THE FORCE THAT THROUGH THE GREEN FUSE DRIVES THE FLOWER

The force that through the green fuse drives the flower
Drives my green age; that blasts the roots of trees
Is my destroyer.
And I am dumb to tell the crooked rose
My youth is bent by the same wintry fever.

The force that drives the water through the rocks
Drives my red blood; that dries the mouthing streams
Turns mine to wax.
And I am dumb to mouth unto my veins
How at the mountain spring the same mouth sucks.

The hand that whirls the water in the pool
Stirs the quicksand; that ropes the blowing wind
Hauls my shroud sail.
And I am dumb to tell the hanging man
How of my clay is made the hangman's lime.

The lips of time leech to the fountain head;
Love drips and gathers, but the fallen blood
Shall calm her sores.
And I am dumb to tell a weather's wind
How time has ticked a heaven round the stars.

And I am dumb to tell the lover's tomb
How at my sheet goes the same crooked worm.

This 'stimulus' regime will never succeed in reviving the tattered world economy. President Hoover tried the same thing in 1930. It failed then and it will fail now.

However, as a means of redistribution of wealth the results the program will be a spectacular and enduring success. What we are witnessing is the inevitable result of liberal republican democracy-- Socialism- wherein all increasingly scarce resources will be henceforth rationed. ‘From each in accord with his abilities and to each in regard to his needs’ is an idea whose time has now arrived.

And to those who mourn for the ‘productive’ sector of society it’s high time for them to accede to the truth that the real problem with the world economy is not[i] lack[/i] of production but rather meaningless and destructive production. Entropic resolve. The overwhelming majority of the world's workers are engaged in transforming the earth into a vast strip-mine dedicated to producing abject shit for the benefit of those whom FDR called the 'economic royalists.' The famous graffiti at the Sorbonne during the New Paris Commune of 1968 will prove to be not only prescient, but will also serve as a warning: ‘Humanity will not be happy until the last capitalist is strung-up from the guts of the last bureaucrat.’

The foreshadowed New Revolution is quietly upon us. The Malthusian garrote, now tighted and drawn, has made it so.

Rage against the dying of the light.

GENERAL STRIKER SAYS:

VOTE EARLY VOTE OFTEN!

Here are the positions of the Colorado Democratic Party. Print and take with you to the poll. My only personal recommendation would be to always vote against any gambling expansion. NO TO FASCIST REPUGLICAN BUSHBOTS! ALWAYS VOTE DEMOCRATIC! ALWAYS SUPPORT UNIONS! ALWAYS SUPPORT CHOICE!

at ease now people/ smoke em if ya got em

Kim

Ballot Measure

Short Description

CDP Position

Platform Citations

Amend. 46

Anti-Affirmative Action

OPPOSE

C124, C130, C185, C205, C206, C207, C532, C536, C537, C584, C587, C839, C841, C843, C844

Amend. 47

So-called "Right To Work"

OPPOSE

C833, C834, C867, C868, C869, C870, C871, C872, C873, C874, C879, C880

Amend. 48

Definition of a fertilized egg as a person in the Colorado Constitution

OPPOSE

C111, C142, C143, C190, C192, C193, C200, C201

Amend. 49

"Paycheck Deception"

OPPOSE

C871, C876

Amend. 50

Expansion of Limited Gaming

NEUTRAL

Amend. 51

Increased Funding for Development Disabilities Services

SUPPORT

C251, C252, C253

Amend. 52

Diversion of severance tax for highway projects

OPPOSE

C633, C634, C635, C636, C637, C638, C639, C644, C645, C646, C647, C648, C695, C696, C699, C704, C720, C721, C722, C723, C724, C725, C990, C1001, C1003, C1237

Amend. 53

Executive Liability for Corporate Fraud

removed from the ballot

Amend. 54

Preventing political participation by government contractors

OPPOSE

C871, C879

Amend. 55

Just Cause for employee termination

removed from the ballot

Amend. 56

Employer responsibility to provide employee health insurance

removed from the ballot

Amend. 57

Remedies for workplace disabilities

removed from the ballot

Amend. 58

Oil and gas extraction tax for funding education and other programs

SUPPORT

C506, C510, C545, C532, C536, C537, C584, C587, C1075, C1076

Amend. 59

Savings Account for Education

SUPPORT

C506, C510, C545, C532, C536, C537, C584, C587, C925, C1056, C1070

Ref. L

Reducing minimum age requirement to serve in state legislature

SUPPORT

C385

Ref. M

Removing obsolete Colorado Constitution provisions about land valuation

NEUTRAL

Ref. N

Removing obsolete Colorado Constitution provisions about alcohol

NEUTRAL

Ref. O

Altering rules for citizen-initiated statutory and constitutional changes

NEUTRAL

From the right at Antiwar.com

Perhaps most egregious is the failure to delve with anything more than superficial slogans into the possible reasons for hostility to the West or the U.S. in particular. Can it possibly be because Arabs "hate democracy"? Most of them wouldn't know what democracy was if they suddenly woke up living in a fully democratic society. They have never experienced it. What they have experienced is invasion and military occupation by countries that call themselves democracies – several Western European colonial powers and now the United States. There are now 22 times as many Western soldiers in Anwar alone as the West had in the Middle East at the time of the Crusades, but Western journalists are not inclined or are not allowed to wonder if that has anything to do with why those benighted people hate us so.

Does The Bailout Pass
The Smell Test?
By Paul Craig Roberts
10-16-8

The explanation that has been given for the financial crisis does not match up with the solution that has been devised. Moreover, the windows into the crisis offered by the authorities are opaque rather than transparent. The only clarity we have is that the crisis is resulting in financial concentration and that the bailout constitutes a massive raid by financial crooks on both taxpayers and central bank reserves in the US and Europe. The public monies that are being directed to private financial institutions are huge. According to news reports, Germany is devoting $540 billion to shoring up German banks, England is devoting $73 billion, and France has pledged over $400 billion. The US now has four separate bailouts underway, $800 billion for banks, $200 billion for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, $85 billion for the insurer AIG, and $25 billion for the US auto industry. These figures add to more than $2.1 trillion. Some of these public monies are for purchasing troubled paper assets. Others are to be directly injected into the banks as public supplied capital for private financial institutions, an ironic outcome for the free market ideology that resulted in the deregulation of the US financial system. According to news reports, in England the entire $73 billion is being poured into banks as publicly supplied new capital. In Germany $135 billion is for recapitalizing troubled banks. In the US Treasury Secretary Paulson is talking about using bailout money to purchase non-voting bank shares. How is it possible that a financial crisis of such magnitude hit with such suddenness and urgency, catching finance ministries and central banks unaware? If the problem is what the public has been told, namely that defaulting subprime mortgages are reducing the income flows through to the holders of the mortgage-backed securities, why isn't the bailout money being used to refinance the defaulting mortgages and to pay off the foreclosed mortgages? That would restore the value of the mortgage-backed securities, and it would not be necessary to pour huge amounts of taxpayers' money into recapitalizing banks and purchasing their bad assets. There is not an unmanageable number of defaulting mortgages. According to the US Treasury estimate, 90-93% of the mortgages are good. How does a 7% or 10% default rate on US mortgages translate into a systemic worldwide financial crisis? The popping of the US real estate bubble could not produce worldwide systemic financial crisis without the mark-to-market rule, short-sellers, and a great deal of hype and orchestration. Why did Secretary Paulson let Lehman Bros. fail when every other firm is bailed out? Did Lehman's failure, by unwinding its own large portfolio, push hedge funds and banks into panic selloffs that spread the crisis at home and abroad? The US Congress held no hearings on the crisis and consulted no independent experts. Congress responded dumbly to the financial crisis, just as it did following 9/11 when the Bush regime handed it the PATRIOT Act and the Afghan invasion. To secure Congress' acquiescence to the Paulson bailout, the Bush regime used threats of meltdown and martial law to panic Congress into turning over vast amounts of money for which accountability is lacking. The hype behind the Paulson bailout is the financial version of the mushroom cloud evocation used by the Bush regime to panic Congress into accepting the US invasion of Iraq. Is yet another hidden agenda at work? It is unclear how the bailout will play out. The monies for the US bailout will have to be borrowed abroad or printed. If foreign central banks need their dollar reserves in order to bail out their own banks that are polluted with toxic US financial instruments, the US Treasury might not have an easy time in the debt market. Moreover, the interest expense on an additional borrowed $700 billion will raise the US current account deficit and burden US taxpayers with higher interest payments. If the money has to be printed, inflation and dollar devaluation will depress living standards for most Americans. If the US economy sinks deeper into recession, lost jobs and rising interest rates on troubled mortgages will result in more defaults and foreclosures, thus further impairing mortgage-backed securities and requiring Congress to put more burdens on hard-pressed US taxpayers in behalf of the banks. The authorities have blamed subprime mortgages for the crisis. Why then does their solution fail to address the problem of the mortgages? Instead, the solution directs public money into an increasingly concentrated private financial sector, the management of which is not only vastly overpaid, but also has escaped accountability for the financial chicanery that, allegedly, threatens systemic financial meltdown unless bailed out by the taxpayers. Perhaps my nose is too sensitive, but this bailout doesn't pass the smell test. _____ Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan's first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow's Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.

Sarah Palin visits the White House!

developing...

The General Banned at AMKON



Comments at Boycotteverything.com

Anonymous said...

Hey General, Stop being a big girl and come back and play.

Some people can be a real pain in the arse, just have to leave those with the whore moans alone...

Come on, no one is using big words to abuse me.. How dull.

Fox

7:07 AM

General Striker said...

Nah, Fox. I can't put up with the bullshit censorship and nannyism there any longer. The nannies seem to think that their personal issues are somehow more important than the larger issue- the one that Amkon was supposed to represent, free speech. They choose to advocate for the protection of hermit crabs and to bitch about their nasty divorces while the big issues- like Freedom of Expression get short shrift and minor lip service. I'm over it bigtime. GN seems to take a self-serving and perverse joy in the fact that I've been banned from posting on several forums for exactly the reasons that her and Vick banned me there. I had hoped that Amkon was different. But c'est la vie. You give a little colonel a hat with a star and some power and this is the result. But I have enjoyed your take on things and will miss you and several other big issue strugglers over there.

Here are the telltale emails among the Amkoids:

ME,

Here are some emails that are germane to the issue. I posted this exchange on Amkon but I'm sure GN and her buddies (biddies?) will kill it immediately. Too bad because some important issues might have been discussed there. Hopefully someone else will post it. It seems that the admin team has circled the wagons and gone into self protection mode. Their hypocrisy is shocking.

Best,

Kim



Hi Kiwi,

Here's an exchange of emails between GN and me And let me belatedly add you and Fox to the list of those for whom my explanation was intended. And, no- 72 had nothing to do with this. It had to do with GN and Vick making censorship decisions on the basis of their parochial ideas of good taste.

