Jump to content

Saddam Stretched


Dechristo

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 392
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[font:Impact]S[/font]hU[font:Comic Sans MS]T[/font] [font:Arial Black]U[/font]p!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.......................................................................................................................................................................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are plenty of factually correct statements in Mein Kampf, but the presence of isolated facts in the text doesn't necessarily validate Hitler's central argument.

 

In the case of the Bin Ladens, they've been the principal contractors for the Saudi Royal family for decades, and amassed a fortune as the result of that relationship. Given the size and scope of the conglomerate that they operate, and the wealth that they've amassed, they probably have stakes in an untold number of corporations, hedge-funds, etc. I'd be astonished if they didn't have equity stakes in every company in the S&P 500. So, the Bin Laden family - of which there are literally hundreds of members by this point - had a stake in the Carlyle Group - ergo...the Bush administration is complicit in a conspiracy to bring down the Twin Towers.

 

I have it on good authority that a member of the Bin Laden family consumed a beverage produced by the Coca Cola company. This is a fact. Ergo the CEO of Coca-Cola might as well have been on the plane with Atta or huddled in a cave with Osama.

 

 

Oh yeah, drinking Coca Cola, selling arms and weapons to the Saudis, funding Bin Laden to fight the Soveits - its all the same. They're rich - they have ties to everything. Bury your head in the sand and ignore it - you'll feel much better.

 

JB, I never alleged that Bush brought down the towers. That may or may not be true - but I think there are much larger questions of whether and how the Bush family's business dealings have impacted our national security interests and whether they have used their political positions to financially benefit themselves and their friends to the detriment of those security interests.

 

But the Bin Ladens probably eat pop rocks too, so I'll just tune back into infomercials for the ginsu knive knowing you're on the muthafucka.

 

 

Your seem to think that your allegations are actually more fully substantiated and more consequential than the pop-rocks example, but your essential claim is no more well established. Take a fact, make an allegation, and then engage in some far-ranging speculation. Same model, different specifics.

 

This "Until someone can prove otherwise, I believe X" model of thinking is a hallmark of the paranoid and the deluded, and your last post should be included in the revised-and-updated edition of Hofstatder's tome. "Until you can prove to me that the toaster in my kitchen DIDN'T come alive and try to molest me last night, you've got no right to question this claim. There is a toaster in my kitchen. I was in my house last night. These are facts...."

 

Sorry - but the passion and commitment behind your claims is not the least bit consistent with the either the magnitude of the evidence nor the power - cough - of the arguments that you've brought to bear to support them, so don't be surprised if folks beyond the ideological ramparts are not persuaded by either.

 

 

JB, what allegations and what passion and commitment? I have posed a couple of questions - I offered no answers and I set forth no hypotheses or speculation and certainly not an argument. You dogmatic fascination with labeling people paranoid/ideological/deluded and generally intellectucally inferior to yourself is seriously clouding your basic reading comprehension skills amigo.

 

Dissent is partiotic - we ought to look skeptically upon our leaders when their business deals overlap with their political roles as public servants. You can label people, call them names, belittle them and generally be an elitist ass towards them with your fancy prose and acadmic theories, but our leaders should answer the questions instead of hiding behind a wall of elitism and privilege. The American public is tired of being ridiculed for posing perfectly good questions - witness the last election.

 

This calls to mind the same essay from which the oft-misunderstood "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." tidbit was taken. Here's another section:

 

"Some claim a place in the list of patriots, by an acrimonious and unremitting opposition to the court.

 

This mark is by no means infallible. Patriotism is not necessarily included in rebellion. A man may hate his king, yet not love hius country. He that has been refused a reasonable, or unreasonable request, who thinks his merit underrated, and sees his influence declining, begins soon to talk of natural equality, the absurdity of "many made for one," the original compact, the foundation of authority, and the majesty of the people. As his political melancholy increases, he tells, and, perhaps, dreams, of the advances of the prerogative, and the dangers of arbitrary power; yet his design, in all his declamation, is not to benefit his country, but to gratify his malice.

 

These, however, are the most honest of the opponents of government; their patriotism is a species of disease; and they feel some part of what they express. But the greater, far the greater number of those who rave and rail, and inquire and accuse, neither suspect nor fear, nor care for the publick; but hope to force their way to riches, by virulence and invective, and are vehement and clamorous, only that they may be sooner hired to be silent.

 

A man sometimes starts up a patriot, only by disseminating discontent, and propagating reports of secret influence, of dangerous counsels, of violated rights, and encroaching usurpation.

 

This practice is no certain note of patriotism. To instigate the populace with rage beyond the provocation, is to suspend publick happiness, if not to destroy it. He is no lover of his country, that unnecessarily disturbs its peace. Few errours and few faults of government, can justify an appeal to the rabble; who ought not to judge of what they cannot understand, and whose opinions are not propagated by reason, but caught by contagion.

