Watching the Government with every stab in the back

My thoughts on Presidential elections and our Presidential choices

2007-04-24T14:12:00.000-04:00

Well, everyone is gearing up for Election season again, and again we are faced with poor choices, poor questions (and faker answers!), and really poor media coverage (that's what happens when all the big media is owned by 5 giant companies. Lots of diversity there! Yup!). A close friend of mine asked me about who I was voting for, and my thoughts in general on the candidates that we have to choose from (well, at least the ones that the Media decides to talk about). Also, today I tried multiple times to give my thoughts on John Edwards little spot on YouTube, but it wouldn't accept my post (I guess a few paragraphs is too much, but it's ok if people want to spit out 1-liners about all Democrats being Commies (I don't like the Dems any, but, are you fucking stupid??)), so, I decided to take my views somewhere else (and perhaps that's good. I don't really feel like swatting away the flame-trolls that lurk amongst YouTube.).

One thing that everyone needs to understand that 99.999999999999999999999% of the time any politician makes it to the preliminaries and has the blessings from their political party to run for prez, is a totally corrupt ass who will sell us out to their corporate (ie, campaign donors) interests in a heart beat. Politicians - as you already know - are fantastic at telling us what we want to hear as elections turn around. John Kerry talked about how every vote would be counted, and what did he do? He threw in the towel amidst numerous instances of reported voter fraud (1, 2)! Kerry was a total puppet; he was never meant to win, he was just there to further the illusion of "democracy" and further pound into people's heads the illusion of this left/right paradigm. There's a spectacular documentary that talks about this entitled American Dictators: Documenting the Staged Election of 2004. Even if you just watch the first 10 minutes, it's a real eye opener.

There are also a few articles pertaining to how this left/right thing is simply a phony paradigm:
Field of Screams: The Real Election Winners and Losers (from the Online Journal)
Meet the New Boss: Same as the Old Boss (from PrisonPlanet.com, by Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones)
Conyers Toes Party Line: No Impeachment (from Infowars.net, by Steve Watson)
Bush Shields Clinton Scandals (from News Max)

Now often, there are candidates who will try to run, and are actually honest (gasp!), but are usually doomed from the start since they run from a 3rd party (like 2004's Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik). There are some exceptions to this, like Republican Congressman Ron Paul who used to run on a Libertarian ticket, but now (obviously) runs as a Republican. Ron Paul is running for president this time around and while I know that he will not reach it to the preliminaries (despite the fact that many call him founding father material), I still support him 100%. Now, another politician that I pro-actively support is Georgia's (now former) Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. While she isn't running for president, she's a phenomenal politician and she's been very active in pursuing things that are in actual interest of the American people (as apposed to the numbers of politicians that voted for the Patriot Act when it wasn't even open to read. Isn't that wonderful? Politicians voted for the Patriot Act even when Bush labeled the entire contents "classified"!). The Democrats that I am aware that are at the fore-front with talking about running for president are largely Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, are terrible choices. Neither hold the interests that are anything but that which benefits the corporations, and none of them talk about (or do anything about) the erosion of our civil liberties, or about how the Federal Reserve is bankrupting us (1, 2), or how we need to get rid of the electronic voting machines... Naturally of course, the big-name Republicans that are running aside from Ron Paul are poor choices as well.

Many times we are faced with two choices: vote third party, or don't vote. If Ron Paul doesn't make it to the end, I won't be voting. I would never vote for someone whom I know is controlled by the corporations, and likewise I wouldn't vote for someone I knew nothing about. I would not be able to live with myself if I were to simply vote for the guy who says most of what I want to hear but doesn't act on it (Dennis Kucinich is a great example of this)

Ask yourself, how many times do you hear these big-name campaign runners talk about preserving AND restoring the Bill of Rights and US Constitution? Sometimes they'll act like they care about this, but you'll never see them actually do something about it. How many have actually tried to appeal the the numerous pieces of Police State legislation (Military Commissions Act, Victory Act, New Freedom Initiative, Patriot Act 1 & 2..)? When will one of them step forward to shut down the Federal Reserve and repeal the 1913 Federal Reserve Act that has been bleeding us dry for nearly 100 years now? When will they make efforts to stop the militarization of the police (how many times have I seen Police with semi-automatic rifles all around NYC? Too many) and restore Posse Commitatus? Certainly if there is a brain amongst our elected officials, why do we still have rampant voter fraud at each election? Why has no one booted our lame-duck president out of office for tearing apart the Bill of Rights and US Constitution? These are the real issues that no one wants to discuss; all we hear about is the war in Iraq and gay marriage and who said what inflammatory comment.. It's absurd. We should expect more from our elected officials, and certainly demand it daily.

It doesn't matter who is voted for, the person that wins will be no different than what we have now.

Think your vote counts? Think again!

2006-11-09T13:18:00.000-05:00

"Hacking Democracy" on Google Video

Hacking Democracy (HBO Special)
Electronic voting machines count about 87% of the votes cast in America today. But are they reliable? Are they safe from tampering? From a current congressional hearing to persistent media reports that suggest misuse of data and even outright fraud, concerns over the integrity of electronic voting are growing by the day. And if the voting process is not secure, neither is America's democracy. The timely, cautionary documentary HACKING DEMOCRACY exposes gaping holes in the security of America's electronic voting system.

At the end of this Film
Cleveland, Ohio. Dec. 23rd 2005. Cuyahoga County spent 22 million Dollars on these Diebold voting system. Cuyahoga did not change there mind after a hearing. What does this tell you? Business as usual, and F the American people, we're using them anyway. Argue all you want! They are going to what they want, not what we want. Sign up for NATIONAL HAND COUNT REGISTRY HERE http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-profile.cgi?action=register
Black Box Voting WebSite
http://www.blackboxvoting.org
Forum
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/discus.cgi
HBO Info
http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/hackingdemocracy/synopsis.html
I'm a 911 Activist Chuck Newell, and it time to make a change in a America, and fix our Voting System

Everyone should be concerned about this. This is what is getting every corrupt, criminal politician into office; especially Bush and the other Republicans I know you all can't stand. America can not be changed if we sit and do nothing. We are faced with a choice, live in ignorance and reap the rewards in more tyranny and even more evil politicians and stolen elections to come, or we can educate ourselves, inform others, send letters to our elected officials and hold their feet to the flames so they do the right thing. Please copy and paste this into your blog, myspace, or wherever and help spread this. What's the point in voting if your vote doesn't count and the corporations elect these politicians into office and not the people?

related items of interest:
Very wierd result in the CT race. Lamont loses with EXACT number that republican did in 2000| Daily Kos
How They Stole The Mid-Term Election| London Guardian
Field of screams: The real election winners and losers| Online Journal
Stoopidest Sleepover Security Ever: Black Box Voting blows through memory card seal| Black Box Voting.org
Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine| Princeton University
Shocking election-theft testimony| AlterNet
None dare call it voter suppression and fraud| Free Press.net
Meet The New Boss, Same As The Old Boss| PrisonPlanet.com

Clinton hysteria = Media hysteria = Partisan hysteria

2006-09-27T22:42:00.000-04:00

Recently (although it's a bit of old news now), Bill Clinton was on Fox News and was questioned as to why he didn't do more to capture Osama bin Laden and prevent terrorism from reaching the US. Clinton went off on the Fox News's Chris Wallace ranting about right-wingers this and fox that and hit piece, etc.. Typically, two things happen as a result of this:

1) The media goes into a frenzy of this "new top story" of an "outrageous Clinton" that turned into a mad man (which he did, really) and doesn't bother to focus on much of anything he said after he stopped his temper tantrum. Not that any of it was real honesty, but that's the perfect opportunity for the media to expose this lie that has been going on for years now. The Daily Show showcased this fantastically

2) The left is now making a backlash saying "what about Bush?", and crying for "poor innocent Clinton". The media will most likely never focus on Bush's lack of interest in bin Laden because we all know that would make them "liberal" and such strong criticism (and hollow) is what really hurt we the people during the Reagan years. Big Media is filled with enough disinformation to gloss over most of Bush's mistakes/crimes and throws in just enough to forget about the more serious crimes of Clinton.

Clinotn had more than one chance to nab bin Laden, but he chose not to. Why? Well that's really simple: bin Laden is the boogey man that they need to help keep the people nice and afraid so they can pass their repugnant police-state legislation. Democrats try to brush off Clinton's oversight with excuses and claims that it's a lie, and Republicans do the same with Bush my just repeating whatever their favourite discredited media pundit has told them (commonly, "bin Laden doesn't matter")

People need to wake up and understand that this left/right thing is a phoney paradigm. There isn't much difference between Clinton and Bush other than some social issues. There wasn't much difference between Bush and Kerry, either. All this back and forth bickering, it just polarises each side and people pay less attention to issues and more attention to partisan matters. It's pathetic each time. A great distraction, while America descends into a Police-State

9/11: A 5 year lie, and why you should care

2006-09-10T20:55:00.000-04:00

5 years ago the US Government sold its people the laughable conspiracy theory that 19 hijackers with box cutters were able to over power airline pilots that were former military officers and then proceed to hit their targets with bulls-eye precision even though their own flight instructors acknowledged that they were totally incompetent pilots and keep the entire fleet of NORAD from responding and shooting them down. George Bush made the claim that there was no prior knowledge and that these terrorists hate us for our freedoms.

For over 2 years now I have studied this tragic event and I have spent countless hours researching, looking for answers. The Government's official story is nothing more than a fairy tale sold to the people as an excuse to take away our liberties and enslave us. Whenever there is doubt expressed to the official story of 9/11, automatically people are called "conspiracy theorists" even though the ones that throw this label around have rarely (if ever) bothered to research this event. It's a common thing throughout history for governments to attack their own people and blame it on a foreign enemy as an excuse for war and domestic martial law. Nero did it, and Hitler did it, and the Russians have done it, and even the US Government admits to doing it multiple times. Ever hear of Operation Northwoods? It's pretty important that you know what that was. Operation Northwoods was a plan by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to have a staged attack and blame it on Cuba as an excuse for war. This is declassified, as you can see in the link I provided. There have been others, like Operation Gladio, and Operation Ajax (find out more about admitted instances of false flag operations).

Similarly, 9/11 was an inside job, carried out by the government as an excuse for war and martial law. Their official story has fallen apart at every turn and this can be seen through numerous piles of evidence. This isn't some conspiracy theory. This isn't partisan politics. This isn't paranoia. This is our sad state of affairs and it's important that everyone educates themselves and fights this New World Order so that we don't end up like Hitler's Germany completely.

On Wednesday, July 25th 2001Alex Jones predicted a coming attack that was promoted by the government. He based this on openly available information.

Alex Jones made a fantastic documentary entitled "Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State", and I urge everyone to watch it. This is about more than exposing Bush-the-puppet. This is about ending these false-flag operations for good. Please, for the sake of liberty, for your rights, and for a better future, watch this documentary:

Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State

related: 600+ Articles that tear the government's official conspiracy theory to shreds

"How do you boil a frog?

You don't throw the frog into a pot of boiling water, it would immediately jump out. You let the frog sit in warm water and slowly heat the pan until the frog boils to death.

How do you erect the infrastructure of a police state?

You incrementally condition both the police and the public that relinquishing liberty in the name of security is necessary because 'we live in dangerous times.'

Be sure to make Grandpa remove his shoes at the airport but let that cargo through without inspection every time. The truth is that the mythical 'war on terror' was never meant to be won and can never be won because it doesn't exist.

The real terror is being waged against ordinary people by our own government.

To say we live in a police state is no longer an alarmist cliche. Perception has clearly and permanently shifted from the police being there to serve the people to the police being there to control the people."

- Paul Joseph Watson. From his 11/29/05 article entitled American Police State: The Frog Has Cooked

I know many of you are not interested in Politics, and that's fine. But for the sake of freedom, for the sake of keeping the United States from turning into WW2 Germany, stand up and do something! Inform others and inform yourself.

note: Again, if anyone would like to send this to that phoney Perry Logan, you may direct him to my political blog. Better yet, look at his arguments with others and see that all he does is go in circles. As I pointed out last year, he has no base, only spin.

More sources of information for those interested

Documentaries:
TerrorStorm
911 The Road to Tyranny
Who Killed John O'Neill?

Other video:
9/11 Wargames discussion (It's admitted that NORAD had a drill of hijacked jets flying into buildings at 8am on 9/11!)
John O'Neil, the man who knew

Resources:
911 Research
911 Eyewitnesses

Articles:
Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Theory' is a Conspiracy Fact By Randy Lavello
The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True by Dr. David Ray Griffin
THE FEMA REPORT ON WORLD TRADE CENTER 7 COLLAPSE IS A TOTAL JOKE.
THE TOP 40 REASONS TO DOUBT THE OFFICIAL STORY OF SEPTEMBER 11th, 2001

9/11 Debunkers debunk themselves

2006-08-12T08:54:00.000-04:00

It's interesting how now every time someone mentions objections to the official story of 9/11, the so called conspiracy debunkers come out (or at least get mention ala linking to their blogs). Oh yes, we already know that I've dealt with and exposed Perry Logan for the fraud that he is, but there are plenty of others that are a little less retarded on the surface than Mr. Logan. A popular one I see is 9/11 Conspiracy Smasher. Many of these so-called debunkings have been as of late tied in part to the critique of Loose Change that has been flying around like wild. Oh no, I'm not saying they're wrong about the film per se, as it certainly had a number of problems with accuracy as WTC7.net pointed out so truthfully. The problem lays in how things are tackled when there is nothing to debunk it. Screw Loose Change talked about the claims of former pilot Russ Wittenberg and specifically when he mentioned how a 767 could not of performed the aeronautical movements it supposedly did to hit the Pentagon due to the fact that it would of encountered a high-speed buffet and fallen out of the sky, well, it was counted with calling him a "conspiracy theorist". This is - apparently - an acceptable means of proving someone wrong and debunking their claims: petty, ignorant, and furthermore unsupported name calling.

Now tell me, are not the "conspiracy theorists" supposed to be the ones that are so petty, and that must rely upon such horribly poor arguments? It's interesting also how little of the official story supporters of the government's conspiracy theory know. When ~~explaining~~ trying to explain the manoeuvres that the plane supposedly took to hit the Pentagon, I am responded to with an answer that is little short of "duh". My personal debates aside though, we constantly see disinfo being promoted by these supposed debunker blogs. Loose Change is the most common strawman. The ignorant and intellectually lazy (or those fearful of the truth) simply point to this each time as if that somehow contained all the issues covered with 9/11. Then we see the wonderful conclusions of innocence because a certain person says they are. Larry Silverstein says he didn't mean demolish when he said "pull it", so therefore it's so! Never mind the fact that everyone who believes he was talking about demolition thinks that he slipped up (this is ignored), and that if he did come forward and admitted to being in on the demolition, he would be under arrest for insurance fraud as well as possible prior knowledge of 9/11. These little facts escape the reality of such debunkers because for some odd reason their brains turn to garbage the minute they are faced to even think about how a respected nation would pull off a false flag operation on its people.

