Why People Won't See (by J.Kaminski)

[Magdalenbrother]

I receive 200-500 e-mails per day. Needless to say I can't read them all, never mind answer them all. But many of them are like this one, and these I always try to answer these even though I really don't have THE ANSWER when people ask me, "What can I do to stop this madness?"

"Hello, John. Thanks for the education. I am wondering, what is that makes most people "uneducable?" Fear? Denial? Upbringing?

"I have a friend who had opened up a bit to the idea that 9/11 was pure theatre, but now is sliding back to "I don't want to talk about it ... after saying to me, 'What are you trying to prove that the government is wrong? Why should people care?'

"I guess I must examine my own fears: the feeling I had when I first started e-mailing people - after learning just enough on 9/11 to be convinced it was an inside job. Maybe it's just the crowd mentality ....

"So I am asking you, what do you think is the main reason why people are uneducable? "I'd appreciate your opinion. "Craig R."

Craig, I think there is one overriding reason that prevents people from confronting the lies their government tells them, and it's the hardest one to realize. And by your phrasing, I can see you're already onto it. Sure, you can blame a lot of the American public's indifferent and uninvolved behavior on a deliberately retarded school system that prioritizes regimentation as far more important than enlightenment, or our bozo media industry that reduces everything to lowest common denominator pandering to our baser instincts.

Or, you can suspect the mentally debilitating effects of fluoride, chemtrails, and food additives - not to mention the omnipresent radioactivity increasing in our atmosphere by the day, or the conscience-numbing aphasia of antidepressant drugs - as possible reasons for this detached malaise that causes many people to be completely disinterested in the vital processes that control and diminish their own lives. But really, you hit it on the head when you speculated that you must examine your own fears.

I've said this before, and I'll never stop saying it. The real opportunity for growth and learning when studying the events of 9/11 is this. Once you realize that 9/11 was an inside job, conceived and carried out by members of the highest levels of the American government, a window opens in your mind that reveals the hypocritical and destructive nature of American behavior over time, and you begin to see that all these heroicized wars that have been conducted in the name of democracy and freedom were really something quite different.

At this point, it becomes a matter of do you have genuine integrity or don't you? As we all know, the first requirement of true integrity is admitting your own faults. I think there is no question in anyone's mind at this moment that America has no integrity (hell, you just need to look at the Indian treaties to realize that). Certainly the mainstream American media has absolutely no integrity, in that it's obvious to everyone the real stories about the Iraq war, depleted uranium, public corruption, fixed elections, and on and on ad infinitum are never mentioned by the hateful robots you see reading the "news" on TV).

But the larger question is: Do WE have integrity? I'm talking about you and me. Are we willing to look at the truth as we perceive it and try to identify and admit our own complicity in all these atrocities, as the American government runs around the world shooting innocent women and children in the head over reasons we KNOW are lies. I mean, we're supposed to be fighting terrorists, right, but we KNOW these terrorists are not Muslim malcontents, and that most likely they are CIA/Mossad-contracted mercenaries assigned to kill Iraqi aid workers, behead innocents and blow up churches and mosques in order to inflame the situation to kindle support from the braindead public, who then mindlessly cheer the genocidal tactics of George W. Bush and pretend not to notice that not only did America CREATE the terrorists and start the war with phony evidence, we now continue the war as viciously as we can, continually murdering innocents and turning our own troops into raging psychopaths.

Why? Increased profits for the military contractors, of course, which means increased under-the-table payments for our elected officials. In a way, the easiest way to deal with that guilt is to pretend it's not really happening, which is what most Americans are doing right now.

But in the conversation between you and me, Craig, we both know that WE are partly responsible - not matter how small or unwilling a part - for the American mass murder in Iraq, because we know we are American citizens and as such have a responsibility for controlling what our government does, at least if we are to believe and endorse the fact that America is a participatory democracy in which the people are ultimately responsible for what their government does. Of course on another level, we have absolutely no control over what our government does.

The Congress and most elected officials throughout America are bought off by the financial powers-that-be, and they do what they want, ordinary people like you and me be damned. But again, if we have integrity, we can trace a small shard of responsibility back to ourselves, to some small event in our histories in which we did not stand for principle, but instead held back and let some innocuous hypocrisy pass us by unchallenged with the rationalization that "there's nothing we could have done about it" or "it didn't affect me that much."

Although these events seemed unimportant at the time, these small defeats, multiplied by the American population total - some 300 million - have combined to produce the situation we face today - an endless war aimed at stimulating hatred and conflicts for the ubiquitous and ever-present purpose of increasing profits for the goons who make and sell the weapons. Why people try to hide in their own indifference is a very old question. So is why they are uneducable. But beyond the political ramifications of this widespread indifference are the spiritual dimensions, the conversations each of us has with ourselves, either lying on a pillow in the dark late at night or taking that first hard glance in the mirror before shaving in the morning.

