is filling out his status report.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
ieddyi: how did the Ba’athists come into power?
PegnVA: dangerously, virtually all of them regularly have calls in motion, with many of them having passed both houses of the state. The near deadly one was the call for a constitutional convention for the purpose of a balanced budget amendment. Duh! A convention CANNOT be limited! That's what we need: Ted Turner, Bill Gates, David Rockefeller, Rupert Murdoch, etal writing a new constitution. We won't even be able to sneak notes at the gulag.
benzdealeror2: shhhhhhh, do you want warning labels on spoons, forks, and knives?
PegnVA: I believe I understand what you are conveying. However, the states can call for a constitutional convention to make amendments. A definite no-no, in my book, these days. In 1988, they came extremely close to doing that.
ieddyi: you just don't get it and probably never will. Those "other" candidates all represent statism in Amerikkka. You advance that. It's both paradoxical and ironic to see a nazi calling some one else a racist.
You haven't a clue about foreign policy and tyranny. Remember that Hitler lost.
This ties in with some things that I have tossed out. It doesn't make it true. Certainly, we should be aware that this is put out to a sophisticated crowd.
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6060
benzdealeror2: as the feral gumit has provided for cash-register medicine to have a monopoly on health care, it has allowed the insurance companies, medical corporations, the pharmaceutical corporations, and various governmental entities to bankrupt the populace's general health. As the sheople pay ministers, etal to do their holiness for them and chase political messiahs to soothe their civic consciences, they also submit to super doctor and friends. The failure to accept responsibility for one’s own actions and to repetitively do the same things and yet expect different results marks the sheople for the mental illness that they possess.
The illegals that flood this nation fail to realize that they have been had. They are part of the very mechanism that attracted them to come here. One million are earmarked to be added to the drug user base.
The blue state/red state scheme was a smoke and mirrors misdirection to the choice of what pill. So the sheople are relegated to being batteries for the machine. The "anchor baby" law came about through planning of the Rothschild family and their attempts to gain a private central bank stronghold. While they were rebuffed during the Lincoln administration, The Constitution became radically redefined through the 13th and 14th Amendments. On the surface they looked fine, but they created sheoplism.
The clutches of tyranny upon this nation is multilayered and multifaceted. One of the ways that this is accomplished is through public consumption politics. Thus we now have Republican verses Democrat; liberal verses conservative; red state verses blue state. Yeppers, divide and conquer; get's 'em every time.
ieddyi: not hard to figure out, Islamophobe. By ending aid to all Middle East participants, they won't be able to afford fighting each other.
BTW, both U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie and Secretary of State James Baker publicly supported Saddam Hussein having to go to war with Kuwait. It was his former C.I.A. buddy, Opium Poppy Bush that stabbed him in the back.
ieddyi: only the toadless toadies of Faux Snooz make that association. The rest of us make that association against Faux Snooz and its cowardly minions.
benzdealeror2: ah, it's the think tank controlled Congress doing the bidding of the owners of The Federal Reserve. Party affiliation has nothing to do with it. It's also statism verses personal liberties. Socialism was the old monopoly. It's more fascism now. It's all still statism. Remember when the Republican Party had virtual carte blanche to make changes? They outdid the Democrats for expanding the feral gumit and taxing and spending and then they started eroding personal liberties.
fuagf: ROFL Mr. Innuendo, himself, comes to troll here and spew out his vile hatred. Now is this public enough for your liking?
BTW, the phrase, "you people," is quite renowned for being a racist metacommunication preface.
extelecom: I see no posts of you using your head.
extelecom: that's already been answered and you're dodging the point. Try honesty.
extelecom: try reading comprehension. You are way off.
extelecom: then it just fits with the rest of their unbiblical doctrines. You just substantiated that all the denominations that are known as "Baptists" are NOT Christians according to biblical teachings. BTW, the bishop/elder/overseer matter is quite miniscule compared to their other false teachings.