Constantly from the supposed debunkers we see theories instead of facts. I haven't been able to have 1 discussion concerning 9/11 without a "debunker" using a strawman disinfo tactic to try to squelch that which they can not disprove. Why is this? Why is it that if I and others that agree with me are such crack pot loonies that are duped so easily and are so paranoid and have nothing but baseless theories, why is it that our arguments are met with such transparent idiocy and disinformation? Many people fear the truth, I believe. People cling to what they want to believe and refuse to give thought to anything else.

I try to look for the truth. Whether it is something I agree with or do not agree with, to me truth is the most important thing of all. I have on many occasions spent time reading these “debunker” blogs and have spent time trying to find something incriminating on men like Alex Jones and the words they say. I’ve spent time on both sides of this fence, as have many, and so therefore I have seen both sides of this coin and I do not have to fear one side or another being wrong because I do not cling to these beliefs like many do a personal bible. I suggest that everyone should read these blogs, and listen to these supposed debunkers. It’s quite amusing as you study more about 9/11, but irregardless, listen to them and check their info and see if it indeed holds up. If you feel it does, then dig deeper and deeper until you find what the truth really is.

Perhaps another day I will take the time to show these poor arguments made by the supposed debunkers in detail.

Fox talks about 9/11!?

2006-02-01T20:26:00.000-05:00

Fox - the biggest Bush-worshiping media outlet on TV - actually made mention of the 9/11 doccumentary Loose Change

I am amazed that they dared to do it and actually didn't try to hard to smear it either. Of course, they didn't bother to mention much of it, but still..

Part 1
Part 2

Related: 4 years of lies: What really happened on 9/11, and why you should care

Freedom sign in

2005-12-15T17:54:00.000-05:00

I've been involved in this movement for only 3 years, which is a pale comparison to many others but the more I get involved, the newer the faces are that I see around me. I really don't think that Alex is far off when he says that more and more people are waking up every day. I've reached out to a lot of people, and I've spent a lot of time on specific issues - both studying them and defending my views on them. Of course, experience really is the best teacher. I give out activist CD's to friends and associates which contain documentaries to educate and wake others up. However, often after waking up, people are often left confused or even frightened. So, I created this to try to reach out to those who wanted to do more but weren't sure where or how to take the first step.

[b]Educate[/b]

Study the issues indepthly. If you don't know enough about something, but trust the source, then don't talk about it - you'll make an ass of yourself (I have!).

[b]Debate[/b]

Bring this issue up to people and debate it. Not only will you see different aspects of things, but it will encourage you to do more research. I've learned a lot through this.

[b]Weigh it in[/b]

Can you prove yourself wrong?

[b]Reach out[/b]

Spread the word! Distribute books, pamphlets, cd's, dvd's, urls, and words! I recently bought George Humphrey's booklet 9/11: The Great Illusion (http://tinyurl.com/dryqa($15 for 5, not bad!)) and have been distributing it to people. Also, I burn activist cd's that contain the best documentaries I've seen so far, and hand it out (contact me (phracktivist@gmail.com) if you would like to request one, or would like a list of contents).

Blogging, articles, etc

[b]Emphasize[/b]

People need to understand that all this isn't just about exposing Bush. It goes so much deeper and that's why it's important for everyone to get involved (Constitution (http://tinyurl.com/2vuk6), Martial Law (http://tinyurl.com/87cz7), Freedom (http://tinyurl.com/drfbj)). If people do not understand the urgency, they will not join this cause.

[b]Utilize free tools[/b]

Make full use of free resources on the net! Link everyone to sites that contain streaming media of 9/11 documentaries (or hell, link to any site that offers these for free to download).

[i]Tinyurl.com[/i] allows you to turn a huge url into something very small. This is a great tool for saving space. Sprawl it on the back of a book you are giving someone, write it anywhere that that extra bit of space is needed.

[b]GoogleVideo, Yousendit, etc.[/b]

When I began my venture through this, there was no such thing as GoogleVideo, and YouTube wasn't around either (or was just starting out). The world of massive streaming media on the web was just starting to gain in popularity. Now days, you can find most any documentary on GoogleVideo, and there's a plethora of short clips on YouTube. The fact that you can embed these videos almost anywhere, is fantastic because this has allowed a lot of people to be able to reach out to many others without making anyone feel pressured to watch something (or, giving them a DVD and watching it collect dust).

Facts? Who needs em! I got me some spin!

2005-09-28T17:17:00.000-04:00

Today I saw a wonderful response to my 9/11 anniversary post. It was by a man named Perry Logan who appears to be a far left Clinton-worshiper (think: NeoCon but mirrored) - but that's really not the point here. Perry Logan claims that Alex Jones is nothing more than a far-right conspiracy nut who just claims rediculous things with no facts to back it. I've got one word for you Mister Logan:

Bullshit!

How do I know this is bullshit? Well, let's take a look at what - accourding to Mr. Logan - makes Alex Jones this crazy paranoid guy. Mr. Logan claims that if you believe in any of this - you must be crazy:

There are live AIDS viruses in the corn.

I guess Mr. Logan missed these articles. What a coincidence! (Two words, Mr. Logan, two words - it's not that hard!)

Vaccines are a you-know-what.

Apparently, it's crazy of people to think that vaccines aren't good for them. But hey - if you like mercury - be my guest! Step right up! (again, two words Mr. Logan. This is really simple stuff here)

The Rothschilds funded Hitler.

Would it be better for you to swallow if I told you it was only the Bush family and IBM?

All of these sources I found using two words in google. We can already start to see that Mr. Logan finds it much easier to simply assume that someone is crazy, than to factually prove them wrong. This is a common trait amongst most; if it's too hard to swallow, then it has to be untrue - there is simply no need for independat research or intelligent counter-claim. Next we will see examples of how Mr. Logan not only has taken Alex Jones out of context, but omisses key facts that support Alex Jones's claims (why am I not surprised?).

In July of 2001 Alex Jones went on the air claiming that the White House was planning a staged terror attack. He encouraged all his viewers to call the White House and tell them that if there is any terror, we know who to blame. Alex specifically mentioned that Bin Laden is the boogeyman needed for their "phoney Orwellian system", and further - he did indeed mention that the WTC could be a target. But not so accourding to Mr. Logan:

But on the 7/25/01 program, he doesn't even predict anything!

Here's what he says on the show:

"I want you to let [the government] know that if there is any terrorism, we know who to blame."

"Let them know we're aware of their terrorist paradigm to control us."

That's pretty clear: Alex's minions were being invited to call the government & tell them we're wise to them--that's all. There is no prediction of anything.

A simple look at the show from that day will show that Mr. Logan is either dillusional (big surprise) or simply only hears things selectively. I find it amazing that people such as Mr. Logan blast Anti-NWO folks such as Alex Jones for omissions - but perform that very same act in a pathetic attempt to discredit. I trust that you will correct this omission Mr. Logan? Another ammusing act of Mr. Logan's is how he claims that Alex Jones says he is psychic. Alex Jones, nor his site, or webmasters have ever claimed that Alex Jones is psychic or can predict the future. Yes, Alex Jones made a prediction that came true. He made this prediction based simply on doccumentation. You'll even notice that on Alex Jones's site it states:

Alex didn't have a crystal ball, he merely studied the elite's propaganda and was able to connect the dots and make a prediction that would materialize on September 11, 2001.

Mr. Logan has a wonderfully compiled list of things that further - I suppose - make Alex Jones crazy. I am going to continue to post these claims and counter-claims of Mr. Logan and show how he has either omissed, inserted personal opinion in exchange for fact, or has simply not bothered to research a topic himself (again, "if it sounds crazy, it must be. There is no need for independant research"). Mr. Logan claims that Alex Jones is wrong concerning the following items:

There is no super-secret cabal putting up websites telling Alex Jones everything it's going to do

Alex Jones has never claimed that the NWO has secret websites that talk about what they are going to do. Specifically, Alex Jones talks about open websites such as PNAC which discuss things such as militarisation and globalism. This is no secret, I've seen many people pull doccumentation from sites such as this.

There are no "globalists"

It's rather apparent that Mr. Logan has never studdied the policies of George W. Bush or the Neo Conservatives.

Alex Jones is not smarter than everyone in the Democratic Party

Alex Jones has never stated this. Infact, he's good friends with Democratic Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney.

The government did not bring off 9-11 as a subterfuge

Mr. Logan has clearly not paid attention to the rising police-state, the RNC protests, Patriot Act 1, Patriot Act 2, Victory Act, or the New Freedom Initiative.. I would of expected Mr. Logan to of paid attention to these things comming out of the Bush Administration.

There is no world government

Again, Alex Jones has never said that there is currently a world government. Simply that this is a process in the making. Mr. Logan is misquoting Alex Jones, again.

No one is talking about global government

*yawn* Mr. Logan hasn't bothered to research this at all. Let me help him out here. Is it really too much to ask for you to have done some research? You're quite the hypocrite.

World leaders are not living forever; Alex thinks they can live forever

Alex Jones has never stated that World Leaders are able to live forever.

As you can see, Mr. Logan is unable to discredit Alex Jones on any sort of factual grounds. It's really quite pathetic. I will reitterate my original claims: I have yet to find one person who has been able to discredit either myself or Alex Jones without the usage of spin, omissions, strawmen, or complete fabrication. Mr. Logan fights against the Right, when he doesn't realise that he partakes in the same pathetic things they do: denial, and bullshit. It's rather clear that Mr. Logan is much more interested in backing his own percieved opinions than uncovering what the truth is.

Why You Should Resist the National ID Card

2005-09-19T14:16:00.000-04:00

Why You Should Resist the National ID Card

Prison Planet | September 16 2005

This piece focuses on the introduction of the British national ID card but the same principles can be applied in any country.

1) A government engaging in escalating criminal actions and becoming more and more secretive should not be watching and tracking us as if we're all criminals. The same goes for CCTV surveillance. That's not freedom. Would you let a convicted murderer and pedophile watch your child 24/7?

The often peddled mantra of 'why should you care if you have nothing to hide?' is manifestly ridiculous in light of the fact that we have a government that has everything to hide and yet we're the ones under suspicion.

Should it concern us that our government shredded hundreds of thousands of documents before a 1st January Freedom of Information deadline? Why should the government care about freedom of information if they have nothing to hide?

But they did care enough to order this mass shredding.

We are told by the government to make our lives completely transparent or go to jail while the government itself becomes more secretive than ever before.

Why should they know everything about me when they won't tell me anything about them?

Would you walk up to a gang of criminals and give them your credit card and PIN number?

2) The government told us that the ID card would make our information more secure. Blair said this would protect, not infringe our liberties. And how did they propose paying for it? By selling the information of 44 million British citizens to private companies. How secure is that?

3) As a perspective on how governing powers use ID cards, consider the fact that residents of Fallujah in Iraq were finger scanned, given retina scans and ID cards just to be able to leave and enter the village. Every citizen is treated as a potential insurgent and is given an ID card. Is that how our government views us all, as potential insurgents?

So, what do you have to hide? is the wrong question. The question should be, why does the government need to know everything about me?

4) ID cards will not stop terrorism. Even the Home Secretary Charles Clarke admitted it after the London bombings. In addition, the Blair government has been caught faking terror alerts to push through increased power. Firstly in the case of the Ricin plot that never was and also an attack on Canary Wharf which was admitted to be totally scripted. Furthermore, the so-called London bombing mastermind was an MI6 asset. Reams of evidence point to the bombings being an inside job, one of the purposes of which was making British people accept ID cards. Large scale terrorist atrocities worldwide always lead back to government perpetrators. In this instance it is important to recall Herman Goering's quote,

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

5) Top criminologists have gone public to say that ID cards will actually result in an increase in identity theft, not a decrease as the government claims.

6) The introduction of the national ID card is one step further towards the mandatory implantation of ID chips in all British citizens. Does this sound outlandish? Implantable chip technology has been in existence for a decade and discussions on ID chipping humans is in the news regularly. Tommy Thompson, the former Health and Human Services Secretary in the Bush administration, had a chip implanted and is now touring the country lauding the virtues of ID chips. During the the confirmation hearings for John Roberts Jr., George W. Bush's nominee for Supreme Court chief justice, Roberts was questioned by Senator Joseph R. Biden on whether he would rule against a mandatory implantable microchip to track American citizens.

7) The purpose of government is to serve the people, not control them. Any scheme of national registration is alien to the basic fundamental principles of a supposed free country.

----------------------------------------

Related: Say No To National ID

This great song from renowned British artist Ian Brown is a well crafted tirade against the introduction of national ID cards.

Related: http://www.no2id.net

Related: http://www.nocards.org/

4 years of lies: What really happened on 9/11, and why you should care

2005-09-11T13:38:00.000-04:00

It's been 4 years now since the terrorist attack on the WTC towers. During these past 4 years, we have been fed more and more and more lies, and have had to deal with despotism to a large degree when it comes to revealing the entire truth about what really happened on the morning of 9/11. Whenever anyone talks about 9/11, and questions anything, the term "conspiracy theory" always comes up. I've got a great one for you: Islamic terrorists belonging to a large group known as Al Qaeda hijacked 4 planes using only box cutters. They then proceeded to fly the planes off course, and fly them straight into the WTC buildings 1 & 2 as well as the Pentagon using fast, tight and precission maneuvers that are almost impossible even for the most experienced of pilots. Buildings 1 & 2 were the first steel buildings in history to even collapse due to fire - and later building #7. Coincidentally, the terrorists flew the plane that hit the pentagon right into a section that was under construction, instead of hitting the opposite side which was Rummy's office. Even more coincidentally, NORAD never intercepted or shot down any of these planes even though they were off course (and that's their job, to shoot down rogue planes), Pentagon officials as well as some members of the government magically decided not to fly on 9/11 and some were magically told not to fly on 9/11.. Oh and one more thing, Marvin Bush's last day of work at the WTC was on 9/10 - completely coincidental I'm sure! I think you can see where this is leading...

I have a little secret to tell you folks:

YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO!!!!

