http://www.sierratimes.com/05/07/08/65_71_189_66_94344.htm
by Larry A. Jones
More terrorist attacks. More people dead and dying and hurting -- this time in London. Damn the terrorists! Damn the Al Queda ! Damn the Islamofascists!
I grieve for those in London who have been affected by this trajedy, and yet, is all really as it seems? Is this just another act of terror?
But why create terror just to create terror? Historically, terrorists engage in their chosen venue as a means to an end. Terror creates fear, fear results in either concessions (stopping actions the terrorists don't like) or allows for extortion of some kind for fear of future terrorist attacks.
Surely, though, these 'terrorists' realize that these attacks, like '9-11' will only result in a response against suspected terrorists, assuming they can be identified (maybe England will invade Ireland with the same justification with which we invaded Iraq)which will lead to more terrorist attacks, which will lead to more response against terrorists, etc., etc.
Who benefits?
There have been no extortion demands because until now no one has claimed responsibility. And who supposedly claims responsibility for the London attacks -- "The Secret Organizations of Al Queda in Europe" ? -- How convenient. To generate acts of terrorism for the sake of generating acts of terrorism might be fun for awhile for such perverted minds, but surely this can only last so long. What do these terrorists really want? George Bush's mantra that they "hate freedom" is absurd. Surely there is much more going on than meets the eye.
The only thing '9-11' did was to allow those with a prescribed agenda the opportunity to pursue that agenda with little resistance. So who benefited -- the terrorists or those with an announced agenda who needed only a "Pearl Harbor" to kick it into high gear?
I don't know, and will likely never know for sure, if the Kennedy Assassination was an "inside job." But the fact I am willing to entertain the idea is disturbing enough. We know there was (and is) government coverup. But why? What is it that 'we the people' aren't supposed to know? And again, who benefited -- Oswald? -- or those with a particular agenda which Kennedy was thwarting.
I don't know, and will likely never know for sure if '9-11' was an "inside job," but again, the fact I am willing to entertain the possibility is even more disturbing. We know there has been, and continues to be, coverup by the government. But why? What is it that 'we the people' aren't supposed to know about '9-11'? The explanation: 'national security' (translation: there are forces at work here that 'they' don't want you to know about).
What about the Madrid bombings in Spain and the fact that two of the leading suspects were found to have ties with the Spanish Office of Security? Mere coincidence? Why is that still 'under investigation'?
What about the fact that the only "actual" Al-Queda cell ever captured turned out to consist of Mossad (Israeli Secret Intelligence) operatives?
Who benefits?
Why is it that Israel (after the fact) claimed to have known about and warned against a possible attack on New York, yet afterward, no one seems to remember receiving any such warning? Why is it that Israel (after the fact) now claims to have known about and warned against a possible attack on London, yet afterward, no one seems to remember receiving any such warning?
Who benefits?
What about the fact that Osama Bin Laden is a CIA-trained and supplied former operative? What about the fact that the Director of Intelligence claims to know where he is but we can't touch him due to "diplomatic concerns." Seems we didn't care about diplomatic niceties when we invaded Iraq, a country with no known connection to '9-11' whatsoever.
Who benefits?
Constantly, it seems, we are being told to "ignore that man behind the curtain" and focus on the illusion. When rational explanations fail, the irrational begins to make more sense. As Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's famous detective, Sherlock Holmes observed, "when you eliminate the probable, then whatever remains, no matter how impossible, is the truth."
We must keep asking the question: who benefits? -- even if the answer is impossible.
Full Version: Who benefits?
OLD American Century / White Rose Society message boards > Political Discussion forums > Politics In General
I read the transcript to BBC special The Power of Nightmares over the weekend. It opened my eyes to a few other possibilities and a possible answer to the question "who benefits?".
By the way, the Daily Kos has banned numerous members as a result of their bringing things like this up this weekend.
By the way, the Daily Kos has banned numerous members as a result of their bringing things like this up this weekend.
What's up with the Daily Kos? Rs take that over too?
I dunno Dori. I saw that this morning but can't find it now. Am still looking.
edit : okay, here the link to back it up.
