Monday, March 31, 2008

CIA Boss Says New Al-Qaeda Are White Westerners

Cites no evidence to substantiate claim

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
March 31, 2008

Citing absolutely no evidence whatsoever, CIA boss Michael Hayden told NBC's Meet The Press yesterday that Al-Qaeda is training new fighters that "look western" and could easily cross U.S. borders, in the latest attempt to re-focus the mammoth apparatus of anti-terror against the American people.

"They are bringing operatives into that region for training -- operatives that wouldn't attract your attention if they were going through the customs line at Dulles (airport outside Washington) with you when you were coming back from overseas," Hayden said.

"(They) look western (and) would be able to come into this country without attracting the kinds of attention that others might," he added, with Reuters forced to point out that Hayden offered nothing to substantiate his claim.

The talking point that the new Al-Qaeda are white westerners has been circulating since at least the start of the year.

On January 14th, Fox News interviewed ex-CIA spook Mike Baker, whose company Diligence LLC has close ties to the Bush administration and just happens to butter its bread with the aid of a steady supply of global unrest and terror hype.

Baker told Fox's Brian Kilmeade that al Qaeda looks for operatives who can fit in, just as the CIA does, saying, "If they can recruit a Scandinavian, that's the holy grail for them." He added, "They need people who can move around freely and do their bidding," apparently implying that blue-eyed blondes are the people who blend most seamlessly into Western society.

However, Baker dismissed Kilmeade's suggestion that al Qaeda would be particularly interested in recruiting in US prisons. "To go into a prison and try to recruit individuals -- that person's already tainted. What they really need, they need people who haven't run afoul of law enforcement in the past. ... Their problems are extreme in trying to recruit someone who can go out there and carry out their business."

Even if you believe we are fighting a war against radical Muslims that want to wipe us off the planet, your intelligence agencies are working on the premise that the next likely suicide bombers are going to look like Ken and Barbie. Does that make you feel safe?

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out what the agenda is here. Just as we were told that there were reds under the bed during the cold war era, without the specter of potential terrorists running around our backyards, the war on terror itself and all the fearmongering attached to it is rendered impotent.

So the new potential terrorists are our friends, our neighbors and even us - mandating that the whole police state apparatus that has been constructed since 9/11 be swung around to target the American and British people.

Oh yeah, and if there are real terrorists planning devastating attacks, they won't be stopped because the CIA's foot soldiers have been trained to look for members of the 1970's Swedish pop group Abba.

Friday, March 28, 2008

Are We Headed For Jericho?

by Chuck Baldwin
March 28, 2008

A friend recently turned me on to the CBS television series, Jericho. I watch so little network television that I confess to never having seen the show before this week. Obviously, then, I am quite uninformed as to the overall plot and previous episodes. What I saw Tuesday evening, however, stunned me. Why? Because it very aptly depicted what could become a very real-life scenario for these United States in the not-so-distant future.

If I accurately picked up the basic plot of the show, average, freedom-loving citizens in the Western U.S. are fighting against tyrannical elements of their own government, including military forces. The State of Texas has declared its independence from the corrupt new government and another civil war is breaking out in America. And all this was predicated upon a nuclear attack, which some believed was an inside job. Am I close?

Contributing further to my amazement was the way Jericho used real-life political events to depict America's fall into tyranny. I was flabbergasted to see the characters of Jericho refer to the Continuity of Government act as the foundation for the government's declaration of martial law after the nuclear attack had occurred.

Ladies and gentlemen, the Continuity of Government (COG) act is not television make-believe: it is the real deal.

To read up on COG, go to Wikipedia's entry at

In addition, I have reported the potential problems associated with COG in this column.


See also

Here is a quote from the Wikipedia entry: "The George W. Bush administration put the Continuity of Operations plan into effect for the first time directly following the September 11, 2001 attacks. Their implementation involves a rotating staff of 75 to 150 senior officials and other government workers from every Cabinet department and other parts of the executive branch in two secure bunkers on the East Coast . . . .

"The Bush Administration officially admitted the implementation of the plan on March 1, 2002. Key congressional leaders say they didn't know this government-in-waiting had been established.

"On July 18, 2007 Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., a member of the U. S. House Committee on Homeland Security, was denied access to the classified version of the continuity of government plan. Though members can access classified information, this is the first time documents have been denied."

As I wrote on January 12, 2007, "In a nutshell, proponents of COG envision a terrorist attack that would precipitate the suspension of the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, COG would authorize Congress to appoint its own members, including those in state legislatures, without a vote of the people. COG even envisions the enactment of such authority for reasons of 'incapacitation' (whatever that is) even if no emergency exists."

Noted author, Dr. Jerome Corsi, wrote this of Bush's enactment of COG, "Translated into layman's terms, when the president determines a national emergency has occurred, the president can declare to the office of the presidency powers usually assumed by dictators to direct any and all government and business activities until the emergency is declared over."

Contrary to the ranting of politicians and media talking heads about how great things are going in these United States, millions of Americans are becoming increasingly aware of the total corruption, crookedness, and chicanery of government officials.

They have had it with being lied to, cheated, and beaten down with thousands of rules, regulations, and laws, which serve only to empower the political and business elite. They do not trust any of their politicians to tell them the truth. Their money and jobs are disappearing; their children are being brainwashed in government schools; their homes and property are being taxed out of existence; and even their country's very sovereignty is being forfeited to foreign interests.

I believe the level of frustration and anger is rising to the point that a Jericho scenario could very easily occur.

I personally believe there are only three reasons why we are not already living the Jericho experience.

One, people have been quite comfortable in their own personal lifestyles. They have enjoyed comfortable homes, nice automobiles, fine clothes, and pleasure-filled vacations. Who in their right mind wants to give up the tranquility of hearth and home?

Two, most of America still rests upon a Christian foundation. As such, Americans believe in peace and harmony. They believe in law and order. They believe in submitting to authority.

Three, there has not been an overt, large-scale attempt by government to confiscate the firearms of the American people. Remember, it was the Crown's attempted gun confiscation at Concord that ignited the American Revolution back in 1775.

However, the materialistic comfort of the average American is quickly fading away. People are losing their jobs, their livelihoods, their homes, and their savings. More than that, they are losing hope for a better tomorrow, and they are losing confidence in their government to honestly protect their freedoms--even their national identity.

Plus, most Christians know that there is such a thing as lawful rebellion. Even Christ's early disciples said no to various governments during extreme situations. And for us Americans, freedom and liberty runs deep in our veins.

Many of us have not buried our Don't Tread On Me banners. We share the sentiment of Benjamin Franklin who said, "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."

Furthermore, Hurricane Katrina put the American people on notice that their government is more than willing to confiscate their firearms. Plus, the forthcoming Supreme Court ruling regarding the right to keep and bear arms is likely to authorize even tighter government regulation on this fundamental right. Even more disconcerting are the reports we are hearing from soldiers coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan telling us that they are being told to prepare for orders to turn their weapons on the American people, should the President declare martial law. (I have had more than one Iraq War veteran tell me this.)

I am afraid that the CBS television series Jericho is more than fantasy: it could be a prediction of the future. As Thomas Jefferson said, "I tremble for my country."

Call For New 9/11 Investigation Reaches Crescendo

Public figures increasingly speaking out while media ignores professionals and experts

Paul Joseph Watson
March 28, 2008

Calls for a new 9/11 inquiry are reaching a crescendo, with well-respected authorities and celebrities alike adding their voices to the cause, as the official 9/11 story crumbles under the weight of revelations of White House ties to the 9/11 Commission, and other cover-ups on behalf of authorities staffed with investigating the attacks.

The corporate media's insistence on ignoring hundreds of professional experts who are calling for a new 9/11 investigation has spurred many celebrities to use their public platforms to speak out, knowing that the press will at least have to address the issue.

The latest to do so is top comedian Margaret Cho, who told the Alex Jones Show yesterday that the public were going to become very angry when it was fully disclosed that the attacks were a conspiracy, concurring with fellow comedian George Carlin who also questioned the official story last year.

The path was trailblazed by Charlie Sheen in March 2006 when he spoke of his doubts about the official story and questioned the collapse of WTC Building 7. Sheen was endlessly smeared for weeks after but he prompted a national debate about 9/11 and the 9/11 Truth Movement enjoyed what many consider to be its most productive year.