To a degree, you are right about the crowd mentality. Everybody wants to fit in. Our minds create and accept authority figures, and we try to live our lives according to these dictates we have accepted as legitimate to our own self-worth. But a deeper reason exists with regard to what we choose to believe. And let me preface this by admitting I've been saying this for a long time, and haven't found all that many who agree with my opinion.

But that doesn't stop me from repeating it. I believe that religions are ultimately debilitating to the spirit, because they try to make us believe things that we know are not true, and in accepting the tenets of any religion, we leave ourselves open to a pattern of behavior that accepts things on faith, without examining them rationally. And this process habituates us to accepting lies as truth, as long as they emanate from an authority figure we have conditioned ourselves to respect.

Once you are willing to accept something that deep in your psyche you know goes against what you perceive to be rational truth - e.g., Jesus died for our sins and rose again from the dead - THEN YOU CAN BE MADE TO BELIEVE ANYTHING, whether it is true or not, as long as it comes from an authority figure to whom you have given credibility in your mind. I believe this is a central component in the phenomenon of a majority of the American people believing the government's bogus story about 9/11, and in their willingness to accept the psychotic carnage in Iraq as being somehow relevant to their own well-being.

Thus, according to the tenets of the psychological process known as transference (in which we take the feelings of trust and dependence that we feel as children toward our parents and transfer them as adults to a relationship with an imaginary sky god to maintain our inner feelings of security), we want to accept what George W. Bush tells us because we have embedded ourselves in American society, and our whole meaning becomes challenged and distorted when we lose that focus by realizing that probably everything that has come out of Dubya's mouth in his whole life has been a cynical and sarcastic rich boy's lie.

Therefore, challenging his public statements can be disorienting to those who are not committed to their own integrity or trapped in the psychological prison of a fictitious belief system that can be proven false, should such believers suddenly develop the courage to confront the lies they are telling themselves. In some cases, confronting these lies can totally shatter a person's sense of self, which is why the majority choose not to do that. Unfortunately, not confronting these lies is very likely to shatter our world into little radioactive bits, a profoundly ugly process we see happening - and accelerating - as we speak.

Thanks for writing, Craig.


John Kaminski is an Internet essayist whose writings can been seen on hundreds of websites around the world. They have been collected into two anthologies, the latest of which is titled "The Perfect Enemy." For information go to http://www.johnkaminski.com/

[anami]

Aho!

[Magdalenbrother]

Don't say Aho! Say:

UA UA Chavez no se va!
UA UA Chavez no se va!

[Captain Ochre]

"So I am asking you, what do you think is the main reason why people are uneducable? "I'd appreciate your opinion. "Craig R."

Craig, I think there is one overriding reason that prevents people from confronting the lies their government tells them, and it's the hardest one to realize. And by your phrasing, I can see you're already onto it. Sure, you can blame a lot of the American public's indifferent and uninvolved behavior on a deliberately retarded school system that prioritizes regimentation as far more important than enlightenment, or our bozo media industry that reduces everything to lowest common denominator pandering to our baser instincts.

On the issue of 9-11 being an "inside job"?
:rofl:
Mr. Kaminski should be dealing with the issue of why people so easily accept Internet claptrap.
Maybe he would thereby harm his own enterprise, OTOH.

Or, you can suspect the mentally debilitating effects of fluoride, chemtrails, and food additives - not to mention the omnipresent radioactivity increasing in our atmosphere by the day, or the conscience-numbing aphasia of antidepressant drugs - as possible reasons for this detached malaise that causes many people to be completely disinterested in the vital processes that control and diminish their own lives. But really, you hit it on the head when you speculated that you must examine your own fears.

Here's hoping that Kaminski himself was brought to his current state of enlightenment free of fluoride, chemtrails, and food additives.

I've said this before, and I'll never stop saying it. The real opportunity for growth and learning when studying the events of 9/11 is this. Once you realize that 9/11 was an inside job, conceived and carried out by members of the highest levels of the American government, a window opens in your mind that reveals the hypocritical and destructive nature of American behavior over time, and you begin to see that all these heroicized wars that have been conducted in the name of democracy and freedom were really something quite different.

Plus, the total paradigm shift will enable one to overlook new brand of mental hypocrisy he's accepted?

At this point, it becomes a matter of do you have genuine integrity or don't you? As we all know, the first requirement of true integrity is admitting your own faults. I think there is no question in anyone's mind at this moment that America has no integrity (hell, you just need to look at the Indian treaties to realize that).

Does Mr. Kaminsky have integrity?
The first requirement of true integrity is admitting your own faults.

Certainly the mainstream American media has absolutely no integrity, in that it's obvious to everyone the real stories about the Iraq war, depleted uranium, public corruption, fixed elections, and on and on ad infinitum are never mentioned by the hateful robots you see reading the "news" on TV).