9/11 was an inside job carried out by the government so as to create an excuse for war and to take away your God-given freedoms and liberties. Nonsense you say? All conspiracy theory and no proof? Take some time to view this doccumentary by Alex Jones and you'll see something that will most likely shake you to your core. This isn't some Michael Moore white-wash with omissions and chopped-up video clips, this takes the sources straight from National and International news media and presents it up close for view (and there's even more available on the website resource page). I have researched this topic for over a year now and I have yet to find one person able to discredit Alex Jones's work without using spin and propaganda. Our civil liberties are going down the drain all in the name of anti-terrorism. This is pathetic! Giving up liberty, only gives way to tyranny, it doesn't make you safer. Perhaps you don't understand fully yet, maybe a look at the Patriot Act 2 will get you to understand a bit more. Understanding what really happened on the morning of 9/11 involves a lot more than just exposing Bush the puppet. It exposes the New World Order, and helps to ensure that in the future, we still have our civil liberties, and that the US (let alone the world) isn't turned into a Martial-Law Police-State. Oh, it's quite possible, it's already starting to happen. Police with semi-automatic weapons, working together with the Military (which is a direct violation of the Posse-Commitatus Act, security cameras everywhere.. Even accourding to General Tommy Franks, if the US is hit with a terrorist attack again - we will throw out the constitution in favor of a military form of government (read: Martial Law).

I think Alex Jones said it best with "You can't fight city hall. Death and taxes. Don't talk about politics or religion. This is all the equivalent of enemy propaganda rolling across the picket line. Lay down, GI, lay down, GI! We saw it all through the 20th Century. And now in the 21st Century, it's time to stand up and realize that we should not allow ourselves to be crammed into this ratmaze. We should not submit to dehumanization. I don't know about you, but I'm concerned about what's happening in this world. I'm concerned with the structure. I'm concerned with the systems of control. Those that control my life and those that seek to control it even more. I want freedom. That's what I want. And that's what you should want."

I want freedom, and I really hope that you do too. I urge you, for the sake of freedom - for mine, for yours, for our children's freedom, and for our children's children's freedom - take time from your day to educate yourself on the events of 9/11 and spread the word so that if another attack happens - we know who to blame, and we won't give up our civil liberties in order "to be safe". I present to you, in its entirety:

9/11 The Road To Tyranny

(can't view it? Make sure you have Real Media Player installed!)
edit: link no longer works, I will search for another streaming media version.

Please, pass this on and educate others. Help them learn to resist the tyranny that the government and the New World Order throws at us.

Resist Tyranny, Give Rise to Freedom!
- Phracktivist
http://www.phracktivist.blogspot.com

Related Links:
Infowars.com
Infowars.net
PropagandaMatrix.com
Arnoldexposed.com
Jonesreport.com
Prisonplanet.com
Prisonplanet.tv
Martiallaw911.info

How the Government Staged the London Bombings in Ten Easy Steps

2005-07-13T15:07:00.000-04:00

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet | July 13 2005

Ten Step Method To Staging a Terrorist Attack

1) Hire a Crisis Management firm to set up an exercise that parallels the terrorist attack you are going to carry out. Have them run the exercise at the precise locations and at the very same time as the attack. If at any stage of the attack your Arabs get caught, tell the police it was part of an exercise.

2) Hire four Arabs and tell them they're taking part in an important exercise to help defend London from terrorist attacks. Strap them with rucksacks filled with deadly explosives. Tell the Arabs the rucksacks are dummy explosives and wouldn't harm a fly.

3) Tell four Arabs to meet up at London Underground and disperse, each getting on a different train. Make sure Arabs meet in a location where you can get a good mug shot of them all on CCTV which you can later endlessly repeat to drooling masses on television.

4) While four Arabs are in London, plant explosives in their houses in Leeds. Plant some explosives in one of their cars in Luton for the police to later discover. Remember that Qu'ran and flight manual in the hijackers' car? Ha ha, they fell for that one hook, line and sinker. No need to change tactics on this one.

5) Before the bombings take place, make sure you warn any of your buddies who are scheduled to be anywhere near where the bombs go off. If this gets leaked to the press, just deny it.

6) 4th Arab goes out partying in London night before and ends up getting out of bed late. No worries, the 9/11 'hijackers' did the same thing but that didn't cause us a big problem. 4th Arab catches bus to see if other Arabs are waiting for him. 4th Arab starts hearing about explosions in the London Underground. 4th Arab comes to the realization that this he is being set up and freaks out. 4th Arab starts fiddling in his rucksack. 4th Arab sets bomb off and is blown up.

If you hired any additional Arabs and they also got wind of the set up, make sure tere are GPS locators in the rucksacks so you can have police snipers ready to kill them before they can blow the whistle.

7) After the bombs go off, put out a story for over an hour that the explosions are a simple electrical fault. This gives you cover time to make sure the lazy bus Arab is dead and any other hired Arabs who reneged are also dead. Make sure any CCTV footage that doesn't support your official story is either seized or destroyed.

8) A few hours after the bombings, have one of your boys post an 'Al-Qaeda statement' claiming responsibility. Don't worry about the whole 'misreferencing the Qu'ran' thing, these idiots don't have the attention spans to figure it out.

9) After you have made sure that all the Arabs are dead and you are managing the story accordingly, wait for four days until the police piece together the story and find the explosives you planted in Leeds and in the car in Luton. Remember that Qu'ran and flight manual in the hijackers' car? Ha ha, they fell for that one hook, line and sinker. No need to change tactics this time either. The time delay will convince the gullible public that a real investigation is taking place. Create a background of the hired Arabs being militant Muslims. The drooling masses, as was the case with the '9/11 hijackers,' will ignore stories of neighbours saying they were the quiet, educated types who liked children and playing sports.

BBC excerpt: One local resident described him as "a nice lad".

"He liked to play football, he liked to play cricket. I'm shocked."

Another resident said he was just a "normal kid" who played basketball and kicked a ball around.

10) Sit back and enjoy as Blair and his minions grandstand in front of television cameras about staying the course in the war on terror. The pay raise, extra agency funding, and power to strip more freedoms and liberties made the ten easy steps to staging a terrorist attack a worthwhile venture. The dozens of dead people were necessary collateral damage. This is a dirty war, we need to be less moral than the terrorists to defeat them.

And that's how the government staged the bombings in ten easy steps.

Granted, you can interchange different pieces of the puzzle. The bombers could be real terrorists that knew exactly what they were doing. All you would need to do is control the 'mastermind' behind the attack and make sure his boys carried out the job in the way you wanted. Voila.

Related: London Bombing Archive

Social Security - Cutting through the B.S.

2005-03-31T17:37:00.000-05:00

Ole Bushie has been making tours to promote his Social Security privatisation plan,and of course with that comes the trademark fear-mongering that is always present with the Neo Conservative logic. "Social Security is in crisis" they say, "it will be gone by 2018" they claim. First, let's lay out the facts undisputedly:

Does Social Security face a crisis?
Yes, it does. But it's not comming in 2018. It's comming in 2041, actually

Will privatisation really help the younger generation?
No. Infact it would actually burden them quite a bit.

According to the Social Security Administration's newest report, released just a few days ago

The 2005 Social Security Trustees Report shows little change in the projected financial status of the Social Security program over last year. The Trustees Report projects that the Social Security Trust Fund will be exhausted in 2041 - one year sooner than last year’s projection.

Now where does Bush get the number 2018 from? In 2017 (accourding to SSA's newest report) tax revenues will fall below program costs for Social Security; but this does not mean that Social Security will be unable to pay out promised benefits. In fact, in 2018 the Social Security trust fund will have $3.6 trillion in assets, as well as $206 billion in interest income that year; as the Center for Economic and Policy Research pointed out in a February 4th article on AlterNet entitled "2018: The Magic Number". So you see, the problem only starts in 2017, it doesn't create a crisis in 2017. But speaking of all this crisis-talk; Fact Check noted in their report about Bush's State of the Union that:

But how severe would those benefit cuts be? In fact there are two official projections -- one by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and a somewhat less pessimistic projection by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The President referred to the SSA projection, which calculates that the system's trust fund will be depleted in 2042. After that, the system would have legal authority to pay only 73 percent of currently promised benefits -- and that figure would decline each year after, reaching 68 percent in the year 2075.

The CBO doesn't project trust-fund depletion until a decade later, in 2052, and figures that the benefits cuts wouldn't be so severe, a reduction to 78% of promised benefits. But either way, even a "bankrupt" system would continue to provide most of what's promised currently.

Now don't get me wrong, a cut of 37% is sufficient enough to do something, and make changes to the current system - but it's hardly a call for labeling it as "bankrupt" and "in crisis". I do support a change, and research into a new system; but I do not see the need to jump to poor decisions such as privatisation so that we can "save ourselves now". Privatising Social Security as Bush has proposed would create a disaster for future generations. The Social Security Network's report entitled "False Promise: How Social Security Privatization Would Sting Young Adults" has pointed this out:

Advocates of Social Security privatization often argue that young adults would be better off when they retire if they could divert a portion of their Social Security payroll tax to private investment accounts. Indeed, polls show that the majority of Americans under age thirty do not think Social Security will be available to them when they retire, and many of them are receptive to the idea of private accounts. But analysis of the privatization proposals put forward by the President’s Commission to Strengthen Social Security shows that today’s young people would receive much lower guaranteed benefits with private accounts than they would under the current system. In addition, they would bear the burden of the trillions of dollars in additional federal debt that would be required to finance the new accounts while paying benefits to current Social Security recipients.

The Economic Policy Institute mentioned in August of 99 that:

Another key point buried in the fine print is that a system of private accounts would require benefit cuts and an immediate tax increase on all workers. Large amounts of new money would be needed to cover a 30- to 40-year transition to the new system, while the two programs operated simultaneously.

Workers would need to put money aside to build up balances in the new private accounts, while also paying taxes to maintain much of the current Social Security system (in order to provide benefits to current retirees and to those retiring over the next 20 to 40 years who will not have accumulated sufficient balances in their individual accounts).

Yet another report showing that privatisation simply isn't a great idea.

Way back in October of `99 CEPR put together a report that said that the Study Shows Social Security Projections are Wrong. In this report, they mentioned that:

A new study by M.I.T. professor Peter Diamond, one of the nation’s foremost experts on macroeconomics and public finance, shows that the rate of return on stocks assumed in most analyses of Social Security reform plans are impossible—unless the stock market first takes a large plunge. Professor Diamond’s paper shows that the 7.0 percent real rate of return, which the Social Security Administration and others have routinely used in their projections for various reform options, cannot be obtained unless the stock market first declines by 50 percent or more.

I have tried my hardest to present this information to privatisation supporters, and each time they deny the truth in it. I could understand their doubts if perhaps I were quoting liberal learning groups - but every source I have quoted comes from non-partisan organisations.

Conspiracy THIS

2005-03-24T07:45:00.000-05:00

Someone started a thread asking for people to try to debunk the doccumentary 9/11 In Plane Sight. It was a noble attempt at trying to see what is true and what is fabricated - and I certainly respect that. But later on the posts turned into "conspiracy theory" this & that. I got sick of it, so here is my elaborate response:

Too many people are confusing a "conspiracy" with a "conspiracy theory". Every time someone hears something they don't want to believe, or have a hard time believing - it's automatically a "conspiracy theory". There's a strong difference between "theory" and evidence. Of course, even after presenting evidence - it's still called a "theory". Nice try at discrediting something but it's just gonna kick you in the end. Look at history people. Look at what Nero did. He torched Rome, and blamed it on the Christians. All his people followed behind him.
Now let's look at Hitler. He torched the Reichstag building, and blamed it on the communists. Before Germany lost the war, Hitler's own people followed along with everything he did. It would of been absurd to think that Hitler would do such a thing. Let's not forget that Hitler planned the war with Poland, all as an excuse to gain patriotic support and be able to increase his military and begin his globalistic vision.

related:

Why don't we fast forward now to the US. We gave small pox blankets to the Idians. Still not good enough for ya? What about Pearl Harbor? According to the History Channel - FDR knew atleast 12 days before hand, the exact day the Japanese would be launching their attack.

related:

Pearl Harbor: It might have been avoided

Ever hear about Operation Northwoods? Cuba ring a bell? 1960?

OPERATION NORTHWOODS: OFFICIAL DECLASSIFIED JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF DOCUMENTS

Now, you all remember Viet Nam, right? Vietnamese attacked innocent ships and we were just defending ourselves - of course

I shouldn't have to remind anyone about Kennedy - because we all know that 1 bullet can hit 8 different parts of the body. Just another conspiracy theory, right? Just another bunch of lies?

I respect that some of you try to see how well such doccumentaries hold up to scrutiny and if there is proof behind it - but it's turning into a white-wash, and it's pathetic. Why not look at things instead as freedom versus tyranny? Life versus death? But of course, it doesn't end there. Why don't we take a look at the Encyclopedia (Wikipedia). I looked up "conspiracy theory" and what-do-you-know, lookie what I found:

Real life imitates conspiracy theory

From the 1950s to the 1970s, the CIA and the U.S. Army operated a research program into mind control, codenamed MKULTRA. In this program, CIA agents gave LSD and other drugs to unwitting and unconsenting victims, in an effort to devise a working "truth serum" and/or
mind-control drug. MKULTRA was uncovered by Presidential and Congressional research committees in 1975, and discontinued at that time. Many prominent writers and drug figures were first exposed to LSD under this program, including Ken Kesey of the Merry Pranksters, Timothy Leary, Allen Ginsberg, Baba Ram Dass (Richard Alpert) and future 'Unabomber' Theodore Kaczynski. A source on this is the book "Acid Dreams" by Bruce Shalin and Martin A. Lee.

ECHELON is a communications interception network operated by the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. It is designed to capture telephone calls, fax and e-mail messages. New Zealand has openly admitted the existence of Echelon, and the European Union commissioned a report on the system.

In the 2003 Iraq War, Iraqi resistance was strong at first and then collapsed suddenly. A conspiracy theory emerged in Iraq and elsewhere that there had been a safqah—Arabic for "secret deal"—between the US and the Iraqi military elite, wherein the elite were bribed to stand down. This conspiracy
theory was ignored or ridiculed in the US media. In late May, 2003, General Tommy Franks, who had been the head of the US forces in the conflict, confirmed in an interview with Defense News that the US government had paid off high-level Iraqi military officials and that they had stated that "I am working for you now". How important this was to the course of the conflict was not
entirely clear at the time of this writing (May 24, 2003).

The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male.
For a period of 50 years, the US Government used some members of the black population of a town in Alabama to observe the effects of untreated syphilis. The participants were not asked to
participate and were not told they were being untreated for their syphilis.

