serve two years in slavery, and then you'll be freed to do what you want with your own life. (Maybe -- until Rangel comes up with his next political stunt that demands that your freedom be sacrificed.)

Rangel thinks he owns you. He feels perfectly entitled to demand that you drop whatever you are doing anywhere in America -- studying for college, learning a trade, launching a small business, starting a family -- so you can instead devote two full years of your life to promote his political agenda.

Rangel doesn't care what plans anyone may have made for their own life as an adult in the land of the free. His message is: "Welcome to adulthood. Now do whatever the government tells you to."

Of course he's trying to make it sound positive. You'll be "serving" this "great republic!"

Mind you, telling grown men and women what kind of work they will or will not be permitted to do -- and for what compensation, if any -- is not what made this republic great.

But you'll be "serving" in "hospitals!" or maybe "seaports!" or maybe "airports!"

Hey, America's farmers could use a little help! We always have a shortage of farm workers, remember? Who knows? Maybe you'll even be allowed to "serve" in the Congress of this great republic and polish Charlie Rangel's shoes!

See, central planners in the government know better than you do what are good uses of your time.
It's communism lite. It's the two-years-of-your-life plan. Big Brother will tell you what types of work are worthy and unworthy.

Want to work in a hospital for little or no pay? OK! Want to work at your uncle's hardware store for a fair wage instead? Or at your dad's veterinary clinic? Not OK.

Want to work at an airport doing whatever the government says? OK. Want to get married and start your family? Nope. Want to start your career as an auto mechanic, or hair stylist, or librarian? Not OK. What do you think this is -- a free country? Want to help discover a cure for cancer? What are you, a wise guy?
Want to be a teacher's aide? Big Brother says OK. Want to just stay in college and work toward your degree? No way, Buster. Put those plans on hold.

And if you won't cooperate with our plan for the first two years of your adult life, we could always send you to "camp."

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

O' Liar: I Will Name FOX News' Enemies When I Get Back (Start with Murdoch)

Self-proclaimed "savior" O' LIEly takes credit for the Simpson cancellations.....thank you Lord Liar


by Larry Simons
November 22, 2006


Bill O’ Liar is full of so much bullshit, I just can’t keep up with this guy! It’s a freaking full-time job to sift through his lies and spin. But I wouldn’t be doing you, the reader, or our country justice if I brought you anything short of the truth. It all started last week when O’ Liar tried to distance himself from the O.J. Simpson interview and book by bellowing, "FOX News has nothing to do with FOX broadcasting".

Well, I must confess, The Real Truth didn’t include ALL the facts in the O.J. post. I did include that Rupert Murdoch owns News Corporation, but I apologize for leaving out that Roger Ailes is also the Chairman for both and News Corporation also owns Harper Collins, the publisher that was to release the Simpson book! O.K., so I guess O’ Liar is correct by saying "FOX News has NOTHING to do with FOX Broadcasting" as long as you don’t count both entities having the same owner, the same chairman, the fact that FOX broadcasting regularly airs FOX News content---oh, and News Corp. owns Harper Collins. So, throw out all those connections and O’ Liar is correct.


Days later, O’ Liar called those who linked Fox News with the O.J. Simpson interview "far left loons". O’ Liar also described them as "kool-aid zombies" who are "doing the bidding of far left fanatics" who want "to tie Fox News in with the O.J. Simpson situation."

It just so happens, in addition to the above mentioned connections between FOX News and the O.J. situation, Fox News has also referenced the Simpson affair MORE times in the last five days than the other three leading cable news networks combined, according to a database search. According to TVEyes, FOX News made 417 references to Simpson between Nov. 15 - Nov. 20 (3:30 PM). During the same period, there were 414 references to Simpson on CNN, MSNBC, and Headline News.

On Monday’s broadcast of the O’ Reilly Factor, O’ Liar called into his own show while vacationing out of the country to utter these lies to his sheeple and to fill-in host Laura Ingraham:

"It’s a culture war victory, the folks did it…and I was the messenger" (YOU were the messenger Billo? So, in other words, YOU were the ONLY one that was appalled by this? Larry King, Keith Olbermann, Joe Scarborough…none of THOSE guys weren’t disgusted?)

"this should put to rest once and for all the independence of FOX News" (what should put it to rest? FOX cancelling a show and a book that ONLY FOX had the inhumanity to financially endorse?)

"what other network would have allowed its commentators to go on and to slam, to hammer the programming arm? (what other network would have said YES to this in the first place O’ LIEly? REMEMBER, NBC VEHEMENTLY TURNED THIS DOWN! FOX DIDN’T, DID THEY?)

"FOX News has nothing to do with FOX broadcasting, I’ve made that quite clear" (I’ve already covered this lie)

"FOX News stepped up big and once we did the folks got it, because obviously we have a very big reach and when the folks heard it….they let FOX know, and to its credit News Corporation led by Rupert Murdoch said ‘ok, we heard ya, we’re not gonna run it’, they did the right thing" (FOX News stepped up big? They thought NOTHING of the families of the victims and insensitively financially endorsed a show and a book for a killer and they listen to the protests, angry emails, letters and calls----of which I’m SURE were threats to never watch FOX again unless they pulled it-------then they cancel it and that’s STEPPING UP Billo? To its credit Rupert Murdoch said ‘ok, we heard ya, we’re not going to run it’? To its CREDIT? Are you kidding me Billo? What about the credit to NBC for saying NO in the first place?? Isn’t this the journalistic equivalent of a kidnapper who kidnaps a child, and then days later gives it back and says "Sorry, here’s your kid back. I saw your protests and outcry on T.V. and decided to give it back" and then the kidnapper is CREDITED as a savior for returning the child? Does the kidnapper still not get punished, or does he go through life known as a hero for returning a child?)