Best,

Kim

On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 7:55 PM, <amerikankonspiracy@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello boycotteverything,

The following is an e-mail sent to you by KIWI via your account on "Forums

@ AmKon". If this message is spam, contains abusive or other comments you
find offensive please contact the webmaster of the board at the following
address:

amerikankonspiracy@gmail.com

Include this full e-mail (particularly the headers). Please note that the

reply address to this e-mail has been set to that of KIWI.

Message sent to you follows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

dont be selfish and deprive all the rest of us from you farkin clever funny
and most importantly,understandable posts!....dont no what happened but can
only imagine that 1972 was involved?.. the guy cannot hide his dislike for
you

KIWI

Hello boycotteverything,

The following is an e-mail sent to you by Yo Mama via your account on

"Forums @ AmKon". If this message is spam, contains abusive or other
comments you find offensive please contact the webmaster of the board at
the following address:

amerikankonspiracy@gmail.com

Include this full e-mail (particularly the headers). Please note that the

reply address to this e-mail has been set to that of Yo Mama.

Message sent to you follows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Your timeout is over.

You and I both know you got no where else to play.

We don't have a lot of rules, I'm just going to look at this as your
testing the limits.

Come back when you're ready. Nobody is going to hold it against you.

Next time an admin says stop, just stop. There's plenty of other trouble
you can get into/cause on the boards. LOL

Now put on your big girl panties and we'll see you on the forum.

*muah*

Reply

Forward

Invite amerikankonspiracy@gmail.com to chat

show details 7:56 AM (4 minutes ago)

Reply

mailed-by gmail.com

Reply

Nah. Thanks anyway, K. I don't hold anything against you (or any other Amkoid) but i won't be back. When it comes to free speech I'm a radical purist- whether or not that's held against me. While I certainly respect your right to censor posts- it's your yard, afterall, self respect is a higher issue for me- And holding fast to what I consider the most sacred of human rights- the right to self expression in any form, dictates that I say adios and a hearty vaya con carne to Amkon. Please post this as I would have loved to explain my decision to Mojo, Jasn, Chii, Gummer, ME, Fox, Kiwi, Johnlear, and a few others- and in hopes that this bit of speaking from beyond the grave may serve to provoke a real discussion of free speech.

Canabalistically yours,

Rod Upyors, ANBUS President
Anti-Nannyist Brigade of the United States, LLC

On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 8:37 AM, <amerikankonspiracy@gmail.com> wrote:

- Show quoted text -

On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 8:26 AM, <amerikankonspiracy@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello boycotteverything,

The following is an e-mail sent to you by Martian Exile via your account on
"Forums @ AmKon". If this message is spam, contains abusive or other
comments you find offensive please contact the webmaster of the board at
the following address:

amerikankonspiracy@gmail.com

Include this full e-mail (particularly the headers). Please note that the
reply address to this e-mail has been set to that of Martian Exile.

Message sent to you follows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I requested of the cunt to give you my email, doubt she will,
...@yahoo.com, rest asure, I will raise hell.

--
lk walker

The thread that started it all is here. Note that some of the most insipid posts by various admins and my (Boycotteverything's) responses have been censored. A follow up thread by me that contained, for the most part, the emails quoted above was pulled in its entirety just minutes after it was started this morning since it exposed the admins in question as small minded little gauleiters who are embarrased by their own mendacity. Maybe there's an archived copy on Google that shows it all.

DENVER AUGUST 24th, 2008

"All we are saying, is give peace a chance."

Our brave children:

DNC report

From Antwar.com today: August 12, 2008 The American Military Crisis by Andrew Bacevich and Tom Engelhardt TomDispatch All you really need to know is that, at Robert Gates' Pentagon, they're still high on the term "the Long War." It's a phrase that first crept into our official vocabulary back in 2002 but was popularized by CENTCOM commander John Abizaid in 2004 – already a fairly long (war-)time ago. Now, Secretary of Defense Gates himself is plugging the term, as he did in April at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, quoting no less an authority than Leon Trotsky: "What has been called the Long War is likely to be many years of persistent, engaged combat all around the world in differing degrees of size and intensity. This generational campaign cannot be wished away or put on a timetable. There are no exit strategies. To paraphrase the Bolshevik Leon Trotsky, we may not be interested in the Long War, but the Long War is interested in us." The Long War has also made it front and center in the new "national defense strategy," which is essentially a call to prepare for a future of two, three, many Afghanistans. ("For the foreseeable future, winning the Long War against violent extremist movements will be the central objective of the U.S.") If you thought for a moment that in the next presidency some portion of those many billions of dollars now being sucked into the black holes of Iraq and Afghanistan was about to go into rebuilding American infrastructure or some other frivolous task, think again. Just read between the lines of that new national defense strategy document where funding for future conventional wars against "rising powers" is to be maintained, while funding for "irregular warfare" is to rise. The Pentagonization of the U.S., in other words, shows no sign of slowing down. Here, by the way, is the emphasis in the new Gates Doctrine – from a recent Pentagon briefing by the secretary of defense – that should make us all worry. "The principal challenge, therefore, is how to ensure that the capabilities gained and counterinsurgency lessons learned from Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the lessons relearned from other places where we have engaged in irregular warfare over the last two decades, are institutionalized within the defense establishment." Back to the future? And here's a riddle for our moment: How long is a Long War, when you've been there before (as were, in the case of Afghanistan, Alexander the Great, the imperial Brits, and the Soviets)? On the illusions of victory and the many miscalculations of the Bush administration when it came to the nature of American military power, no one in recent years has been more incisive than Andrew Bacevich, who experienced an earlier version of the Long War firsthand in Vietnam. His new book, The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism, has just been published. Short, sharp, to the point, it should be the book of the election season, if only anyone in power, or who might come to power, were listening. (The following piece, the first of two parts this week at TomDispatch, is adapted from section three of that book, "The Military Crisis.") But if you want the measure of our strange, dystopian moment, Barack Obama reportedly has a team of 300 foreign policy advisers – just about everyone ever found, however brain-dead, in a Democratic presidential rolodex – and yet Bacevich's name isn't among them. What else do we need to know? Tom Illusions of Victory How the United States did not reinvent war… but thought it did by Andrew Bacevich "War is the great auditor of institutions," the historian Corelli Barnett once observed. Since 9/11, the United States has undergone such an audit and been found wanting. That adverse judgment applies in full to America's armed forces. Valor does not offer the measure of an army's greatness, nor does fortitude, nor durability, nor technological sophistication. A great army is one that accomplishes its assigned mission. Since George W. Bush inaugurated his global war on terror, the armed forces of the United States have failed to meet that standard. In the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, Bush conceived of a bold, offensive strategy, vowing to "take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans, and confront the worst threats before they emerge." The military offered the principal means for undertaking this offensive, and U.S. forces soon found themselves engaged on several fronts. Two of those fronts –- Afghanistan and Iraq – commanded priority attention. In each case, the assigned task was to deliver a knockout blow, leading to a quick, decisive, economical, politically meaningful victory. In each case, despite impressive displays of valor, fortitude, durability, and technological sophistication, America's military came up short. The problem lay not with the level of exertion but with the results achieved. In Afghanistan, U.S. forces failed to eliminate the leadership of al-Qaeda. Although they toppled the Taliban regime that had ruled most of that country, they failed to eliminate the Taliban movement, which soon began to claw its way back. Intended as a brief campaign, the Afghan War became a protracted one. Nearly seven years after it began, there is no end in sight. If anything, America's adversaries are gaining strength. The outcome remains much in doubt. In Iraq, events followed a similar pattern, with the appearance of easy success belied by subsequent developments. The U.S. invasion began on March 19, 2003. Six weeks later, against the backdrop of a White House-produced banner proclaiming "Mission Accomplished," President Bush declared that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended." This claim proved illusory. Writing shortly after the fall of Baghdad, the influential neoconservatives David Frum and Richard Perle declared Operation Iraqi Freedom "a vivid and compelling demonstration of America's ability to win swift and total victory." Gen. Tommy Franks, commanding the force that invaded Iraq, modestly characterized the results of his handiwork as "unequaled in its excellence by anything in the annals of war." In retrospect, such judgments – and they were legion – can only be considered risible. A war thought to have ended on April 9, 2003, in Baghdad's al-Firdos Square was only just beginning. Fighting dragged on for years, exacting a cruel toll. Iraq became a reprise of Vietnam, although in some respects at least on a blessedly smaller scale. A New American Way of War? It wasn't supposed to be this way. Just a few short years ago, observers were proclaiming that the United States possessed military power such as the world had never seen. Here was the nation's strong suit. "The troops" appeared unbeatable. Writing in 2002, for example, Max Boot, a well-known commentator on military matters, attributed to the United States a level of martial excellence "that far surpasses the capabilities of such previous would-be hegemons as Rome, Britain, and Napoleonic France." With U.S. forces enjoying "unparalleled strength in every facet of warfare," allies, he wrote, had become an encumbrance: "We just don't need anyone else's help very much." Boot dubbed this the Doctrine of the Big Enchilada. Within a year, after U.S. troops had occupied Baghdad, he went further: America's army even outclassed Germany's Wehrmacht. The mastery displayed in knocking off Saddam, Boot gushed, made "fabled generals such as Erwin Rommel and Heinz Guderian seem positively incompetent by comparison." All of this turned out to be hot air. If the global war on terror has produced one undeniable conclusion, it is this: Estimates of U.S. military capabilities have turned out to be wildly overstated. The Bush administration's misplaced confidence in the efficacy of American arms represents a strategic misjudgment that has cost the country dearly. Even in an age of stealth, precision weapons, and instant communications, armed force is not a panacea. Even in a supposedly unipolar era, American military power turns out to be quite limited. How did it happen that Americans so utterly overappraised the utility of military power? The answer to that question lies at the intersection of three great illusions. According to the first illusion, the United States during the 1980s and 1990s had succeeded in reinventing armed conflict. The result was to make force more precise, more discriminating, and potentially more humane. The Pentagon had devised a new American Way of War, investing its forces with capabilities unlike any the world had ever seen. As President Bush exuberantly declared shortly after the fall of Baghdad in April 2003, "We've applied the new powers of technology … to strike an enemy force with speed and incredible precision. By a combination of creative strategies and advanced technologies, we are redefining war on our terms. In this new era of warfare, we can target a regime, not a nation." The distinction between regime and nation was a crucial one. By employing these new military techniques, the United States could eliminate an obstreperous foreign leader and his cronies, while sparing the population over which that leader ruled. Putting a missile through the roof of a presidential palace made it unnecessary to incinerate an entire capital city, endowing force with hitherto undreamed-of political utility and easing ancient moral inhibitions on the use of force. Force had been a club; it now became a scalpel. By the time the president spoke, such sentiments had already become commonplace among many (although by no means all) military officers and national security experts. Here lay a formula for certain victory. Confidence in military prowess both reflected and reinforced a post-Cold War confidence in the universality of American values. Harnessed together, they made a seemingly unstoppable one-two punch. With that combination came expanded ambitions. In the 1990s, the very purpose of the Department of Defense changed. Sustaining American global preeminence, rather than mere national security, became its explicit function. In the most comprehensive articulation of this new American Way of War, the Joint Chiefs of Staff committed the armed services to achieving what they called "full-spectrum dominance" – unambiguous supremacy in all forms of warfare, to be achieved by tapping the potential of two "enablers" – "technological innovation and information superiority." Full-spectrum dominance stood in relation to military affairs as the political scientist Francis Fukuyama's well-known proclamation of "the end of history" stood in relation to ideology: Each claimed to have unlocked ultimate truths. According to Fukuyama, democratic capitalism represented the final stage in political economic evolution. According to the proponents of full-spectrum dominance, that concept represented the final stage in the evolution of modern warfare. In their first days and weeks, the successive invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq both seemed to affirm such claims. How Not to "Support the Troops" According to the second illusion, American civilian and military leaders subscribed to a common set of principles for employing their now-dominant forces. Adherence to these principles promised to prevent any recurrence of the sort of disaster that had befallen the nation in Vietnam. If politicians went off half-cocked, as President Lyndon Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara had back in the 1960s, generals who had correctly discerned and assimilated the lessons of modern war could be counted on to rein them in. These principles found authoritative expression in the Weinberger-Powell Doctrine, which specified criteria for deciding when and how to use force. Caspar Weinberger, secretary of defense during most of the Reagan era, first articulated these principles in 1984. Gen. Colin Powell, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the early 1990s, expanded on them. Yet the doctrine's real authors were the members of the post-Vietnam officer corps. The Weinberger-Powell principles expressed the military's own lessons taken from that war. Those principles also expressed the determination of senior officers to prevent any recurrence of Vietnam. Henceforth, according to Weinberger and Powell, the United States would fight only when genuinely vital interests were at stake. It would do so in pursuit of concrete and attainable objectives. It would mobilize the necessary resources – political and moral as well as material – to win promptly and decisively. It would end conflicts expeditiously and then get out, leaving no loose ends. The spirit of the Weinberger-Powell Doctrine was not permissive; its purpose was to curb the reckless or imprudent inclinations of bellicose civilians. According to the third illusion, the military and American society had successfully patched up the differences that produced something akin to divorce during the divisive Vietnam years. By the 1990s, a reconciliation of sorts was under way. In the wake of Operation Desert Storm, "the American people fell in love again with their armed forces." So, at least, Gen. Colin Powell, one of that war's great heroes, believed. Out of this love affair a new civil-military compact had evolved, one based on the confidence that, in times of duress, Americans could be counted on to "support the troops." Never again would the nation abandon its soldiers. The all-volunteer force (AVF) – despite its name, a professional military establishment – represented the chief manifestation of this new compact. By the 1990s, Americans were celebrating the AVF as the one component of the federal government that actually worked as advertised. The AVF embodied the nation's claim to the status of sole superpower; it was "America's Team." In the wake of the Cold War, the AVF sustained the global Pax Americana without interfering with the average American's pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. What was not to like? Events since 9/11 have exposed these three illusions for what they were. When tested, the new American Way of War yielded more glitter than gold. The generals and admirals who touted the wonders of full spectrum dominance were guilty of flagrant professional malpractice, if not outright fraud. To judge by the record of the past twenty years, U.S. forces win decisively only when the enemy obligingly fights on American terms – and Saddam Hussein's demise has drastically reduced the likelihood of finding such accommodating adversaries in the future. As for loose ends, from Somalia to the Balkans, from Central Asia to the Persian Gulf, they have been endemic. When it came to the Weinberger-Powell Doctrine, civilian willingness to conform to its provisions proved to be highly contingent. Confronting Powell in 1993, Madeleine Albright famously demanded to know, "What's the point of having this superb military that you're always talking about, if we can't use it?" Mesmerized by the prospects of putting American soldiers to work to alleviate the world's ills, Albright soon enough got her way. An odd alliance that combined left-leaning do-gooders with jingoistic politicians and pundits succeeded in chipping away at constraints on the use of force. "Humanitarian intervention" became all the rage. Whatever restraining influence the generals exercised during the 1990s did not survive that decade. Lessons of Vietnam that had once seemed indelible were forgotten. Meanwhile, the reconciliation of the people and the army turned out to be a chimera. When the chips were down, "supporting the troops" elicited plenty of posturing but little by way of binding commitments. Far from producing a stampede of eager recruits keen to don a uniform, the events of 9/11 reaffirmed a widespread popular preference for hiring someone else's kid to chase terrorists, spread democracy, and ensure access to the world's energy reserves. In the midst of a global war of ostensibly earthshaking importance, Americans demonstrated a greater affinity for their hometown sports heroes than for the soldiers defending the distant precincts of the American imperium. Tom Brady makes millions playing quarterback in the NFL and rakes in millions more from endorsements. Pat Tillman quit professional football to become an army ranger and was killed in Afghanistan. Yet, of the two, Brady more fully embodies the contemporary understanding of the term patriot. Demolishing the Doctrine of the Big Enchilada While they persisted, however, these three illusions fostered gaudy expectations about the efficacy of American military might. Every president since Ronald Reagan has endorsed these expectations. Every president since Reagan has exploited his role as commander in chief to expand on the imperial prerogatives of his office. Each has also relied on military power to conceal or manage problems that stemmed from the nation's habits of profligacy. In the wake of 9/11, these puerile expectations – that armed force wielded by a strong-willed chief executive could do just about anything – reached an apotheosis of sorts. Having manifestly failed to anticipate or prevent a devastating attack on American soil, President Bush proceeded to use his ensuing global war on terror as a pretext for advancing grandiose new military ambitions married to claims of unbounded executive authority – all under the guise of keeping Americans "safe." With the president denying any connection between the events of Sept. 11 and past U.S. policies, his declaration of a global war nipped in the bud whatever inclination the public might have entertained to reconsider those policies. In essence, Bush counted on war both to concentrate greater power in his own hands and to divert attention from the political, economic, and cultural bind in which the United States found itself as a result of its own past behavior. As long as U.S. forces sustained their reputation for invincibility, it remained possible to pretend that the constitutional order and the American way of life were in good health. The concept of waging an open-ended global campaign to eliminate terrorism retained a modicum of plausibility. After all, how could anyone or anything stop the unstoppable American soldier? Call that reputation into question, however, and everything else unravels. This is what occurred when the Iraq War went sour. The ills afflicting our political system, including a deeply irresponsible Congress, broken national security institutions, and above all an imperial commander in chief not up to the job, became all but impossible to ignore. So, too, did the self-destructive elements inherent in the American way of life – especially an increasingly costly addiction to foreign oil, universally deplored and almost as universally indulged. More noteworthy still, the prospect of waging war on a global scale for decades, if not generations, became preposterous. To anyone with eyes to see, the events of the past seven years have demolished the Doctrine of the Big Enchilada. A gung-ho journalist like Robert Kaplan might still believe that, with the dawn of the 21st century, the Pentagon had "appropriated the entire earth, and was ready to flood the most obscure areas of it with troops at a moment's notice," that planet Earth in its entirety had become "battle space for the American military." Yet any buck sergeant of even middling intelligence knew better than to buy such claptrap. With the Afghanistan War well into its seventh year and the Iraq War marking its fifth anniversary, a commentator like Michael Barone might express absolute certainty that "just about no mission is impossible for the United States military." But Barone was not facing the prospect of being ordered back to the war zone for his second or third combat tour. Between what President Bush called upon America's soldiers to do and what they were capable of doing loomed a huge gap that defines the military crisis besetting the United States today. For a nation accustomed to seeing military power as its trump card, the implications of that gap are monumental. Andrew Bacevich, professor of history and international relations at Boston University, retired from the U.S. Army with the rank of colonel. This piece is adapted from his new book, The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism (Metropolitan Books, 2008). He is also the author of The New American Militarism, among other books. His writing has appeared in Foreign Affairs, the Atlantic Monthly, the Nation, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Wall Street Journal. A TomDispatch interview with him can be read by clicking here, and then here. [Note for TomDispatch readers: This is the first of a two-part series, "The American Military Crisis," adapted from Andrew Bacevich's new book, The Limits of Power. Next up: "Is Perpetual War Our Future? Learning the Wrong Lessons from the Bush Era."] From the book The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism by Andrew Bacevich, copyright © 2008 by Andrew Bacevich. Reprinted by arrangement with Metropolitan Books, an Imprint of Henry Holt and Company, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Digg this! comments on this article? send them to backtalk! [visit backtalk!] Back to the Antiwar.com Home Page

The End of Victory Culture (Revised Edition) Digg this! Archives The American Military Crisis 8/12/2008 Living Through the Age of Denial in America 8/1/2008 The Military-Industrial Complex 7/28/2008 The Pentagon and the Hunt for Black Gold 7/18/2008 The Wedding Crashers 7/14/2008 Reality Bites Back: Why the US Won't Attack Iran 7/10/2008 The Bush Administration Strikes Oil in Iraq 7/8/2008 The Urge to Surge 6/30/2008 The Pentagon's Stealth Corporations 6/25/2008 No Blood for… Er… Um… 6/23/2008 The Greatest Story Never Told 6/16/2008 Garrisoning the Global Gas Station 6/13/2008 One Man's Online Journey Through Bush's Alphabet Soup 6/11/2008 Uncle Sam's Cyber Force Wants You! 6/6/2008 'Atrocity-Producing Situations' 6/4/2008 The Movie-Made War World of George W. Bush 6/2/2008 McCain (Mis)Speaks 5/30/2008 The Pentagon Takes Charge 5/28/2008 River of Resistance 5/23/2008 Irony Man 5/21/2008 Coming Down to Earth 5/7/2008 The Last War and the Next One 5/5/2008 The Iranian Chessboard 5/2/2008 Teaching Imperialism 101 4/30/2008 Selling the President's General 4/28/2008 A Pentagon's Who's Who of Your Life 4/25/2008 12 Answers to Questions No One Is Asking About Iraq 4/21/2008 Leaving Cheyenne Mountain: How I Learned to Start Worrying and Loathe the Bomb 4/18/2008 Nine Propositions on the U.S. Air War for Terror 4/11/2008 Petraeus' Ghost 4/9/2008 The General and the Trap 4/7/2008 Petraeus' Grand Delusions 4/4/2008 The End of Empire? 4/2/2008 The Pentagon's Battle Bugs 3/31/2008 Trust the Government to Do for the Economy What It Has Done for Iraq 3/28/2008 More Archives An editor in publishing for the last 25 years, Tom Engelhardt is the author of The End of Victory Culture, a history of American triumphalism in the Cold War era, now out in a revised edition with a new preface and afterword, and Mission Unaccomplished, TomDispatch Interviews with American Iconoclasts and Dissenters. He is at present consulting editor for Metropolitan Books, a fellow of the Nation Institute, and a teaching fellow at the journalism school of the University of California, Berkeley.