<---End Bitch Rant-->

The reason why I am throwing all of this upfront is to try to prove a few points:

What happened on 9/11 (accouding to "conspiracy theory") has happened throughout history
Many so called "Conspiracy Theories" are actually "Conspiracy Reality"
This isn't the first time that the U.S. Government has taken a knife to its citizens to accomplish what it wanted
Based on these events alone, it's quite possible that a conspiracy exists within the official story of 9/11

I am not going to even try to debate about the entire official story of 9/11 in this thread. I am slowly compiling evidence from other sources that I am compiling together and searching out the original articles (most are cached) from and doing my best to ask what information is rellevant, and what would a skeptic say about each (and therefore, is it worth posting). The only issue I wish to debate here is one that I saw come up earlier in the thread: that being the collapse of WTC buildings 1, 2, & 7.

Official Story
Buildings 1 & 2 were taken down by the collapsing of the support beams due to the severe temperature of fire (which was increased by the presence of much jet fuel). Building #7 collapsed as well due to fire even though no plane hit it.

What I say
The WTC buildings were brought down by placed explosives by Larry Silverstein - the owner of the WTC complex, and the Fire Chief of NYC. It was brought down for two reasons:

So that Larry Silverstein can cash in on the (supposed) absurdly high insurance he invested in the buildings (he got back 3 1/2 billion dollars)

So that there would be a larger open wound for the people to see

My proof:

Bombs in the Buildings

NBC: FDNY Chief of Safety Reported Bombs Both Within the Towers and on the Planes on 9/11

What you will hear is a clip from NBC reporter Pat Dawson on the morning of 9/11. In it he discusses the comments of Albert Turi, the Chief of Safety for the New York City Fire Department.
-NBC

When The Explosives Were Placed: WTC South Tower Upper Floors Closed on 9/8 & 9/9

NYC firefighters remarked that day that it seemed like bombs were going off in the buildings, just prior to the tower's collapse. One glaring question remains unanswered: exactly how and when could such a monumental undertaking be accomplished. Read on for the answer...
-San Francisco Indymedia

9/11 Firefighter Observes: "The Building Collapsed to Dust"

"You have two hundred and ten story office buildings. You don't find a desk. You don't find a chair. You don't find a telephone, a computer. The biggest piece of a telephone I found was half of the keypad. The building collapsed to dust."

CBS News Channel Eyewitness Describes 'Secondary Explosions' in WTC

The following clips originate from CBS Channel 2 in New York. The reporter is in a helicopter as the WTC Towers collapse.
Clip 1 Clip 2
-CBS News

New York Firefighters Discuss Bombs in WTC Towers

In this clip you will hear a discussion between New York Firefighters from September 11 where they describe the WTC and the fact that it looked like detonators were planted in the towers.

WTC 7 Imploded by Silverstein, FDNY and Others

It has now been admitted with little or no press coverage that WTC7 was brought down by explosives inside the building. This is simply the biggest 9/11 revelation since the event and proves there is a press blackout in operation.

Flashback: Bush Blocked Bill For WTC Rescue Workers and Firemen: People Becoming Ill and Dying as a Result of the Deliberate Demolition of Building 7At his Waco, Texas pep rally on the economy, President Bush announced that he intended to enforce "spending restraint" by blocking a US$5.1 billion emergency spending Bill passed by Congress. The Bill included US$90 million for long-term health monitoring of World Trade Centre (WTC) rescue workers and volunteers who were exposed to a catastrophe with potential long-term health and environmental consequences.

-London Guardian (cached)

In a September 2002 PBS documentary called 'America Rebuilds,' Silverstein states, in reference to World Trade Center Building 7, "I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

-PBS Doccumentary "America Rebuilds"

Steel Not Seen As Factor in WTC Collapse: Early tests on steel beams from the World Trade Center show they generally met or were stronger than design requirements, ruling them out as a contributing cause of the collapse of the towers, federal investigators said Wednesday.
-News Channel 8

Where's the inferno? The reason given for the collapse of the twin towers is floor trusses at the aircraft impact level failed due to an inferno generated by aircraft fuel which turned the impacted floors into an 800ºC furnace capable of casting aluminum and glazing pottery.
-Inependant Study, Author unknown

WTC 7: First large building ever to collapse from fire alone (no debris impact)
-Under Reported.com

The Firefighters' Tapes - Tapes reveal that fires were under control not raging infernos: A lot of the portions of the tapes have been classified. This portion lasts an hour and thirteen minutes, we have highlighted the interesting parts below with full transcripts.
-Direct source with commentary

Rescue Fireman Louie Cacchioli - "We think there was bombs set in the building": I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building.
-People.com (cached)

Experts says explosives brought down the towers - then strangely changes his mind days later: Televised images of the attacks on the World Trade Center suggest that explosives devices caused the collapse of both towers, a New Mexico Tech explosion expert said Tuesday.
-ABQ Journal (Cached to show differences)

More Photographs Unearthed to Suggest Bombs in the Twin Towers
-Images from Fox News

An Eye-Witness Account of the World Trade Center Attacks
-The Planetary Society

Unasked Questions about bombs in the World Trade Center on September 11 2001: One (or more) eyewitness reported hearing a series of at least about "five" explosions in at least one of the buildings just before it came down.
-Independant Compilation

Eyewitness Reports Persist Of Bombs At WTC Collapse: Despite reports from numerous eyewitnesses and experts, including news reporters on the scene, who heard or saw explosions immediately before the collapse of the World Trade Center, there has been virtual silence in the mainstream media.
-Rense.com

Eyewitnesses tell of horror - "I heard the bomb"
-BBC

Full horror of WTC attack on FBI tape - "Then comes a longer and much louder explosion."
-Fairfax Digital (cached)

New York Firefighters’ Final Words Fuel Burning Questions About 9-11: Evidence that could debunk the official explanation for the collapse of the World Trade Center is being kept secret by the Department of Justice on a flimsy pretext.
-American Free Press

WTC 7 Professional Demolition Footage (be patient while this GIF image downloads)
-What Really Happened.com

ENGINEERS ARE BAFFLED OVER THE COLLAPSE OF 7 WTC: Almost lost in the chaos of the collapse of the World Trade Center is a mystery that under normal circumstances would probably have captured the attention of the city and the world. That mystery is the collapse of a nearby 47-story, two-million-square-foot building seven hours after flaming debris from the towers rained down on it, igniting what became an out-of-control fire.
-NY Times (cached - original requires membership)

Unexplained 9-11 Explosion at WTC Complex: Despite the fact that the horrible events of Sept. 11 occurred in broad daylight and were widely photographed, significant aspects of the attacks have been completely suppressed by a media blackout.
-American Free Press (cached)

“I don't know about you, but I'm concerned about what's happening in this world. I'm concerned with the structure. I'm concerned with the systems of control. Those that control my life and those that seek to control it even more. I want freedom. That's what I want. And that's what you should want.”
-Alex Jones, from the movie Walking Life

Thanks for the Freedom! ...where is it again?

2005-01-31T19:02:00.000-05:00

Yesterday was the Iraqi election. Many ~~conservatives~~ neocon/Bush supporters have been rejoicing over this, hailing it as a victory for both the U.S., and most especially Iraq. They paint this wonderful picture of Iraqi's braving the insurgent battles because they are so happy to vote, and that now that things are over, everyone is "dancing in the streets". I do not have counter evidence to show that this is not the case for some - although I have yet to recieve any information saying this is so for anyone as well. Just like our elections, these elections are staged as well. They put up politicians and such and tell the people they have a choice, when in reality, things are manipulated through vote rigging (and in the last election, having your distant cousin and fellow Skull & Bones brother run against you knowing he'll lose). Bullshit conspiracy theory you say? Well aparently, even an Iraqi finds truth in this. As Dahr Jamail had reported from Iraqi: “All of it was 100% staged. Good PR before the election,” he says. Then in a reference to mainstream America he adds, “Fallujah is fine, now go back to sleep.”. I'd say that last part really rings soundly. There was some collumnist that said after the election that (paraphrased) "now that George Bush has won the election, all the (right winged) Christians can go back to sleep for four more years" - basically implying that after election, many just go back to dream land and paint roses over everything King George does. The situation is turning into the same thing with the Iraqi election. Bushites are celebrating a victory for Iraq already, without even looking for some facts... A while back I got into some debates with the Bushites about how many Iraqi's feel that they'd much rather have Saddam back in power than have U.S. forces occupying their cities. No no, they said, that would never happen! Sure enough, I found a dozen or so links that stated otherwise. The Iraqi people are not free, most aren't even happy! Children have been throwing things at American soldiers - does that really seem like the thing that happens to liberators? But it gets better! CNN got footage of U.S. Soldiers throwing out candy to Iraqi children. Staged propaganda, I say! What does our Iraqi friend have to say of this?

“I’d never seen those guys anywhere in the city before. I don’t know where they came from.”

After a pause to take a drink of soda he adds, “I’d never seen any boots on the ground at all, and all of the sudden there are all these marines standing around like everything was ok. It was the first time I’d seen any soldier not in a Humvee or a Bradley. I was really surprised.”

Smells like propaganda, looks like propaganda.. hmm.... This is the despotism Americans unkowingly put up with. Our media is (mostly) controlled, so as to paint a certain picture. It's pathetic. Iraq is still a war zone, thousands lay dead, even more are severely wouned, the Iraqi people officially hate most Americans.. That's some freedom, some liberation. King Georges words were "it's a resounding success". Say George, is that anything like the quagmire in Iraq being a "catastrophic success"? We went in there for what again? WMD? OBL links? Mobile weapons labs? Sarin Nerve Gas? Uranium? preventing a 1980's Skud missile from reaching the US even though it's never been able to? Yeah, that's just great...

“Now I’m afraid mortars will hit my home if the polling station is attacked”

“I’m already living off my food ration, and have little business,” he says while pointing at the deserted street, “Now who wants to come near my shop? All of us are afraid, and all of us are suffering now.”

A tired looking guard standing nearby named Salman chimes in on the conversation. “I would be crazy to vote, it’s so dangerous now,” he says with a cigarette dangling from his hand, “Besides, why vote? Of course Allawi will stay in. The Americans will make it so.”

“They can block the whole city and people cannot move,” says a man speaking to me on condition of anonymity, “The city is dead, the people are dead. For what? For these forced elections!”

...sad.. this is supposed to be freedom?

edit:

"Two of the food dealers I know told me personally that our food rations would be withheld if we did not vote," said Saeed Jodhet, a 21-year-old engineering student who voted in the Hay al-Jihad district of Baghdad.

There has been no official indication that Iraqis who did not vote would not receive their monthly food rations.

Many Iraqis had expressed fears before the election that their monthly food rations would be cut if they did not vote. They said they had to sign voter registration forms in order to pick up their food supplies.
-Truth Out

Much thanks to my good friend Pieces for that last part!

Sojourners Action Alert - Tell Gonzales "No" on torture

2005-01-07T16:06:00.000-05:00

Attorney General nominee Alberto R. Gonzales has faced stiff questioning from both Republicans and Democrats for his role in policies that have bent long-established international norms prohibiting torture. Despite Gonzales' claims that "torture and abuse will not be tolerated by this administration," the details of his testimony and record are cause for deep concern:

HIS TESTIMONY	HIS RECORD
Gonzales claimed he could not recall details of his role in the production of the so-called Justice Department "torture memo" of August 2002 saying, "I don't recall today whether I was in agreement with all the analysis, but I don't have a disagreement with the conclusions then reached by the [Justice] department."	He actually chaired the meetings on this memo, which included detailed descriptions of interrogation techniques such as "waterboarding," which involves strapping a detainee to a board, raising the feet above the head, wrapping the face and nose in a wet towel, and dripping water onto the head to produce an unbearable sensation of drowning. He raised no objections and gave CIA interrogators the legal blessings they sought.
Gonzales declined repeated invitations to repudiate past administration assertions that the president has the authority to ignore anti-torture statutes on national security grounds.	He advised President Bush in January 2002 that he had authority to exempt detainees from such protections as the Geneva Conventions.
Gonzales said "it is appropriate to revisit" the Geneva Conventions. When questioned about whether U.S. personnel could legally engage in torture under any circumstances, Gonzales said: "I don't believe so, but I'd want to get back to you on that and make sure I don't provide a misleading answer."	A January 2002 draft memo signed by Gonzales stated that a "new paradigm" of a war on terrorism "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners."

Republicans such as Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (SC) challenged Gonzales, saying, "When you start looking at torture statutes and you look at ways around the spirit of the law...you're losing the moral high ground. Once you start down this road, it is very hard to come back. So I do believe we have lost our way, and my challenge to you as a leader of this nation is to help us find our way without giving up our obligation and right to fight our enemy."

Tell your Senators to insist that the Attorney General of the United States, the highest ranking law enforcement official, must clearly, consistently, and unequivocally uphold internationally recognized standards of human rights.

»Click here to take action today

Quotes and information from The Washington Post:
Gonzales Defends His White House Record
Gonzales Helped Set the Course for Detainees

Torture? Why what an ugly word..

2005-01-06T22:53:00.000-05:00

Due to Alberto "I love torture" Gonzales (Much thanks to Alex Jones for that nickname) being a Attourney General nominee today, there has been much talk in the political spectrum for the past 48 hours about torture. They talked about it on CNN's Crossfire, and also on Beliefnet today. Many ~~conservatives~~ Bush Supporters are standing behind Gonzales like lame sheep, either defending or denying both his notoriety for the aproval of torture as well as the President's. You have half saying that torture is necessary as a tool against terrorists so that "we can get information that may help prevent another 9/11"

<-- Begin bitch rant for ignoramus's -->
NEWS FLASH FOLKS!!
9/11 was an inside job! Terrorism is a tool manufactured by governments to controll the population and create tyranny! The real terrorists are the morons that tell you they will keep you safe!!
<-- End Bitch Rant -->

and the other half saying that "Alberto Gonzales does not approve of torture, and neither does the President" (of course not! Why, they said so themselves on TV, and we all know that no self respecting politician would ever lie to the American public).. So you have two sides that are blinder than hell. One side just creates excuse after excuse (while they would fry the other side for doing such a thing), and the other just denies everything as some kind of rediculous concoction created by the other side.