"we’re making tremendous strides in this country and this proves it…and I think the people see this and I think we’ll have more of this and the bad guys are on the run, and do you know what’s going to be really facinating? To see how the enemies of the FOX News channel in the next few days, to see how they spin this…and when I come back on Monday I’m gonna just list them, all down…." (Bad guys? You mean Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes and every other executive at News Corporation? Enemies of FOX News spin this? You mean say that Rupert Murdoch does NOT own News Corporation? You mean say that News Corporation does NOT own Harper Collins? You mean say that FOX News didn’t reference the O.J. special and book MORE than MSNBC, CNN and Headline News COMBINED? Is that what you mean by SPIN Billo? Make sure when you get your pen and list the enemies…..put Murdoch’s name first pal!)

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

O’Reilly: iPods Are Endangering America

Billo condemns iPods, yet his website offers podcasts!!!

by Larry Simons
November 21, 2006

Apparently sparked by the PlayStation 3 launch, conservative pundit Bill O’Reilly took off after video game culture and digital technology generally in yesterday’s Radio Factor.
The controversial talk show host, who advertises his program as a “no spin zone” offered the following spin on gamers and much of their favorite gear:

"American society is changing for the worse because of the machines… In the past to flee the real world people usually chose drugs or alcohol… now you don’t have to do that, Now all you have to do is have enough money to buy a machine…
Basically what you have is a large portion of the population, mostly younger people under the age of 45, who don’t deal with reality - ever. So they don’t know what day it is; they don’t know temperature it is; they don’t know what their neighbor looks like. They don’t know anything… because they are constantly diverted by a machine. Now what this does is it takes a person away from reality because they’ve created their own reality…"



Here comes the PS3 rant:

"The newest thing is the PlayStation 3. Now this is a machine that allows you to play games in hi-def and all this other stuff… It’s the newest state of the art system from Sony…. It has a video game console, plays DVDs, connects you to the Internet, tells you how handsome you are. It’s six-hundred bucks. Now people lined up for hours to get this thing. Hours!"

Next, O’Reilly recounts some of the various, well-publicized incidents that took place on PS3 lines around the country, before launching into:

"The problem with this stuff is that some people can deal with it constructively… but other people get addicted to it, just like opium, just like drugs and alcohol… So this is a big, big problem. It’s going to change every single thing in this country."

At about this point, O’Reilly has Blois Olson of the National Institute on Media & the Family on as a guest. Olson talked about some issues regarding video game addiction, but was quite reasonable. As for O’Reilly? He thinks your video gaming may well doom you to a life of poverty:

"The have-nots are growing. Why are they growing? Because the skill set that is necessary to earn a decent living is being deemphasized in a fantasy world of football games and shooting zombies and all that…. Now you have the “knows” and the “know-nots”, because if you spend all your youth being prisoners of machines….. you’re not going to know anything…. You’re gonna fail."

And, even though O’Reilly’s pay site offers a podcast, the pundit rather curiously disses the iPod and seems to equate video gaming with national collapse:

"I don’t own an iPod. I would never wear an iPod… If this is your primary focus in life - the machines… it’s going to have a staggeringly negative effect, all of this, for America… did you ever talk to these computer geeks? I mean, can you carry on a conversation with them? …I really fear for the United States because, believe me, the jihadists? They’re not playing the video games. They’re killing real people over there."

Another EXCELLENT special comment by Olbermann; Educating Bush on Vietnam

Bush: "We'll succeed unless we quit". Proves Bush is out of touch with the war he dodged

by Keith Olbermann
November 20, 2006

"And now, as promised, a Special Comment about the President's visit to Vietnam.

It is a shame — and it is embarrassing to us all — when President Bush travels 8,000 miles, only to wind up avoiding reality, again.

And it is pathetic to listen to the leader of the free world, talk so unrealistically about Vietnam, when it was he who permitted the "Swift-Boating" of not one but two American heroes of that war, in consecutive Presidential campaigns.

But most importantly — important, beyond measure — his avoidance of reality is going to wind up killing more Americans.

And that is indefensible — and fatal.

Asked if there were lessons about Iraq to be found in our experience in Vietnam, Mr. Bush said that there were — and he immediately proved he had no clue what they were.

"One lesson is," he said, "that we tend to want there to be instant success in the world, and the task in Iraq is going to take a while."

"We'll succeed," the President concluded, "unless we quit."

If that's the lesson about Iraq that Mr. Bush sees in Vietnam, then he needs a tutor. Or we need somebody else making the decisions about Iraq.

Mr. Bush, there are a dozen central lessons to be derived from our nightmare in Vietnam, but "we'll succeed unless we quit" is not one of them.

The primary one — which should be as obvious to you as the latest opinion poll showing that only 31 percent of this country agrees with your tragic Iraq policy– is that if you try to pursue a war for which the nation has lost its stomach, you and it are finished. Ask Lyndon Johnson.