Olympian spirit.

Re-post from April.

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

The van of death

China is taking high tech to a whole new level. Could this be coming soon to a Wal-mart near you?

VAN SPECS

Cost: $37,500 to $75,000, depending on vehicle's size Length: 20 to 26 feet Top speed: 65 to 80 mph THREE SECTIONS Execution chamber: in the back, with blacked-out windows; seats beside the stretcher for a court doctor and guards; sterilizer for injection equipment; wash basin Observation area: in the middle, with a glass window separating it from execution area; can accommodate six people; official-in-charge oversees the execution through monitors connected to the prisoner and gives instruction via walkie-talkie. Driver area Production to date: at least 40 vehicles, made by Jinguan and two other companies in Jiangsu and Shandong provinces

Re-post from April 2008

Says Greg Palast today:

McCain's plan to spend endless billions on nuclear plants without a waste disposal system in place is like building a massive hotel without toilets. I suppose you can always tell the guests to poop in buckets until someone comes up with a plan for plumbing. But the stuff piles up. And unlike the fecal droppings of tourists, nuclear waste will stay hot and dangerous for a thousand generations.

Thuggery worthy of the Dick and Bush

From MSNBC/ Washington Post This Morning

By Edward Cody

updated 12:47 a.m. MT, Thurs., Aug. 7, 2008

To prevent (Olympic) protests inside their own borders, Chinese authorities recently threatened to take away one female activist's two babies as she tried to enter the country. A Tibetan woman surnamed Kemo was returning to China on July 18 after nearly two years in the United States, where she had had two children. She was stopped by a passport control officer, escorted to an interrogation room and asked whether she had ever participated in political protests.

Video China's extra eyes Aug. 6: With exclusive access inside the Olympic security command center, NBC’s Richard Engel reports on heightened security for the Games. Nightly News

"Yes, but a long time ago," Kemo said she replied, speaking on the condition that her first name not be used. Officers then showed her computer printouts of photos of her participating at various U.S. protests. "You are lying to us," an officer told her.

Officers pried the children away from her, slapping her and one of her children when he clutched her purse strap to prevent her from being taken away, she said.

The officer then gave her a choice: accept deportation and buy plane tickets to take her children back to the United States or go to jail and lose her children. After she bought the tickets, police escorted her to the next flight to New York and returned her children on the jetway to the airplane.

Climate Change?

Email exchange between Ray Hudson and me this morning:

----- Original Message -----

From: Ray Hudson

To: Kim Walker

Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 8:41 PM

Subject: Crumbling Away

Kim,

The propaganda of Anthropocentric Global Warming (AGW) is crumbling all around the priests and zealots who abuse science. I know you will never admit that these clowns are wrong, and are doing “bad science”, but it is becoming more and more clear. Check out my last two posts in RU on the political spin thread. There is no valid scientific refutation of the issues I raise in these posts. None.

Gore is toast. He should be thrown in jail for lies and falsifying science to meet a political agenda!

R

Rainman,

I think it's quite obvious that the human race requires three environmental principles in order to thrive: clean air, clean water and fertile soil. Regardless of the debate concerning climate change these three elements are being destroyed at an exponential rate by the over-use of fossil fuels. The cause? Overconsumption/ production brought about by overpopulation. The Malthusian knot. That's the real crisis. I think we're about to witness the consequences, at least in terms of the atmosphere, in this communist Olympic bullshit. When people require respirators simply to breath and have to drink water out of bottles- we've got a problem. Don't you think? Personally I don't need Algore to alert me to this. I can plainly see the air being turned into smoke.

Kim

AFP News: DIA Involved in Spy vs Spy on the Internet

From Gary Bekkum yesterday:

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

AFP News: DIA Involved in Spy vs Spy on the Internet

According to this interesting news release from AFP:

... the Defense Intelligence Agency is being given a larger
mandate to pursue the "strategic offensive counter-intelligence operations" as part of a reorganization approved late last month.

Gary made this very point in his blog many months ago- especially in regards to the leaking of DIA information/disinformation on the forum, Reality Uncovered.

Is Reality Uncovered a tool of the DIA? Certainly at least 2 0f the half dozen active posters there boast of having 'security clearances' of some sort while a third, the site administrator, actively consorts with known intelligence operatives- who have even been known to post there on occasion.

Uri Avnery's Column

Hollow Time "If I Forget Thee, Umm Touba…" Different Planets Why Not? Satan's Counsel Ole - Ole, Ole, Ole All Quiet on the Gaza Front An Apology No, I Can't! When the Kettle Calls the Pot Black Escaping Forwards With Friends Like These… 1948 "…Namely the State of Israel" The Military Option The Lion and the Gazelle Manifest Destiny? "Not You! You!!!" "Death to the Arabs!" TWO AMERICAS More...

Hollow Time August 2, 2008 EHUD OLMERT'S resignation speech reached us on our way back from a demonstration. We were protesting the death of Ahmad Moussa, aged 10, who was murdered during a demonstration against the Separation Fence at Na'ilin village - the fence that robs the village of most of its land in order to give it to the nearby settlement. A soldier aimed and shot the child with live ammunition at close range. The protesters stood under the windows of the Minister of Defense's apartment in the luxurious Akirov Towers in Tel-Aviv and shouted: "Ehud Barak, Minister of Defense / How many children have you murdered so far?" A short while later, Olmert spoke about his strenuous efforts to achieve peace, and promised to continue them until his last day in office. The two events - the demonstration and the speech - are bound together. Together they provide an accurate picture of the era: peace speeches in the air and atrocities on the ground. I AM not about to join the choir of retrospective heroes, who are now falling upon Olmert's political corpse and tearing it to pieces. Not an attractive sight. I have seen this happen several times in my life, and every time it disgusts me. This phenomenon is not particular to Israel. It can be found in the history and literature of many times and places: "The Rise and Fall of…" It's an old story. People grovel in the dust at the feet of their hero. The ambitious and avaricious prance around him. Court-poets and court-jesters sing his praises, and their modern successors - the media people - extol his virtues. And then, one day, he falls from his pedestal and they trample all over him without mercy and without shame. This is the mob that idolized Moshe Dayan after the Six-day War, and then smashed his statue into pieces after the Yom-Kippur war. The mob that kicked David Ben-Gurion viciously after years of boundless flattery. That toppled Golda Meir after following her blindly. I certainly struggled against all three of them when they were at the height of their power, but the rush of the political mob to trample upon their bodies after they had fallen was simply loathsome. Now this is happening again. I have never been captivated by the charms of Ehud Olmert. I have followed his career from the moment he appeared on the stage to the moment he announced his resignation. I saw nothing to arouse my admiration. But now, when I see and hear the outpouring of abuse upon him by those who exalted him to high heavens only yesterday, I feel like averting my eyes. The right to criticize him is reserved for those who have struggled against him over the years. HE IS a total politician, and nothing else. Not a statesman. Not a leader. Not a man with a vision. Only a political technician. Intelligent. A very smooth speaker. I friend among friends. A politician for whom power is the aim, not a means to achieve an aim. The first time I came across him was almost 40 years ago. He was then an assistant of Shmuel Tamir, in the most concrete sense: he assisted him in carrying his bags. Before this, something had happened that was to characterize the whole career of this ambitious man. Tamir, then a young Knesset member for the Herut party (today's Likud), thought he had an opportunity to topple Menachem Begin and take over the party. He tried to push him out during the party convention, and for a moment it seemed that he would succeed. Begin, then 53, seemed totally worn-out after suffering six consecutive election defeats. Olmert, then 21, jumped onto the rebels' bandwagon and made a passionate speech against the legendary leader. But his calculations were faulty. Begin sprang into action and delivered a death blow to the conspirators. They were thrown out of the party in disgrace. Olmert remained with the tiny faction around Tamir, which presented itself as a moderate party, attuned to the peace-seeking mood of the country at the time, mocking the nationalistic stance of Herut ("Both sides of the Jordan belong to us"). But then the Six-day War changed the public mood completely, the weathercock turned and Tamir coined the popular slogan "Liberated Territory shall not be Returned!" Without batting an eyelid, Olmert the moderate turned into Olmert the extremist. But in that small faction there were too many chiefs and not enough Injuns. The road to advancement was blocked. Before long, Olmert engineered a split in order to become the No. 2 in an even smaller faction. He later split that one too and pushed out its veteran leader, Eliezer Shostak. The proceedings bordered on farce: Olmert ran off with the faction's rubber stamp. After the 1973 elections, Olmert return to the Likud at long last and became candidate No. 24 on the party's election list. Before that he had not been idle: he finished law school and flourished financially, using his connections in the Knesset and the corridors of power for his clients' benefit. That's when he perfected the method of exploiting the connections between power and money, a method that he practiced ever since and that eventually caused his downfall. In the Knesset, the young member was looking for a way to attract attention. At the time, the media invented "organized crime", long before it came into being. (A wag jested: "In Israel, nothing is organized. So how come crime is suddenly organized?") Olmert smelled a horse he could ride on. He made rousing speeches, waved papers in the style of Joe McCarthy, presented himself as a valiant fighter against the criminals and reaped a lot of publicity. It was an empty performance: even the police chiefs confirmed that it did not contribute anything to the struggle against crime. But it was a good example of what later came to be known as "spin". IN 1977, Menachem Begin came to power. But he had not the least intention of promoting the man who, 11 years earlier, had tried to stick a knife in his back. Among his other strengths, Begin had a good memory. When Olmert saw that his career in the Knesset was going nowhere, he decided in 1993 to make an Olympic jump: he declared his candidacy for the office of Mayor of Jerusalem. Mayor Teddy Kollek was popular, but old and tired. Olmert won. Today there is general agreement about his tenure: he was a bad mayor. The city deteriorated, poverty increased, young people left for other places and the Arab neighborhoods were criminally neglected. In 1996, he pushed Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu into opening a tunnel leading from the Western Wall to the Muslim quarter, causing a conflagration that killed 17 Israeli soldiers and almost 100 Palestinians. He never expressed any remorse. He also pushed for the creation of the Har Homa settlement between Jerusalem and Bethlehem, which has caused unending friction with the Palestinian community. All the recent attacks in Jerusalem were carried out by youngsters who grew up in the Arab neighborhoods adjacent to Har Homa. Olmert presented himself as the Judaizer of Jerusalem and as a fearless national fighter. But when he ran for Likud chairman in 1999, he was easily beaten by Ariel Sharon. He got only the 32nd place on the Likud election list (out of 38 who won Knesset seats). His rational reaction was to get on Sharon's wagon and push him into leaving the Likud and creating a new party, Kadima. That was a successful bet, testifying to his sharp political senses. Under Sharon he became the de facto No. 2 of the new party and Sharon's official "Deputy Prime Minister" (as a consolation prize, after Sharon could not give him the Treasury but only the far less important Ministry of Industry and Trade). At the time it looked like an empty title, but when Sharon suffered a stroke, Olmert adroitly took over his job. The long and meandering road had finally led to the summit. SHARON'S SUCCESSOR was his opposite in almost every respect. Sharon was a rather maladroit politician and a poor speaker, but a determined leader with a clear political vision. He had an aim and strove towards it consistently. Olmert is a politician, soul and body, a complete opportunist and a smooth speaker, but lacks charisma and has no vision. He is satisfied with the routine mantra of a democratic, Jewish state. After coming to power through the accident of Sharon's stroke, he tried at first to look as if he was following the same path. Sharon wanted to turn Israel into a strong, compact state by annexing the settlement blocs and leaving the Arab enclaves to a weak "Palestinian state". For this purpose he carried out the Gaza "separation". Olmert promised to do the same in the West Bank, but gave up the idea almost immediately. Throughout his term of office he invented grandiose schemes at a dizzying rate, with each of them doing little more than providing fuel to his spin-machine. His incompetence as a leader and commander soon revealed itself. Lebanon War II was a disastrous scandal. The media, which had applauded enthusiastically at the beginning of the war, attacked him after the event for its "faulty execution", but ignored the main failure: the very decision to go to war without a clear and realistic aim and without a political and military strategy. His incompetence as statesman and strategist was equaled by his competence as politician and survival artist. The fact that he held on for an additional two years after such a monumental failure testifies to his political acumen, but also to the degeneration of the Israeli political system. After the war he was desperately in need of a new horse to ride. He chose the "political process" - negotiations with the Palestinians, and later on also with the Syrians. This choice is significant: his sensitive political nose smelled that this is now the really popular thing: not Greater Israel, not the settlements, but peace negotiations and "two states for two peoples" - the more so as this was already popular with the US and Europe. This week, Arab leaders complained that now "the political process will begin again from Square One." That is a complete misunderstanding: the "process" has never left Square One. It was wholly without content, wholly "spin". The "process" has become a substitute for peace, the idea of a "shelf agreement" a substitute for a real peace agreement. There was never any possibility that Olmert would dare to provoke the settlers. The final summing-up of the Olmert era: not the smallest real step toward peace has been taken. The historic peace initiative of the Arab League has been buried. The secular, peace-seeking Palestinian leadership has been almost destroyed, paving the way for the Hamas takeover in the Gaza strip, and perhaps also in the West Bank. Not one single hut in a settlement was dismantled, and the settlements have been enlarged everywhere. In one respect, Olmert resembled Sharon: they both loved money almost as much as power (as do Netanyahu and Barak). They both cultivated close relations with billionaires. They both trailed behind them a cloud of corruption wherever they went. This did not hurt Sharon. He radiated leadership, and the scandals did not really harm him. He was robust enough to carry them on his back. Olmert, being much more fragile, was crushed by them. In the end, he has fallen: not because of the criminal war, not because of his lack of seriousness in pursuing peace, not because of the appointment of a Minister of Justice whose aim is to destroy the judicial system, but because of cash in envelopes and free trips abroad. WHEN FUTURE historians look for a way to characterize this chapter in the annals of the state, one word will readily present itself, the one the writer David Grossman applied in a similar context: hollow. It was a hollow era. A hole in time. A meaningless period, devoid of content (though not for those who paid the price with their lives, destruction and ruins.) And that is also the suitable title for Olmert himself. A hollow politician, devoid of vision. Anyone researching the headlines of these two years will find a lot of drama there. A lot of initiatives. A lot of slogans. A lot of spin. A lot of hot air. And the sum of all this: nothing. A hollow leader of a hollow party pursuing hollow policies in a hollow political system.