First let's deal with my personal favorite group: the ones that deny everything. To say that Alberto Gonzales's approval of torture is a rediculous democrat conspiracy that is simply conjured because King George II nominated him is pathetic, and it shows just what that person will believe: every damned thing that will reinforce their thoughts and the phony left/right gap (read: Spin). In my Action Alert post, I gave the sources that showed that Alberto Gonzales is truly a torture architect. But for those too lazy or ignorant to look, I will compile a chunk of it here:

On June 13, 2004 the London Telegraph reported that Constitutional experts were shocked by Gonzalez's memo, which told Bush that the nature of the war on terror "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions". On June 16, they also reported: "A string of leaked government memos over the past few days has revealed that President George W Bush was advised by Justice Department officials and the White House lawyer, Alberto Gonzalez, that Geneva Conventions on torture did not apply to "unlawful combatants", captured during the war on terror."

The Washington Post reported on 11/11/04:
Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a New York-based group that represents families of some detainees at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, said Gonzales' legal opinions "opened the door and paved the way" for abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. "He's right in the middle of where this administration went off the page of the law and into chaos," Ratner said. "They're promoting someone who was one of the legal architects of the abuse. It's just appalling."

His office also played a role in an August 2002 memo from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel advising that torturing alleged Al-Qaeda terrorists in captivity abroad "may be justified" and that international laws against torture "may be unconstitutional if applied to interrogations" conducted in the U.S. war on terrorism.

The Washington Post published on its Web site an internal White House memo from Aug. 1, 2002, signed by then-Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee, which argued darkly that torturing al-Qaida captives "may be justified" and that international laws against torture "may be unconstitutional if applied to interrogations" conducted under President Bush. The memo then continued for 50 pages to make the case for the use of torture.

But why stop there? King George is promoting a man who is Pro-Abortion (didn't Bushie say that he was against abortion?), and also involved with Enron. You call this a good canidate? If you ask me, some Joe off the street would do a better job than this guy - atleast we know that the average Joe off the street isn't as corrupt! Wake up and pay attention!!

Now we also have the morons that say "hey! Torture is OK as long as it's on terrorists". Puh-lease. Torture is innefective. Did everyone just forget the Salem Witch trials? Most of the so called Witches were actually Christians that just happened to know someone that didn't like them. But under torture, they admitted to all sorts of fantasies that never happened. What ever happened to independant research? That seems to have totally died among most Conservatives since King George took office. I remember one columnist put it as "It's November 3rd, now all the Christians can go back to sleep for 4 more years"; basically implying that they (the "Religious Right") just pay attention to the politics game when it's election year. But I digress.. I've heard all the excuses - "It'll prevent another 9/11" , "If you knew you were going to be tortured, you would tell everything you knew". I'll say it again for those that have slow brains: Torture does not work! It is historically proven that torture is counter productive. I know this long before this issue was brought up, but just to be sure, (immagine that one kids!). Sure enough, every resource I found said "torture doesn't work". Quit is with the pathetic excuses. If Bill Clinton was torturing people, many Conservatives would be comming out of the wood-work to blast him on it. Stop being so blind!

So now my question to the Conservatives that support Gonzales is this: Who's right? The Conservatives that say he never authorised torture, or the ones that say torture is necessary? I hate the partisan game...

Monopoly Men

2005-01-04T21:45:00.000-05:00

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men"
-Woodrow Wilson
In regards to the 1913 Federal Reserve Act and the downfalls it has caused America since then

Action Alert: Renounce Torture

2005-01-04T19:23:00.000-05:00

On Thursday, the Senate will begin consideration of nominee Alberto Gonzales as the new Attourney General. You thought John Ashcroft was bad with his 3 Patriot Acts? Folks, you haven't seen anything yet! Alberto Gonzales is a torture architect; you can't put it any more simpler than that. This is the man that suggested the use of torture in places like Abu Graib, the man who told the president that he is "above the law" during a time of war. He is an absolute mad-man and he must not be put into office (of course, they'll probably have Dick Cheney give the Senate a lilttle fear mongering pep-talk to make sure he gets in - that's how they passed the Freedom Reform bill). When Geoge Bush announced his nomination, many people on the left were outraged. This of course started a counter-point by many of the ignorant on the right (note: they're ignorant because they don't look at the issues, not cause they're "on the right") claiming that "liberals" would appose even that of Jesus Christ if he were to be nominated by a conservative. So bubble-buster me came in and provived sources to my claims about Alberto Gonzales being a torture architect (of course, many of the Bush-worshipers brushed it all off). This is absurd. Look at the facts! This man is just one more nail in the coffin that the New World Order is placing for us. Do the country a favor and stand against this. Denounce torture, and tell your senator to do the same!

Act Now!

I know some of you don't like Moveon.org. They may not be balanced, but they are fair. I know, I know. They're "leftist", right? It's time to grow up and stop looking at things as left and right - and see it as freedom and slavery.

"What a bunch of garbage: Liberal, Democrat, Conservative, Republican. It's all there to controll you. Two sides of the same coin; two managment teams bidding for controll of the CEO job of Slavery Inc."
-Alex Jones

Do you want someone as your Attourney General who approves of torture? Under the new Patriot Act 2, U.S. Citizens can be declared Enemy Combatants (section 101). So guess what they do to enemy combatants? Abu Graib ring a bell? Guantanamo? It's not that hard to get the Patriot Act pressed on you - they've been abusing it for over a year now (ask Pufferbelly Toys!). Now is the time to take action, and let your senator know that you don't want a torture architect in office as a Attourney General!

Take Action! Sign the petition and send it to your Senator!

oh and BTW for all of you anti-abortionists: Guess who happens to be pro-abortion?

sources

Freedom rant

2004-12-14T02:07:00.000-05:00

"You can't fight city hall. Death and taxes. Don't talk about politics or religion. This is all the equivalent of enemy propaganda rolling across the picket line. Lay down, GI, lay down, GI! We saw it all through the 20th Century. And now in the 21st Century, it's time to stand up and realize that we should not allow ourselves to be crammed into this ratmaze. We should not submit to dehumanization. I don't know about you, but I'm concerned about what's happening in this world. I'm concerned with the structure. I'm concerned with the systems of control. Those that control my life and those that seek to control it even more. I want freedom. That's what I want. And that's what you should want.

It's up to each and every one of us to turn loose of just some of the greed, the hatred, the envy, and yes, the insecurities, because that is the central mode of control: make us feel pathetic, small, so we'll willingly give up our sovereignty, our liberty, our destiny. We have got to realize that we're being conditioned on a mass scale. Start challenging this corporate slave state.

The 21st Century's gonna be a new century; not the century of slavery, not the century of lies and issues of no significance, and classism and statism, and all the rest of the modes of control. It's gonna be the age of human kind, standing up for something pure, and something right.

What a bunch of garbage: liberal, Democrat, conservative, Republican. It's all there to control you: two sides of the same coin. Two management teams bidding for control of the CEO job of Slavery, Incorporated. The truth is out there in front of you, but they lay out this buffet of lies. I'm sick of it, and I'm not going to take a bite out of it. Do you got me?

Resistance is not futile. We're gonna win this thing. Human kind is too good. We're not a bunch of underachievers. We're gonna stand up and we're gonna be human beings. We're gonna get fired up about the real things, the things that matter: Creativity and the dynamic human spirit that refuses to submit.

Well that's it. That's all I've got to say. It's in your court."

-Alex Jones, from the movie "walking life"
clip

9/11 police state bill on the move again -- STOP NATIONAL ID

2004-11-19T23:06:00.000-05:00

Liberty Think | November 18 2004

Washington sources tell Libertythink.com negotiations on the 9/11 police state bill (aka "Intelligence Reform") are picking up steam again.

The Senate's McCain national-ID-biometric-checkpoint seems to have the advantage over the House's NAFTA tri-national ID card system. These asshat Congresscritters on the conference committee need to be told, again, that NO NATIONAL ID SYSTEM IS ACCEPTABLE.

Call now:

U.S. House Negotiators

Pete Hoekstra of Michigan - 202-225-4401, Fax: 202-226-0779
Duncan Hunter of California - 202-225-5672, Fax: 202-225-0235
Henry Hyde of Illinois - 202-225-4561, Fax: 202-225-1166
*James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin - 202-225-5101, sensenbrenner@mail.house.gov.
*David Dreier of California - 202-225-2305, Fax: 202-225-7018
*Robert Menendez of New Jersey - 202-225-7919, Fax: 202-226-0792
Jane Harman of California - 202-225-8220, Fax: 202-226 7290
Ike Skelton of Missouri - 202-225-2876, www.house.gov/skelton/zipauth.htm

Senate negotiators:
* Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut - 202-224-4041, Fax: 202-224-9750
* Susan Collins of Maine - 202-224-2523, Fax: 202-224-2693
Pat Roberts of Kansas - 202-224-4774, Fax: 202-224-3514
* Trent Lott of Mississippi - 202-224-6253, Fax: 202-224-2262
* George Voinovich of Ohio - 202-224-3353, Fax: none listed
* Norm Coleman of Minnesota - 202-224-5641, Fax: 202-224-1152
* John Sununu of New Hampshire - 202-224-2841
Mike DeWine of Ohio - 202-224-2315, Fax: 202-224-6519
Carl Levin of Michigan - 202-224-6221, Fax: 202-224-1388
* Bob Graham of Florida - 202-224-3041, Fax: 202-224-2237
* Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey - 202-224-3224, Fax: 202-228-4054

Arnold Exposed

2004-11-19T11:27:00.000-05:00

Yesterday Alex Jones launched his newest site: Arnold Exposed

He's been talking for years now about Arnold's corruption and maniacal dreams, now here's all the proof. Mobilise to defeat the constitutional amendment that's being proposed to let Arnold run for president. The RNC is hoping to have an Arnold vs Hillary (Clinton) in 2008, and you know no one (except the disillusioned on the left) wants to vote for her - so they're gonna vote for Arnold. We can not let this happen. Our Founding Fathers amended the constitution this way because they knew that throughout history countries that have had foreign leaders have been over thrown and drug into the dirt. Send this out to everyone, send it to the media, and send it to your state Senators.

Resist Tryanny, Give Rise To Freedom!

Looks like someone was holding out on their party. Gee - I wonder who they were helping?

2004-11-17T21:39:00.000-05:00

I've been saying for months now that the election results are predetermined, and I've said since the election that John Kerry threw it on purpose. Here's one more piece that proves I was right. So much for conspiracy theories - wake the hell up people.

Democrats question Kerry's campaign nest egg

WASHINGTON, Nov. 17 — Democratic Party leaders said Wednesday they want to know why Sen. John Kerry ended his presidential campaign with more than $15 million in the bank, money that could have helped Democratic candidates across the country.
Some said he will be pressured to give the money to Democratic campaign committees rather than save it for a potential White House bid in 2008.
''Democrats are questioning why he sat on so much money that could have helped him defeat George Bush or helped down-ballot races, many of which could have gone our way with a few more million dollars,'' said Donna Brazile, campaign manager for Al Gore's 2000 presidential race.
Brazile is a member of the 400-plus member Democratic National Committee, which meets early next year to pick a new party chairman. One high-ranking member of the DNC, speaking on condition of anonymity, said word of Kerry's nest egg has stirred anger on the committee and could hurt his chances of putting an ally in the chairmanship.
Congressional Democrats and labor leaders also privately questioned Kerry's motives. One said he would personally ask the Massachusetts senator to donate some of the money to the Democratic House and Senate campaign committees.
Democrats lost seats in both the House and Senate on Nov. 2, setbacks compounded by the multimillion-dollar debts they incurred in the process.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee borrowed $10 million in the final days of a campaign in which it spent heavily in Texas, where four veteran lawmakers wound up losing their seats. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee borrowed a smaller amount, more than $3 million according to officials. Even so, Democrats lost four Senate seats, and will have 44 seats when the new Congress convenes, fewer than at any time since 1930.
Three former Kerry campaign aides, also demanding anonymity out of concerns about alienating their former boss, said they were surprised and disappointed to learn that he left so much money in the bank.
Kerry had roughly $45 million left in his primary campaign fund as of mid-October, according to his Federal Election Commission report, and could use that as seed money for another presidential bid.
His final report is not due until next month, but officials close to Kerry said he has $15 million to $17 million in that account, with no outstanding debts, after giving the DNC about $23 million and state parties about $9 million since the mid-October report.
In addition, the report showed that Kerry had about $7 million on hand in a legal and accounting compliance fund that he could use for legal expenses in a 2008 campaign. Officials said he raised several million more for that account since the filing.
Last summer, Kerry donated $3 million each to the House and Senate campaign committees and $2 million to the Democratic Governors Association.
While Kerry has likely given more money to state committees than any other nominee, no other Democrat has raised as much as he did. And second-guessing Democrats said Wednesday they couldn't recall a candidate leaving so much money on the table after a campaign.
''He's going to have to give some of it up for 2005 and beyond,'' Brazile said. ''The party will demand it.''

"We're going to make sure every vote is counted"
-John F. Kerry

Oh really John?

Evidence Mounts That The Vote May Have Been Hacked

N.C. Computer Loses More Than 4,500 Votes

Machine error gives Bush 3,893 extra votes in Ohio

Surprising Pattern of Florida's Election Results

Broward machines count backward

Computer Loses More Than 4,000 Early Votes

Too many voting ’irregularities’ to be coincidence

Palm Beach County Logs 88,000 More Votes Than Voters

Missing ballots another blow to voter confidence

Group Finds Voting Irregularities in South

3 members of Congress call for an investigation

Voting Problems Widespread in Florida, Pennsylvania

Politics of Fear

2004-11-15T15:51:00.000-05:00

The Power of Nightmares: The Shadows In The Cave

The Power of Nightmares assesses whether the threat from a hidden and organised terrorist network is an illusion. In the concluding part of the series, the programme explains how the illusion was created and who benefits from it.

BBC:

In the wake of the shock and panic created by the devastating attack on the World Trade Center on 11 September, 2001, the neo-conservatives reconstructed the radical Islamists in the image of their last evil enemy, the Soviet Union - a sinister web of terror run from the centre by Osama Bin Laden. There are dangerous and fanatical individuals and groups around the world who have been inspired by extreme Islamist ideas, and who will use the techniques of mass terror - the attacks on America and Madrid make this only too clear.

But the nightmare vision of a uniquely powerful hidden organisation waiting to strike our societies is an illusion.

Wherever one looks for this al-Qaeda organisation, from the mountains of Afghanistan to the "sleeper cells" in America, the British and Americans are chasing a phantom enemy.

But the reason that no-one questions the illusion is because this nightmare enemy gives so many groups new power and influence in a cynical age - and not just politicians.

Those with the darkest imaginations have now become the most powerful. in his lair in Afghanistan.

______________________________________________________________
You can get a copy of this doccumentary here. This is about an hour long, so those of you on Dial-up may need a while to download it. The server is rather fast - but if you'd like, you can get download resuming software here.