The second most important lesson of Vietnam, Mr. Bush: if you don't have a stable local government to work with, you can keep sending in Americans until hell freezes over and it will not matter. Ask South Vietnam's President Diem, or President Thieu.

The third vital lesson of Vietnam, Mr. Bush: don't pretend it's something it's not. For decades we were warned that if we didn't stop "communist aggression" in Vietnam, communist agitators would infiltrate and devour the small nations of the world, and make their insidious way, stealthily, to our doorstep.

The war machine of 1968 had this "Domino Theory."

Your war machine of 2006 has this nonsense about Iraq as "the central front in the war on terror."

The fourth pivotal lesson of Vietnam, Mr. Bush: if the same idiots who told Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon to stay there for the sake of "Peace With Honor," are now telling you to stay in Iraq, they're probably just as wrong now, as they were then… Dr. Kissinger.

And the fifth crucial lesson of Vietnam, Mr. Bush, which somebody should've told you about, long before you plunged this country into Iraq — is that, if you lie us into a war — your war, and your presidency, will be consigned to the scrapheap of history.

Consider your fellow Texan, sir.

After President Kennedy's assassination, Lyndon Johnson held the country together after a national tragedy — not unlike you tried to do.

He had lofty goals and tried to reshape society for the better. And he is remembered for Vietnam and for the lies he and his government told to get us there and keep us there… and for the Americans who needlessly died there.

As you will be remembered for Iraq and for the lies you and your government told to get us there and keep us there… and for the Americans who needlessly died there — and who will needlessly die there tomorrow.
This president has his fictitious Iraqi W-M-D, and his lies (disguised as subtle hints) linking Saddam Hussein to 9/11, and his reason-of-the-week for keeping us there when all the evidence has, for at least three years, told us we needed to get as many of our kids out, as quickly as we could.

That president had his fictitious attacks on Navy ships in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964, and the next thing any of us knew, the Senate had voted 88-to-2 to approve the blank check with which Lyndon Johnson paid for our trip into hell.

And yet President Bush just saw the grim reminders of that trip into hell:
– Of the 58,000 Americans and millions of Vietnamese killed;
– Of the 10,000 civilians who've been blown up by landmines since we pulled out;
– Of the genocide in the neighboring country of Cambodia, which we triggered;

Yet, these parallels — and these lessons — eluded President Bush entirely. And, in particular, the one over-arching lesson about Iraq that should've been written everywhere he looked in Vietnam, went un-seen.
"We'll succeed unless we quit"?

Mr. Bush, we did quit in Vietnam! A decade later than we should have; 58,000 dead later than we should have; but we finally came to our senses.

The stable, burgeoning, vivid country you just saw there is there, because we finally had the good sense to declare victory and get out!

The Domino Theory was nonsense, sir. Our departure from Vietnam emboldened no one. Communism did not spread like a contagion around the world.

And most importantly — as President Reagan's Assistant Secretary of State Lawrence Korb said on this newscast Friday — we were only in a position to win the Cold War because we quit in Vietnam.

We went home. And instead it was the Russians who learned nothing from Vietnam, and who repeated every one of our mistakes when they went into Afghanistan. And alienated their own people, and killed their own children, and bankrupted their own economy, and allowed us to win the Cold War.

We awakened so late — but we did awaken.

Finally, in Vietnam, we learned the lesson. We stopped endlessly squandering lives and treasure and the focus of a nation on an impossible and irrelevant dream.

But you are still doing exactly that, tonight, in Iraq.

And these lessons from Vietnam, Mr. Bush, these priceless, transparent lessons, writ large as if across the very sky, are still a mystery to you.

"We'll succeed unless we quit."

No, sir. We will succeed — against terrorism, for our country's needs, towards binding up the nation's wounds — when you quit — quit the monumental lie, that is our presence in Iraq.

And in the interim, Mr. Bush, an American kid will be killed there, probably tonight — or, if we're lucky, not until tomorrow.

And here, sir, endeth the lesson".

(click here for video of Keith's comment)
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/11/20/olbermann-delivers-a-special-comment-educating-bush-on-vietnam/

Monday, November 20, 2006

'Bush doesn't think America should be an actual place'

Tancredo says president believes nation should be merely 'idea' without borders

By Joe Kovacs
WorldNetDaily.com

PALM BEACH, Fla. – President Bush believes America should be more of an idea than an actual place, a Republican congressman told WND in an exclusive interview.
"People have to understand what we're talking about here. The president of the United States is an internationalist," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo. "He is going to do what he can to create a place where the idea of America is just that – it's an idea. It's not an actual place defined by borders. I mean this is where this guy is really going."

Tancredo lashed out at the White House's lack of action in securing U.S. borders, and said efforts to merge the U.S. with both Mexico and Canada is not a fantasy.

"I know this is dramatic – or maybe somebody would say overly dramatic – but I'm telling you, that everything I see leads me to believe that this whole idea of the North American Union, it's not something that just is written about by right-wing fringe kooks. It is something in the head of the president of the United States, the president of Mexico, I think the prime minister of Canada buys into it. ...

"And they would just tell you, 'Well, sure, it's a natural thing. It's part of the great globalization ... of the economy.' They assume it's a natural, evolutionary event that's going to occur here. I hope they're wrong and I'm going to try my best to make sure they're wrong. But I'm telling you the tide is great. The tide is moving in their direction. We have to say that."