The Latest from Rense

And now- from that font of 'Jew wisdom' comes this.

Is Rense an advocate of a New Holocaust? A Jew hater par excellence? To my mind he is- but hasn't got the balls to state his real position. Is Vladimir Putin a true Christian? YES- according to Rense- because he hates Jews. That's all that's required to be in Rense's favor. He's a one trick pony, afterall.

Disclosure




I received this from Bob Collins today. This is indeed a significant disclosure.

Mc
to undisclosed-re.

show details 6:14 PM (13 hours ago)


Reply


FYI--Big Surprise, very new for a lot of people, see Ed's comments below.....Best.....Robert Collins

Edgar Mitchell wrote:
> Bob, sorry you missed the very beginning of all this. That was the point. I grew up in the Roswell area. I was almost 17 and senior in high school when it happened. Family were ranchers and cattle people. We knew all the ranchers and towns people in the area, including where the UFO impacted. In spite of official denials and threats about talking, the local lore told the story. After my space flight, and being a local boy, people involved, not only the locals, trusted me with their stories, because they were getting older and wanted the truth out, but were afraid to say it publicly; so considered me a trustworthy source to carry their story onward. Been telling it all that way, if anyone bothered to ask my opinion, since the Pentagon incident 11 years ago. Only now, suddenly, it got international media attention. Edgar M
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mc [mailto:Mc@donet.com]
> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2008 2:19 PM
> To: undisclosed-recipients:
> Subject: Re: ON TV Since Last on Email
>
> Hi Ed, I know the Pentagon story, but what this about "being in Roswell" when the incident happened? Never heard that one for whatever that might mean. Please clue me in. And while I have you see the OM post on New Paris.....Rmc
>
> lucianarchy.proboards2...hread=3509
>
>
> Barbara Wade wrote:
>> When I left email, I was JUST IN TIME TO SEE EDGAR MITCHELL on "Hannity's America". I took notes. He TOLD MORE this time. He said that because he was in Roswell when the "incident" happened, plus being an astronaut and scientist, many locals and scientists wanted to tell him what THEY knew. They showed Walter Haut's death-bed statement. Then he said something I never heard him say before. He said that in 1997, he was at the PENTAGON FOR A DISCLOSURE MEETING! A Vice-Admiral found out THE DISCLOSURE PROGRAM IS IN THE PENTAGON! The Vice-Admiral was TOLD that "HE HAD NO NEED TO KNOW", so he wasn't let in. They mentioned that Gordon Cooper observed a UFO incident and had PHOTOS OF IT, BUT HIS PHOTOS WERE CONFISCATED!
>> Barbara

And this from an email from Ron Pandolfi to Rick Doty concerning Bob Collins:

7/13/2008 10:38 PM: Ronald Pandolfi wrote:

Rick,

Some wing nuts within the UFO Community might not think much of Robert Collins, but within the senior ranks of the intelligence and defense communities, there are many who consider him an honest and respectable citizen who served this country well. Go after Collins in court, and you are going to have us testifying on his behalf. And we are prepared to open the books.

Ron

The significance of the foregoing is that 'disclosure' has now been entirely taken out of Doty's hands. He obviously fucked it up. While we may never know the full story concerning his involvement with Green, Pandolfi, Martinez, Bill Ryan and Serpo, I think we can safely conclude that Doty has been summarily shit-canned. Ed Mitchell and Captain Collins are now in ascendant in my opinion.

The 'core story' of alien visitation (invasion) originates in Roswell in 1947. The UFO cover-up by the US government was designed to deal specifically with that event and ensuing events related to it. That Ed Mitchell was both there at the time and has since gained credibility as an astronaut who has walked on the moon makes him an ideal vehicle for disclosure. Expect more from him- and other astronauts- shortly. Bob Collins will undoubtedly also be in the loop.

I had originally broached this subject at Amkon but have since left that forum which turned out to be full of anti-semitic faux conspiracists and mindless chit-chatterers. All my future posts with reference to disclosure will henceforth be posted here.

UFO UPDATE FROM GARY BEKKUM

Monday, July 28, 2008
Astronaut Edgar Mitchell Hints at UFO ET "Core Story"

The past few days have seen a viral explosion of stories about statements made by Apollo astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell, who walked on the moon in 1971.

The entire affair, which began with an interview at Kerrang! Radio, appears to be building a small mountain of momentum, with headlines like:

Ex-Astronaut: Aliens Are Real and NASA Knows It

Aliens are out there, says former Nasa astronaut

Astronaut reveals that aliens have better technology than humans

Ex-NASA astronaut 'sure' aliens exist

Even Reuters has posted a video news report on-line.

A quick search of Google News pulled up more than 300 articles.

Curiously, the most important aspect of Dr. Mitchell's testimony to the "Spies, Lies, and Polygraph Tape" affair has received little attention from most of the media outlets.

During the Kerrang! interview, Mitchell stated:

"But I've also been in military circles, and intelligence circles, that know that beneath the surface of what has been public knowledge, that yes, we have been visited. "

It appears that Dr. Mitchell is referring to the so-called UFO "Core Story" of extraterrestrial visitation.

For a quick review of some of the Intelligence Community interest in all things out-of-this-world, I recommend Gus Russo's article, The REAL X-files.

According to the Russo article, a well-placed source Russo calls "Jim" (not his real name), who remains close to high-ranking former U.S. officials told him:

“I believe there’s a ‘core story’,” Jim explained, “but I don’t know what it is. I have been told by people more senior than me that there is some truth to it, but they told me time and time again to stop pursuing it with CIA people and other intel types. Two very senior officials told me they saw briefing books, [however] the only ones who would be cleared to know the story are the most senior Pentagon career officers.” Jim refuses to divulge his sources, but when pressed, he reiterates what they told him: look to the Pentagon and the private sector’s aerospace and weapons labs, etc. US intelligence “doesn’t have labs capable of dealing with something this profound.” He also notes that over the years he has received thousands of UFO-related government documents in unmarked envelopes. Although some are obvious fakes, others, according to Jim, contain information that correlates with known, but still classified, scientific studies. In an intriguing footnote, Jim adds, “I have spoken to three former Presidents and the subject always comes up, not as a briefing, but they also want to know the truth. But apparently they aren’t cleared for it.”





Posted by Gary S. Bekkum / STARpod.org at 10:44 AM 0 comments Links to this post

THE STUPID BIOFUELS DEBATE

From here:

Time for some of that famous outside-the-box thinking. Think- "Post Automobile" and you'll be on the right track. How many french fries are required to produce a gallon of this crap? It's the dumbest of all dumbfuck ideas. The internal combustion engine is as passé as the flat earth. Just let the economy kill the fucking thing rather than searching out ways to reform an obsolete technology. It's high time to rediscover the most essential mode of transportation- legs. Maybe we need to reinvent society so that travel is measured not in miles per french fry but rather in steps. Is there really anyplace worthwhile to go that walking and running and bicycling cannot provide? Is it impossible to recognize that the world got along just fine before Jesus invented Henry Ford and Wilbur Wright? Think in terms of the Indian Nations that were vigorously and happily rubbed out by the Europeans for essentially no other reason than to bring us to this nightmare impasse. Hell- they seemed to manage very nicely without 50 million Chevies farting the world into oblivion.

Just bear in mind that reformers are nothing more than enablers and therefore the enemy of true progress. Our own Gummer grasped the essence of this idea when he committed to 'going raw.' Remember that? Do Luddites and Anarchists not have a point worth considering? Or are they too far outside the box?