In September 2006, former Governor, actor and wrestling star Jesse Ventura questioned 9/11 during an on-camera interview with Alex Jones and also cited Operation Northwoods and the Gulf of Tonkin as examples of how the government has planned and carried out staged war provocations in the past.

In July 2007, popular film maker Michael Moore told reporters that he had many more questions about 9/11 than at the time of making Fahrenheit 9/11 and did not believe the public had been told "half the truth" about what really happened.

Martin Sheen echoed his son's comments in October 2007 along with rising actor Mark Ruffalo, following in the footsteps of Rosie O'Donnell, who caused shockwaves when she brought 9/11 truth to national prominence during her stint as The View host.

The View was also used as a platform for actor James Brolin to raise 9/11 truth, who questioned the official version of events in the same week that acclaimed director David Lynch spoke out.

Lynch told Dutch television he thought WTC Building 7 was brought down via controlled demolition and that the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash sites were suspicious due to the absence of evidence that a plane crashed at either location.

Other notable public figures speaking out at the same time included Ed Asner, Matthew Bellemy of Muse and director Richard Linklater.

American icon Willie Nelson threw his hat in the ring last month, when he told The Alex Jones Show that he thought the twin towers were imploded like condemned Las Vegas casino buildings.

Nelson's comments were almost universally blackballed by the corporate media, who had patently learned from the Sheen controversy that smear campaigns were only leading to more people being exposed to the information and beginning the wake-up process.

Of course, the really important advocates of 9/11 truth are the hundreds of architects, scholars, engineers and other expert professionals who are demanding a fresh inquiry, but they are habitually ignored by the media as the 9/11 Truth Movement is smeared as a fringe interest fad populated by kooks and imbeciles.

In reality, doubts about the official 9/11 story are shared by a myriad of well-respected figures.

The Japanese Parliament were recently a captive audience to a 9/11 truth presentation by Fujita Yukihisa - a member of the House of Councillors in the Diet.

Andreas von Buelow, the former German Defense Secretary, was perhaps the first most prominent individual to go on the record back in 2004, when he blamed the CIA for orchestrating the attacks.

He was followed by former environment minister in Tony Blair's government Michael Meacher, who questioned the stand down of NORAD on 9/11 and dismissed the entire war on terror as a hoax.

Veteran CIA agent and respected geopolitical expert Robert Baer said that "all the evidence points to" 9/11 having had elements of an inside job during a radio apperance in June 2006.

Late last year, former Italian President Francesco Cossiga told Italy's most respected newspaper that the attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad and that this was common knowledge amongst global intelligence agencies.

Former Wall Street Journal editor, U.S. Treasury Secretary and founder of Reaganomics Paul Craig Roberts questioned the susupicious collapse of the twin towers and Building 7 in February 2006.

Headed up by Richard Gage, the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth organization lists hundreds of experts in their field who all concur that the implosion of the buildings is not consistent with the official story and needs to be investigated.

Scholars For 9/11 Truth & Justice, headed by Professor Steven Jones, counts amongst its ranks hundreds of physicists, scientists and academic professionals who all share doubts about 9/11.

Another website, Patriots For 9/11 Truth, lists hundreds more former government, military, air force, and navy officials who have all spoken out about 9/11.

With the impartiality of the 9/11 Commission having been blown wide open by revelations of White House ties with Philip Zelikow, allied to the fact that the Pentagon knowingly lied to the Commission during testimony, the call for a new independent inquiry, armed with subpoena powers, is amplifying to a crescendo.

Allegations of a cover-up in regard to the organization responsible for investigating the collapse of the twin towers on behalf of FEMA this week also increased the pressure.

The more prominent figures that add their voice to that call, be they captains of culture or respected authorties in their discipline, can only increase the eventual likelihood of a new investigation.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Truckers ‘going broke’ and threatening to strike

Outraged truckers threaten to turn off their engines on April 1 (no fooling)

by Barb Ickes
March 20, 2008

What started as a small, online grassroots effort now appears to have the potential for something bigger.

Dan Little, the owner/operator of a livestock hauling company in Carrollton, Mo., estimated Tuesday that at least 1,000 other truckers from across the United States have committed so far to joining him in a strike on April 1.

Although none of the truckers interviewed Tuesday at the Iowa 80 Truck Stop, Walcott, which is just off Interstate 80 west of Davenport, has heard of the intended strike, some said they would shut down, too.

Weldon Kinnison, a Virginia trucker who was hauling soft drink from Indiana to Denver, heard about the plans for a strike for the first time Tuesday while stopping at Walcott.

“I’m an owner/operator with the American Truckers Association,” he said. “I’d park my truck for a week with the cattle haulers.

“The fuel is too high, and there’s no reason for it. I don’t listen to the CB (radio) that much, but I guess I’ll start now.”

At issue is the rising cost of diesel fuel, which has reached or exceeded $4 per gallon in at least 17 states. But Little does not expect his strike to bring down the per-gallon price of gas, nor does he expect to have any effect on the oil companies.

“What I would personally like to see is our federal and state governments, until our economy recovers, suspend federal and state fuel taxes,” the 49-year-old said. “The second thing I’d like to see is an oversight committee for truck insurance, which is part of what’s taking us down.

“The average owner/operator is paying $600 to $800 a month for truck insurance. It’s based on personal credit, which means the monthly cost is going up for a lot of truckers because their credit is going down.

“Everything in the world is going up (in price), except for what we do. I lose money if I start my truck, and that truck is paid for — free and clear.”

Mike Hills, a driver from Wyoming, Iowa, said he also would shut down to support Little and the others — if he could.

“I can’t strike with them because I’m company,” he said while at the Walcott truck stop. “If I owned the truck, I’d strike with them. As far as I’m concerned, the gas prices are driving the economy.

“It might be a good thing if the drivers strike. They can’t make payments. Maybe if the oil companies bought all the trucks, things would change. Everything in this country is trucked.”

Hills then removed his wristwatch, using it to explain his point of view: “Every piece of this watch was trucked from somewhere. If you can’t keep up with the trucks, we’re all screwed — not just this country, but the world.”

Keith Deblieck, the owner of a trucking company out of Geneseo, Ill., said that, for many drivers, the time for a strike has come.

“They ought to strike,” he said. “We all ought to. They lose money every day they go out.”

But officials from the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association are encouraging truckers to find options to a strike. The trade group represents the interests of more than 160,000 small business trucking companies and drivers.

“If we told our operators to shut down, we’d be slapped with a lawsuit because of anti-trust,” said association spokeswoman Norita Taylor, adding that a poor economic outlook and rising fuel prices are creating “a lot of emotions” among truckers.

“It’s hurting these people who are living paycheck to paycheck,” she said. “People are upset. What can we do?”

One thing the association is trying to do is talk to lawmakers and truckers about making sure that surcharges being charged to shippers are getting back to the people who paid for the gas. Surcharges are supposed to compensate for high fuel charges, but they must be negotiated with each shipper, and the truckers who pay at the pump aren’t always first in line to receive the surcharges.

Even when the surcharges do make it back to the driver, they are not enough.

“I turn down loads every day,” Little said. “The loads aren’t the problem — never have been.

“It’s the only thing I know how to do, driving a truck. But I sold my trailer the other day, and I’m not buying another one until something gets done.

“In no way, shape or form do truckers want to hurt this country. My whole deal on this thing is that I’m shutting down on April 1. Call it a strike, a shutdown or just flat-ass going broke.”

Jim Johnston, president of Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, warned that a strike “is not the answer,” saying, “Calling for a strike without the support of the majority would show weakness rather than strength, and the result would be increased economic hardship to the small percentage of truckers who do participate in the shutdown with no gains to justify their sacrifice.”

Little said he has no other choice.

“Our federal government is subsidizing railroads, airlines, banks and farmers,” he said. “Meanwhile, we’re being taxed to death.”

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Report Of WTC Collapse Cover-Up Justifies Call For New Inquiry

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth experts demand questions answered

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
March 26, 2008

Richard Gage AIA, the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and hundreds of other industry experts' call for a new investigation into the collapse of the WTC twin towers and Building 7 is gaining strength following revelations of falsification and cover-up in relation to the FEMA-funded inquiry into the destruction of the buildings on 9/11.