 

The fallaciousness of this note of patriotism is particularly apparent, when the clamour continues after the evil is past."

 

Making wild accusations and conjectures about public figures that you don't care for is one thing, holding the government to account with fair and intelligent scrutiny is another, amigo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These, however, are the most honest of the opponents of government; their patriotism is a species of disease; and they feel some part of what they express. But the greater, far the greater number of those who rave and rail, and inquire and accuse, neither suspect nor fear, nor care for the publick; but hope to force their way to riches, by virulence and invective, and are vehement and clamorous, only that they may be sooner hired to be silent.

 

:grlaf:

 

I give - you uncovered my true invetivenessiss.

 

Now I'll STFU if someone will pay me. Who wants to hire me? I can't wait to strike it rich!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"i couldn't find anything on 4 nazis in the current administration. buckaroo, any links or info?"

 

I had the gyst of it more or less correct but my memory failed on the details. They were on bush srs. campaign staff, not his admin and they weren't German Nazis but Nazi collaborators and sympathizers. But there were as many as 7, not just the 4.

 

The point being that it's the Nazi/fascist ideals that are infused throughout the bush family history, not the actual party, athough the grandfather had very close connections directly to Hitler.

 

"a dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, as long as I'm the dictator"

 

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

 

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?noframes;read=15726

 

In late summer, during the 1988 campaign, the seeds of a major Bush scandal began to take roots. On August 2 1988, the Bush campaign, in a press conference announced the formation the Coalition of American Nationalities to coordinate the campaign activities of "ethnic groups".

Five weeks later on September 8th, The Washington Jewish Week charged that several of Bush's ethnic advisory committee were "well known anti-Semites and pro-fascists." The article focused on four Bush advisors, including Jerome Brentar, who had worked with groups who claimed the Holocaust was a hoax, Ignatius Billinsky president of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America which is described by Reporter Russ Bellant as "heavily influenced" by "anti Semites and collaborators with Hitler and apologists for Nazism."

The article also focused on Florian Galdau who was described by Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal "as the leader of a Romanian pro-Nazi and anti-Semitic movement in New York City", and known racist and anti-Semite Philip Guarino. The most shocking character though was Laszlo Pasztor, who served in World War II as "an official in a anti-Semitic Hungarian government controlled by the anti-Semitic Arrow Cross"

Henry Siegman executive director of the American Jewish Congress said that "It suggests a high degree of insensitivity or incompetence on the part of Bush's staff." Mr. Siegman also expected Bush to "not only remove these people but to repudiate what they stand for." Albert Vorspan, senior vice-president of the Union of American Hebrews called the story "outrageous and frightening" that the Bush campaign would harbor such "notorious extremists." Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League said "there is no place in any campaign for anti-Semites. The League urges that these persons be summarily removed."

The Bush campaign spokesman Mark Goodin, announced at a press conference about the charges: " If there is anything to them, we'll take action." James Baker, Bush campaign chairman later said "There is no place in this campaign for anti-Semitism, racism, bigotry or people who espouse these views. Any individuals with those views will not be welcome in this campaign."

On September 9th Bush spokesmen Mark Goodin announced that Jerome Brentar had resigned from the campaign. Two days later, The Washington Post carried a story that Bush Advisor Fred Malek had also resigned from the campaign. Malek, according to the Post, while serving as aide to President Nixon had compiled lists of employees with "Jewish-sounding" names that Nixon suspected were part of a "Jewish" cabal at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Michael Miller, executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council tells the New York Times "There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that these individuals have expressed sympathies with Nazism."

On September 12 the Bush Campaign announced five more resignations from Galdua and Guarino, Billinsky, Pasztor and Bohan Fedorak. It was soon revealed that Mr. Fedorak hosted a Bush campaign appearance in July of 1988 which was co-hosted by a pro-Nazi group.

A few days later Radi Slavoff, national co-chairman of Bulgarians for Bush, becomes the seventh Nazi sympathizer to resign.

On September 15th CNN runs an interview with Jerome Brentar, who claims he never really resigned from the Bush campaign and denied that the Nazis deliberately gassed Jews during the Holocaust. Bush spokesperson David Sandor quickly responded to the interview: "This is obviously in conflict with what we have said. We stand by what we have said. Mr. Sandor also said that "George Bush is their friend" in regard to the seven staffers who resigned.

On September 27, in a Boston Herald column Alan Dershowitz revealed that he had information regarding the Republican Party and Nazi sympathizers. Mr. Dershowitz writes "I first heard about the presence of Nazis in the hierarchy of the Republican Party as far back as 1970." While he was working on the New York Governor's race Dershowitz said he "learned that several members of a Republican 'Captive Nations Committee' were Nazi sympathizers who had been personally involved in the Holocaust in Europe, as well as with racist and neo-Nazi groups in America."

That same day, New York Post columnist Pete Hamill wrote a column "George Bush And His Fascist Fan Club" and quotes Menachem Roseensaft, president of the Labor Zionist Alliance and leader of the International Network of Children of the Holocaust: "Clearly Bush wanted them out once they were exposed, but he still wants the votes of their constituency."