So PegnVA, please refrain from calling The Huckster: Bishop, as he isn't Christian.
brainlessone: spoken like a true statist. The Democrats were pushed into power in 2006 to end the war. More and more liberties have been lost since. If the dems are the freedom fighters, I'd might even cringe at whom you propose to be our enemies.
extelecom: you right and wrong. First off, you didn't read the post, so "Duh!" on you. There is a great push among the Baptists denominations to have elders and try to resemble a biblical church. A bishop is an elder and an elder is an overseer. They are the same. The transliterated word from the Greek text is episkopos. The RCC plays words of art and you fell for it.
It's quite common among nondenominational groups, such as the Churches of Christ, to have the multiple elders/bishops that the Bible describes for each autonomous congregation.
hap0206: there's a difference between rule of law and our system of government. Technically, The U.S.A., through decades of political corruption, especially fostered by the owners of The Federal Reserve, has become a fascist democracy. Executive orders abuse and actions for which the executive branch has not been held accountable by Congress have allowed for massive spending apart from appropriations originating from The House of Representatives.
NSA has a secret budget. FEMA/DHS have no real financial oversight. Hurricane Katrina demonstrated that FEMA was only set up for martial law, not for emergency assistance. The American socialists screamed to have executive branch earmarks. None of this is part of The Constitution and neither is line item veto, for extremely good reasons.
We get deficits because the electorate demand benefits that they cannot afford and they elect people who are willing to lie to them and spend beyond the government's means to stay in power. The deficits, in turn, serve the purposes of the owners of The Federal Reserve, who simply print up more money faster than 10,000 OTCBB CEOs.
SoxFan: look I understand what your point is, however it is not synchronized with a bigger issue that did not start with votes for Ron Paul. I have been quite aware of Cook County's voting early and often to the 2004 Ohio Diebold scam.
extelcom: this is from www.mikehuckabee.dom :
"A significant part of his adult life was spent as a pastor and denominational leader. He became the youngest president ever of the Arkansas Baptist State Convention, the largest denomination in Arkansas. Huckabee led rapidly growing congregations in Pine Bluff and Texarkana. He said those experiences gave him a deep sense of the problems faced by individuals and families."
An elder, bishop, or overseer is the same thing from a pure biblical perspective. It would have been a bit strange for him to have been the pastor and not also an elder/bishop/overseer, but anything is possible in denominationalism.
ieddyi: Hello??? Say what?!!!
http://www.france24.com/france24Public/en/special-reports/20071001-iraq-sectarian-civilian-death-baghdad-conflict/20070917-iraq-numbres-civilian-deaths-lancet-estimates.html
Add that to the millions of Iraqis who died fighting Iran at the behest of The U.S.A. Saddam's rebellion against his C.I.A. masters saved lives for a few years and they had far more liberties, in spite of his despotism, than with The U.S. overlording.
extelecom: do you mean all the dead Catholics and burned down RCC retail outlets who were free under Saddam Hussein? Every time the American foreign policy goes into a nation with a significant Muslim population the country ends up with Muslim rule. I'm a bit presumptive that the six figure Iraqi civilian body count is also a meaningless statistic to you?
One can only gasp, in horrific imagination, at would have been the outcome, in Iraq, had Saddam Hussein had not accepted The C.I.A.'s offers and The State Department's support all those years that they performed the dirty work against Iran?
Susie924: America is at a crossroads, as never before. When it looked to free itself from tyranny it formed a constitutional republic. Still, it was an oligarchy. It was it's own planned tyranny. People of integrity, like Patrick Henry, forced changes toward a limited government via the inclusion of The Bill of Rights into the rule of law. Yet, throughout American history, as one "right" has been added more liberties are taken away.
The essential difference for public consumption is that the oligarchy went into the shadows instead of easily being viewed by the populace. "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." has become an accepted norm, even though it qualifies as a clear symptom of collective mental illness. As Gustave Le Bon demonstrated, it is far easier to persuade a group of people than an individual. People, such as Adolph Hitler, grasped the body of work and utilized that knowledge for nefarious purposes.