(JayHawk wipes sweat from forehead)
edit : okay, here the link to back it up.
(JayHawk wipes sweat from forehead)
THis computer doesn't do links, but I trust you. If you say so, I believe it is so.
Sorry about the sweat thing. it is going to be in the 90s today so I will be wiping sweat from my forehead in a couple of hours. You had to work for yours.
You see, some people have to work for what they get, for some it just comes along free. Ain't life grand?!
Sorry about the sweat thing. it is going to be in the 90s today so I will be wiping sweat from my forehead in a couple of hours. You had to work for yours.
You see, some people have to work for what they get, for some it just comes along free. Ain't life grand?!
yipper, life is sometimes grand. Like Friday and Saturday evening when my eldest son played timapani drums in a symphony orchestra for the 1st time after only 3 practice sessions and did a damn good job of it. I tought him all he knows about percussion and drumming - a 30 year vet of it I am.
No link ? That sux. Here's the text 4 U :
No link ? That sux. Here's the text 4 U :
| QUOTE |
| The conspiracists by kos Fri Jul 8th, 2005 at 08:48:56 PDT Today I did something I've never done before (not even during the Fraudster mess), and wish I'd never had to do. I made a mass banning of people perpetuating a series of bizarre, off-the-wall, unsupported and frankly embarassing conspiracy theories. I have a high tolerance level for material I deem appropriate for this site, but one thing I REFUSE to allow is bullshit conspiracy theories. You know the ones -- Bush and Blair conspired to bomb London in order to take the heat off their respective political problems. I can't imagine what fucking world these people live in, but it sure ain't the Reality Based Community. So I banned these people, and those that have been recommending diaries like it. And I will continue to do so until the purge is complete, and make no mistake -- this is a purge. This is a reality-based community. Those who wish to live outside it should find a new home. This isn't it. Update: I've been reinstating some of the banned accounts as they email me. Some people wondered why there wasn't any warning. There have been warnings from others -- repeated pleadings for people to ground themselves in reality. It's telling that I have NEVER done something like this before. Because this has been an extreme situation. This isn't about disagreeing with what people are saying. If that was the case, everyone would've been banned by now. The myth of the "echo chamber" is just that. A myth. But as for warnings, well, this has been my warning. I wanted it clear that I was serious, and I think that has come through. I am reinstating those who ask to be reinstated. But the message has been sent. |
Yes, it must have been truly grand to hear your son play, especially when this is something you have loved yourself. Sounds like you had a great weekend.
Thanx for the kos article. It is a bummer though. Does this sound so very rightwing to you, "This is a reality-based community. Those who wish to live outside it should find a new home" as it does to me?
I have heard religious organizations saying the same thing.
Reality based? Really?
Whose reality?
Thanx for the kos article. It is a bummer though. Does this sound so very rightwing to you, "This is a reality-based community. Those who wish to live outside it should find a new home" as it does to me?
I have heard religious organizations saying the same thing.
Reality based? Really?
Whose reality?
| QUOTE |
| Does this sound so very rightwing to you, "This is a reality-based community. Those who wish to live outside it should find a new home" as it does to me? |
Nope, it doesn't, and I agree with him. People who eat up and spew conspiracy theories are a wet dream for Karl Rove, especially if they infect an entire political wing. They make easy targets and they make the left look bad, even if the people spewing them aren't left wing, like Alex Jones. Not to mention these same conspiracy nuts have no plan of action. They're the type who believe the illuminati and the Rockefellers own and control everything and when asked what they plan to do they clam up. They think if people just know everything then the whole world will suddenly change. Right, because these people who they believe are all powerful are just going to let go of that power because people bitch and moan.
Kos is right, there are plenty of reality based crimes we can get these fucks on that we don't need to start getting into the outlandish.
| QUOTE (dori @ Monday, 11 July 2005, 6:39 am) |
| Reality based? Really? Whose reality? |
The general publics'. Political reality. You know we all whine about needing a liberal administration and yet here's abunch of the left wing spewing this crap which makes it even more difficult for us to win. Not to mention all of the anti-Christian BS from the reactionary atheists among other things. Political movements only go anywhere when the majority of people agree with you, if y'all can't handle that you need to go sit in the corner until the rest of us are done.