Fear mongering? never!

Vote recount petition! Please sign!

2004-11-11T15:59:00.000-05:00

Moveon.org has issued their own recount petition. Apparently 6 members of congress have also signed this. So here's the little blurb I'm supposed to e-mail everyone. In other words - sign the damned thing!. Thank you :D

Subject: Tell Congress to Investigate the 2004 Election

Dear friend,

Questions are swirling around whether the election was conducted honestly or not. We need to know -- was it or wasn't it?

If people were wrongly prevented from voting, or if legitimate votes were mis-counted or not counted at all, we need to know so the wrongdoers can be held accountable, and to help prevent this from happening again.

Members of Congress are demanding an investigation to answer this question. Join me in supporting their call, at:

http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevote/
Thanks.

-------------
Here is another one, please sign this as well

http://www.petitiononline.com/uselect/petition.html

A wake up?

2004-11-08T14:00:00.000-05:00

Since the 2nd day of the RNC, I have not really done much in the way of politics. The lies and spin at the RNC made me sick, really. I got tired of it and I turned the TV off. Since then, I have gone upon a different path. Not so much out of politics, but along a different route. I have woken up to the truths of this reality of our government, former presidents, and even our current democratic and republican presidential canidates.

Instead of word searching, I am going to refer you to something I just read that talks about the things I've learned, and what is really going on behind our backs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bush And Kerry Represent The Real Terrorists

Henry Makow | October 11 2004

Americans have an unappetizing choice November 2.

They can vote for the candidate who metaphorically will kill their brother. Or they can choose the other who will kill their sister.

Choices. Isn't democracy great?

George Bush represents US oil interests. He likely will launch a nuclear war against Iran and let the radiation solve his Iraq problem. (See "Bush Victory Could Foil occult Plot"

http://www.savethemales.ca/000594.html)

John Kerry represents Rothschild oil interests. Kerry will look the other way while Israel does the same thing.

If I were an American (I am Canadian), I would not vote on Nov. 2.

The election legitimizes and makes us accomplices to government by a thoroughly corrupt and immoral elite. It is far better to disassociate oneself from the sorry affair.

SEPT 11

I cannot participate in a system that slaughters its own citizens as a pretext for war. Both the Democrat and Republican leadership are guilty of perpetuating the 9-11 and War on Terror hoax. They are the terrorists, as well as traitors.

On Sept. 11, 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story building nearby collapsed apparently in sympathy with the twin towers. Larry Silverstein, the owner, admits that he chose this moment to demolish it.

Isn't it a huge coincidence that it was already wired for demolition? Was it the intended target of the jet that crashed in Pennsylvania? http://www.wtc7.net

Silverstein also owned the World Trade Center. It stands to reason that it was a planned demolition as well. http://www.assassinationscience.com/wtc.html

According to one source, the towers fell in roughly 10 seconds, about the same rate that an object falls through air. http://hawaii.indymedia.org/news/2003/07/3250_comment.php

"Anyone with a little common sense will realize that the top of a building does not pass through the concrete and steel that comprises the lower portion of the building at the same rate that it falls through air. This just doesn't happen, unless, of course, the lower part of the building has lost its structural integrity (and this is usually due to the detonation of a multitude of small explosive charges as seen in controlled demolitions.)"

A Boeing 757 jet did not hit the Pentagon. The damage did not fit the profile of a passenger jet and there was no debris on the lawn. See this short video. http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main

Sept. 11 was perpetrated by the Mossad, CIA and MI-6, which are instruments of the London-based financial cabal that runs the Western world. The purpose was to provide a rationale to invade Moslem countries and create a police state in the West.

STOCKHOLM SYNDROME

The corrupt criminal elite spins a yarn about Al Qaeda. Like children, Americans hope that they won't be harmed if they play along. This has reached the level of "Stockholm Syndrome."

According to Ask Yahoo, "Stockholm Syndrome describes the behavior of kidnap victims who, over time, become sympathetic to their captors. The name derives from a 1973 hostage incident in Stockholm, Sweden. At the end of six days of captivity in a bank, several kidnap victims actually resisted rescue attempts, and afterwards refused to testify against their captors.

Captives begin to identify with their captors initially as a defensive mechanism, out of fear of violence... Rescue attempts are also seen as a threat; since it's likely the captive would be injured during such attempts.

These symptoms occur under tremendous emotional and often physical duress. The behavior is considered a common survival strategy ... and has been observed in battered spouses, abused children, prisoners of war, and concentration camp survivors."

When "terrorists" hijacked four planes on Sept. 11, it was only the latest episode in the long history of the kidnapping of humanity by a corrupt financial elite.

REFLECTIONS ON 'DEMOCRACY'

"Democracy" is the financial elite's preferred method of deceiving and controlling the plebes.

The media creates the illusion that the candidates are our leaders. In fact, they are members of the elite who also own the media.

Both Bush and Kerry pretend to be opposed. Distant cousins, they are both members of an occult secret society, the Illuminati "Skull and Bones" at Yale. You would think this would disqualify them from "public service."

The two men and their respective parties act as giant pincers keeping the sheep in their pen. They are the two arms of the great American mental straitjacket. They define the boundaries of the debate. People like Ralph Nader or Dennis Kucinich need not apply.

Although the major parties barely differ, they have polarized the US population into two warring camps. Thus Americans ignore the true enemy, the sponsor of both parties.

The U.S. talks of bringing democracy to Iraq when American democracy is an embarrassing farce. The U.S. promises freedom to the world while gutting it at home.

WHO IS THE ELITE?

"They Live", a visionary 1988 movie directed by John Carpenter, postulates a police state run by aliens who look and behave like yuppies. The masses are reduced to a nomadic life of poverty and persecution. http://www.propagandamatrix.com/291103theylive.html

The hero, played by wrestler Roddy Piper, discovers glasses that reveal the true hideousness of the ruling class. An interminable fight between Piper and his sidekick ensues when his sidekick refuses to wear the glasses and see the truth. Anyone who has tried to reason with a brainwashed acquaintance will identify.

Prophetically, Piper and the people resisting alien rule are dubbed "terrorists" by the mass media in the movie.

In reality, the financial elite are aliens only in the sense they have embraced the Illuminati's occult mission to spiritually enslave humanity.

Meyer Amschel Rothschild started the Illuminati in 1776, at the same time as the American Revolution, which was caused by England's demand that the colonists use its (privately produced) money and stop printing their own.

To put down the revolt, Rothschild concocted the scheme of sending 16,800 Hessian mercenaries. For this King George paid the Hessian Landgrave $20 million which he gave to Rothschild for safekeeping.

Rothschild promptly lent it to the colonists to finance their rebellion. The Rothschilds and their allies have instigated and financed every major war since. (See Gertrude M. Coogan, Money Creators pp.173 ff.)

They regained control of the U.S between 1902 and 1913 when they purchased 25% of US industry and established the privately owned Federal Reserve. When Marina Oswald was asked who killed JFK, she answered, "the Federal Reserve." Kennedy had committed the unpardonable sin: he tried to print US money.

Also known as the "Club of the Isles" the moneylenders and their allies are the aliens. Both Bush and Kerry are members of this clique. Every war has been designed to enrich this cabal and consolidate its power. See "The Jewish Conspiracy is British Imperialism" http://www.savethemales.ca/000447.html

This cabal controls every Western government, newspaper, TV network, university and large corporation. You are a bystander in their unfolding program of "world government."

I would love to be wrong about all of this. But as a hostage who eschews Stockholm Syndrome, I think participating in their elections shackles my mind and makes me an accomplice to their evil design.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So there you have it, I suppose. There are so many things I am now learning about involving this government, the UN, the world, and I guess everything in between. I will be updating this on some things. All I can say, is to wake up, and wake other up, and see that we are being ruled by Tyrany - the New World Order. I hope you continue to join me, and others, in this fight.

great links:
First I would like to take great honor to plug Freedom TV . It was because of Freedom TV, that I have been able to find all this information out. One day I found the Internet TV option on WinAmp 5, and I was scrolling through the different channels offered and I saw a channel called "Freedom TV" and in the show description, it said "911". I thought to myself "9/11? Another exposing of it?" so I checked it out, and sure enough it was Alex Jones's film 9/11: The Road To Tyranny. I was hooked! I could not move from my seat I was so struck with awe by the things that I saw and heard. This is no Michael Moore job folks, Alex Jones actually provides sources for all of his findings (and encourages people to call these places and see if they did indeed say/publish/air such things). Bill Clinton giving Bin Laden a get-out-of-jail-free card? A growing Police state? Population controll? Bin Laden a CIA asset? Well, after the movie was over, I checked out Alex Jones's site, Infowars.com (he also has Infowars.net, PrisonPlanet.com, PrisonPlanet.net, and JonesReport.com) and I have since been learning many more things. Did you know that there is mercury in our vaccines? Oh yes, you can view that here. According to the FDA, Mercury is good for us! Even though studies have shown in the past that (oh my!) mercury impairs brain development and can cause autism. So you may not want to take any shots, ever. I also know that our elections are staged and the winners are predetermined. Why do you think John Kerry conceded so fast? We have rampant reports about voter fraud in the media right now. How about the Patriot Act? Did you know that there are now 3 of them? Pretty soon, you'll be required to have a National ID card. Yep. You gotta swipe it every time you buy someting - somehow this is going to make us safe from terrorists? Our government is corrupt, and we are living in a Fascist, Despotistic, Dictatorship. I am asking, begging, every one of you to wake up, and to wake others up. We can reclaim this country, we can stop these pathetic wars, and we can stop this Government sponsored terrorism! But to do that, we have to stop being so damned ignorant of the truths, we have to pay attention to things - and make noise the minute something goes wrong. Even if this kind of thing isn't in your interest - these so called "conspiracy theories" (even though it all comes from the news), it is important for you to just not be ignorant of the truth, of the things that have gone on.

"At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer. If it ever reaches us, it must spring up among us. It can not be from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher"
-Abe Lincoln

Infowars.com
Prisonplanet.com
Infowars.net
Prisonplanet.tv
Propagandamatrix.com

Resist Tyranny, Give Rise To Freedom!

Spin City - Day One

2004-08-30T22:56:00.000-04:00

The first day of the Republican National Convention is now underway. I can't get over the load of spin that these people put out. I suppose that is what these conventions are all about. In spite of what many of the 9/11 families think against Bush, Bush decided to insult them anyway and used 9/11 as a partial theme at the RNC. 3 people who had family that died on 9/11 actually gave a small speech. I guess they aren't part of the groups of families that have funded their own 9/11 pannel. It's a shame that these people do not know the horrible truth that Bush not only let 9/11 happen, but made it happen. Rudy Giuliani mentioned tonight that Bush is psychic - little does he know (or those poor families from 9/11) though that it is, only selectively. As the Republicans make speeches about the war, and how Terrorism is on the run, and that Iraq was a success, they of course miss some key issues: why did we go there in the first place, what caused the war? It certainly wasn't Saddam Hussein. No, it's our old friend Osama bin Laden - the man supposedly responsible for 9/11. GW acknowledged in the past that he's not interested in his good buddy Osama. Perhaps this is why GW said today that it's not possible to win the war on terror? Many of his lemmings jumped at the chance to cover up and explain his stupidity: "He just meant that it won't be a conventional end, that there won't be surrender or peach treaties". Well that's funny, because with the Republican claims of "peace through superiour fire power" - I never expected a peace treaty, simply blood shed untill the terrorists are all gone. I think that they must see things in a strange way... Like that Michael Moore was trying to claim in Fahernheit 9/11 that Iraq was peaceful before the war. That was never the impression I received from it - simply that the vilages children were alive and uninjured untill we started bombing cities without proper direction. Airzona Senator John McCain gave a speech tonight despite the back stabs that Bush did to him in 2000 with the smear adds against his own war record (sound familiar?). I can understand that time changes many things. But back stabbing? Smear attacks on your own party members? Perhaps that was Bush's first public showing of being a divider, not a uniter.
Back to Bush's comment - will the hypocricy ever end? Not too long ago, the Republicans were bashing on Kerry for his supposed pessimism about the decline that the US is in. But when Bush says that the war on terror can not be won - it's ok? I'm not sure who's taking lessons from who - the Bush Campaign or the Swift Boat Veterans For "Truth". Of course, it didn't end just there. Rudy Giuliani blasted Kerry for his supposed "flip flopping" on issues. He mentioned, what, maybe 5 issues? Lets take a look at Bush's flip flops:

1. Social Security Surplus
2. Patient's Right to Sue
3. Tobacco Buyout
4. North Korea
5. Abortion
6. OPEC
7. Iraq Funding
8. Condoleeza Rice Testimony
9. Science
10. Ahmed Chalabi
11. Department of Homeland Security
12. Weapons of Mass Destruction
13. Free Trade
14. Osama Bin Laden
15. The Environment
16. WMD Commission
17. Creation of the 9/11 Commission
18. Time Extension for 9/11 Commission
19. One Hour Limit for 9/11 Commission Testimony
20. Gay Marriage
21. Nation Building
22. Saddam/al Qaeda Link
23. U.N. Resolution
24. Involvement in the Palestinian Conflict
25. Campaign Finance

So who is the bigger flip flopper Mr. Giuliani? I guess everyone will have to agree that people change their minds.

Besides the mention of how only GW could of supported this nation after 9/11 (I suppose every other president would just do nothing?), the biggest thing continually mentioned was the war. The War On Terror and The War In Iraq have been mentioned a lot during this convention thus far, but it is always under the same package - which many agree that it is not a singular package. The Republicans are trying to label The War as not only a just and truthful thing, but a success because of George Bush. This has confounded me so-much. What has George Bush done for this war? A President's role in War is provide direction. George Bush has shifted direction many times with this war - so many infact that our main goal has been swept under the rug and forgotten. I think it is the soldiers who are risking their lives to fight this war that should be commended. I don't see Bush out there with them, telling them where to attack, and what strategies to use. But of course your average person doesn't see this. They simply buy into whatever is told to them. The Republicans talk about Kerry's voting record, but I wonder how many have seen it. Many times it is simply easier to believe what is told to you, than to research your own issues.

All in all, I think that the RNC missed a lot of key things. Mostly: What is the War President going to do when the war ends? Send us to another war? 4 More Years = 4 More Wars.