We are faced with folks in power and folks seeking power that virtually all submit to the oligarchy. This is unacceptable. The corruption and level of tyranny far exceeds that of George III. Who will prosecute these crimes?
The work of deception has played out so expertly that most Americans simply resort to the religiosity of Republican verses Democrat and the artificial liberal verses conservative. Their collective memories have been erased and new meanings of words are injected into their minds. They have boiled to governmental death slowly and before their own eyes.
For a person to run for president, of The U.S.A. in the 21st century, one must belong to one of the control groups, such as The Council on Foreign Relations. This allows the Republican Party to become indistinguishable from the Democrat Party, all platforms and ideologies withstanding. Since Michael Bloomberg has long been a faithful little CFR automaton, he will help the Republican Party immensely, but will further cause harm to America.
No thanks!
Susie924: a twenty million donation to Diebold should do the trick.
IxCimi: WOW! I saw The U.N. accomplish similar things in parts of Africa. Thanks for sharing that.
kashasha: Oh, you're so close. Fascism and communism and nazism is all statism. Certainly America has turned fascism into an art form that would have made Benito blush.
Often being paranoid simply means that you are equipped with all the information.
IxCimi: ROFL do I get extra credit for option "C" or "D?"
"All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. 'Reality control,' they called it; in Newspeak, 'doublethink.'" (George Orwell, 1984)
IxCimi: there is a school of thinking that only imperialists are entitled to a conscience. Of course, then there is the history of the American intelligence community that grew out of New Haven, Connecticut and the drug running by the Russell family and the "co-incidental" ties to The Watch Tower Tract Society. I think this might be referred to as evangelical drug pushing or The Church of the C.I.A. With the plethora of windup Manchurian Candidates in America today, the combined work of The C.I.A. and The ABTT Networks is mission accomplished.
shermann7: it's very easy to write about anyone, especially public figures. Somehow, because someone took the time to write it, so many people give credence to it. I merely dredged up the piece to demonstrate just how easy it is to smear someone. Stephanie's “Amens!” simply affirms her own hard-core bigotry.
I am first and foremost for restoring the republic. My work didn't start with Ron Paul and it won't end with him. I don't chase political messiahs.
wall_rus: one of the seven founders of Hands Across New Jersey told my late friend and me that after the referendum pushes and the monumental toppling of New Jersey state legislators and senators, they were approached with a gift of ten thousand dollars and a promise for more IF they would do some activism that would be suggested. She came to us, because we warned her beforehand that it would happen.
bbotcs: ever since Ohio 2004, I've been most distrustful of the Diebold machines. Somehow, several thousand votes got tallied for Hitlery. The Zogby poll couldn't have been off that much.
This is Stephanie's boy: BTW the Internet savvy can find thousands more like this.
"Hope is on the Way"
The Disturbing Words of John Edwards
By JOHN CHUCKMAN
I heard several lines from John Edwards' convention speech on the radio before I clicked it off. Anymore and I would have vomited.
As it was, I experienced a horrible flashback to being a twelve-year old at the Midwest Baptists' Camp Sycamore, sitting in the sweltering cinderblock meeting hall, shirt stuck to the back of a card-table chair, while a strutting little preacher sprayed beads of sweat and globs of spit into the twilight yelling about hell.
John Edwards is pure Elmer Gantry.
Well, what would you expect from a guy who spent twenty years chasing ambulances, looking for deep pockets to sue, always waving his arms and smiling like a chipmunk? America's litigation lawyers and its evangelists-for-profit have a lot in common, and when they come from places like Dog Bite, North Carolina, it's almost impossible to tell them apart. There's always a syrupy sweet exterior, the beneficent smile--just think of Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson--in the ruthless pursuit of things that human society would be better off without.