Tzu, you are talking about the article, I am talking about the two sentences I posted.
Again I say, whose reality? There are people around here who will not talk to me because I am not Catholic. I am not part of the 'reality based world. to them.
Rove and company can do their own smear canpaign on us whether we talk about 9/11 or leaks of CIA members names or not. Heck, they have people infiltrating the left and presenting themselves as such.
To top that off, they have their shills everywhere. If I have heard that 'serviceman' spouting off on C-Span once I have heard him dozens of times. He seems to be at every meeting, every book signing, always repeating word for word his messages of how the left 'just doesn't get it'.
I am not big on censorship, whether it comes from the left or the right.
I understand the people who own sites get to make the rules, I just don't care for the 'we are based in reality' business when it is THEIR reality. Some of those 'crazy' theories have turned out to be not so crazy afterall.
Remember, the sun used to revolve around the earth--and you darn well better believe it to be based in reality!
Again I say, whose reality? There are people around here who will not talk to me because I am not Catholic. I am not part of the 'reality based world. to them.
Rove and company can do their own smear canpaign on us whether we talk about 9/11 or leaks of CIA members names or not. Heck, they have people infiltrating the left and presenting themselves as such.
To top that off, they have their shills everywhere. If I have heard that 'serviceman' spouting off on C-Span once I have heard him dozens of times. He seems to be at every meeting, every book signing, always repeating word for word his messages of how the left 'just doesn't get it'.
I am not big on censorship, whether it comes from the left or the right.
I understand the people who own sites get to make the rules, I just don't care for the 'we are based in reality' business when it is THEIR reality. Some of those 'crazy' theories have turned out to be not so crazy afterall.
Remember, the sun used to revolve around the earth--and you darn well better believe it to be based in reality!
censorship sux. If you rule out any discussions over any given possibility, a conspiracy e.g., you're tainting the truth and poisining the exchange of ideas. Don't buy in on a conspiracy about 9/11 ? Okay by me but go wander off into other threads to get off on what's goin down there and leave the others to talk it out. Saturday was a turning point for Kos cause he stepped on his fellows by introducing censorship on what was an open blog. May have been necessary but was also harsh and will not go without consequences. This is not good. To avoid censorship by banning people and pulling the plug on the thread, admin could have put in a temporary block to save the server(s) and the bloggers from over heating. Tzu, you should read the script to the BBCs Power of Nightmares. Only 56 pages of enlightenment - if you dare to read it.
Would you guys still read the transcript, or see the documentary, if it had not come from BBC?
| QUOTE (dori @ Monday, 11 July 2005, 7:14 am) |
| Tzu, you are talking about the article, I am talking about the two sentences I posted. |
No, I'm talking about the general political movement. Kos and other left wing bloggers are interested in winning elections so we can then start asking questions and holding hearings which aren't simply blown off so the country can move forward. I'm talking about political strategy to deal with the masses. Kos is only part of it. Y'all need to wake up to the fact that there's reality and political reality and we don't have the luxury of running around saying certain things as blatantly as we do. It's called discretion and appealing to the masses. Running around yelping blatantly that Bush and Blair orchestrated the attacks is bad politics, especially when your evidence is circumstantial, at best.
There's an art to framing an argument and making a charge without making it look like you believe in the charge but can get people questioning. "Isn't it odd how quickly they demoed WTC7? I wonder how they did that so fast, I mean usually it takes a few days of planning to do something like that" is alot better than "WTC7 was rigged to blow beforehand!!! They orchestrated 9/11!!!" They both make the same charge except the fore mentioned allows there to be wiggle room for a legitimate explanation and you don't end up looking like a nut that people can just blow off. "Hey, I didn't say it was orchestrated by the NeoCons, just said it was odd and curious how they rigged WTC7 to blow so fast."