As we reported earlier, the American Society of Civil Engineers - an organization that was funded by FEMA to investigate the collapse of the twin towers on 9/11 - has been accused of engaging in a cover-up to protect the government, with critics charging the organization falsified conclusions that skyscrapers could not withstand getting hit by airplanes.

In a recent sit-down video interview conducted by Alex Jones, Gage gave a succinct presentation bringing forth the best evidence for controlled demolition being the cause of the three buildings' implosion on September 11.

As Gage highlights during the interview, numerous prominent architects and other industry experts have called for a new investigation into the collapse of the twin towers and WTC 7.

These include James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), who last year said that "the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable."

"Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another," he added.

Charles Pegelow, BS CE – Civil Engineer with more than 25 years experience in structural design and analysis and project management of construction of major projects, including large steel structures, also added his support to a new inquiry.

Pegelow stated that the "FEMA / Kean Commission Report was a flawed investigation and it needs to be reopened."

Joel S. Hirschhorn, former full professor Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison; senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment; Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources at the National Governors Assoc., has also called for a new investigation to bring out the truth behind 9/11.

The Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth website lists scores of other experts who have added their voice to the call for a fresh inquiry and Gage lists their credentials during the video interview.

Today's fresh controversy, allied to last month's revelations about 9/11 Commission executive director Philip Zelikow's ties to the White House and his efforts to shield the Bush administration from responsibility for the terror attack, only lend new weight to calls for an independent inquiry - complete with subpoena powers - into the terror attacks.

Friday, March 21, 2008

BILLO compared bloggers to Nazis and the KKK for posting vile comments. Where's the “O’ Reilly police” when does the exact same thing?’s moderators have allowed bloggers to call black people lazy, worthless theives while claiming that they [black people] would be naked and eating bugs “if it weren’t for white people”

by Larry Simons
March 21, 2008

For weeks now, the professor of propaganda, the sultan of spin, Bill O’ Reilly, has been leading a personal crusade against any website that dare utter any ideology that he opposes. In no way am I condoning threatening, racist comments by any website on Billo’s shit list (Daily Kos, Huffington Post), but to Billo this goes a lot deeper than a vile comment here or there. It’s personal to Billo. He opposes the politics of the website in general, therefore he chooses to attack the very small number of people who leave objectionable comments in order to invalidate and smear the central purpose of the site itself.

Do these sites have people that post vile, slanderous comments? Of course they do. Any site that is moderately popular will receive a substantial amount of visits. The odds of a website being nasty comment-free when half of a million people visit it everyday are about the same as Billo doing an entire telecast of his show and not lying.

This is not about what website posted this or posted that. This is about good old-fashioned hypocrisy, Billo-style. To Bill O’ Reilly, it’s not about facts, truth, integrity or fair reporting. It’s about how much he can stir up the shit storm to orchestrate more controversy on his failing show, which is rapidly sliding in the ratings. Of course, Billo counters this fact by just merely stating that his show is #1, which doesn’t contradict the fact that he’s dropping in viewership.

Billo’s attacks began last year when he started crucifying the Daily Kos for letting bloggers post inappropriate comments and pictures. Keep in mind they were "inappropriate" to Bill O' Reilly, the same man who sexually harrassed one of his staffers in 2004 and ended the whole ordeal by settling out of court by paying the victim, Andrea Mackris, millions. The same man who doesn't pass up a chance to show footage of scantily-clad babes on his show under the guise of a "legitimate" social issue story. The same man in whom about 90% of his guests and analysts are females--and not JUST females, but hot babes who look like they could take a second job at Hooters.

Billo doesn’t like the Daily Kos, therefore the purpose and message of the Daily Kos must be fraudulent because 10 or 11 people post comments that are deemed unacceptable to Bill "falafel" O' Reilly. More recently Billo’s anger has been pointed to Arianna Huffington for “allowing” bloggers to post, in Billo’s words “vile” comments.

Whether the comments are nasty, vile, racist, hateful or slanderous takes a backseat to the fact that Billo not only contradicts himself by condemning others when his OWN site allows the same nasty comments, but that he has the audacity to compare postings on a blog to Nazism. This is what Billo said last month to an email he read on his show:

“from the late nineteen twenties to nineteen thirty-three when Hitler became chancellor, the Nazis used vile propaganda to demonize Jews and others in the eyes of the German people. The used newspapers, radio, leaflets and rallies to build up enormous hatred towards your family. Today we’re seeing the same thing on the net here in America, there is no difference. When Arianna Huffington allows people to say that Nancy Reagan should suffer terribly and then die, that is no different that what doctor Joseph Goebbels and others were putting out way back then.”

Here’s the clip:

Yeah, Billo, except for the fact that Goebbels’ job was to censor every branch of the arts and media (newspapers, books, film, novels, plays, broadcasts and concerts) and not ALLOW it as you claim Huffington does. Goebbels would not allow free speech. You claim Arianna Huffington allows it. How are they doing the same thing? We live in America Billo, where we are FREE to say things we want. We have laws against threats, slander and libel. If we speak and break none of the laws established, it is allowed. You may not like it Billo, but if the law is not broken then I guess you just have to live with that thorn in your side called the Constitution. Goebbels probably would have been an employee of FOX News and would have despised Huffington.

Watch the clip of O’ Reilly attacking Huffington and calling her actions (of ALLOWING posts on her blog---not actually posting them herself) Nazi-like

The most glaring hypocritical action (or I should say, NON-action) is the fact that Billo continually attacks the Huffington Post when right NOW, as I speak, racist and vile comments are posted on and they’ve been on there for at least 2 days, and I have not seen him say ONE word about it. Seems his internet police is on vacation. Click HERE for the page where I personally witnessed at least 2 racist, vicious comments aimed at black people. As of this writing, they are still there. Below you will see screen shots I captured of the comments just incase has removed them.

(click to enlarge)

(click to enlarge)

The amazing thing is, on the comment page on right above where you enter a new post, it issues this warning:

(click to enlarge)

The irony of all this is, is that most of the time when Bill O’ Reilly makes a claim or an accusation, it is usually the opposite that is the truth. He claims his show is the “No-Spin Zone” when on countless occasions even on my site alone I have shown video evidence of Billo’s spin. He claims FOX News is fair and balanced. How many hundreds of times have we seen this to be a lie? I can’t even count how many times he has invited 2 conservative talking heads on his show to ridicule a liberal issue or guest and no one from the other side of the argument was invited to speak.

Same thing applies here. Billo claims that websites like the Daily Kos and the Huffington Post are agents of propaganda and equates them with Joseph Goebbels. In reality, it is Bill O’ Reilly who is more like Goebbels than anyone he criticizes. How many times have we seen Billo cut the mikes of his guests? How many times have heard Billo tell his guests to “shut up”? Billo doesn’t allow free speech, yet he claims he does.

Billo has stated on many occasions, “I’m a free speech guy”, yet calls for censorship, FBI investigations, people being fired for just saying things he doesn’t like, telling guests to shut up and cutting them off while they speak. Then Billo has the nerve to say OTHERS are like Joseph Goebbels when they do the complete opposite of what Goebbels would have done…….ALLOW freedom of expression.

“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it” (Adolf Hitler)

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” (Joseph Goebbels)

Ahh yes, how Hitler and Goebbels would have loved FOX News.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

It’s not Cheney’s “So?” that is disturbing; it’s that he thinks Abraham Lincoln was an upstanding guy!

Uses references to Lincoln to justify the Iraq war. Pretty accurate considering Lincoln was an asshole too

by Larry Simons
March 20, 2008

On Wednesday, Good Morning America’s Martha Raddatz informed Dick Cheney that “two-thirds of Americans now think the war was not worth fighting”. Cheney replies, “So?” Raddatz then followed by asking, “So you don’t care what the American people think?”

After responding, “No”, Cheney continued by saying, “…I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls. Think about what would have happened if Abraham Lincoln had paid attention to polls, if they had had polls during the Civil War. He never would have succeeded if he hadn’t had a clear objective, a vision for where he wanted to go, and he was willing to withstand the slings and arrows of the political wars in order to get there. And this President has been very courageous, very consistent, very determined to continue down the course we were on and to achieve our objective.”