Here's a few lines from John's official site on how he sees his career:
For 20 years, John dedicated his career to representing families and children hurt by the negligence of others. Standing up against the powerful insurance industry and their armies of lawyers, John helped these families through the darkest moments of their lives to overcome tremendous challenges. His passionate advocacy for people like the folks who worked in the mill with his father earned him respect and recognition across the country.
That sounds like a promo for the next episode of "Rescuing Little Nell from the Clutches of Snidely Whiplash." Of course, it's what the words don't say that is often important. Why did John only stand up for "families and children"? Is there something wrong with representing people without families or children? Of course not, but his language is reclaimed manure from the Republican family-values compost heap.
John stood against armies of lawyers? No, actually John swelled the ranks of lawyers who now swarm America like the aftereffect of a lab-accident release of killer bees, spreading conflict and fear everywhere they appear. The blurb doesn't say that in twenty years John had made himself a very rich man through litigation, that is by helping to raise insurance premiums for everyone, but that's the truth. "Standing up against the powerful insurance industry" could just as well read, "Mining the huge revenues of the insurance industry for all he could haul away."
Like any of America's current crop of crocodile-tear evangelists hoping to witness a repeat of the miracle of the loaves and fishes from a collection plate, John helped families through their "darkest moments," just managing to accumulate a fortune by the time he was in his forties. Well, I'm not against success, just against misrepresenting what it is you did.
Since most litigation is socially disruptive and economically unproductive, there is something particularly disturbing about one of its predatory practitioners seeking high office. After all, it is the abject failure of American legislators to provide sufficient enlightened laws and decent regulations that makes the threatening jungle where litigation flourishes.
Reading the balance of John's speech on the Internet had the advantage of not having to hear his backwoods, folksy tone and watch his flamboyant, well-practiced gestures, but I still quickly grasped why John was so successful at litigation. People would settle just to escape having to hear him for months in court. My favorite passage of his speech is this:
When you wake up and sit with your kids at the kitchen table, talking to them about the great possibilities in America, you make sure that they know that John and I believe at our core that tomorrow can be better than today. Like all of us, I have learned a lot of lessons in my life. Two of the most important are that first, there will always be heartache and struggle-you can't make it go away. But the other is that people of good and strong will can make a difference. One lesson is a sad lesson and the other's inspiring. We are Americans and we choose to be inspired
Apart from the fact that half of all America's marriages end in divorce, you could never convince me that there are many of the remaining families who sit around a breakfast table talking up "the great possibilities of America." Can't you just see squirming kids, screaming about how someone ate all the Lucky Charms or what a jerk the math teacher is, falling silent as a father decides to lift his Lincolnesque brows, perhaps having offered the blessing for the morning's Pop Tarts, to invoke the great possibilities of America? Doesn't that sound just a little bizarre? If this is what happens at John's house, you should be afraid of his holding office. If this isn't what happens at John's house, why is he saying it?
The truth is, and I'm sure John knows this, few families even sit together at the breakfast table in America, and, if they do, there's a better-than-even chance that a television is mindlessly blaring the whole time. As for millions of poor families, there is no breakfast on the table. Isn't that why Head Start supplies the kids with food at school? Even in suburban middle-class families, it's all they can do to each make it out of the door on time with rush-hour commutes and drop-offs for the privileged kids' heavy schedule of activities.
And how do like that injunction about adding to the breakfast-table sermon, "you make sure that they know that John and I believe at our core that tomorrow can be better than today." John and I believe at our core? Why can't they just believe? Why must it be at their core, whatever that means? The word suggests a nuclear reactor rather than a human being. Anyway, more than a few disturbed personalities in history lay claim to some kind of mystical core something-or-other. Frankly, this statement is so patronizing and ridiculous, it makes me wonder about John's rationality.
And what does John mean about tomorrow being better than today? It resembles the words of a certain old American religious huckster who used to open his pitch for money by saying "Something GOOD is going to happen to YOU!" But it is worse than that, because it is so utterly implausible and silly. He is giving you an injunction to talk seriously to your kids about the fatuous advertising claims of two bought-and-paid-for politicians.