The alchemy of transforming food into black gold is nothing more than the desperate act of tossing the axe handle into the fireplace for that last few moments of warmth.

The greatest of mendacious conspiracies? None other than Reform.

Have a good day.

_________________
"How can a nation be great when its bread tastes like Kleenex?" Julia Child

We all knew that the skunk was tough- but now he molders in the gutter with his stringy guts being picked over by wild hermit crabs.

yeah i know. but i've been a little leery of kacen ever since it turned out that he fills his pool with the effluence from the new york city liposuction clinic.

Those with eyes to see/ ears to hear bear witness to the emergence of the Synthetic element of the Platonic-Hegelian Dialectical Trinity of history. The Zeitgeist. In trivial political abstraction this Enjoyed symbology is apperceived as: From the enlightenment of Kennedy/King to darkly nixonian Bushism and then to this Obama moment.

Posted by Gary Bekkum founder of Starstream Research on his blog- Spies, Lies, and Polygraph Tape
Friday, July 18, 2008
Are Reality Uncovered Moderators Fearful of the Truth?

Since one of the moderators at Reality Uncovered decided to shut off my access, thus preventing me from responding to on-going inquiries from RU members, I will continue by responding here.

"Amateur sleuths, using less than ethical methods of investigation, and even less respect for sources and the rules of journalism (apparently due to a general lack of ethical guidance), ignore the prerequisite professional rules for truthful reporting."

From an email sent to Ray Hudson by me yesterday:


There are 20 sub-forums at RU. The last post totals are: chorlton-7, ryan-4, steve-3, ray-3, others-3. AD must be attending a banner's society convention. The site is dominated by the same coterie of choir boys continually- the same crew of debunkers chasing out anyone of differing viewpoint in cacophony of horse laughs.

A Ufologist whom I hold in the highest regard, Jacques Vallee had this to say in an
interview yesterday:

"By denying the reality of the reports, brushing aside the witnesses...and treating them like fools or crooks, the academic skeptics are actually teaching the public that science is impotent at studying the phenomenon."


Add to that 'gratuitous ad hom attacks,' as in the case of Gary Bekkum, and you have perfectly described the methods of RU.

If you're happy with that then more power to ya.

For the record- almost all RU's ideas concerning USG intelligence community interest in the UFO phenomena, Kit Green, and Ron Pandolfi were purloined lock, stock and barrel from the work products of either Starstream Reasearch or Dan Smith. The RU 'researchers' have actually done no real research in these areas but rather have relied on Gary Bekkum to do all the heavy lifting- while at the same time both importuning and compromising his sources. This mendacious courtship has resulted in the forum being used by these same sources for the planting of spooky disinformation and has finally led to the demise of the site's credibility and membership participation. It seems to me that the scape-goating and ultimate banning of Gary Bekkum is simply a cynical attempt to finalize the charade by assuming ownership of Bekkum's research.

It is interesting to note that after 2 years of existence RU has about 170 members of whom 6! are active. The forum currently consists of:

1. withering attacks on Bill Irvin of ATS and Gary Bekkum of Starstream Research
2. a smarmy angel counting religious thread run by a paranoid Christian fundamentalist
3. an ongoing debunk of Ufology by the use of Phil Klass-type methods and
4. maudlin complaints by Chorlton about his various health issues.

Memo to Obama, McCain: No One Wins in a War

by Howard Zinn

Barack Obama and John McCain continue to argue about war. McCain says to keep the troops in Iraq until we “win” and supports sending more troops to Afghanistan. Obama says to withdraw some (not all) troops from Iraq and send them to fight and “win” in Afghanistan.

For someone like myself, who fought in World War II, and since then has protested against war, I must ask: Have our political leaders gone mad? Have they learned nothing from recent history? Have they not learned that no one “wins” in a war, but that hundreds of thousands of humans die, most of them civilians, many of them children?

Did we “win” by going to war in Korea? The result was a stalemate, leaving things as they were before with a dictatorship in South Korea and a dictatorship in North Korea. Still, more than 2 million people — mostly civilians — died, the United States dropped napalm on children, and 50,000 American soldiers lost their lives.

Did we “win” in Vietnam? We were forced to withdraw, but only after 2 million Vietnamese died, again mostly civilians, again leaving children burned or armless or legless, and 58,000 American soldiers dead.

Did we win in the first Gulf War? Not really. Yes, we pushed Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait, with only a few hundred US casualties, but perhaps 100,000 Iraqis died. And the consequences were deadly for the United States: Saddam was still in power, which led the United States to enforce economic sanctions. That move led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, according to UN officials, and set the stage for another war.

In Afghanistan, the United States declared “victory” over the Taliban. Now the Taliban is back, and attacks are increasing. The recent US military death count in Afghanistan exceeds that in Iraq. What makes Obama think that sending more troops to Afghanistan will produce “victory”? And if it did, in an immediate military sense, how long would that last, and at what cost to human life on both sides?

The resurgence of fighting in Afghanistan is a good moment to reflect on the beginning of US involvement there. There should be sobering thoughts to those who say that attacking Iraq was wrong, but attacking Afghanistan was right.

Go back to Sept. 11, 2001. Hijackers direct jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing close to 3,000 A terrorist act, inexcusable by any moral code. The nation is aroused. President Bush orders the invasion and bombing of Afghanistan, and the American public is swept into approval by a wave of fear and anger. Bush announces a “war on terror.”

Except for terrorists, we are all against terror. So a war on terror sounded right. But there was a problem, which most Americans did not consider in the heat of the moment: President Bush, despite his confident bravado, had no idea how to make war against terror.

Yes, Al Qaeda — a relatively small but ruthless group of fanatics — was apparently responsible for the attacks. And, yes, there was evidence that Osama bin Laden and others were based in Afghanistan. But the United States did not know exactly where they were, so it invaded and bombed the whole country. That made many people feel righteous. “We had to do something,” you heard people say.

Yes, we had to do something. But not thoughtlessly, not recklessly. Would we approve of a police chief, knowing there was a vicious criminal somewhere in a neighborhood, ordering that the entire neighborhood be bombed? There was soon a civilian death toll in Afghanistan of more than 3,000 — exceeding the number of deaths in the Sept. 11 attacks. Hundreds of Afghans were driven from their homes and turned into wandering refugees.

Two months after the invasion of Afghanistan, a Boston Globe story described a 10-year-old in a hospital bed: “He lost his eyes and hands to the bomb that hit his house after Sunday dinner.” The doctor attending him said: “The United States must be thinking he is Osama. If he is not Osama, then why would they do this?”

We should be asking the presidential candidates: Is our war in Afghanistan ending terrorism, or provoking it? And is not war itself terrorism?

Howard Zinn is author of “A People’s History of the United States.”

© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company

Quote:

Hopefully I am over reacting

I think you're reacting quite properly. As the Republicans/ Neocons say- work will set you free.

The issue isn't how many times somewhat inaccurate claims are made in the internets- it's a matter of principle. Everything posted has a half-life of a million years. So? In principle, and in fact, the Leviathan is making preparations for the ultimate summer camp. Wanna be bunkmates? Have I told you recently that you're cute?

Damn! you look good in stripes!

Arbeit macht frei!

And... the foregoing doesn't even consider the other big shoe that's dropped- abrupt climate change. When the near term consequences of global warming are added to this social witch's brew the problem compounds exponentially. I'm reminded of the report prepared for Andrew Marshall at the pentagon in 2003 by Randall and Schwartz. http://www.gbn.com/GBNDocumentDisplaySe ... v?id=28566
Their conclusions: societal dissolution and general war. The DOD took this report very seriously and has been preparing for the predicted consequences ever since. And, yes- this includes the camps.

I purposely chose to avoid mention of climate change in my original jeremiad because to many righties it seems to be a matter of some dispute. Consideration of climate change is not essential to drawing conclusions concerning the decline and fall of the empire but when added to the mix the future becomes more bleak by a factor of ten.

1972 wrote:

Not an answer.
Care to connect the dots for someone not on the same page as you?
Bad economy = prison camps?

I think Mur's point is that this isn't simply 'a bad economy.' This is the ultimate economic and social meltdown. The time when the chickens come home to roost. Such a meltdown will not occur in a vacuum. The social consequences will lead to everything from suicide to rebellion- the total dissolution of civil society. In such a world you can expect the State to exercise any means necessary to maintain its grip on power. But I think Mur might be wrong about the need for these camps. The neocon fascists will resort to wholesale execution instead- just as they've done in Iraq.

All this and more, here:

Quote:

In the past few weeks fear has come back in full force complete with blown out credit spreads and crashing financial sector stocks. However, this time around the Fed does not have the fire power nor the market confidence behind them because every measure they have taken thus far has only drained their reserves, delayed the inevitable, caused other problems elsewhere for the US and global economies and has not fixed the problem.

The Fed and the usual gang of 'experts' will always spend their meager energy on the analysis of the economic cogs and gears rather than the state of the deus ex machina itself. The fact is that the world is experiencing the greatest transfer of wealth since the beginning of recorded history. Pax Americana is in decline and fall. Nothing can slow the decent and the chaotic consequences for human continuance per se. Behold a pale horse. The ultimate discontinuity is at hand and the results will not be pretty- interesting, but not pretty.

The Empire won't go quietly- not with a whimper but a bang. Perhaps that is why the Johannine prophecies seem so apt. This movie played out before in a much smaller theatre. It doesn't require a prophet to see the future anymore- just a bit of tweaking on the fine tune knobs. The future has never had such a compelling immediacy.

The world is being strangled by the Malthusian garrote. Desperate populations are about to become engaged in a war for remaining resources. That is what the Iraq war is all about. Self preservation will finally wring out the last dampness of altruism. It has happened before to a lesser degree and the remedy that it spawned- Christianity- will find itself finally eclipsed by it's opposite principles. This is the larger picture. All that's left are the tedious details, the footnotes- the various methods of mayhem and the hydra-headed fools, the walk-ons of history, that permit their use.

So what sound and fury do we see in the immediate future? The crash of the markets, unlimited war, local transfers of wealth and property- evictions, repossessions, the calling of social margin. Families squatting in the dross of their own foreclosed homes- the new huddled masses, their utilities disconnected, while the successors of the failed banks are unable to force them out. Transportation at a stand-still. Empty grocery stores. Gunshots in the night. And the foreign wars of our addled emperor coming home. The attack on Iran will result in the sinking of aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf. Saudi Arabia will be over-run by the gangs of it prodigal son. There will be no more oil shipped by those greedy sheiks. The ayatollahs will loose their missiles on Israel and taste the fruits of Samson's nukes. Persia will be no more. Israel will be no more. And then it all comes home. The scatterings of the Middle Eastern desperadoes will appear on our own streets, in our own buildings- and bring with them endless nine elevens. Of course there is more- much more- this is just a selective foretaste of the impending chaos. Let your imagination run wild to see the entire movie. Whatever disaster that you have the temerity to envision will come to pass. Shortly.