Or, Lincoln could have just said, "Fuck you" to the American people and did what he wanted ANYWAY, like you just did. Oh, that's right, he did.

But anyway, DICK, good job comparing yourself to Lincoln. What you didn’t count on was us well-informed Americans that know that the REAL Abraham Lincoln was in many ways EXACTLY like your partner in war crimes, Bush. Most Americans (even dumb ones) already know you have no soul and don’t give a fuck about anybody or anything except your gargantuan war profiteering, so the “so?” line just comes with the territory with you being the colossal prick we already know you are.

What most Americans probably don’t realize is that Lincoln was a racist. He cared nothing about the Constitution. He suspended Habeas Corpus. He said and did anything to win an election. He was a dictator in the North, shut down newspapers and had thousands of people arrested, even executed. It was a treasonous act to dissent against his administration. He had everyone fooled into believing he was a Christian man when he was far from it. He supported slavery and only freed them so he could win votes from thme to get re-elected, and it worked. He was responsible for the deaths of 600,000 men (at the time 10% of the male population) lost in a war that was unnecessary because secession from the Union was the South's constitutional right when they felt the Union was violating the constitution.

Gee….who does THAT sound like? Either Cheney is duped like the majority of Americans and has no clue who the real Lincoln was, or he is very intelligent and his comparing himself to Lincoln was blatant arrogance.

This makes Dick Cheney either stupid and soulless or intelligent and soulless…..regardless, he’s still a prick.

Of course, we already knew that, didn’t we?

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

BILLO covers the Spitzer scandal. Isn’t this like O.J. Simpson covering Jack the Ripper?

Olbermann translates the REAL, hidden message of Billo on the Spitzer scandal play-by-play

by Keith Olbermann
March 18, 2008

(Editor’s note: I usually do my own stories on Billo, but this was just too good not to post. Billo’s words below in purple)

After years of having talked out of his seat, Bill O‘Reilly of Fixed News has finally found a subject to pontificate about in which his personal knowledge actually reaches to the level of expertise, a topic in which he is not just hypocritical scold, but battle scarred veteran.

Bill-O analyzes Eliot Spitzer. The New York governor‘s resignation only becoming official today after a money and prostitution scandal laid him low. Spitzer, as you doubtless know, has been accused of financial shenanigans, possibly employing state funds to pay for the services of Kristin, the singing prostitute with the heart of gold, or at 1,000 dollars an hour, the something of gold.

For reasons unknown only to Billy, he decided to deconstruct the Spitzer saga in the latest edition of his not-so widely read newspaper column. Again, when it comes to having your pockets drained and your name turned into a punch line by your pursuit of a woman, Bill O‘Reilly knows his topic.

Why he would write this column and remind everybody of all of this all over again? Well, maybe in trying to explain Spitzer, perhaps Bill-O has wound up explaining Bill-O. October 13, 2004, also known around this business as cable Christmas, his former producer Andrea Mackris filed suit in New York against O‘Reilly and Fox for 60 million dollars, claiming he had repeatedly harassed her by telling her lurid stories of his own sexual history, describing his fantasies, trying to coral her into sexual liaisons by phone, in person, with others, with loofahs and with a falafel.

Watch the video:

The case was settled just over two weeks later with Bill-O shelling out a reported 10 million dollars. So Billy decided to write about Spitzer? Leave us to quote from the writings of the bard of Babe-ology, the Frank Burns of news, the falafel king himself, and then translate them for you back into what he really meant.

“Let‘s analyze this Eliot Spitzer situation without emotion because there are lessons to be learned here.”

Expensive lessons, embarrassing lessons, lessons which, even if they did cost you 10 million dollars, you might forget and bring up the topic again anyway.

“If you watch cable TV news, you will hear the braying pack talk about Spitzer‘s arrogance, his I am above it all mentality, but if you examine the facts, this shallow analysis doesn‘t wash.”

Hey, pal, if you are going to call Greta Van Susteren, Sean Hannity and John Gibson the braying pack of cable TV news, I‘m going to have to ask you to step outside.

“Governor Spitzer had to know that repeated visits with people breaking the law, prostitutes, put him at enormous risk. At any time, any one of these ladies might have been arrested and facing prosecution could have easily offered authorities Spitzer‘s name in return for having all charges dropped.”

Translation: If you are going to associate yourself with prostitutes, strippers, porn stars, body language experts, or other ladies who might be arrested, make sure you do it like Bill-O does.

'Defendant Bill O‘Reilly, read item 42 in the Andrea Mackris lawsuit, “without solicitation or invite, regaled plaintiff and her friends with stories of a girl at a sex show in Thailand who had shown him things in a back room that blew his mind.'

Yes, if you are going to visit with sex workers, make sure you do it like Bill-O does, in a foreign country that has weak extradition laws.

“The ladies also could have blackmailed Spitzer, could have sold their stories about him to the tabloid media, could have done many things to destroy his life.”

Translation: Here Bill is saying, trust me, I know. For a change, he sure does know.

“Then there‘s the money. Spitzer knew that wire transfers to off shore facilities are closely monitored as part of terrorist surveillance.”

Translation: Bill-O is, in a round about way, tipping his hat to the former governor. Mr. Spitzer paid a reported 80,000 dollars for a variety of activities. Mr. O‘Reilly wound up paying a reported 10 mill to Andrea Mackris and he didn‘t even get a kiss.

“Spitzer also knew that talking on the telephone to pimps, people setting up liaisons with prostitutes, left him open to being tapped.”

Talking on the telephone, did you say? Item 36 in the Mackris suit, 'Defendant Bill O‘Reilly proceeded to inform plaintiff Andrea Mackris that he advised another woman to purchase a vibrator and had taught that woman how to masturbate while telling her sexual stories over the telephone.'

“So you‘re telling me that Eliot Spitzer thought he wouldn‘t get caught? Sure, and I‘m Paris Hilton. No, what‘s in play is what I call the Belushi Syndrome. That‘s when a famous person who has money and success subconsciously tries to destroy himself. You see it all the time, movie stars, athletes, politicians doing incredibly stupid stuff.”

The Belushi Syndrome, you say?

“This is not some dime store psychoanalysis.”

Not unless by dime you mean 10 million.

“There are many people walking around who are deeply self-destructive and who will hurt themselves and others around them. That‘s a fact. A self-destructive, self-loathing personality will find a way to blow everything up. It doesn‘t matter what kind of career the person has.”

Either kind of career, broadcast or cable television.

“We all know people like this. Stay away from them.”

As we digest your analysis of what makes Bill-O—I‘m sorry—what makes Spitzer tick, we would be happy to stay away from people like this, Bill, if only you'd stay away from us.

Monday, March 17, 2008

Leading Economist: Dollar Faces Outright Collapse

Financial experts issue dire warnings as Fed and Treasury continue to say they are "committed to a strong dollar"

Steve Watson
March 14, 2008

Another prominent economist has warned that the bottom may soon drop out of the dollar completely as the currency hits fresh lows and continues to sink worldwide.

Peter Schiff, a dollar-bear at Security Pacific Capital, told the London Telegraph that the greenback faced the danger of outright collapse as countries in Asia and the Middle East mull plans to break their dollar pegs, which are fueling inflation across the region.

"The decline could accelerate rapidly. The world is still holding a lot of dollars it doesn't need," he said.

Schiff is well respected amongst the major financial publications, primarily due to the fact that over two years ago he accurately forecast that the U.S. housing market was a bubble that would soon come to bust, and also that the crisis would extend to the credit card lending industry.

Schiff is also the economic advisor for Ron Paul's Presidential campaign.

The greenback reached a record low of $1.5651 against the euro yesterday, meaning it has lost 15 percent against the euro since September alone. It also dipped below 100 yen, its lowest level in 12 years, and fell below parity with the Swiss franc for the first time in history today.

Other analysts share Schiff's fear of a total dollar collapse. Mitul Kotecha, head of currency strategy at Credit Agricole, said: "The real risk remains that we get a dollar rout. The news from from the US is consistently negative and investors are actually not overly long euros."