John has one or more mini-sermons in almost every brief passage. You'd think he was running for church deacon instead of high political office. I like his great first lesson, "there will always be heartache and struggle-you can't make it go away." Is that what the leaders of a great nation are supposed to talk about? Do we need national elections to hear lines borrowed from Oprah Winfrey?
Then there's, "But the other is that people of good and strong will can make a difference. One lesson is a sad lesson and the other's inspiring. We are Americans and we choose to be inspired."
John probably has in mind the kind of "inspired" a preacher talks about, as the inspired Word of God. That kind of inspired allows of no mistakes, because God can't make any. It also allows of no questions or critics. Nice stuff for a politician to embrace--feel self-righteous while effectively telling people to shut-up.
In the real world, and it is the job of politicians to deal with the real world, inspired is not always a sound state of mind. Inspired about what? Inspired to do what? People are just as likely to be inspired to do terrible things as good things. The word is often used by the flunkies of great tyrants. Germans regularly used the word to describe Der F?hrer. The ghastly blood-letting of Vietnam was inspired by a loopy, religious-like belief in the need to stop communism. Would you say that that smiling humbug, Pat Robertson, was inspired when he recently advocated America's invading Iran to overthrow the heathens?
The passage is full of question-begging phrases. Make a difference to what? I can't help thinking of the cliche about the path to hell being paved with good intentions. Sorry, John, but there's no shortage of leaders with strong wills in the world, and each of them believes in his own goodness. That fact is almost certainly one of the human race's true curses.
The rest of John's speech is sprinkled with soul-deadening cliches and even contradictions. At one point, he said, "I stand here tonight ready to work with you and John [Kerry] to make America strong again." Well, I think the last thing any thinking person on the planet wants are people working to make America stronger. America has destabilized two countries, killed tens of thousands of innocent people, tortured, and improperly imprisoned simply because it had the power to do so. Power is like that, as Lord Acton so wisely said, it corrupts. Chase after enough of it, and you get absolute corruption.
John's speech takes on the theme of two Americas, and were he to deal with the genuine problem of two distinct and separate societies in America (actually, I think it is three, including the wealthy class represented by all the Presidential candidates)), he might have said something worthwhile. John tells us: "Because the truth is, we still live in two different Americas: one for people who have lived the American Dream and don't have to worry, and another for most Americans who work hard and still struggle to make ends meet. It doesn't have to be that way." But it was John himself who already told us how struggle and difficulties won't go away, so what's he saying?
On education, John says: "We shouldn't have two public school systems in this country: one for the most affluent communities, and one for everybody else. None of us believe that the quality of a child's education should be controlled by where they live or the affluence of their community."
John must know perfectly well that education is not primarily a responsibility of the federal government under America's 18th-century Constitution, so what's he talking about? What does he propose to do to change a situation where some suburban high schools have PhDs teaching and classes enjoy trips to Europe, while urban schools have labs with rusted taps and Bunsen burners that don't work?
The truth is that all good things in America, including medical care and political influence, are rationed according to ability to pay. So why would education be any different?
John adds: "We shouldn't have two different economies in America: one for people who are set for life, their kids and grandkids will be just fine, and then one for most Americans who live paycheck to paycheck." What does that mean, beyond populist hot air? I have no idea, and I suspect John doesn't either.
Here's Preacher John on adversity and hardship: "and you know what happens if something goes wrong-a child gets sick, somebody gets laid off, or there's a financial problem, you go right off the cliff. And what's the first thing to go? Your dreams." Your dreams? I really think dreams are the last thing people experiencing hardship worry about. They are worried about getting through with a shred of dignity, perhaps about surviving. Is John offering them genuine help or an airy hand-out of dreams and inspiration?
Here's a few selected gems from Preacher John on 9/11:
We will do whatever it takes, for as long as it takes, to make sure that never happens again, not to our America. We will strengthen our homeland security and protect our ports, safeguard our chemical plants, and support our firefighters, police officers and EMT's. We will always use our military might to keep the American people safe.And we will have one clear unmistakable message for al Qaida and the rest of these terrorists. You cannot run. You cannot hide. And we will destroy you.