I'm not blind! I swear! Just don't give me any "liberal media"

2004-08-24T01:07:00.001-04:00

I got into a rather long debate with a conservative tonight concerning Bush, Oil, and the War. Although the debate began about religious laws. According to him, without a God, without a religion, we have no morals. I guess that must mean that all the baby rapists in this world must be agnostic atheists. Sorry, doesn't add up. Long before I had faith, I knew right from wrong, it's called having a heart. So yes, that esceladed into the war. Lets see. Bush lied about nearly every single thing he told Congress during his State of the Union address. Lets review: He said that Saddam was giving the torrorists WMD, that's false, he said Iraq hasn't accounted for nearly 30,000 missiles, that is false, he said that Iraq purchased aluminum tubes used for WMD, that is false (they are used for M-81 rockets and are incompatible with any nuclear weapon), he said that Iraq could launch a nuclear attack at us within 45 minutes of being given the command, that is false - Iraq has never been able to launch missiles at us, he showed footage of a plane spraying faux anthrax, that is misleading - the plane was demolished in 1991. Bush on the captured "terrorists" at places like Abu Ghraib: "More than 3000 suspected terrorists have been arrested (by the US) in many countries. And many others have met a different fate. Lets put it that way. They are no longer a problem..." (state of the union message - Feb 4th 2003.

I would say that now I know who the Swift Vets role model is! Now, I really don't think that the information above can be contested. All of it, has been proven. But no, not good enough. He wants to use the good old "well Saddam was terrible to his people and you're saying we should of let him slide?@#"
For the love of beef people, lets get one thing straight: I would esitmate that 98% of americans, for or against the war would agree that Saddam was a mad man (who else do I know that is mad?). Yes Saddam needed to be stopped, yes he was terrible. But I didn't see us rush into Nazi Germany because Hitler was an asshole to the Jew and Polish. No, we went in there because he was a militaristic threat! Furthermore, it wasn't a "we have no time to wait, we can't think about this any longer we have to act now" - ie: no preemptive war, that's suicide. But according to most conservative logic, it's OK because Saddam was a bad guy. It doesn't matter who lied, doesn't matter why we're there, doesn't matter how the focus has changed so many times our heads are spinning. No, all that matters is that "Bush did what Clinton didn't" in capturing Saddam and fighting terror. I find it funny though, because back when Clinton nearly captured Bin Laden after a surprise attack - the con's were bitching at him because "he's one man, not an entire nation! gripe gripe bitch bitch". Funny how a few years makes you change your mind on such big issues like war (right Swifties?).

So yes, back to what I was saying. I tried time and again to prove to this man that Bush sent us into war based on lies. He again counters about Saddam this, and Clinton that. What the hell does Clinton have to do with it?! I found an article by "The American Conservative" that had a very nice, very long explanation of the problem with invading Iraq. I was even nice enough to show it to him, since he kept claiming bias partisanship on the links I gave him (news flash: Facts don't always mean partisanship, especially when you look front page and you see BOTH names there). Of course that still wasn't good enough. So let me spell it out, again: By not only sending us all over creation, but also sending us into war without so much as a plan, hundreds of lives were lost. If we had actually planned things out, worked with real intelligence, and were discreet (instead of blasting "America plans secret attack on Bin Laden" on the news) about it - we could of had Bin Laden. But instead, we rush Congress into letting us go to war based on the fear that Iraq will nuke us (*cough* horse shit *cough*). Result: an up hill battle with an enemy we out number and out arm. It's like a retarted version of Viet Nam almost - another uphill battle because we weren't prepared. What do the neo cons say?

FDR... led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did. From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.
Truman... finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost,an average of 18,334 per year. John F. Kennedy...started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never attacked us. Johnson...turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year. Clinton...went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never attacked us. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

And again, the cons just can't get their facts or history straight.... I've offered evidence after evidence about how this war was one big hypocricy, but it just gets dodged and a Clinton comment is thrown back. If Clinton was really that bad, as the cons think he was, that must make GW Bush the living biblical devil!

Here is a history of this war in Bush's own words:

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

"I want justice...There's an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,'"
- G.W. Bush, 9/17/01, UPI

"...Secondly, he is not escaping us. This is a guy, who, three months ago, was in control of a county [sic]. Now he's maybe in control of a cave. He's on the run. Listen, a while ago I said to the American people, our objective is more than bin Laden. But one of the things for certain is we're going to get him running and keep him running, and bring him to justice. And that's what's happening. He's on the run, if he's running at all. So we don't know whether he's in cave with the door shut, or a cave with the door open -- we just don't know...."
- Bush, in remarks in a Press Availablity with the Press Travel Pool,
The Prairie Chapel Ranch, Crawford TX, 12/28/01, as reported on
official White House site

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)

So its: Get Bin Laden! Get Hussain, he knows where Bin Laden is! Screw Bin Laden! Get the rogue terrorist groups - all of them! Reform, help, and provide for Iraq! Put in a president for them who hasn't been in Iraq for ages - this way he'll get us some nice oil deals!

Thanks for the lesson Bush, I now see what lives are being lost for: Your stupidity.

row row row your Swift Boat, gently down the lies..

2004-08-21T19:11:00.000-04:00

Again today I ran into more instances of simply blind leadership and moronic giggling. Daily I check out Dales Electoral College Breakdown to see how close we are to getting rid of this facist regime we are in right now. One of the things I like about it is the lack of partisan text when it comes to analysis of each state. Surprisingly, the other thing I do like about it is that the maintainer of the site is a Bush supporter. So I feel that this means that if Kerry is shown in the lead, no one can cry foul when it comes to this site. I knew I would regret it, and I did - when I decided to look at Dale's Political Blog, there was a link to this picture. These people are morons. What they don't realise is that this is all based upon opinions. Now some would say that "well, there are a lot of them and they all agree that John Kerry was a bad soldier". Now how many conservatives do you know that wouldn't jump at the chance to lie about a Democrat when they're paid to do it? It seems to work for David Boise. No see, these Swift Boaters are simply out for the rich man: Bush. In 2000 they gladly smeared Republican Senator John McCain (to help boost Bush), and as a result, he has spoken against it. But, that's not a true Republican thing it seems these days. Free Republic has actually asked for McCain to keep his mouth shut about the fact that these Swifties just aren't truthful. I could make some more comments on the Free Republic crew, but I'll save it for later.
It's funny what you find when you start digging. But it's even funnier to watch someone else dig their own grave. I am reffering to the Swift Vets, of course. It seems that the more time passes, the less credible they are proven to be. These Swift Vets, on their site claim: "For more than thirty years, most Vietnam veterans kept silent as we were maligned as misfits, addicts, and baby killers. Now that a key creator of that poisonous image is seeking the Presidency we have resolved to end our silence" - Of course what they don't tell you is that it was actually Jane Fonda who incited protests against the soldiers. Kerry simply protested against the war itself (and if anyone is wondering, Jane Fonda stated that her and Kerry had no involvement). It seems to me that the rationale train left these Swift Vets behind. They claim that they are unpartisan and are simply here to tell America the truth. Well that's funny guys, because I think you missed something: GW's missing paychecks from when he went AWOL in the National Guard. I know you guys like money, so why not try to win $10,000 in proving that Bush didn't go AWOL? I guess it's just coincidence that they don't attack on Bush. Despite their claims of being unpartisan, it's been proven that not only are they Republican Funded, but they are infact, in league with the Bush supporters. So what was that again boys about not supporting Bush? And say, what's with the hypocricy, men? Shame shame!

America IS comming together

2004-08-20T20:20:00.001-04:00

(if anyone is curious, the title is a play on words taken from the group "America Comming Together")

I checked my e-mail a bit ago and I was amazed at the timing of these news letters. I figured that I would update everyone on all these movements

Help Counter GOP Smear Campaign on TV

Moveon.org

The GOP has been airing a commercial on TV run by the "Swift boat veterans for Truth" that claim that John Kerry was a horrible soldier and that his medals and injuries were fake. They are saying that since he was a terrible soldier and is dishonest about his military record, he would be a bad commander in chief. Republican John McCain has said that the Swift Boat crew is nothing but a bunch of Bush-groupies. They are dishonest, and deffinately don't care about the Truth, just about Bush. Apparently they also attacked Mr. McCain when he ran against Bush for the Republican Presidential seat in 2000 (for those that don't remember). McCain, and others have asked Bush to denouse these claims by the Swift Boat crew and of course he has not agreed to do so (even after a petition was sent to him). So now the lovely folks at Moveon.org have decided to air an add to tell about how GW doesn't have a leg to stand on since he went AWOL while in the National Guard - and that Bush needs to tell the Swift Boat crew to stop their adds. Moveon.org says that they need $200,000 dollars to air this ad today! The group says about their new comercial "Together, we can put it on TV in precisely the markets where the "Swift Boat" ad ran, making sure that no swing voters are misled by this smear campaign."

If you would like to see what this commercial will look like, you can check it out here

It's time to call Bush to account for these dirty tricks. Together, we can do that on TVs across the country.

Report Shows How Bush Is Squeezing Middle Class

Misleader.org

Every day I get an e-mail from this group that tracks all of Bush's blunders. Usually I don't bother putting it in here because you can read it all for yourself by signing up for their daily e-mails here. However, in the spirit of all the political e-mails that has filled my inbox in the last hour, I decided to plug them for once. Here is the first paragraph of todays "mislead":

"President Bush is now storming the country claiming his records show that he cares about America's middle class. On everything from taxes to health care to workers wages, the President says he has fought for average Americans. But a new comprehensive report shows that in almost every key economic area, he has actually gone to bat for his wealthiest contributors, at everyone else's expense. "

He says he's for the middle class, but he, and all of his friends, are not middle class, and he gives tax cuts to the rich? Something doesn't sound right there George.

To view the full report, click here

Bush 'Faith-Based' Agenda Spreading In Federal Government, Report Finds Initiative Ignores Constitutional Principles And Civil Rights Protections, Says Americans United

Americans United For Seperation of Church and State

This is deffinately one of my favorite organizations. Americans United is a group that is on what you could call "theocrat watch". They keep a close eye on church and state issues and an even bigger eye on cults like the Christian Coalation that want to do nothing more than turn this nation into a Christian Theocracy. Just the thought of their selfishness and intollerance makes me want to puke.. AU reported today on the dangers on Bush's faith based initaitives.

To check that out, go here

George Bush: You're Fired

HRC.org

The Human Rights Campaign is probably my 2nd fav next to AU. They fight hard to make sure that the Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual, Trans-Sexual (GLBT) community has the same rights as every other citizen in this country. Since the protester areas for the political conventions this year (both democratic and republican nationals) are way off away from the building that the convention is being held at - protestors aren't getting a fair deal here. But leave it to the wonderful folks of HRC to come up with a great idea: 4 trucks with the slogan "George Bush: You're Fired" running all around NYC and especially Madison Square Garden (where the Republican National Convention is being held). Check out their van add and help donate. Let's send Bush a message

Well, that's all for this issue folks. I think now I'm gonna finally get some ice cream to nurse my sore throat.

special thanks to Jute Cat for helping fix the HTML problems

Political fanaticism IS terrorism

2004-08-20T20:20:00.000-04:00

Too many times I see this political fanaticism comming from the strong right wingers. They love to preech their mantra of "just blame Clinton". I was astounded as to how much this happens when I first got involved with political debate. I will never understand how people can just keep voting and voting and voting for a single party. I could understand perhaps if this is just how things worked for them, and that the canidates they voted for always held what they wanted in a leader. But.. jeezus people! Don't get into this mentality of "My house votes (Political Party)". This causes so many problems, I swear. Wanna know what's partly to blame for Bush getting into office? A group of 12 Republicans outside the courtroom where the recount was held who were screaming and banging on doors and shouting "let us in! let us in! let us in!". Why? Of course so that their man could get put into office. Do people have any comprehension of fairness? Apparently not. If Bush was ellected into office legally without anything shady, I wouldn't complain about it. I wouldn't sit here and contest his election. While most of us know it, this country needs to open its eyes and grow a damn brain. These people just keep spurting off about whatever it is that the presidential ellection campaign uses as it's mantra.
I think our first step in cleaning up America is to get Bush out of office. Honestly, I don't care who takes his place - anyone could do a better job, really. The second thing we gotta do, is whoever takes over, we need to make sure to get a fire up their ass and make sure they do the right thing. We have to make sure that we pay close attention to everything they do and when they step out of line - we gotta take to the streets and inform The People.We can not allow them to start up with conspiracies and such!
The second thing we gotta do is pay attention to every election that goes on, no matter how small. Whether it's a judge, mayor, senator, or congressman - we must take this country back and help forge it into something that it should be! These morons that get into government offices are backed by political fanatics - and most of the time they're the ones with the money who want specific controll of how our country is run. This is how we got into this mess from the begining - the people with the money are the ones running, or the ones that are supporting.

This is a democracy - let our voices be heard!

Ten Questions about Media to ask every candidate and elected official

2004-08-20T20:18:00.000-04:00

Today I recieved my stickers from Freepress.net. I ordered 25 for $5 and then I also got 5 for free. These stickers are great - I wish I had them when I went to HOPE. With my order, came a lovely pamphlet:

Ten Questions about Media to ask every candidate and elected official

WHY ASK THESE QUESTIONS?

Media provide information, the lifeblood of democracy. But today, paid TV ads have replaced political debate. Soundbite journalism and celebrity-obsessed news dominate the airwaves. Content is marinated in commercialism and local coverage is dwindling. In short, the public interest is being sidelined by giant media corporations' insatiable quest for bigger profits.

Asking political candidates and officials to state their positions on media brings these concerns into the public eye and onto the political agenda. Indeed, the future of our media — and our democracy — may depend upon how our elected officials address these ten media issues.

10 Questions for Every Candidate and Elected Official

1) Consolidation
Do you support setting limits on media consolidation — through antitrust law and ownership protections — to prevent large companies from having too much control over what Americans see, hear and read?

Why to ask this: The United States has seen a massive wave of media consolidation over the past two decades. For example, Time Warner alone — in addition to its cable empire reaching 11 million subscribers — controls over 100 magazines, dozens of television networks and record companies, as well as major publishing, Internet, TV and movie production companies.

2) Noncommercial Media
Do you support policies that would increase and preserve funding for public and noncommercial media, and eliminate commercial sponsorship of public radio and TV programs?

Why to ask this: Democratic discourse requires quality sources of information free from advertiser pressure. However, we provide less funding per capita for public broadcasting than most other industrialized countries — by a wide margin.

3) Kids' Marketing
Do you support efforts to reduce commercialism and predatory marketing toward children, and to promote noncommercial educational TV programming for young children?

Why to ask this: Our children today are bombarded with advertising. Parents, teachers, and organizations dedicated to children's issues are growing increasingly concerned as evidence mounts connecting media exposure to a variety of health and behavior problems.