The Negative dollar sentiment is now becoming global, with nations who have traditionally accepted the dollar as equal to or better than local currency now rejecting it outright. Reports suggest that the once mighty dollar is no longer good enough even for Manhattan flea market traders:

In Manhattan's Bowery district, Billy LeRoy, the owner of Billy's Antiques & Props, prefers payment in euros so he can stockpile the currency for his annual antique buying trip to Paris.

"Whip out dollars at the French flea market now, and they'll shoo you away," he said at his store near apartment buildings where Europeans are snapping up units because they've become dirt cheap. "Before it was like the second coming of Christ, but now they don't want it or if they do take dollars, they're going to take their pound of flesh."

Other nations mulling a turn away from the dollar peg are likely to be influenced by the fact that the Chinese yuan has risen to the highest level since the end of its dollar link in 2005.

As the Financial Times reports, analysts are in no doubt that the weakness of the dollar is being caused by Fed rate cuts and injections of liquidity, which it says constitute efforts to steady markets.

Executives, investors and politicians say they're becoming increasingly worried. Dollars are ``printed on toilet paper,'' Marc Faber, managing director of Marc Faber Ltd., said in an interview with Bloomberg Television.

Yesterday U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson again repeated the now engrained mantra that he backs a "strong dollar'' and refused to elaborate when questioned at a press conference in Washington.

"The "strong dollar" message is so familiar, and is uttered with such unfailing regularity, that market observers often roll their eyes when they hear it, and short-term traders pay it little heed," reports Market Watch.

In the wake of the news that the G7 nations may intervene to shore up the dollar, analysts have stated that such action may now be futile considering that the Fed is seemingly unfazed by the currency's total degradation and has the ability to effectively "pull rank" over policy makers who may be genuinely worried about the decline.

Supporting the dollar may also prove futile, as its decline partly reflects the Fed's cuts and the ECB's decision not to follow, said Chris Turner at ING Financial Markets.

The Fed has cut its main rate by 2.25 percentage points since September to 3 percent, while the ECB's rate is still at a six-year high of 4 percent.

"Failed intervention is worse than no intervention,'' said Turner, ING's head of currency research in London. "Policy makers have their hands tied and will defer to the global priority of the Fed slashing interest rates.''

Meanwhile the corporate media in the US continues to echo the Bush administration's snowjob policy on the dollar crisis by ludicrously citing "experts" who claim that the unprecedented plunge of the greenback is "not necessarily a bad thing for the U.S. economy."

by Larry Simons

To comment on that last sentence, here is Dana Perino just over a week ago saying how the plunge of the dollar is "not necessarily bad". Oh, wait, that's right. She didn't say ANYTHING about it, remember? She wasn't allowed to talk about it. Hmmmmmm. I wonder why she would be stifled from talking about something that is viewed as "not necessarily bad" by her superiors.

Watch the clip:

Yeah, I always avoid things that aren't "necessarily bad" too. I don't blame the American people for the dollars' collapse, I blame Bush, and Bush alone. He caused this with the astronomical cost of this war. It is bankrupting our country. Ron Paul has been warning us about this for years, and now it has come to pass...our new great depression. All because we have deranged lunatics in the White House that have no limit to their obsessive need for greed.

I remember not too long ago when supporters of Bush were ecstatic because of the economy. It was the only thing they could think of in which Bush hadn't totally fucked up (Of course, the fact is, that when Bush supporters were bragging that the economy was good even then, it wasn't). Now, it has surpassed recession stages and has entered into, according to some experts, the new great depression.

The sad part of all this is there are STILL complete morons in this country that do not see this as Bush's fault and will still support the maniac-in-chief. Of course I'm angry that gas is near $4 a gallon and food prices are rising, who isn't? But, a small part of me is very happy. I'm happy that all this bad shit is happening, because something is needed to wake up these fucking MORONS who STILL stand by George Bush, who is by FAR and officially the worst president this country has ever had....period.

The cover-up of 9-11 wasn't enough to wake people up. The hundreds of lies that led us to war wasn't enough. The ending of our rights and shitting on our Constitution wasn't enough. Torturing prisoners wasn't enough. Being business partners with the Bin Laden's wasn't enough. Being a total fucking idiot wasn't enough. Being a member of Skull & Bones and the Bohemian Grove wasn't enough. Using fake fear on the American people wasn't enough. Nothing seems to be enough.

Sadly, maybe it will take Americans to be hit hard, in their wallets or literally by means of another false flag terrorist attack by the Bush administration. Do I want this to happen? Of course not. This is why I didn't vote for this prick EITHER time, but sadly, it may the only thing to start a revolution in this country. I realize that the Neo-con assholes in this country will take what I just said as advocating terror. If it makes you feel better, go ahead.

Notice I didn't say "Another 9-11 attack is NEEDED" like Philadelphia Daily News writer Stu Bykofsky said last August, in which FOX News AGREED. I said, "sadly, it might take that to wake people up". Two different things.

The Neo-cons will get their wish with the retirement of General William Fallon on March 11, 2008. Now the Neo-con assholes in Washington, in the media and the ones at home who support this psychopath we have as our President can rejoice when we attack Iran and our gas doubles or triples in price overnight and Iran bombs our targets overseas and domestically. Sadly, and even sickeningly, even after that there will be mentally ill people in this country that still stand by Bush.

Where do these people come from?

Friday, March 14, 2008

Olbermann gets “O’ Reilly-itis” and fails to condemn Pat Buchanon for defending Ferraro

Olbermann rips Geraldine Ferraro for racist comments about Barack Obama, but when fellow MSNBC analyst Buchanon defends her, Olbermann is silent

by Larry Simons
March 14, 2008

On Tuesday’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Keith did a small 2 minute segment on Geraldine Ferraro’s comments about Barack Obama with Air America’s Rachel Maddow. The following night he did a 10-minute special comment on why the Clinton campaign is suffering because of her decision to have people like Ferraro on her team.

Here is the special comment:

First, lets make it clear what Ferraro said about Barack Obama:

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position […] and if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”

Let me be very clear on one thing. Who cares? This is a non-issue that deserves as much air time as any story FOX News covers. I can see the racism in Ferraro’s comments yes, but it can hardly be compared to anything Bill O’Reilly has ever said about issues involving race. This is a distraction from other important issues. Gas is near $4 a gallon. This war is costing America $12 billion a month and the dollar has absolutely no value, and this is what the media talks about…..unimportant shit.

However, this is not about the comment. It’s about the hypocrisy of Keith Olbermann.

On Wednesday’s Live with Dan Abrams on MSNBC, Political analyst Pat Buchanon was joined by Air America’s Rachel Maddow and Democratic strategist Keli Goff. During the discussion of Geraldine Ferraro’s comments, Buchanon got so upset that he told Keli Goff to shut up. This was the dialogue:

Buchanan: "In Iowa and New Hampshire, there aren’t that many black folks. He skipped Michigan, the first big contest besides South Carolina –

Goff: “Because he’s black?”

Buchanan: "HOLD IT!” [cross talk] Shut up for a second, please!”

Goff: "Excuse me, don’t talk to me like that, Pat. That’s inappropriate. [snip]

Maddow: "First of all I would just say, as a matter of procedure here, Pat, I’ve been on television with you a million times and I’ve never heard you tell anybody to shut up before. That was absolutely, completely ridiculous of you. Second of all, tell me about how the black vote explains Obama’s win in Utah.”

Watch the clip:

This show aired right after Keith Olbermann’s show (where he did the special comment). Since I don’t expect Olbermann to be psychic and make a comment about a show that airs after his show, I waited until the next night to see if he would condemn Pat Buchanon for agreeing with Geraldine Ferraro’s comments.

Not a word.

Hell, I wasn’t even anticipating an entire segment on it. A “worst person” award would have been enough, but no, Buchanon wasn’t mentioned in that segment either.

It didn’t take me long to figure out that the reason Olbermann didn’t condemn Pat Buchanon was probably because Buchanon is a political analyst for MSNBC! Hmmmm, could that be it? I’m putting my money on that.