Does John think there are people in America--other than its substantial population of militia types, survivalists, millenarianists, and those looking forward to Armageddan--who want that to happen again? Does he think there's people, other than the two million or so in America's prisons, who don't support police?
John's promise to hunt down terrorists is pure comic-book superhero, and isn't it exactly what the delusional Bush believes he's been doing all along? What does John propose that is different? He says absolutely nothing about using proper diplomatic and legal channels to hunt down violent criminals or about strengthening international institutions. No, it's all America this and America that, the same totally narcissistic stuff that's making the world sick of hearing from America. Nobody wants a friend who only talks about himself and refuses to help anyone except on his own terms, but Americans like John think those same qualities somehow become attractive traits in world relations. Like his partner-candidate, Kerry, he promises only more threats about not hesitating to use the military to kill more people.
Keep in mind that John, sitting as he does on a Senate intelligence committee, has an extremely high intelligence clearance and ask yourself what he was able to forecast or advocate either before or after 9/11. Not much is the answer. John's pet project now is to start a new domestic spy agency--still another multi-billion-dollar agency on top the vast existing network of intrusive agencies and one dedicated specifically to spying on the homeland's residents. Does that sound like someone genuinely concerned about rights and freedoms? Someone should ask John if he is committed to rescinding the execrable Patriot Act, but I doubt he'd receive an honest answer.
Having Preacher John teamed up with Kerry--that drearily ambitious man whose concept of bravery ran to shooting civilians safely from a riverboat in Vietnam--leaves me with a bleak outlook for America and thereby the world. That this dishonest pair and the insipid Bush are the best America offers as leaders says something terrible about that frighteningly-powerful nation: it suffers a devastating poverty of imagination and spirit.
http://www.counterpunch.org/chuckman07312004.html
StephanieVanbryce: are these your own words, automaton, or did you copy them from your '30-'40s German counterparts?
You are a co architect of your prison. You are culpable for the Iraq invasion and the coming attack against Iran. All that blood is on your hands.
bbotcs: fair enough question and one worthy of good debate. Far and away, I have favored Dennis Kucinich as the Democrat Party's presidential nominee. His biggest plus is that he is not a think tank member and has gone against the recent push for American hegemony and domestic totalitarianism.
Unfortunately, the great force of concentrated power to the point of monopoly has long utilized principles of Hegel and Marx. Dennis has always repulsed the rule of law. He advances Big Mother government usurping The U.S. Constitution. In the final analysis, he still supports the dereliction of Congressional duty to coin money via the ongoing hands off of the privately owned and criminal Federal Reserve. How inconsistent he is on this. He has long declared being against all privatization of government enterprises, yet makes the exception for the most destructive force in American governmental policies and politics.
Furthermore, he pushes the bogus science behind “global warming” and fails to grasp the illegal immigration issue. I liked his attempts against Cheney, but he is all talk on 9/11 accountability. The cabal heavily pushed communism, at first, but now has looked to a NWO through American dominance. Dennis Kucinich is a dinosaur of the past pushes of the Hegelian dialectic.
brainlessone: CFR member Michelle Obama has a convenient memory and/or knowledge lapse like all racists. Overwhelming statistics demonstrate that any harm coming to a black, especially a light-skinned one, at a gas station would likely come from another black, typically a darker-skinned one.
It is a prevailing philosophy in the more educated black community that the greatest racism comes from other black folks.
STRIPER: thanks for the post and welcome aboard.
wall_rus: so the moral is that girls who live in grass houses shouldn't swim out to the sea or they'll end up throwing stones for eternity like a crazed bird?
bartermania: yeppers, it's called making lemonade out of a lemon. Had he not been snubbed by Faux, then he couldn't have had the better showcase tonight.
The people shouldn't fear the propagandists. The propagandists should fear the people.