Tancredo was in South Florida joining the likes of media giants Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter at a four-day event called "Restoration Weekend" which concluded today. The gathering was hosted by the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

He pointed to Florida's largest city as an example of how the nature of America can be changed by uncontrolled immigration.

"Look at what has happened to Miami. It has become a Third World country," he said. "You just pick it up and take it and move it someplace. You would never know you're in the United States of America. You would certainly say you're in a Third World country."

He said quickly changing demographics can cause big problems, and specifically cited the "Islamization of Europe" in recent years which has led to conflict across the continent.

Tancredo isn't the only congressman warning about plans to integrate the three nations of this continent.
Rep. Ron Paul, a maverick Republican from Texas, denounced plans for the proposed "NAFTA superhighway" in his state as part of a larger plot for merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico into a North American Union.

As WND reported this month, Enrique Berruga, Mexico's ambassador to the United Nations, came right out and said a North American Union is needed – and even provided a deadline.

Berruga said the merger must be complete in the next eight years before the U.S. baby boomer retirement wave hits full force.

Tancredo – a heavyweight champion of the border-security issue, and whose new book on how to solve that vexing problem, titled "In Mortal Danger," became an immediate best seller – just may be elected president, Fox News's Neil Cavuto said recently.

"Illegals coming into America are sure to be front and center in the next presidential election here," Cavuto said on a June broadcast of "Your World with Neil Cavuto," "and Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo certainly knows it. He owns this issue. And straw polls show that, if he were to run for president, he just might well be president."

Sunday, November 19, 2006

Mancow: In lock-step with those who cannot and will not debate FACTS

Radio host resorts to ridicule, sarcasm, jokes and reinstating disbelief as intellectual debate, instead of facts

by Larry Simons
November 19, 2006

I can't say I'm shocked. I've seen it with my own eyes. You try an intellectual debate with someone about the events of 9/11, and the only tactic the supporters of the official government story can muster is ridicule and sarcasm, rather than to actually engage in talking about the specific facts and points you discuss. This tactic is called the "I don't know anything specific about anything being discussed, so I will attempt to make you look nutty" tactic.
This is the very tactic that Chicago-based radio talk show host Erich "Mancow" Muller used with Infowars.com spokesman Kevin Smith. Muller begins the interview with Smith and retired NYC firefighter Brian Harvey by telling Harvey, "conspiracy is big business", then says, "what do you think of this guy (Smith) making money off this tragedy?"

Thankfully, Harvey showed Mancow what being a respectful human being is like. Harvey, although disagreeing with Smith, showed Smith tremendous respect. Harvey showed the model behavior of what debating should actually be....disagreement without disrespect. Of course, I learned that when FOX taped the show, there were many times FOX producers yelled "cut", and they ended up editing out very vital pieces in order to include some of Mancow's insults and lies.

One such lie is Mancow saying it's "big business" for truth-ers, as if we are in the same boat as Halliburton profiting from a war started by a lie, Ann Coulter exploiting 9/11 widows to sell books or O.J. Simpson profiting off of his murders by selling books and having a televised program coming up later this month (on their own network).

The many yelled "cuts" by FOX during the taping is why Smith sarcastically blurted out the word "cut" right after he had jumbled his words giving a response to a question. FOX cut out the part of the show where Smith says that you can watch Alex Jones' "Terrorstorm" for FREE on Google video. Also, Mancow just doesn't know enough to know that many people in the truth-movement (me included) make DVD's for FREE for people. I've already given away hundreds of copies of 9/11 DVD's and have not made one dime.
So, Mancow, like MANY people who try to shut 9/11 revisionists up, he simply just has no clue what he's talking about. Another edit from the final cut was Smith being asked who he would blame for 9/11, and Smith mentioned Cheney by name and mentioned Norman Mineta's testimony during the 9/11 Commission hearings when Mineta testified that Cheney gave a stand-down order as the plane approached the Pentagon. Of course, we all know Cheney's words were "Of course the orders still stand (to shoot down Flight 77), have you heard anything different?" Well, since the plane was NOT shot down and it crashed into the Pentagon, the order by Cheney had to be to NOT shoot it down.

(Click below for Mineta's testimony)
Throughout this hit-piece, aimed at discrediting 9/11 truth-ers, Mancow resorts to insults, sarcasm and the cliche straw man attacks to diminish the perception of the truth of 9/11, including naming the segment 'The Grassy Knoll,' asking Smith about Bigfoot, the Lochness monster, space aliens and even launching into an unprompted special interlude titled "Lies on the Internet." This is typical of idiots that can't debate facts. They resort to the only thing they have in their arsenal.....sarcasm and insults to make us appear nutty.