Here is Buchanon defending Ferraro on Harball with Chris Matthews as well:

I hate to say it Keith, because I think you’re one of the best on TV news, but you’re briefly suffering from O’Reilly-itis. I’m not saying a thing like this surprises me. I make it no secret in my stories that although there are some media journalists out there who tell the truth ranging from “barely to most of the time” (very few “most of the time”), there is no one who tells it ALL of the time. In the end, every journalist on TV is a corporate bought-and-paid-for shill who does and says nothing without someone above them pulling the strings.

Olbermann is no exception.

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Fox News connects Spitzer and Vitter controversies - incorrectly

Steve Doocy lies and gets his facts wrong on Spitzer scandal. Nahhhh, not FOX News!!

By Steve Benen
March 12, 2008

It’s not too often that high-profile political figures elected to statewide office are caught buying the services of a prostitute, but as luck would have it, we’ve seen two major examples in the last nine months — Louisiana Sen. David Vitter (R) and New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D).

There are some interesting similarities. Both held public office while hiring prostitutes, both are married, and both are subject to charges of hypocrisy (Vitter for touting “family values,” and Spitzer because he prosecuted prostitution as a state Attorney General). But the controversies are hardly identical — most notably, the statute of limitations had run out for Vitter, while Spitzer may still face charges.

But leave it to Fox News’ Steve Doocy to make a different kind of connection:

“Speaking of hypocrisy, when David Vitter, the senator from down South, was caught up in the D.C. madam scandal, of course, the mainstream media said, ‘Look, this is just part of the culture of corruption with the Republican Party,’ and, in fact, that led to steep losses in the 2006 congressional elections."

“So, you’ve got to wonder whether or not the Democrat [sic] Party is going to take a hit with this and also, nationwide not just in New York State, but also nationwide, will the mainstream media talk about this as being a big scandal in the Democrat [sic] Party, which it is — he’s one of Hillary Clinton’s superdelegates — or will they just say, ‘Look, it’s a story about a single governor in one state and he had a problem and now his wife is really mad at him.’”

There’s been no shortage of analysis and discussion of the Spitzer scandal lately, but this is arguably the dumbest.

Let’s count the ways.

1. Doocy insisted that the “mainstream media” connected Vitter’s sex scandal to the Republicans’ culture of corruption. I wish that were true, but it’s false. In fact, I searched Nexis from the day the Vitter story broke to one month later. The number of mainstream media outlets to use the words “Vitter” and “culture of corruption” in the same article/broadcast is zero. Doocy’s imagination is impressive, but he’s remembering news coverage that didn’t exist.

2. Doocy was adamant that the Vitter story — or, more accurately, the media’s coverage of it — led to “steep losses in the 2006 congressional elections” for Republicans. That, of course, is impossible. The Vitter story broke on July 10, 2007 — eight months after the elections.

3. Doocy believes this is a “big scandal” for Democrats because Spitzer is a Clinton superdelegate. This doesn’t make any sense. What does Spitzer’s status as a Clinton superdelegate have to do his sex scandal? Why would a superdelegate’s personal/legal controversy reflect badly on Democrats “nationwide”?

4. If Doocy hasn’t learned that it’s called the “Democratic Party” by now, one might be inclined to suspect that he’s a Republican hack.

Poor Fox News. It must get tiresome to be so wrong so often.

Watch the clip: (Dan Abram's coverage is pretty humorous)

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

God has never been in America

"Their (Christians) allegiance to God has blinded them from reality and has given them a license for their laziness"

by Larry Simons
March 11, 2008

To the millions of people in America who still believe the lie that God favors America, or that God sees us as better people because we put his name on our money or because we have a song called “God Bless America”, well, you couldn’t be more blind.

God left the building a long time ago. In fact, many would argue that God was never in America to begin with. After all, many of our founding fathers practiced religions contrary to the traditional Judeo-Christian teachings that many Protestants follow today.

Many founding fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, were Deists. Deists typically rejected supernatural events like miracles and held that God did not intervene with the affairs of human life. Deists also typically saw scripture as human interpretation and not divine revelation.

John Adams was a Unitarian. Unitarians typically held that Jesus, although a great man and prophet, was not God himself. Ben Franklin was a Deist as well and later became a freemason (as many founding fathers were). Many religious people in Franklin’s day (mostly Catholics) believed Freemasonry to be a teaching of Deistic thought.

Millions of people who sit in pews every Sunday believe in the Judeo-Christian teaching of scripture. Meaning they believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, died on the cross for the sins of mankind, was raised from the dead and ascended to Heaven where he now awaits his return (or second coming). They believe that Jesus was God himself. They believe God dwells within each and every believer. They believe God is omnipresent. The Bible does in fact teach all of these things. What people don’t realize is that many of our founding fathers believed the complete opposite of these teachings.

Does this make our founding fathers unintelligent men? Of course not. Our founders may very well have been the most intelligent people to ever grace our land. They had the ‘seeming’ foreknowledge to adopt laws that would protect our rights to speak, to worship, to be protected from illegal searches, to be protected from self-incrimination and the right to legal counsel. They also had the wisdom to grant the very freedoms that the Bible endorses without making the words of scripture the law itself.

Does that translate to “God being here?” Does that mean that our country was founded on biblical teaching? If so, how? The Constitution and Declaration of Independence might use terminology that reflects biblical inspiration, but to say that it was founded on biblical teaching is just plain absurd.

This is why the founders were very careful when writing the first amendment. They specifically included that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” It wouldn’t make any sense for the founders to say “we are establishing a federal or official religion, but yet you can worship anywhere you like”.

I could be an atheist and still be able to have the capability and intelligence to sit down with a group of men and come up with laws that protected and respected the basic human freedoms every man deserves. Naturally, I am not saying I am anywhere near having the intelligence the founders had, but you don’t need God or religion to create laws that protect and instill human freedom and dignity.

No, my friends, God has not been here in America for a very long time if he ever has been at all. Why would he be? Jump to present day. Look at us. We are by far the most hated country on Earth, thanks to Darth Bush, Dark Lord of the Sith.

Remember, this is the man who claimed that “God told me to attack Iraq”. Yep. That’s the answer. When you don’t want to be questioned or doubted in this country, all you have to say is “God told me to do it” and the sheeple take you at your word. I mean, good grief, how can someone be wrong who has a direct line to the Almighty?

Nevermind the fact that God (supposedly) is omniscient (all knowing). Yet, this same God told Bush that Saddam Hussein had WMD’s. Obviously God is in the same business that Bush is in: seeing things that don’t exist. Nevermind that God is adamantly against attacking innocent people. Nevermind that. Do we really want a president who hears voices? I have a message for you King George, we didn’t elect God, we elected YOU! (Well, I didn’t…either time)

I don’t want the future of my country to be threatened because of the decisions of maniacal tyrants who see things that aren’t there….like people walking on water, seas being parted and animals talking, but when things ARE there right in front of them (like a recession) claims they don’t exist.

God has never been here. He didn’t have to be. We had educated, freedom-loving men who wanted freedom and independence from tyranny. Our country was founded by intelligent men who wanted basic human rights given to all its citizens. They were all part of a religious affiliation, but most of them did not believe in the Judeo-Christian teachings most people claim they follow today. And so what? Who really cares? These men were logical thinkers. They were intelligent enough to have almost a foreknowledge of events yet to come, and yet their views of God were far from the basic teachings of the Bible.

Look where we are today. Our country is hated everywhere. Our freedoms are threatened and not by the supposed “terr-rists”. No, by people right here in this country. Our government claims that 19 terrorists hijacked 4 planes and attacked us 7 years ago. How did we respond? By doing the exact same thing: attacking a country that did nothing to us.

Did the terrorists end Habeas Corpus? Did the terrorists cover-up the investigation of 9-11? Did the terrorists sign laws and pass bills that violate our Constitution? (Patriot Act I & II, Military Commissions Act, HR 1955) Did the terrorists murder 700,000 innocent Iraqi citizens? Did the terrorists sign hundreds of signing statements for Bush to protect him and his administration from future charges of war crimes? Did the terrorists turn down an offer for us from Hugo Chavez to have oil at $50 a barrel? Did the terrorists say on several occasions, “I really don’t care about him (bin Laden). I really don’t spend that much time thinking about him?” Did the terrorists destroy our dollar and run up a 500 billion-dollar bill from this war? I could go on and on.