Frankly, until the conspiracy nuts learn this, I don't blame admins kicking them out. They're damaging to our cause and make it more difficult for the rest of us on the ground who get that shit thrown in our face.
| QUOTE |
| Rove and company can do their own smear canpaign on us whether we talk about 9/11 or leaks of CIA members names or not. Heck, they have people infiltrating the left and presenting themselves as such. |
First of all, there's a difference between the leaked CIA agent and the conspiracies of 9/11, one's been proven fact, the other hasn't, there's a big difference there. Secondly, yes, Rove is going to smear us, SO WHY GIVE HIM MORE AMMO?! Thirdly, yes there are people infiltrating the left, they're called Alex Jones Republicans.
| QUOTE |
| To top that off, they have their shills everywhere. If I have heard that 'serviceman' spouting off on C-Span once I have heard him dozens of times. He seems to be at every meeting, every book signing, always repeating word for word his messages of how the left 'just doesn't get it'. |
You think that's the worst? Hell, how do you know all of these conspiracy theories about 9/11 and such weren't started by them? Frankly I believe Alex Jones is one of them. I mean here's a guy who admits to being a diehard Republican for the old Republic of the United States where the people didn't vote for their president and the left is listening to this fool.
| QUOTE |
| I am not big on censorship, whether it comes from the left or the right. |
Me either, but I'm big on politically smart operatives who know how to say something without coming out and saying it directly.
| QUOTE |
| I understand the people who own sites get to make the rules, I just don't care for the 'we are based in reality' business when it is THEIR reality. |
No, the "reality" they're refering to is the political reality where saying certain shit gets you blown off as being a nut.
| QUOTE |
| Some of those 'crazy' theories have turned out to be not so crazy afterall. |
Like what? The weather machines run by the yakuza? Chemtrails?
| QUOTE |
| Remember, the sun used to revolve around the earth--and you darn well better believe it to be based in reality! |
Which was proven wrong through much scientific proof and hard and recurring evidence, not circumstantial evidence.
JayHawk
| QUOTE |
| Tzu, you should read the script to the BBCs Power of Nightmares. Only 56 pages of enlightenment - if you dare to read it. |
OMFG you dared me!
I've heard and discussed it before, nothing was said which hasn't been discussed at length on the liberal message boards that I go to and on my home forum at CG's. I'm talking about methods, not facts, when you're ready to discuss that, let me know.
| QUOTE (Toshiro Tzu @ Monday, 11 July 2005, 7:29 am) |
| .....politically smart operatives....... |
That phrase triggers my gag reflex.
I don't have a car and I ride the bus a lot. To pass the time, I talk to people--just whatever people happen to be sitting near me on the bus.
I am constantly amazed by the number of people who agree with progressive views, but tell me that they've never heard or spoken with anyone else who did until they got into a conversation with me on the bus.
Due to the right-wing media takeover, and the huge number of "politically smart operatives" on progressive boards and blogs, an awful lot of people seem to think that they're they only one in the country with progressive views. I'm not a politically smart operative. I'm plain-spoken and direct. And the words of the last guy I spoke with on the bus, an 85-year-old who happened to be sitting across from me, are still ringing in my ears. He said, "Thank you for giving me hope."
| QUOTE (folkie @ Monday, 11 July 2005, 10:20 am) |
| That phrase triggers my gag reflex. |
That's ok, every one of your posts has that affect on me, you get used to it though.
| QUOTE |
| Due to the right-wing media takeover, and the huge number of "politically smart operatives" on progressive boards and blogs, an awful lot of people seem to think that they're they only one in the country with progressive views. I'm not a politically smart operative. I'm plain-spoken and direct. And the words of the last guy I spoke with on the bus, an 85-year-old who happened to be sitting across from me, are still ringing in my ears. He said, "Thank you for giving me hope." |
Wow you too? Lets give you a cookie. Most Americans hold progressive views, yet abunch of them still vote Republican and Libertarian, why is that? Politicians are car salesman, they tell you what you need to hear to vote for them and they omit what you don't. They dodge issues which make people cringe, or have you not learned that by now? "Thank you for giving me hope." "No problem, who do you plan on voting for in 2008?" "Jeb Bush."
It's not that people don't have progressive views you tool, it's that the right wing continually sells them shit which goes against those views and dress that bullshit up like those views or they marginalize certain views. Being a "smart political operative" is not someone who educates people on said views, an SPO gets them to vote in our favor, he sells them the liberal way of doing things.