Another tactic used by Mancow was to have an actual firefighter from 9/11 engage in the debate as if to say "you can't believe this was an inside job, because look...look, here's an actual firefighter who was THERE", as if having someone on the show who was at Ground Zero in and of itself disproves government involvement. It was obviously done by FOX to have viewers have a visual of a guy (demonized as a "nut") disagreeing with a firefighter in order to fuel additional anger toward the "nut". On the other hand, when 9/11 truth-ers mention people who were THERE as well like Willie Rodriquez (a janitor who worked in the WTC for 20 years) who heard and saw explosions of bombs going off and seeing people with skin hanging off their bodies from these explosions....oh well, that's not important is it? "Who is this Rodriquez guy?" they will say, and then they will hurl insults at him. He was there TOO, and he was even there BEFORE the police and firefighters were. But his testimony means nothing to the "19 hijacker/Bin Laden" crowd.
Not once in the entire interview did Mancow refute or even attempt to refute one of Smith's claims. At least Harvey asked questions like "Why isn't this out in the media?" It was an easily refutable question, but at least Harvey had the respect to ASK. Mancow simply relied on sarcasm and "Grassy Knoll" comments in order to make the sheep FOX viewers chuckle.

At one point, Mancow even asked "Is Hillary involved?" This isn't even a real question. It's a bullshit question in an attempt to divert attention away from FACTS. There's a simple rule for idiots that can't debate. When you don't know anything: make jokes, be sarcastic and use nutty buzz-words like Grassy Knoll and Bigfoot.
Smith brought up the fact that several of the alleged hijackers lived at the Pensacola, Florida Naval Air Station, according to addresses listed on their licenses and the fact that Mohammad Atta and others were trained at a base in Monterrey, California, as well as
the fact that Osama bin Laden was a known CIA asset. Did Mancow address this? Of course not. All he did was make a James Woods remark and went on his bigfoot rant. Then later, Mancow looks at Smith and says "Do you feel anything for this guy?"(Harvey), as if to say "believing that others were involved in 9/11 outside of what we've been told automatically means you hate everyone involved in 9/11...firefighters, police, rescuers, people inside the Pentagon and the twin towers", and the list goes on. If anything, we as 9/11 truth-ers care MORE about these people because we are fighting for the truth of how these people died and why. The ones who believe the official story want NO other information other than: "19 hijackers and Osama bin Laden". Everything else to them is bullshit.
Another small piece of information that I'm sure Mancow is clueless on is the FACT that most of the police and firefighers themselves believe 9/11 was an inside job. I was at Ground Zero on the fifth anniversary of 9/11. I saw firefighters pose in pictures with 9/11 truth-ers and policemen shook our hands.

Bill Doyle, the head of the largest victims' families group believes 9/11 was an inside job. People like Mancow that present this false theory that 'if you believe in a cover-up, then you disrespect cops, firefighters, family members, etc...' are sad excuses for human beings attempting to bring more sheep to their camp. They know they don't win the war on facts, so they have no choice but resort to everything BUT facts to gain support for THEIR conspiracy theory.

Smith clearly won the debate, because Mancow did NOT debate...he attacked and ridiculed...the only thing he COULD do. Mancow is an entertainer, not a journalist. FOX News is not a news company, they are entertainers as well. Mancow didn't have enough respect for Brian Harvey to at least say what Smith was saying was worthy to at least research.
We have nothing but respect for firefighters like Brian Harvey, and I think Smith did a great job showing respect to Harvey as well as Mancow, even though it was very clear to Smith what Mancow was doing. It didn't work, at least with people who think on their own, who are not hooked up to the FOX News life-support system.

Saturday, November 18, 2006

Only 16% Think Government Telling the Truth about 9/11


New York Times/CBS News Poll reveals hard truth

According to a new New York Times/CBS News poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11:

"Do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?

Telling the truth 16%
Hiding something 53%
Mostly lying 28%
Not sure 3%"

The 16% are probably a waste of energy: if they still believe the official story, then they are unlikely to change their minds based on facts. (If you have the patience to never give up, then more power to you).

The 28% who say "mostly lying" are probably already 9/11 truthers. They may, however, simply believe that the government LET 9/11 happen on purpose, without understanding that 9/11 could not have succeeded unless elements within the government had actively ASSISTED in the attacks. So you might want to discuss some of the facts regarding the war games and the Mineta testimony, for example.

The 3% who are not sure are certainly worth reaching out to.

But I would argue that the 53% who responded that the government is "hiding something" are the best use of our time. These folks already have a little knowledge or a gut feeling that the government is hiding something, but haven't learned enough facts to understand that 9/11 was an inside job. With a little education, they will understand that what the government is hiding is that it was complicit in the crime of the century, the biggest false flag attack in history.

And this is the majority of Americans, a worthwhile group to speak with. So spending time giving the facts to someone who understands that the government is hiding something is a very effective investment.

Addressing some of the basic facts proving that the government knew of and let the attacks succeed, or the many high-level people questioning 9/11 or saying building 7 was brought down by controlled demolition might be good places to start.

The poll also suggests that it is worth starting out conversations about 9/11 by asking the same sort of question asked by the poll. That way, you can quickly identify whether someone falls into the "hiding something", "telling the truth", or "mostly lying" categories.

Note: the full text of the poll question was "When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?"

Friday, November 17, 2006

Americans To Be Tortured For Refusing To Show ID?


Student shocked, tortured for defending constitutional rights

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
November 16, 2006


A horror video that wouldn't look out of place in Maoist China or Nazi Germany shows a student being repeatedly shot with a stun gun by UCLA police for the crime of not showing his ID. As similar cases begin to pile up how long will it be before Americans are routinely tortured for noncompliance and refusing to have their 4th amendment violated?