Four days before election day, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that another Bush ethnic coalition leader Akselis Mangulis, is accused of belonging to the Latvian Legion, which during World War II was connected to the Nazi SS. Before the paper hit the stand Mr. Mangulis resigned. The following Tuesday, mostly because of his strategist Lee Atwater's self proclaimed "guerrilla tactics" Bush defeated Michael Dukakis in a landslide.

Even though James Baker said there was "no place in the campaign for anti-Semitism (and) racism" Bush campaign strategist Lee Atwater, a prot�g� of Senator Strom Thurmond, who used anti-Semitism to win a congressional seat for Carroll Campbell in 1978, stayed in his position while this whole scandal erupted. Mr. Atwater also created the notoriously racist Willie Horton ad, associating Michael Dukakis with images of black prisoners furloughed from jail raping and pillaging the streets of White America.

Over a year later on February 2 1990 in a USA Today article, Tom Squitieri writes that "Four Key Republican activists, ousted from George Bush's 1988 campaign amid charges of anti-Semitic or pro-fascist links are back working for the party." According the article, two of the four were Fred Malek and Phil Guarino.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"i couldn't find anything on 4 nazis in the current administration. buckaroo, any links or info?"

 

I had the gyst of it more or less correct but my memory failed on the details....

 

No. Actually, you didn't. Your memory didn't fail you - you simply heard an obscure snippet or two once or twice and fused it with your belief system, then polished it up a bit and tried to present it here as fact. And you got caught. Simple, really.

 

Now, tell me more about those evil Jews who control 90% of the media. Even if you can demonstrate this - which I doubt - what does it matter? Do you believe all American Jews are really Israeli agents? Do you know where their loyalties lie? Do you understand how racist your comment was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

""A side note on beef, which has the greatest variety of amino acids of any domesticated meat, tastes fucking great, and is not unhealthy if eaten in moderation""

 

Agree, it's not beef per se. It's too many servings combined with lack of exercise combined with the chemicals. The cooking/heating doesn't do much good either. The most harmful aspect is the heated fats. In Europe raw beef is served as steak tartar(sp?). The more raw you can take it the better, but then bacteria becomes a problem.

 

Of course you can go with sashimi once a week which is what I do when I get run down in these long grey winters. I think it's part of Japan's secret, after all they are a fierce competitor in the engineering/manufacturing sector.

 

"Grass fed beef raised with proper pasture rotation is a completely sound environmental practice, typically much more so than grain production on the same land. Grass fed beef raised on semi arid natural grassland does not require...""

 

Your right here too, the only problem maybe it's not as profitable and won't address the volume needed for mcD's.

 

The beef rant was part hyperbole but the base argument is US colon cancer rates, which are above all other countries is tied to too much meat, meat which has an adverse affect on the environment by the way it's currently raised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nobody but you said they were evil. thats racist.

 

That's called sarcasm you fucking dolt. What is racist, is Buckaroo strongly suggesting that American (or Israeli) Jews -who supposedly control American media - have hidden motives or a unified agenda. Even a dumb-fuck like you should be able to see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Are you a member of the Verendra7/Jmckay fantasy club too? I hear its very exclusive."

 

Shhh....don't interrupt him. He's in the middle of negotiations with representatives that the Skull and Bones Society, the Saudi Royal Court, and the Freemasons have sent to buy his silence.

 

Or perhaps he's busy composing a monograph lauding the inspired patriotism of the survivalist wingnuts who had the courage to ask the questions about whether or not Bill Clinton was conspiring with the U.N. and the Zionist Occupation Government in their plot to impose libertine homoatheosecularism on their children via the shock troops deployed in the black helicopters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know - has their paranoia scored them a sweet job yet?

 

Yes, keep dodging the point, restated here for your benefit:

 

Making wild accusations and conjectures about public figures that you don't care for is one thing, holding the government to account with fair and intelligent scrutiny is another..."

 

The simple fact is that its not the simple act of criticizing or questioning the government in an act of "Dissent," that determines whether or not those actions are patriotic. The motives that inspire those actions are what matters when making this determination.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to deny jewish ownership of american media is akin to denying reality.

 

it would then be a surprise to find the same news on all outlets at the same time.

if that is not the case,please enlighten us, Mr fairweather american

 

BOTH YOU AND BUCKAROO ARE ASSUMING THAT ALL JEWS THINK ALIKE SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY SHARE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. That's a form of racism. Got it?

 

As Archenemy recently asked: "What is wrong with you?"

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YOU jump to that conclusion. like jb 's qoted piece on filling the blanks to suit your agenda.

 

i can speak only for myself. i use facts.

if all the media is owned by one group,be it martians

and all the outlets ran varied views about varied news items,

it would be pointless to mention.

 

i can call it the american media monopoly if you prefer.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...