To put it simpler, since you're obviously struggling with this, our Liberal hydrogen fueled economy car is better built than the Conservative oil chugging SUV lemon but the fuckers are still outselling us because they know how to sell their piece of shit car. "This SUV will make you look cool in your 30s, no more looking like June Cleaver dropping the kids off in the minivan, you can be stylish even as a parent!" "Yeah but it has shitty gas mileage, has a tendency to roll over, among a host of other problems, and when are you ever going to actually take it offroading or using it for ski trips and the like?" "Uhhh, who cares, I look cool!"
Do you get it now? You're trying to tell them everything that's wrong with the car when all they really care about is how it makes their public image look. Meanwhile our Liberal economy car is getting a rep as a car for pussies and slow whiney women. It's ALL about image and nothing else, facts are just the icing on the cake.
Next time you gag at something I say, try to understand it first, k?
| QUOTE (Toshiro Tzu @ Monday, 11 July 2005, 8:53 am) |
| "Thank you for giving me hope." "No problem, who do you plan on voting for in 2008?" "Jeb Bush." |
Actually, we touched on our upcoming mayoral election, and he's voting for the most progressive candidate, Democrat Donna Frye.
I don't think it is possible to reach people in cars. On the other hand, as gas prices go up, more and more of them are riding the bus.
There was a recent poll that showed that at the same time that Republican numbers are dropping, Democratic numbers are also dropping. Unions are doing a lot to educate communities that still have any. But right-wing extremism and left-wing toadyishness, have alienated so many people that even politically smart operatives aren't going to be able to repair the damage. Even people who are die-hard Rep or Dem voters, are loathe to give them any more money. And people are waking up to the fact that for the corporate parties, just like with any other corporations, it's all about the money and people don't matter.
WHO BENEFITS?
Let's see now...There was an ambassador John Negroponte who terrorised Central America during the Ray-gun years. Nothing was too dirty or horrible for his dark soldiers. This very same J. N. is now our "ambassador" to Iraq. This horror of a person is NEOCON from way back. Do you REALLY suppose that all of the bombings are done by "insurgents" and "malcontents"?
WHO BENEFITS?
Uh-oh, is Mr. Natural tipping off the edge of reality? I don't think so...
Let's see now...There was an ambassador John Negroponte who terrorised Central America during the Ray-gun years. Nothing was too dirty or horrible for his dark soldiers. This very same J. N. is now our "ambassador" to Iraq. This horror of a person is NEOCON from way back. Do you REALLY suppose that all of the bombings are done by "insurgents" and "malcontents"?
WHO BENEFITS?
Uh-oh, is Mr. Natural tipping off the edge of reality? I don't think so...
| QUOTE (JayHawk @ Monday, 11 July 2005, 6:20 am) | ||
| yipper, life is sometimes grand. Like Friday and Saturday evening when my eldest son played timapani drums in a symphony orchestra for the 1st time after only 3 practice sessions and did a damn good job of it. I tought him all he knows about percussion and drumming - a 30 year vet of it I am. No link ? That sux. Here's the text 4 U :
|
This is a very good expression of my own concerns.
And then TZU! My god man, you speak my words!
I fear the Progressive Agenda is being sabotoged either deliberately by others with their own agenda, or by individuals. Either way, all this conspiracy shit is hurting the progressive need to remove the evil from the American Political system!!!!
Something else to consider....
The very fact of all the conspiracy theories, isn't that in it's self news worthy?
Doesn't this phenomena clearly illustrate a building and pervasive social paranoia?
Who will post a story on Perspectives about this issue?
People, BUsh is NOT a space alien sent here to pave the way for interstellar invasion in which our bodies will be harvested as food for the claw people from alpha ceti!
FOCUS!
Take care of the greater evil, THEN you can all go after your individuals theories about what is evil in the world today!
As long as Bush, The PNAC, the Evangelicals and the Neocons are in power,
nothing else can be addressed properly!
Focus
Focus!
FOCUS!
Hm, ok.
| QUOTE (Mr. Natural @ Sunday, 17 July 2005, 12:47 pm) |
| Hm, ok. |
Mr Natural,
I'm sure you recall the battle in Southern Oregon over the Spotted owl!