"A cell phone captured video of a 23-year-old student being administered multiple Taser shocks by UCLA police on Tuesday. The UCLA student was hit with the Taser shocks multiple times while he was in the Powell Library Computer Lab. According to the paper, (Mostafa) Tabatabainejad did not show ID to community service officers who were conducting a random check," reports NBC.

Watch the video above and witness as the cops bark at Tabatabainejad to get to his feet as simultaneously shock him over and over until he begins crying and screaming for them to stop.

Police are given extensive training on the use of stun guns and in most cases that training involves taking a taser shot and feeling the effects. Depending on each individual's physiology, it takes at least a minute to be able to even stand after a single Taser shot. Over a hundred deaths have occurred in America as a result of taser shocks and Taser's own manual discourages repeated shocks, yet the history of their use tells us that police simply administer repeated shocks until "compliance is gained." This is a euphemism for torture.

The video and the eyewitness reports describe multiple taser shots as Tabatabainejad begs and pleads while at one point screaming, "Here's your Patriot Act, here's your f---ing abuse of power."

The officers repeatedly order Tabatabainejad to stand even as they administer further shocks - sending 50,000 volts of current that override the nervous system and temporarily paralyze muscles shooting through his system again and again. He can't stand and the cops know it, they just get off on the maniacal ego power trip of torture and this is why Tabatabainejad is hit again and again despite his screaming and the protests of the onlookers.

Similar cases abound in the so-called land of the free, including the video above in which a housewife, Abbey Newman, is assaulted and arrested for simply refusing to tell the gestapo her name at an unconstitutional checkpoint. Another case in which an Alex Jones listener, Ferrell Montgomery, was tasered and had a dog set on him again underscores the brutal and sadistic nature of the police. Like Tabatabainejad, Montgomery was repeatedly told to put his hands behind his head and stand up while he was electric shocked and a dog savaged him for not complying.

In November 2005, Deborah Davis was reading a book on a Denver bus when a guard of a nearby federal building got on board and demanded everyone show their ID. Davis refused, leading the guard to "call on federal cops, who then dragged Davis off a public bus, handcuffed her, shoved her into the back seat of a police car and drove off to a police station within the Federal Center."

How long before Americans are tortured with taser weapons on the streets for refusing to show identification on a routine basis?

How long before we are forced to wear shock collars like some bizarre science fiction movie, where our masters can discipline us on a whim for not obeying orders?

It may be a lot sooner than we think.

Every indication suggests that there are moves afoot to implement these measures on every major street corner and transport system. A year ago we were told that Federal air marshals were to expand their work beyond airplanes, launching counter-terror surveillance at train stations and other mass transit facilities. So called "Visible Intermodal Protection and Response" teams — or VIPER teams, may soon be permanently deployed to check ID's under the banner of counter-terrorism.

We need to set a precedent now whereby police who use taser stun guns and any other kind of unreasonable force as implements of torture, simply if an individual refuses to have their 4th amendment right illegally violated, are instantly fired, sued and can never work in any sector of government, policing or security again.

Watch this space for further updates on the Tabatabainejad case.
ACTION: Call UCLA and demand an investigation into this incident. BE POLITE. 310-825-4321
See the story coverage here from Countdown with Keith Olbermann
Complete video here from Prisonplanet.com

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Neo-con mouthpiece FOX News' message: "We LOVE murderers....HATE 9/11 truth-seekers"


by Larry Simons
November 15, 2006

FOX News never ceases to amaze me. They will demonize Cindy Sheehan (a mother who lost her son in Iraq), John Kerry for attacking American troops (when he was really calling Bush "stupid"), 9/11 truth-seekers who give overwhelming evidence that the government was complicit in the events of 9/11......but when it comes to their good 'ole friend (and MURDERER, I might add) O.J. Simpson, all Neo-con arms are open wide to welcome back their favorite knife-wielding football hero.
On November 27 and 29, FOX is airing a 2-part interview titled...(and I'm not kidding), "If I Did It, Here's How It Happened". It's not enough that this asshole killed two people and got away with it just because he ran up and down a football field for 11 years. He doesn't even have the decency to just craw into a hole and stay away from us for the REST OF HIS LIFE. He's an attention-seeker. He can't stand not being crammed down our throats on a regular basis. REAL sick minds can't just commit horrendous crimes, but they must grandstand their celebrity status, despite what they've done.
Enter accomplice FOX News. Leave it up to these Neo-con bootlickers to give this asshole air-time and exposure. They LOVE O.J. Why shouldn't they? They love criminals period. They are mouthpieces for the Bush administration and their many atrocities, the New World Order and globilization. After all, FOX pays Mark Fuhrman to be a contributor on several shows...and why not? He's a known liar. And let's not forget about Greta Van Susteren, who basically owes her fame and career to O.J. Although she worked for CNN during the O.J. trial, she has been with FOX News since 2002. It's just that whole "lies/crime" thing that attracts FOX News. Yeah, that's right, I forgot, O.J. was acquitted. I also "forgot" that O.J. said that he wouldn't rest until he found the "real" killer either. I guess little minor details like finding the killer of your wife just slide to the back of your mind as the years pass, and you can just never find the time to fit that in between playing golf and moving to Florida to escape the responsibility of having to pay back 33 million dollars to the families of your victims. (In Florida, a person's residence nor pay can not be seized from them to collect debts from trials) ------("psst.....but O.J. denied that's why he moved there!") Yeah, ok, I believe you O.J., I'm a dumbass.
Remember, this is the same asshole that said in an interview (once AGAIN on FOX News!) in 2004, "There are times I am angry at her" (Nicole)...."There are things that she could be doing with the kids better than I, you know? When it's emotional stuff, especially with my daughter, I am angry with her." Maybe you shouldn't have killed her then asshole! And poor you, O.J. Awwwww, now you're stuck with the kids and you just can't do things right....and yet your wife's head was almost cut off. You're right, O.J.....YOU deserve the sympathy. But FOX News sucks up to this guy more than they suck up to the criminals in Washington. Don't investigate 9/11 or seek the truth about it (or you're a nut).....don't mourn for your son killed in Iraq or criticize Bush (or you're radical and far left)......but kill your wife and her friend?----that's perfectly o.k. with FOX News!
Correction: minor correction---O.J.'s special is airing on FOX local affiliates, not FOX News, but it's all a part of News Corporation, so my error is no big deal. It's all a part of the same ownership and ideology. I would make a huge correction or remove the story if it was a bigger deal than this, but FOX is FOX.
LIE ALERT! : On the Nov. 15, 2006 broadcast of the O' LIEly Factor, O'Liar said this about the O.J. special: "We want you to know FOX Broadcasting that is airing this has NOTHING to do with FOX News"
---LIE--- Fox Broadcasting is a subsidiary of News Corporation, which owns FOX News, which is all owned by Rupert Murdoch. (TomAto/Tomato) Once again, O' Liar is caught in the No FACT Zone by deceiving his sheeple. So when O' LIEly tells his sheep that he's appalled that FOX would air this, he's appalled at his OWN boss. Guess he's once again a loofah short of a falafel. Here's a link to information about FOX Broadcasting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Broadcasting