No, they didn’t do ANY of those things. Neo-conservatives did. God didn’t stop them because well….he’s not here. Even God is disgusted. I sometimes think to myself, “I’m glad God has deserted us…I’m glad all these bad things happen, because SOMETHING has to wake America up”. But, it doesn’t seem to be working. We still live in excess. Americans are still the fattest, laziest people on Earth and among many of the extremely obese guessed it----the religious. I guess they figure they can pray to God to remove the blubber.

Nothing works for us...not even God. We still gleefully accept the high gas prices. We still buy things we don't need. We still accept anything...ANYTHING the media tells us, simply because they said it, without question, doubt or scrutiny. We still turn our brains into mush by watching the stupidest shit on TV. We still vote for pro-war candidates in our elections and we shun and vilify the true patriots who would end wars, restore our freedoms, restore our dollar and would make us thrive again as a country.

We still stick our heads in our asses and never care enough to investigate anything. Even something as important as the history of the people we elect into office every four years. We still vote for politicians based on appearence, popularity, religious affiliation, how funny or well-spoken they are, what state they're from, how well they dress, what TV show they appeared on, what music they like, what musical instrument they play or who they're related to.

Look what it gets us. Every four years, more of the same. All because we didn't bother taking the time to research that their voting records are abysmal, they are members of elite organizations that are as American as Naziism or that they make empty promises about issues they claim they can fix (like health care) when in reality they have no control over. All because Americans have no clue what the Constitution says themselves; why would they care where their candidate stood on it?

We are a country of complete idiots with a few intelligent, well informed people interspersed throughout us. We deserve everything we get. Maybe Ron Paul wasn't elected because we don't deserve Ron Paul yet. I sometimes wonder if God just drops by at times for brief visits and stays long enough just to whisper into the ears of the Neo-cons to tell them to smear and censor true patriots like Ron Paul, because he knows a land chock-full of babbling buffoons is not worthy of being graced with such a leader.

I remember in 2004 when the so-called “Christians” voted for Bush because he ran on promises to do something about abortion and gay marriage. Since then, how much have we heard about these issues? Would “not a word” be accurate? Now, here we are in 2008, after voting in a Democratic-controlled House and Senate just 16 months ago, with the biggest case of memory loss I’ve ever witnessed in my life, because the top 3 Presidential candidates that are getting votes are ALL PRO-WAR AND WILL ATTACK IRAN OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY PREEMPTIVELY.....NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAY.

Our citizens and our media ignore Ron Paul, the one candidate that would seem to be the likely favorite among Christians, yet even among Christians he is ignored, shunned and vilified. Despite being married to the same woman for 51 years, delivering over 4,000 babies (obviously pro life), wanting personal civil liberties protected for our citizens and having a non-interventionist foreign policy-----all things which makes him about as Christian as you can get.

No. America doesn’t want the candidate who would be the most like our founding fathers or Jesus himself. America wants Clinton, Obama and McCain----all pro-war, Neo-con, bought and paid for elitists. And why not? These same Christians voted for Bush, who just happens to be complicit in the biggest terrorist attack to ever hit our soil by knowing about it and doing nothing, and hand-picking his own people to investigate the attacks in order to cover it up and preventing it from being independent. Not to mention his membership in the secret societies Skull & Bones and the Bohemian Grove.

With the exception of a few (that I personally know), Christians/religious people are the ones who are most blind to what is really happening in this country. They feel that since God is in control, he couldn’t possibly let anything bad happen in America. Yet, the bad things continue to happen. Their allegiance to God has blinded them from reality and has given them a license for their laziness.

The irony here, of course, is that most of the founding fathers didn’t hold the traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs, yet The Constitution was followed and America was at its strongest then. Now, we live in a day where all you have to do is call yourself a Christian…and bingo….you are one despite what you do.

You can be Bush and attack other countries preemptively, take away people’s rights, cover-up terror investigations, torture prisoners, protect oil companies, violate the Constitution repeatedly, be chums with the the Bin Ladens and the Saudis (the country that produced 15 of the 19 hijackers), protect profit making crooks, appoint criminals to your cabinet, violate the Geneva Conventions, cut health care for war veterans and active military personnel and LIE about entering into wars-------and BABY------you’re still the world’s best Christian!

You can be Mike Huckabee and want to attack Iran, stay in Iraq, change the Constitution to incorporate the Bible in it-----and hell, you’re Billy Graham!

You can be John McCain and want to attack Iran, stay in Iraq and advocate torture, ---and you’re A-OK with Christians!

The so-called conservatives of today claim they are the “Christian” party and yet we are on the precipice of losing our country because of the decisions and policies of these lunatics.

America is about to be lost and it has nothing to do with abandoning religion. Religion is what destroys things. Most of the world’s atrocities of the past 2,000 years have all been done in the name of religion. Now, today, we find ourselves battling “Islamic extremists” all under the guise of “the war on terror”. Our presence in the Middle East is to protect Israel. Again, religion dictates our foreign policy. Religion will be death of this country…..the death of the world.

We have abandoned the Constitution. Since God has never been here and has no plans of showing up anytime soon, the Constitution is our only hope.

Friday, March 7, 2008

Lou Dobbs: New World Order Can Be Defeated

Popular CNN host attacks Bush administration for "shameless" destruction of sovereignty

Paul Joseph Watson
March 7, 2008

CNN host Lou Dobbs says that the New World Order can be defeated but only if "Americans awaken and soon," as he attacked the Bush administration's "shameless" destruction of U.S. sovereignty on a nationally syndicated radio show.

"What we have permitted in allowing the Bush administration to have effectively further reduced our sovereignty and respect for our laws and certainly regard for our borders and our ports - it's been a shameless, shameless period in American history that we're going to have to reverse," Dobbs told the Alex Jones Show.

Dobbs said that if people did not wake up to the unfolding North American Union agenda as well as the Trans Texas Corridor under the banner of the Security and Prosperity partnership, then America could "kiss its future goodbye."

The CNN host said that the New World Order could be defeated, but only if the American people awakened and did it soon.

Speaking on the subject of 9/11, Dobbs said the federal government had acted with deceit in failing to prevent the attack .

"We gave George Tenet a gold medal while the CIA failed to act intelligently or responsibly to stop that attack - I'm talking about a government that almost seven years after September 11th continues to leave our borders wide open and our ports insecure with 95% of what enters this country uninspected, it's unconscionable," said Dobbs.

During the interview, Dobbs also said that the U.S. economy is heading for a stagflation crisis as a result of the U.S. government's policy of dollar depreciation and that the only solution is for the American people to restore a proper Constitutional system of government.

"We have the specter of stagflation staring at us coldly and inevitably right now," said Dobbs, adding, "There's no doubt that those who would degrade the sovereignty of this country would want to certainly degrade the power, the strength, and the respect of the U.S. dollar and it is the last thing we should permit," he concluded.

Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Michelle Malkin is a conspiracy theorist

Malkin has no problem with conspiracies when it suits her ideologies; when it doesn’t, then others are “nuts”

by Larry Simons
March 4, 2008

Neo-con sycophant Michelle Malkin is blowing her hot air again on both of her websites; one, ironically called “” and this website. Malkin, quick to call anyone with an alternative version or theory a “left-wing loon”, has now joined the loonies by suggesting that the videotape of the Marine, David Motari, who is now infamous for tossing a puppy over a cliff, has been doctored.

Malkin says this on her site, “Watch the clip closely. The puppy doesn’t move. It’s clear to me that it’s either dead or a stuffed toy. The sound effects of a dog yapping seem to have been dubbed in.”

Isn’t it amazing that whenever someone else has a different opinion, alternate view or theory about something that Malkin gatekeeps for like 9-11, the war on terror, internment camps, the Iraq war, etc….she goes on the immediate defensive and attacks, attacks, attacks and is quick to call the freethinker a “nut”, a “loon” or whatever other word she parrots from her fellow Neo-con slugs. But, when a “theory” would suit her agenda, then all of a sudden being a conspiracy theorist isn’t such a bad thing after all. Typical of The Incredible Mrs. Limpet.

What I found unsurprisingly interesting is that on that same page (scrolled down) she says this, “Will they give equal time to the story of Marines rescuing Iraqi pups?” How she can compare rescuing puppies with savagely killing them is beyond me. How many times do we see cats being rescued from trees on the news? I’ll tell you…never. Why? Because we are SUPPOSED to be humane and treat animals with respect and dignity. It’s really not a big news story to report on behavior that is expected.