I'm sure you are aware that the battle was not really about this little owl.
It was about what the Owl represented.
Those who took this battle on knew they could do nothing on a broad front!
Instead, they focused on one little bird,
and Stopped the logging of old growth in that area, at least temporary!
Putting all their energy into one focus, that was the heart of the over all issue,
they accomplished something!
A laser beam is high energy, and yet without focus it is worthless and just so much scattered light .
I believe our Focus right now should be firmly behind Dean and the DNC.
Then AFTER Bushco has been addressed and taken care of,
then we can be like the liberals we have always been,
and scatter ourselves to the four corners to do battle on so many individual fronts!
FOCUS
On the Evil Empire
| QUOTE (sky of mind @ Sunday, 17 July 2005, 11:13 am) |
| I believe our Focus right now should be firmly behind Dean and the DNC. |
And you are entitled to your beliefs, which I respect.
I am also entitled to my beliefs. I believe that our focus should be on free and fair elections.
Are you aware that Gore WON the popular vote in 2000, but due to voter suppression and dirty tricks in Florida, the electoral college, and Supreme Court intervention, was not able to take office?
Are you aware that according to statisticians, some of the least likely conspiracy theorists in the world, Kerry won the 2004 election? Are you aware that in the Ukraine, an election was overturned due to the fact that, just like in our 2004 elections here, the results did not match the exit polls? Are you aware that the algorithms used by ALL electronic vote counting systems, appear to have switched votes in the same proportions everywhere, from third parties to Bush?
I believe that if our focus is not on free and fair elections, it doesn't matter which candidate we support, as our votes don't really count anyway. Unless we focus on free and fair elections we are likely to get elections results that favor big business interests, regardless of party affiliation.
The Republicans are in such disarray that it is likely that a Democrat will "win" in 2008. The question is if they will win or just "win," meaning, will it be our votes that elect them, or will they be "elected" by those who own the vote-counting apparatus.
I'm sure that Howard Dean is a nice guy. But I haven't seen him insisting that we have voter-verifiable ballots, open-source software, the abolition of the electoral college, publicly-funded elections, instant run-off voting, or any other reforms that would ensure free and fair elections. If a Howard Dean victory will not ensure free and fair elections, it will not be a victory for democracy, just a victory for the Democratic Party. That's the same Democratic Party that gave us NAFTA, and CAFTA, that voted for the continuing war crime in Iraq, and that twice failed to protest stolen presidential elections. As Lynn Landes say, 80% of the votes in America are counted by machines owned by two Republicans--so why isn't the Democratic Party fighting for your right to free and fair elections?
Walter Karp, in his book, "Indispensable Enemies," and Alexander Cockburn in his book, "Dime's Worth of Difference," both pointed out that the Democratic Party is quite content with political business as usual, because every so often it becomes their turn to screw us. So long as they get their turn once in a while, they don't really care if the other side screws us even worse--in fact it works to their benefit as they can point to the greater evil as a reason for voting for the lesser evil.
I believe that we have to turn our focus from which party will screw us the least, to how we can restore government by, for, and of the people. Unless we focus on restoring democracy, all we'll get is greater or lesser fascism.
Could a corrupt election process give us a good winner once in a while? Sure. That's like a mobster financing a deserving charity in his neighborhood. It doesn't make him less of a mobster to do good once in a while. And it doesn't give us good government if it occasionally does something to make corruption look better. You have the right to disagree, but I would rather see a corrupt politician elected by a free and fair election process, than see a decent politician elected by a corrupt election process. Because, in the long run, the process itself is more important than any individual candidate. In other words, I believe that democracy is more important than party politics. You have the right to disagree, and you have the right to focus on party politics and turn a blind eye to our loss of democracy. You have the right to believe that even without democracy, if we get the right party in power, everything will improve. I respect your right to disagree with me, and I sincerely wish you'd do the same.
folkie,
There are some good posts and responses about voting machines in the ELECTIONS forum.
Catherine
There are some good posts and responses about voting machines in the ELECTIONS forum.
Catherine
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.