Monday, November 13, 2006

Ron Paul: TRUE Republican and TRUE American

Texas Representative urges repeal of neo-fascist laws in America before it is too late
Steve Watson
November 13, 2006
Re-elected Texas Republican Congressman Ron Paul joined Alex Jones on air last week to discuss the fallout of the midterm elections and what he sees transpiring over the next two years. He ended by ominously warning that if something is not done soon to overturn legislation such as the Military Commissions act, the law officially allows for citizen concentration camp facilities.

Beginning with the positives to come out of the election, Ron Paul stressed that it has provided an important indication to the rest of the world that the people of America are unhappy with the usurpers that have seized control of their government and are trying to initiate change. The Congressman was quick to point out that this may not be carried into policy however:

"Not a whole lot will change because the leadership on the Democratic side, even if they had their way, don't have a different foreign policy. They have been supportive of an interventionist foreign policy in the middle east, and they are not about to back away from that... They are willing to criticize the policy but only as a means to get power."

As we have seen over the past week, leading Democrats are all towing the party line, unreservedly dismissing any notion of the possibility of impeaching the President over Iraq.

The Congressman also stated that monetary policy will stay the same, which can only mean bad news for the American economy.

" They all believe in the federal reserve, they are not going to get rid of the IRS and the income tax. I think the dollar is going to keep sliding, which means prices are going to rise, when currencies self destruct, the end goes quickly. There are no signs that there is anything being done in Washington to correct the problem. Spending is going to continue and probably going to get worse, the deficits are going to stay high if foreign policy is not going to change."

The Congressman agreed that the elite globalists within the US government may not care about this too much because it means they can blow out the economy and then come back and buy it up very cheaply. These Internationalists care not about preserving and protecting American sovereignty when there is a quick buck to be made.

"That's also part of the foreign policy to be in position to hold onto natural resources, that's one of the major reasons why we're in the middle east, so yes if there is a financial crisis, they're going to have the guns, and they have control of the natural resources... It's not a good scenario, because what usually happens when you wipe out a currency is that you wipe out the middle class, and we already see this happening. The standard of living is going down." Paul asserted.

Ron Paul's comments echo those of Former World Bank Vice President, Chief Economist and Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz, who two weeks ago predicted a global economic crash within 24 months - unless the current downturn is successfully managed. Asked if the situation was being properly handled Stiglitz emphatically responded "no," and also drew ominous parallels to the development of the NAFTA Superhighway and the North American Union.

What real Conservatism there was left in the House, to block such moves, as well as Bush's amnesty program for illegals, is gone. With Pelosi at the helm Ron Paul sees it as a forgone conclusion that such policies will sail through.

"I think that's right, although I complain about the two parties being exactly alike, I would say on this amnesty issue and what's happened with the election, there probably was a difference between the two. It is more likely with the Democrats in charge, and Judiciary and the other major committees, and with the President not really fighting for our national borders, he's always argued for some type of worker program, yes I think there's a much greater danger that that is going to be coming in the next session."

Commenting on strategies to defeat the North American Union, the Congressman urged a continuance of educating people on the real issues and reaching more and more Americans who care about preserving their national sovereignty:

"You have to keep doing what you are doing, you are reaching a lot of people, and they have to get to their members of congress, and in many ways the current House has been pretty good with this. With the new House we don't know exactly what is going to happen, but I had something very encouraging come to my attention just this week. I had a call from a young lady that won in Kansas as a Democrat, and in her literature she put my whole article on the NAFTA super corridor in there... She is not going to vote with Nancy Pelosi."