4) Cable Rates
Will you promote consumer choice by setting limits on cable ownership and by supporting policies to encourage the development of competition in cable markets?

Why to ask this: Over the past 5 years, cable rates have risen over 40% nationwide. This is the direct result of government-granted monopolies and lack of competition. The government has stalled on setting reasonable cable ownership limits. Meanwhile, cable companies are increasing their profits as they eliminate communities' ability to negotiate public-interest-oriented cable agreements.

5) Internet Freedom
Do you support open access rules that keep the Internet free and open, and that protect individual privacy from both government and corporations alike?

Why to ask this: The Internet exploded over the past decade in part because Internet Service Providers were required by law to allow access to all websites and users without discrimination. Big cable and telephone companies now want to restrict what users and providers can and cannot access, all in the name of profit.

6) Campaign Coverage
Do you support requiring broadcasters to provide significant free airtime for candidates and public debates as a condition of receiving their government-granted licenses?

Why to ask this: The skyrocketing cost of buying ad time is a major reason candidates raise ever-higher sums of campaign money from wealthy special interests. This year, TV broadcasters — who hold licenses to use publicly-owned airwaves, free of charge — will rake in a record-setting $1.47 billion from political ads. At the same time, news coverage of campaigns, especially on radio and television, has plummeted.

7) Community Media
Do you support giving more communities the ability to broadcast their own locally-based programming through an expanded low-power radio and television service?

Why to ask this: Many communities find themselves and their concerns misrepresented by major broadcasters. Citizens need to hear their own voices over their own airwaves, and the capability exists to fulfill this demand. Legislation is pending that would create thousands of new low-power FM radio licenses.

8) Minority Ownership
Do you support providing incentives to increase diversity in media ownership and leadership?

Why to ask this: Minority ownership of media is at a 10-year low, down 14% since 1997. Today, only 4% of radio stations and 1.9% of television stations are minority-owned. And studies show that the glass ceiling for women is firmly in place at communications companies.

9) Media Workers
Do you support laws that make it easier for media workers to form trade unions and ensure they are paid for their overtime?

Why to ask this: Media consolidation pressures media workers to abandon their professional values in order to generate maximum short-term profits. Trade unions are especially important in media industries because they serve both to protect the rights of workers and to insulate the media's role in our democracy from economic pressure.

10) Copyright
Do you support policies that will shorten the terms of copyright and lend balance to the law by allowing fair use for nonprofit and noncommercial purposes?

Why to ask this: Large corporations are buying protection from new competition and technological innovation. No copyrighted work created after 1922 has entered the public domain — an incubator for new ideas — due to legislation extending copyright terms. If laws being considered today had been in effect a few generations ago, consumers might not have access to products such as VCRs and copiers.

for those of you that don't want to spend money or wait for your free stickers, here is a link to the pdf version of this. Print it out and hand it out to people!

http://www.freepress.net/washington/10questions.pdf

More Brainwashing, Republicans for world president, and the religious reicht... err.. Right

2004-08-20T20:13:00.000-04:00

so in my ever continuing debate with people, one of the biggest things I notice is that people assume that everyone is christian. I personally feel that abortion should be legal. There are too many "what if's" to outlaw it. so I posted my response to this complete whack-job on beliefnet, and this is how she responds (this is great)

jesusisprolife
7/26/04 1:32:52 PM
AND CALL ME CRAZY, BUT I DON'T THINK VOTING FOR A POLITICIAN BASED ON MORAL VIEWS OVER MONEY IS WRONG. SINCE WHEN DID MONEY BECOME MORE IMPORTANT THAT OBEYING GOD?
AND IT'S NOT JUST ONE ISSUE THAT I CARE ABOUT (ABORTION), IT'S EVERYTHING! GAY MARRIAGE, LOOK AT SODDOM AND GAMORRAH, IF WE EMBRACE HOMOSEXUALITY GOD WILL BRING JUDGEMENT ON US AS A COUNTRY. DOES ANYBODY CARE? WHAT ABOUT THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGENCE, TEN COMMANDMENTS, AND ANY OTHER REFERENCE TO GOD BEING TAKEN OUT OF OUR SOCIETY? DO YOU THINK IT'S THE REPUBLICANS DOING THAT?
AS A CHRISTIAN, DO YOU HONESTLY THINK THAT GOD WOULD LIKE TO PUT A PARTY IN POWER THAT CAUSES THE LIVES OF MILLIONS OF BABIES, IN ORDER TO RAISE MINIMUM WAGE? OR WOULD ALLOW GAY MARRIAGE? COULD THAT POSSIBLE BE THE WILL OF GOD? HAVE YOU EVER READ THE BIBLE?

jesusisprolife
7/26/04 1:22:29 PM
ok i just read some of the old comments about me. i don't know everything about politics, and maby you people do, but i do know that democrats are for the most part secularists. they want sex ed in our classrooms to be about all the options in birthcontrol, with no mention of what God has to say about sex outside of marriage. If you are a christian, don't you think that thats what needs to be taught to our kids? A biblical view on sex. God's plan works. Let's empower our kids with the Word of God, and with biblical morals, I don't see the democrats wanting to do that. I think all you people are really worried about is money. money money money, the democrats say they will take money from the rich and give it to the poor. thats what it's all about. Maby you think money is the answer to all lifes problems, but i say it's the Word of God.

jesusisprolife
7/26/04 12:44:58 PM
i think that by having abortion on demand, we are teaching our children that we don't have to worry about consiquences to our actions. That they should be able to do whatever feels good, reguardless of how that may affect their future children. "oh who cares, we can just kill them, and anyone who has a problem with that is tring to force their morals on me" that's the attitude this generation has! i guess some people think that because you can't hear the baby cry, or see the pain on their face as their limbs are being ripped off, that it's ok. as long as we can keep having sex whenever we darn well please, it's all worth it. IT'S SICK.

jesusisprolife
7/26/04 12:36:00 PM
By the way, those abortion doctors are not honest to women about how developed their child is. they will call it "a ball of cells" or a "mass of tissue" but they do not tell them that by the time a pregnancy test is able to detect the pregnancy hormone, the embreo already has a heart beat. wich means they are alive. wich means that it's murder.

jesusisprolife
7/26/04 12:35:28 PM
KYMUS, 14 year olds shouldn't be having sex. If they do have sex, I'm sure they realize that that could get them pregnant. That's a risk they are willing to take. I don't think a innocent baby should pay for their parents mistakes. If they don't want their baby, I guarentee somebody else does. And even an abortion preformed in a nice clean clinic are still dangerous to women. Women who have had an abortion have a much higher risk for getting breast cancer for one thing. But that does not even come close to the emotional pain that can result in any woman with atleast half of a concience. Do you realize the huge amount of women who REGRET having their babies killed? it can ruin their life.

jesusisprolife
7/26/04 12:19:34 PM
KYMUS: you say "By making abortion laws,we are taking away a persons right to choose for themselves." What about the baby's right to choose for themselves??? I realize that they may not be capable of doing much intellegent thinking, but they still have a little heart that pumps blood, and they are just as important to God as a fully grown human. And that is why we should make anti-murder laws to protect tiny babies as well as any other human. Think about it, the bible says God formed us in the womb. Do you think he would appriciate us coming along and killing that life? Even if it's father did rape it's mother? Do you really think that child is less important to or loved by God? I don't because the Bible says God is no respector of persons.

And well, I couldn't help but respond with this:

Kymus
7/26/04 5:18:01 PM
jesusisprolife: did it ever occur to you that not everyone is christian? You want God to be taught in schools, that's great, take your kids to a christian school. How about we start enforcing new religious laws? Let's start with the Buddhists and Wiccans since they've started less wars, are less zealous, and understand that thing called FREEDOM OF RELIGION. God didn't smite Hitler, or Hussein, or the Roman Catholics when they rewrote the Bible, or the Romans when they were having lots of gay sex.
"AS A CHRISTIAN"
I am not christian, most of my friends are not christian. You are not Buddhist, you don't see me asking you to follow Buddhist law do you?

Kymus
7/26/04 5:17:51 PM
That's cause I have respect for others beliefs enough to let them practice what they want and realise that passing religous laws is biased, bigoted, and wrong!. The christian coalation needs to do their homework cause there's a reason why we are a DEMOCRACY and not a THEOCRACY. I think it had something to do with Colonial Europe.. gee.. then our founding fathers said something like "lets have a country where people can practice their faiths as they wish and they don't have to follow the rules of another religion" . Since you're such a humanitarian, do you also think about the bugs that you kill? How about flowers that you pick? Or the animals that are abused when companies test their products on them? All of them have feelings, all of them can suffer, all of them are actually more concious than that "baby" that is being aborted.

Kymus
7/26/04 5:17:26 PM
But I am sure you would never condescend to think about those, since they are not humans, they don't matter, right? In Buddhism is says "try not to kill". That applies to everything. But you don't see me sitting here telling you that you have to follow that because Buddha (who was a miracle worker, just like Jesus!) said so. No, see I understand that for me to press my faith on you, it's wrong! I am not Christian, so therefore why should I be bound by Christian laws, thoughts, ideals, morals, etc etc etc? Would it be right if the Moslems enacted a law that made it illegal for women to be un-modest and not cover their heads and/or faces? I'm sure that many would agree that that indeed would not be fair. But it seems that the religious right doesn't care! Yes, lets keep the republicans in power. Lets just deny 15 million people the right to happiness in a relationship,

Kymus
7/26/04 5:16:35 PM
and the ability to visit their partner in Intesive Care. How would you feel if someone said you couldn't visit a loved one in IU because you're christian and christians aren't allowed to marry? that would be pretty bigoted, wouldn't it? Think for a minute how it is for others. Think about how you would feel if someone got on a religious high horse with you and told you that what you are doing is wrong because their religion said so - and you had to deal with it for all of your life. (BTW Soddom and Gamorah story is a farse - it was on a fault line!)Welcome to the world the rest of us live in - it's called Earth. Oh boy, and those republicans.. Yes, lets keep them around so that they can send us to war on false reasons, give tax cuts to the rich, give favors the the corporations, push religion on people who don't follow it, deny 15 million people civil rights,

Kymus
7/26/04 5:16:03 PM
cut funding for AIDS, establish a facist regime, just like Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Suharto, and Pinochet, and lets not forget the wonderful job in office and let everyone think that they have those good-guy values, and then they enjoy lieing to the people. Oh they also like to blame things on other people that they are guily of themselves - what wonderful people! Yes, I would prefer to have someone in office who doesn't try to make decisions for me, favors the people who need money more, and doesn't try to push their religion on me. I enjoy having a democrocy, not a theocracy or a dictatorship. I'd like to keep it that way :)

here's a link to the site: http://www.beliefnet.com/story/148/story_14856_1.html

As you can see, this lady is a complete and utter whack-job. She should really look into getting herself committed - it would do the rest of us a favor.

How people try to discredit Kerry

2004-08-20T20:06:00.000-04:00

For the record, John Kerry wasn't my first decission. My first decision on who to vote for was Reverand Al Sharpton. I had read some of his responces from when he was being interviewed on MTV and he seemed to have a good head on his shoulders. He said how banning Gay's from maraige is like saying that Blacks can't marry. It's funny that he mentioned that since in the 1960's there was a civil rights movement going on with them and the same lines were being used by the conservatives: "It's redifining marraige" "It will destroy the sanctitiy of marraige". Bunch of lies as we see today nothing about marraige has changed. So yes, as I was stating earlier, so many people on the Right are trying to discredit John Kerry. Let's get something straight here. John Kerry isn't the best canidate for a President, but right about now, we don't have much of a choice. We can have 4 more years of Bush where many of our friends and family could possibly get drafted to fight in Iraq and then maybe later in North Korea (there are theories that Bush has more targets planned). I don't want to see my friends and family have to fight for a greedy war. Let's not forget the deficit. I think it's down to $477 Billion? When Clinton left office there was actually a small surplus for the first time. Bush says that the oil revenue from Iraq will pay for the war, but that's not true. The oil company donates money to Bush's campaign because they know that he is going to give them big kick-backs on money. All Bush does is lie. He lied at his State of the Union, he lied to Congress about a war, he lies about environmental protection.. It is really boiling down to a lesser of 2 evils...

Brainwashing your political party and How we got the OK to go to war

2004-08-20T20:05:00.000-04:00

It never ceases to amaze me as to how brain washed the Bush Administration has made so many conservatives. I see them all the time talking about how Bush would benefit the country the most and how if you don't support Bush and the war then you're in league with the terrorists. Another one of my favorites is that questioning the president is being unpatriotic. Wtf?! NO! The Bush Administration has spewed out so many lies to the public that they need to be impeached. Misleading and lying to congress about issues concerning war is a crime.

To touch up on that... The other day a person asked about exactly why Congress allowed us to go to war with such little proven intelligence. I think this is something that people should look into more. This really is a starting point to show just how terrible Bush's administration is for America. Bush got us into a preemptive war. Him and his administration were all talking about how we have to act now before it's too late. So the first thing they did was use their slogan (which Bush and Condoleeza Rice both said) "we don't want a smoking gun to turn into a mushroom cloud" - meaning it's possible that we could wait too long to unearth the facts and we could be faced with a nuclear attack. Bush told congress that he had recieved information from British Intelligence that Iraq could fire off "chemical and biological weapons" withing 45 minutes of recieving the order to do so. NEWS FLASH: Iraq has never had the ability to launch missiles at us; they didn't have that ability in the first Gulf War, the didn't have it in 2001, and they never will. The next thing Bush says, and I believe this was during his State of the Union address - was say that Iraqi has purchased aluminum rocket tubes that are suitable to be used to build Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). According to military intelligence from people with experience with these weapons, the aluminum tubes are for M-81 rockets and aren't even compatable with the WMD. Then Bush goes on to talk about how Sadam gives weapons to Al-Quida and other terrorists. Let's get something straight here. Saddam is running a Dictatorship. In a dictatorship you do not give free radicals your best weapon. Another thing, is that the terrorists didn't even like Saddam. So these, along with a few others that you can find out if you google around, are the reasons we went to war. America isn't used to a preemptive war. But I think that now hopefully we won't let it happen again.

Pardon the clutter..

2004-08-20T18:30:00.000-04:00

This is the first blog I've ever had outside of Live Journal, so it will take me a little while to figure out all of Blogger's settings and tools. Within a few days everything should be good! In the mean-time - check out my political blog on livejournal: Phracktivist - it is simply a mirror of what this will be.

2004-07-20T20:40:00.000-04:00

2003