The billions that have gone before us, upon whose shoulders we stand, are here and now- new flesh on their bones- to witness the denouement of history. It could have been otherwise. The greatest fear shall now become- not death, but the inability to die. Perhaps John had it right after-all.

A truly sad day. Rest in peace, George. You've earned it.

I stole this from General Nuisance at www.amkon.net and don't forget it bitch!

A brief history lesson from the General:

When Jeremy Wright made his, "God damn America" remark this is exactly what he had in mind- the merciless slaughter of Native Americans and the enslavement and 300 year persecution of Africans. When you strip away the myths America has a brutal and shameful history of interminable, illegal wars and the abject, ongoing persecution of its own minority populations. Genocidal racism, in one manner or another, is as American as cherry pie.

UFO PROBLEM SOLVED BY GENERAL STRIKER!!

Said the General today:

Here's America's real problem concerning UFOs. We are a country whose greatest science minds are devoted to solving the conundrum of how many gallons of vile crud need to be burned in order to fly one contraption, three men and a bomb from Blefuscu to Lilliput. We're a backwater popsicle-stand of a planet and only of passing interest to the advanced civilizations visiting us. So put your head back in your butt and pay them no mind- you've got some Chinese shit to buy at Walmart.

IMPEACH THE BASTARD

Has the RK question been answered?

Kali Field Investigator Joined: Jan 28, 2007 Posts: 348 Karma: +23 Applaud / Smite	Post subject: Re: Serpo.info has been updated Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 06:12 PM Thread unlocked. My latest ramblings on the other thread. wyzwyrlde.com/Forums/v...html#29756 I've removed the edit and delete functions from this section for all users (and the mind control section) while I work out how to just restrict individuals from abusing the delete function. I created a group called restricted access and added Shawnna to the group but haven't worked out the specifics of the task just yet. So bear with me, I'm only 6 months late. Yep this is censorship but I'm wanting to reopen the thread, locking it is censorship too, LOL. Damned if I do....
Back to top
hibits Shit Spewing Troll Joined: Oct 22, 2006 Posts: 618 Location: area 51 Karma: +8 Applaud / Smite	Post subject: Serpo.info has been updated Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 08:49 PM OK! So what's your RK theory? Please!!! _________________ And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
Back to top
Kali Field Investigator Joined: Jan 28, 2007 Posts: 348 Karma: +23 Applaud / Smite	Post subject: Re: Serpo.info has been updated Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 09:23 PM RK uses a similar grammatical error to those often used by Bob Collins. If you read lots of BC's post from usenet from 6+ years ago, you'll see that often the phrase "had of" or "had to of" is used rather than "had to have" (also would of" "could of" etc, etc) Reading all those posts would also give a sense of Deja Vu. His communications to others on usenet were the first to get my goat up:), with the overuse of phrases such as "I know and you don't/won't " but that's another non-relevant story. Searching SERPO related sites you'll see that hardly anyone else ever makes this type error and the odd person or 2 that do are pretty unremarkable, so it's...... interesting but not really useful or proof of anything:)
Back to top
Kali Field Investigator Joined: Jan 28, 2007 Posts: 348 Karma: +23 Applaud / Smite	Post subject: Re: Serpo.info has been updated Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 09:49 PM If anyone actually wants to wade through all the historical usenet posts, then here's a few of his old addies. groups.google.com.au/g...bX05nZ-8fQ groups.google.com.au/g...4AZhN98BFg Can only find 2 profiles for now, from the late 90's, but I have a couple more written down somewhere if anyone is interested.
Back to top
Kali Field Investigator Joined: Jan 28, 2007 Posts: 348 Karma: +23 Applaud / Smite	Post subject: Re: Serpo.info has been updated Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:15 PM Multiple posts (sorry) but the edit feature has gone on this thread for now. Recognition for the above thoughts should be passed around. I initially found all the grammatical errors back in 2004 when I was reading up on RMC. I created a thread in the mod section in 2005 with pastes of these usenet posting just in case we'd ever want to refer to them. Last year, Kiwi matched RK's style to RMC's style and posted them in my hidden RMC thread. Another unnamed member also read through and agreed that there was a possible match. So it was a group effort thingie:) I can't really move the related thread into public view as there are one or 2 posts from members who have since fled from the internets or at least conspiracy land and wouldn't really want their names outted. It was just pages and pages of pastes (by me) really, collected from links like those posted above. (I had a quick squizz and everything on the other thread is linked here or mentioned at the least. Thread drift in process but this is the article that got me started, I've put a couple of errors in bold but I haven't read the post for years so there may be more: www.bbc.co.uk/insideou...ufos.shtml Quote: Another ex-USAF I’d like to reply to Anonymous: "Military Police are very serious people and to fool around in a time where the threat of national security was so great, would cause serious problems especially on a military base where nuclear weapons were housed.” Humor is a basic part of human nature. Even in the worst situation we usually find something to laugh about. No one, even security policeman, can be serious 24-7. My understanding is that nuclear weapons were not stored at Woodbridge at the time. “A foolish act could of been used as a decoy to allow possible communist spies into the base.” Spies don’t usually cause large disturbances as a cover to low crawl through the woods onto a base. There are much more efficient and safer methods. On a daily basis literally hundreds of people were on the base, tradesmen, etc. Besides, nothing ultra secret went on at Bentwaters/Woodbridge, and the Russians probably knew more about the operation than most average USAF members, without the need to put on black clothing and crawl through the woods. “This would cause any superior to court marshall any soldier who might of done an act that was not required instead of doing there job to help protect western europe.” Discipline in the military is not nearly as rigid as you might think. We’re humans after all. “My beliefs is a Deputy Base Commander would be more creditable than a Senior Master Sergeant.” Wouldn’t that depend on the Deputy Base Commander and the Senior Master Sergeant? “I guess we all would of had to been there at the time of the incident to fully understand what was going on.” On this we agree.
Back to top
hibits Shit Spewing Troll Joined: Oct 22, 2006 Posts: 618 Location: area 51 Karma: +8 Applaud / Smite	Post subject: Serpo.info has been updated Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 05:42 AM I agree. Bob makes the same sorts of errors in EfD (mostly edited out by Victor Martinez in subsequents editions, I understand.) On the other hand the sections of the first edition of that book attributed to Rick Doty also contain similar errors in both syntax and grammar. The gratuitous 'Britishisms' contained in the RK posts incline me towards Doty, however, because of his long tutelage by Bill Ryan- (who admitted to me at one time that he rewrote Doty's essay in UFO Magazine in order to make it intelligible.) I really don't think that RK has anything to lose by coming back here to clear this up. Hopefully he will. There are pitfalls in this type of linguistically based analysis as evidenced by the conclusions of Broadbent and Shawanna rifht here on this board that RK was in fact Hibits. I suppose only RK himself can finally solve the mystery. One point that I believe is clear is that the real RK is undoubtedly an associate of the Serptonical clique comprised of Kit Green, Victor Martinez, Bob Collins, Bill Ryan and Rick Doty- all of whom, I should note, hate Shawanna (and each other!). And then again- there is Springer... _________________ And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
Back to top
hibits Shit Spewing Troll Joined: Oct 22, 2006 Posts: 618 Location: area 51 Karma: +8 Applaud / Smite	Post subject: Serpo.info has been updated Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 05:45 AM jesus kate, i can't even correct my spelling anymore! _________________ And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007

Chinese Bullshit Knows No Limits

The insipid torch is about to be jammed down the throat of Tibet.

BOYCOTT THE OLYMPICS

From the

today:

Police chase UFO over Cardiff

By Laura Clout

Last Updated: 2:35AM BST 20/06/2008

A police helicopter crew gave chase to a UFO after it almost collided with their aircraft near a military base.

The pilot was forced to bank sharply to avoid being hit by the mystery aircraft as the helicopter was returning to the Ministry of Defence base of St Athan, near Cardiff.

The three crew, who described the UFO as 'flying saucer-shaped', then gave chase, getting as far as the North Devon coast before they ran low on fuel, it was reported.

The police aircraft was hovering at 500ft and waiting clearance to land on June 7, when those onboard spotted the other craft hurtling towards them from below.

A spokesman for South Wales Police said: "We can confirm the Air Support Unit sighted an unusual aircraft. This was reported to the relevant authorities for their investigation."

It was reported that the aircraft closed in at great speed, aiming straight for the helicopter which swerved sharply.

"They are convinced it was a UFO. It sounds far-fetched, but they know what they saw."

The helicopter crew are said to have crossed the Bristol channel in pursuit of the UFO, but lost sight of it and had to turn back due to a fuel shortage.

The sighting comes weeks after the most comprehensive Government files on UFO activity are opened to the public for the first time today and they disclose that even air traffic controllers and police officers have seen mysterious craft in the skies over Britain.

The sightings range from incredible tales of little green men visiting the Wirral to corroborated accounts from policemen and pilots of Unidentified Flying Objects hovering above towns and cities.

All were recorded on official forms, held by air bases and police stations, and compiled by the Ministry of Defence between 1978 and 2002.

As usual, the debunkers are having lots of fun with this report.

This interesting tidbit from RU's Ryan Douche today:

Quote:

It appears that ATS is actually the place where government informants go to anonymously "take a leak". Making ATS more of an outhouse than a Wal-Mart.

It seems that that falling-out between ATS and RU is now scatologically complete.


As usual Ryan takes refuge in the proverbial shit-house. Surprised?

And, of course, Shawanna adds an insipid emoticon retort.

Quote:

"The only thing we found that makes the emptiness bearable is................... each other." From the movie "Contact" Shawnna's Reality

What did we expect?

"No one could see Tim in a room and not smile," said ABC's Diane Sawyer. "He brought so much joy and curiosity and sheer vitality to all our lives."

Rest in peace, Tim Russert

Will the assholery ever cease?

This poster has been banned from Above Top Secret for questioning the truthfulness of one Clifford Stone who claims to be a contactee of at least 57 races of aliens! The guy, Stone, is a ridiculous fraud and yet the management of ATS sees fit to support his asinine assertions even to the extent of banning anyone with the good sense to challenge his absurd blather. This banning has to be the work of Mark (Springer) Allin even though it was one of his sleazy sycophants who actually did the dirty work.

I recommend that you stay away from that site.

This is what replaced my posts:

reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 13-6-2008 @ 02:51 PM by boycott1

reply to this post: copyright & usage

This- for simply telling the truth. Go figure...



Toon

Is Dr. Kit Green about to be trashed by Reality Uncovered?

ScaRZ wrote:I've been looking forward to reading this for a long time. Would this bird by any chance be a green bird?

And Ryan Douche wrote:

You are correct my friend. Supposedly moved in April/May, but we received a report that he was back in Washington, DC recently allegedly attempting to find buyers for some of his artwork.

Because it's so perfect and apt- this repost from last month...