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, The Congressman spoke on the issue of going about demanding a repeal of freedom crushing legislation such as the Patriot act and the Military Commissions Act and the Defense Authorization Act which essentially wipes out Habeas Corpus.

"We might have to hope that our Supreme Court helps us out a little. The Court has been better than the executive branch and a heck of a lot better than the Congress, because we've given the President everything he's asked for and the President has been begging for all this authority, so immediately we have to hope that the courts will save us on some of these things. But once again ultimately its only when the people wake up and say they don't like this... sometimes the people wake up to late. Right now we don't have concentration camps, but like you have pointed out, the authority has been given so that concentration camps can come without Habeas Corpus . I have heard the argument that there is nothing else left in the Bill of Rights. If they can lock you up, what good is freedom of speech or what good is a gun? That is now part of the books, part of the law."

Take Ron Paul's suggestion up and contact your new or re-elected members and demand a move to repeal legislation paving the way for fascist government control in America today.

Saturday, November 11, 2006

Venezuela Officially Says 9/11 was "Self Inflicted"


Venezuela's president continued his criticism of President Bush after the pro-Chávez legislature declared that the 9/11 attacks were `self-inflicted.'

PHIL GUNSONThe Miami HeraldSaturday, November 11, 2006

CARACAS - When Venezuela's leftist President Hugo Chávez called President Bush ''the devil'' in a U.N. speech in September, many thought his ''anti-imperialist'' rhetoric had reached rock bottom.
But fresh depths have since been plumbed. The Venezuelan government, to judge from recent events, officially regards Bush as a genocidal Nazi who arranged the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to justify aggression against other nations.

In a speech Tuesday, Chávez criticized the decision of an Iraqi court to sentence former dictator Saddam Hussein to the death penalty. ''If sentencing is to be done,'' Chávez said, ``the first one to be given the most severe sentence this planet has to offer should be the president of the United States, if we're talking about genocidal presidents.''

RESOLUTION ON 9/11
His comments, which were fairly typical of his recent attacks on Bush, came shortly after the publication of a resolution by Venezuela's legislative National Assembly describing the 9/11 attacks as ''self-inflicted'' and after an exhibition at the Foreign Ministry building in Caracas in which Bush was portrayed as a Nazi storm trooper.

The resolution, which appeared in the official government gazette in mid-October, primarily criticized Washington's decision to build a wall along the Mexican border to keep illegal immigrants out.

But in its fourth paragraph, it calls on the U.S. Congress to ``demand that the government of President Bush explain the self-inflicted attack on the World Trade Center and its victims, the supposed aircraft that crashed into the Pentagon and the links between the bin Laden family and the Bush family.''

The resolution, drafted by the deputy chairman of the Foreign Affairs Commission, Carlos Escarrá, was passed unanimously by the 167-member assembly, all of them Chávez supporters after an opposition boycott of elections last December.

Both Chávez and Foreign Minister Nicolás Maduro have referred several times in the past to suspicions that the 9/11 attacks were planned by the Bush administration, and have called for an inquiry.

But this appears to be the first time that the term ''self-inflicted attack'' has been used without qualification.
Asked how the legislature had reached that conclusion, Escarrá said that ''evidence and testimonies'' had emerged in the United States and that ''for the rest of the world, there is no longer any question'' that 9/11 was not an al Qaeda attack.

About the time the lawmakers were approving the resolution, an exhibition called ''Truths About the Empire'' was on display in the foyer of the Foreign Ministry. It included a photo montage showing Bush dressed in the uniform of the German SS.

The exhibition was removed after a reporter for a U.S. newspaper asked to photograph it. A U.S. diplomat, who asked for anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record about the issue, said the display was ``an insult to the 400,000 Americans who died in World War II fighting the Nazis.''

Escarrá said the comparison might indeed be considered unfair -- but to Hitler, not to Bush. ''Hitler was a babe in arms compared to Bush,'' he asserted. He added that just like Hitler, Bush had ``an extermination plan.''

'LARGE' DIFFERENCES
U.S. Ambassador William Brownfield told a Venezuelan radio station last week that differences between the two governments were ''large, broad and deep'' and were unlikely to disappear.

It is a view shared by Escarrá, who told The Miami Herald that Bush ''defends the most outdated, the most radical form of capitalism'' and added that it was evident to the whole world that the U.S. ``empire is in decline.''

Chávez insists that it is Bush, rather than the main opposition contender, Manuel Rosales, who is his true adversary in the Dec. 3 presidential election. The opposition, he argues, is merely puppets of the United States.

He has also often claimed that Washington has plans to invade Venezuela, assassinate him and install a government more in accordance with U.S. interests. Washington has dismissed his allegations as fabrications.

Welcome all


After 1 year of doing my newsletter I have decided to go blog and welcome any views and viewpoints, no matter how stupid they are. On this blog it will be they way it should be....no censorship. The ONLY time I will remove blogs is if it's an obvious abuse of the medium.....posting personal information, or just saying really dumb things that have nothing to do with anything...you know, obvious stuff. Example: if you just post the word "poop" , although funny, it will be deleted. So, feel free to post away and use this as a means of intelligent debate. If you can't be intelligent, at least try to get your facts straight...in other words, research first. If you can't, well.....suffer the humiliation of the blogosphere.-----L