If someone savagely pulled the cats from the trees and tossed them from cliffs, or beat them with baseball bats, would this not be newsworthy? Of course it would, because it’s barbaric and inhumane. Malkin wants us to believe that a story of rescuing an animal would have the same emotional intensity as viciously murdering an animal. Unbelievable.

The bottom line here is that Malkin will say anything, take any side or hold any view when it serves her agenda. When others step outside the box, think for themselves and support views that Malkin rejects, they are “loons” who should be silenced. It matters not if the video evidence debunks her conclusions and opinions. If she thinks it, it’s fact. Evidence doesn’t matter.

On the other side of the coin, if we have video evidence that supports any view we hold, that also doesn’t matter to Malkin because the only litmus test she uses to discern truth from lies is ‘whatever she feels’. What a miserable existence that must be.

Also posted at here

Also referenced here in an article by Kurt Nimmo. Thanks Kurt!

David Motari, Alleged Puppy Killer, Tracked Down

Kurt Nimmo
March 4, 2008

It didn’t take long for internet sleuths to track down the perp. David Motari, the Marine accused of pitching a puppy off a cliff for the sheer psychopathic fun of it, is a member of the Bebo social network. Although the network requires registration to view member profiles, an enterprising researcher was able to login and screen capture Motari’s profile (photo from profile on right)

Motari is a Lance corporal, 1st Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment, stationed at Haqlaniyah, Iraq, and based out of the Marine Corps Base at Kaneohe, Hawaii. He is from Seattle, Washington.

"Don’t have to follow nobodies (sic) footsteps," writes the Marine on his Bebo profile. "I’m makin my own, fully grown, and this life is my own." Motari tells us he is "happiest when… Chillin out, sleeping, playing sport, hittin the gym, hangin with friends, with my family, at home, fridays, eating, running, cruisin, and defintely (sic) when I get out of the marine corps!" He forgot to add he is especially happy when emulating Jeffrey Dahmer, who also shared a penchant for torturing and killing small defenseless animals.

"There is no way to know for sure if the puppy is real or not unless you are the one who produced it," explains Charlie Powell, College of Veterinary Medicine, Washington State University.

However, after watching the video on YouTube, it certainly appears the puppy was alive prior to Motari’s sadistic stunt.


Neo-Cons Scramble To Downplay Shameful Puppy Video
While others sickeningly lament that it was just a puppy and not an Iraqi baby

Paul Joseph Watson
March 4, 2008

Emotionally castrated Neo-Cons are doing everything in their power to downplay shameful scenes of U.S. Marines throwing a puppy off a cliff in Iraq, while others are openly and sickeningly lamenting the fact that the poor victim was just a puppy and not an Iraqi baby.

Shocking video shows two Marines talking on the edge of a cliff as one holds up a puppy by the scruff of its neck. The soldier then tosses the dog over the side of the cliff as it yelps in panic.

Neo-Cons have reacted by claiming the video is fake or that the puppy is already dead before it is thrown off the cliff. - Watch more free videos

Michelle Malkin's Hot Air blog attempts to analyze what a puppy would sound like when thrown off a cliff (how on earth would they know?) and makes out that the yelping noises are edited in to the video. The post also claims that the puppy is motionless and therefore probably already dead before it is tossed over the side of the cliff.

As one of the respondents points out, "When you hold a puppy, or a kitten for that matter, by the nape of it’s neck…much the way it’s mother would pick it up, the legs go limp, and there is usually no struggle. It kinda puts the young animal in a catatonic, relaxed state."

Having previously worked closely with a vetanarian, Alex Jones confirms that such behavior would be expected for a puppy when picked up by the scruff of its neck.

The Neo-Con's attempt to deny the reality of the shocking video, even after one of the Marines in the clip was identified by his Marine corps base in Hawaii, again highlights the childish nature of how they stick their heads in the sand and pretend something doesn't exist when it completely contradicts the mythical pretense of the sanctity of the war in Iraq.

The Marines have publicly deplored the video and made it clear that they know who the Marine in the clip is - a lance corporal who returned to Hawaii in October from Iraq - so to still claim it's a fake video is beyond twilight zone levels of delusion.

The fact that some can't entertain the notion that troops could bring themselves do to this underscores the myopic nature of their world view.

When a government sets the standard that torture is justified this is what happens, people become dehumanized to the point where they treat humans as animals and are fully prepared to torture and kill animals for the purposes of a sick joke.

In addition, despite the admitted atrocities committed at Abu Ghraib and other torture camps, including raping children and beating people to death, the fact that a puppy causes more outrage reflects on how the rest of society has also been dehumanized.

Even more disturbing is the fact that comments by Neo-Cons on the original You Tube clip which has now been pulled expressed sickening lament that the puppy was not in actual fact an Iraqi baby. Routinely. when we trace these comments back they lead to MySpace pages belonging to people who had served in Iraq.

These are the kind of people who, when we write an article detailing the building of concentration camps in America, will simultaneously deny the existence of those camps while calling for us to be incarcerated and tortured within them.

"Would it still be funny if he threw a 3 month old baby off a cliff?" asked a user called 'ehs332'.
"YES it would be funny but only if it was an IRAQI baby," he answers his own question. (CLICK HERE FOR SCAN)

The frightening thing is that these monsters are coming back and becoming cops, which is partly why we have seen an explosion in cases of extreme police brutality since 2003.

There is a steady legacy of abuses and atrocities coming out of Iraq that we have had the displeasure of watching online for years, so to learn of a puppy being thrown off a cliff is almost standard fare.

U.S. soldier throws puppy off of cliff

Soldier throws a puppy from a cliff like it was a rock, laughs about it

by Larry Simons
March 4, 2008

We already know policy makers and politicians do not care about the 4,000 U.S. soldiers and nearly 700,000 dead Iraqis this illegal, unconstitutional war has already claimed. But will they care about a psychopathic soldier throwing a puppy off of a cliff? I would like to think they would. The fact is, Bush and his warmongering administration cares nothing about human life or any kind of life, including animals. I’m sure this clip will never be shown on FOX News, CNN or any other news channel that is in lockstep with this administrations foreign policy.

Watch the clip (caution: children should not watch this) - Watch more free videos

Of course, the big difference here obviously is that although I want the war over and the troops home and I’m sickened by each and every death that occurs, at least the soldiers have the means to defend themselves, unlike this defenseless animal that a sick soldier tosses off of a cliff like it was a rock. Even after the dog can be heard yelping as it is in mid-air, the soldiers can still be heard laughing and one says, “that was mean” jokingly.

Of course, propagandists like Bill O’ Reilly will no doubt refuse to show the clip, and anyone who does will be labeled a “far left loon” who hates America. That’s right, to Billo you can’t show clips like this. You can’t reveal the truth, because if you do, you’re emboldening the enemy. You’re a terrorist sympathizer….you’re aiding alQaeda.

Billo won’t show you clips from the film “Redacted” or the documentary “Taxi to the Dark Side” which show American troops killing innocent Iraqis and Afghans. No, of course he won’t. Billo would rather condemn and demonize those who DO show the clips, because to Billo, showing the clips or portraying it in movies is worse than the act itself.

I’m not even a dog lover, but this was just terrible to watch. I don’t have to be a big fan of dogs to recognize utter and unmistakable cruelty to another living creature.

Naturally, the warmongering Neo-con assholes will think I’m politicizing this in order to support my stance against this war. My reply?: I’m not “politicizing” nothing but as far as using it as an example for why I want this war over? Goddamned right! This is the kind of BULLSHIT that only solidifies and adds to the reasons of why this PHONY war should be over and why we should be out of Iraq!

Do I NEED this story to add to my reasons or my anger? Of course not. I already have over 704,000 of them to justify my stance on why this war needs to end. This story just adds to the sheer inhumanity of this senseless war. The very same people who will look at this clip and think it’s no big deal are the same chicken-shit motherfuckers who are too PUSSY to march down to the recruiting office to enlist.

I hope at least one soldier will be coming home soon. The sick bastard in this clip to face charges for cruelty to animals.