The OBF

The evil monster from hell is wounded but is she dead yet?


It seems to have all distilled down to this: Hillary is dead but her flatulent remains are still twitching. And what is the sublime force that sustains her? Simply this: the OBF, The old Bag Factor. The parsing of the election demographics is complete:

Young people- Obama.
Educated people- Obama
Black people- Obama

White old ladies (OB's)- Hillary

And why is that? Why would the most progressive element of the 60's revolution support a monster who's a throwback to Eva Peron? Damned good question. Could it be that they perceive that this is the final possibility for political ascendancy before their immanent date with the soylent green checkout counter? Or might they simply harbor a latent fear of young black men? Hard to say. But we can say this- they are a reactionary force in the body politic. They support Hillary why? Because she has a vagina? Because she has a powerful, perverted husband who greased the political skids? Women are supposed to be all about the protection of their children. But their children reject this pandering pretender by overwhelming margins. Apparently that matters not to the leaky OBs.

But for me- I'll always vote with my kids. The future is theirs, not our's, vagina or no. And they have spoken. And they said: fuckit, let's do it a different way. They said- Barack!. Morons and Old Bags can do or be what they might- but there's a new sheriff in town. There is a beautiful black man in the offing. The world is about to change.

Articles of Impeachment

Follow the link to Wyz Wyrld for the entire document.




In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Thanks for posting the Articles, Wyz. If ever there was a clear case for presidential impeachment and imprisonment it is contained in this document. Unfortunately the craven assholes in the Democratic Majority will shirk their Constitutional duty and continue to marginalize Dennis the K. Why? Because they reckon they already roped their dope, Dumbya, and will soon dump his sorry ass in the dust bin of history. But that's not enough. Criminals need to be held accountable for their crimes or the statutes are meaningless. In this case those statutes are the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. To render those laws and principles meaningless is to undermine the very foundations of the Republic. Two crimes now. And which crime is more grievous shall be left for history to decide.

AP Breaking Business News

Dateline: Denver, Colorado

Denver Post Exclusive 6/10/08

A start up farming concern in Denver has announced a public stock offering aimed at taking advantage of the great tomato shortage of 2008.

Hudson Farms CFO, Mr. LK Walker, tells the Post that the company is confident that its tomato crop, due for harvest in the Fall of 2008, will be sufficient to make up the world wide shortages caused by the botulism outbreak currently effecting the American tomato crop. "Let me assure the public that a dozen of our organic tomatos will cost less than a tank of gas, plus shipping and handling of course," Mr. Walker stated. "And that's good news for chefs everywhere."

Hudson Farms, LLC hopes to raise $250,000,000 with its initial public offering of 10,000 shares of common stock. "Tomatas is good business," states Mr. Walker.

Indeed it is, sir!

BE NEWS EXCLUSIVE

Kansas hail

The recent spate of hailstorms in Kansas, ranging in size from baseball sized in Lawrence to watermelon sized in Kansas City to Volkswagen sized in Wichita brought this comment on a popular Kansas website from your own BE News weather reporter:

To the long suffering people of Kansas

There's a bright side to bad weather ya know. Just look what happened in Denver. Back in the winter of '82 it's estimated that 48% of all Denvoids froze their asses off. But this event gave rise to a new industry which has recently been acknowledged as the largest commercial venture in the entire State of Colorado: VAPB, Inc. (Velcroe Attached Prosthetic Butts, Inc.) Now 26 years later there's a VAPB store (Asses R Us) in every strip mall in the state. And considering that an additional 57% of all Coloradans froze their asses off last winter the growth of this industry is off the charts.

Bearing that American success story in mind, I'm certain that new uses for Kansas hail is just around the corner.

Says Hillary, "Bite this, Barack!"

Even at this greatest of generational moments- the nomination of an African American to lead America's Party- to be the true inheritor of Jefferson- Hillary finds a way to spoil the celebration.

This from Maureen Dowd this morning:

---

June 4, 2008

Op-Ed Columnist

She’s Still Here!

By MAUREEN DOWD

He thought a little thing like winning would stop her?

Oh, Bambi.

Whoever said that after denial comes acceptance hadn’t met the Clintons.

If Hillary could not have an acceptance speech, she wasn’t going to have acceptance.

“It’s never going to end,” sighed one Democrat who has been advising Hillary. “We’re just moving to a new phase.”

Barry has been trying to shake off Hillary and pivot for quite a long time now, but she has managed to keep her teeth in his ankle and raise serious doubts about his potency. Getting dragged across the finish line Tuesday night by Democrats who had had enough of the rapacious Clintons, who had decided, if it came to it, that they would rather lose with Obama than win with Hillary, the Illinois senator tried to celebrate at the St. Paul arena where Republicans will anoint John McCain in September.

But even as Obama was trying to savor, Hillary was refusing to sever. Ignoring the attempts of Obama and his surrogates to graciously say how “extraordinary” she was as they showed her the exit, she and a self-pitying Bill continued to pull focus. Outside Baruch College, where she was to speak, her fierce feminist supporters screamed “Denver! Denver! Denver!”

Even as Obama got ready to come out on stage for his victory party, the Clinton campaign announced that it had won a Wyoming superdelegate and Terry McAuliffe introduced her at Baruch as “the next president of the United States.” She gave a brief nod to Obama without conceding that he was the nominee before rushing through a variation on her stump speech. She clung to her fuzzy math about winning the popular vote, and in one last fudge she said: “Thanks so much to South Dakota. You had the last word” — even though the Montana polls still had 25 minutes to go.

“What does Hillary want?” she mused, in her most self-aware moment in some time. “I will be making no decisions tonight,” she concluded, asking fans to go to her Web site to share their thoughts.

And, even though Democrats were no longer listening, Hillary’s camp radiated the message that Obama was a sucker who had played by the rules on Florida and Michigan, and then reached an appeasing compromise, and that such a weak sister could never handle Putin or I’m-A-Dinner-Jacket.

As he was reaching the magic number of delegates, she was devilishly stealing the spotlight. First, her camp vociferously denied an Associated Press report that she would concede and then, in a conference call with the New York delegation, she gave a green light to supporters to push for her to be on the ticket.

Clintonologists know that Hillary is up to something, but they aren’t sure what. Theory No. 1 is that it’s the Cassandra “I told you so” gambit: She believes intensely that he’s too black, too weak and too elitist — with all his salmon and organic tea and steamed broccoli — to beat her pal John McCain. But she has to pretend she’ll do “whatever it takes,” even accept the vice presidency, a job she’s already had and doesn’t want again, so that nobody will blame her when he loses on Nov. 4. Then she can power on to 2012.

Theory No. 2 is that it’s a “Bad stuff happens” maneuver, exemplified in her gaffe about the R.F.K. assassination, that she figures that at least if she moves a few blocks from Embassy Row to the Naval Observatory, she’ll be a heartbeat away from the job she’s always wanted.

Either way, by broadcasting that she’s open to being Obama’s running mate, she puts public pressure on him similar to the sort of pressure Walter Mondale was under from rampaging feminists when he put Geraldine Ferraro on the ticket. Mondale ended up seeming henpecked, as Obama would seem if he caved to the women who say they will write in Hillary’s name or vote for anti-choice McCain before they’d vote for Obama.

For months, Hillary has been trying to emasculate Obama with the sort of words and themes she has chosen, stirring up feminist anger by promoting the idea that the men were unfairly taking it away from the women, and covering up her own campaign mistakes with cries of sexism. Even his ability to finally clinch the historic nomination did not stop her in that pursuit. She did not bat her eyelashes at him and proclaim him Rhett Butler instead of Ashley Wilkes.

She just urged her supporters to keep the dream alive, and talked privately about what she would settle for. She has told some Democrats recently that she wanted Obama to agree to allow a roll call vote, like days of yore, so that the delegates of states she won would cast the first ballot for her at the convention. She said she wanted that for her daughter.

Obama supporters are worried that it’s a trick and she’ll somehow snatch away the nomination. Just as Hillary supporters have hardened toward him, many of Obama’s donors and fans have hardened against the Clintons, saying it would be disillusioning to see them on a ticket that’s supposed to be about fresh politics.

“It would be,” said one influential Democrat, “like finding out there’s no tooth fairy.”

And this from The Guardian:

What's her game? It's this, I think. It's not merely to be vice president. Although apparently it is that. I take it she and Bill have decided that being Obama's vice-president for eight years is the most plausible path to the presidency. But she did not on Tuesday night merely try to make a case for herself as a good vice-presidential candidate. She held a rhetorical knife to Obama's throat and said, in not so many words: I'm still calling some shots, buddy. You offer me the vice-presidency, or I walk away. But she has also forced Obama into a situation whereby if he chooses her now, he looks weak. So that's the choice she is hoping to impose on the nominee: don't choose me, and Bill and I will subtly work to see that you lose; choose me, and look like a weakling who can't lead the party without the Clintons after all. Now that's putting the interests of the party first, isn't it?

Deferential, glad to be of use, Politic, cautious, and meticulous; Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse; At times, indeed, almost ridiculous— Almost, at times, the Fool. So said Polonius in Prufrock. And so is Ryan Douche. Note his reply to recovered RU enabler, Mark Springer Allin: Quote: lol...ok..that one paragraph, especially the last line "...crap spewed by the socially incapable and bitter" was poetic enough to make me spit out my coffee laughing. lol...that was some good writing. Spit your Maxwell House, moron- but consider this: After page upon page of the most vitriolic attack on ATS, Springer, and Bill Irvin by the “bitter” sophomores at RU, Douche sucks up and sues for peace- "...deferential and glad to be of use…” Typical of this two-faced exemplar of timidity. I suppose that the final dagger was thrust by Springer- in the calling out of Broadbent, Shawanna, Douche and Wayne Alphabetsoup, Esq. Reference was made to their mendacious little hoax- l’afaire Tacitus Monroe. Broadbent and Douche, along with their amen posse, saw fit to foist an amazingly pernicious hoax upon their own supplicants in order to establish some rather arcane point concerning, ta daaaa---HOAXTERS! The Bill Moore method redux. It was, of course, that at this very moment that I bid the RUoids a less than respectful adieux. Fuck em, said I. I’ve not sourced this little diatribe aside from linking to the rather sophomric RU thread- BUT- if you’re interest and require references- let me know. Page and paragraph will be supplied. I have recently been further astounded to find out that the trolling pig, Access Denial, is actually a trolling sow named Lori. Who could have imagined that a woman was capable of putting out all those stinky-butt spews? Go figure… And yet- in their wisdom- and in the mode of Dr. Dankk, Hidden Masturbator and Shawanna, she was made a mod! But in a sad way it all makes sense. Shawanna brought this debunkerist hog, AD, to RU ( the only forum that had not yet banned Shawanna's ass) in order support her own destructive trysts there. A community of ugliness ensued. AD has not disappointed. Ugliness is alive and well at RU. Best regards

HUDSON FARM
Denver