Obvious to everyone.
Excellent.
:lol:

But the larger question is: Do WE have integrity? I'm talking about you and me. Are we willing to look at the truth as we perceive it and try to identify and admit our own complicity in all these atrocities, as the American government runs around the world shooting innocent women and children in the head over reasons we KNOW are lies.

Great! Kaminsky has begun at least a show of self-examination.
Already we see him tripping over his own feet. On the one hand we're looking at "the truth as we perceive it" in order to feel our supposed guilt, while on the other hand the reasons given for the current wars in which the US is involved are based on "reasons we KNOW are lies".
Kaminsky would be better served examining the supposed evidence that supports his perception of the truth.
Probably he's too agenda-driven to bother (which would make for a particularly virulent brand of hypocrisy).

I mean, we're supposed to be fighting terrorists, right, but we KNOW these terrorists are not Muslim malcontents, and that most likely they are CIA/Mossad-contracted mercenaries assigned to kill Iraqi aid workers, behead innocents and blow up churches and mosques in order to inflame the situation to kindle support from the braindead public, who then mindlessly cheer the genocidal tactics of George W. Bush and pretend not to notice that not only did America CREATE the terrorists and start the war with phony evidence, we now continue the war as viciously as we can, continually murdering innocents and turning our own troops into raging psychopaths.

Kaminsky's spouting mindless nonsense of his own at this point.
1) We "KNOW" that the terrorists are not Muslim malcontents? What happended to the Muslim malcontents? What are they truly up to these days? Afghanistan was a puppet government of the CIA before we went there to dismantle terrorist training operations?? Or what?
2) US sekrit forces behead civilians and blow up mosques (terrorists are blowing up mosques? news to me) in order to kindle support from an allegedly braindead public when the reality is that the support for the Iraq action would probably be greater without those events?
3) America supposedly created a war using supposedly phony evidence that was corroborated by virtually every nation with an intelligence agency with information on Iraq????? Is it a worldwide conspiracy, Mr. Kaminsky, or is the US particularly at fault? No doubt we hold the strings to puppet governments all over the world (France, Russia, etc.). Why didn't we pull some strings in order to obtain their UN Security Council votes? :huh:
4) Continuing the war as viciously as we can?????
Where are the carpet bombs and chemical weapons? Surely Kaminsky is aware that we possess such things? Either he is lying, or he apparently doesn't realize that we've got chemical weapons and carpet bombs.
Either way ...

Why? Increased profits for the military contractors, of course, which means increased under-the-table payments for our elected officials. In a way, the easiest way to deal with that guilt is to pretend it's not really happening, which is what most Americans are doing right now.

Riper pickings could have been had from multibillionaire corporations who took a bath from the WTC attacks. Why should politicians favor the low bidding represented by military contractors over the higher bidding from the entertainment industry (for example)
Kaminsky has trouble stringing together consecutive thoughts.

But in the conversation between you and me, Craig, we both know that WE are partly responsible - not matter how small or unwilling a part - for the American mass murder in Iraq, because we know we are American citizens and as such have a responsibility for controlling what our government does, at least if we are to believe and endorse the fact that America is a participatory democracy in which the people are ultimately responsible for what their government does. Of course on another level, we have absolutely no control over what our government does.

So which is it?
:smile:

The Congress and most elected officials throughout America are bought off by the financial powers-that-be, and they do what they want, ordinary people like you and me be damned. But again, if we have integrity, we can trace a small shard of responsibility back to ourselves, to some small event in our histories in which we did not stand for principle, but instead held back and let some innocuous hypocrisy pass us by unchallenged with the rationalization that "there's nothing we could have done about it" or "it didn't affect me that much."

I draw the line at accepting without good evidence Kaminsky's suggestion that the WTC deal was an inside job.
What now?

Although these events seemed unimportant at the time, these small defeats, multiplied by the American population total - some 300 million - have combined to produce the situation we face today - an endless war aimed at stimulating hatred and conflicts for the ubiquitous and ever-present purpose of increasing profits for the goons who make and sell the weapons.

Iraq was buying tons of weapons from France and Russia before the Gulf War (and after, FTM, but more beforehand).
Does Kaminsky bother to figure any of this into his calculations?

Why people try to hide in their own indifference is a very old question. So is why they are uneducable. But beyond the political ramifications of this widespread indifference are the spiritual dimensions, the conversations each of us has with ourselves, either lying on a pillow in the dark late at night or taking that first hard glance in the mirror before shaving in the morning.

Let me sum it up for you Mr. Kaminsky. You're frustrated that people don't buy your crackpot theories. To save yourself from having to realize that you're promoting crackpot theories, you blame your inability to convince others on their conditioned uneducability. For all I know, there may be folks who just don't care about your crackpot theories. OTOH, there are those who know the issues and see why those same theories belong in the fever swamp.

To a degree, you are right about the crowd mentality. Everybody wants to fit in. Our minds create and accept authority figures, and we try to live our lives according to these dictates we have accepted as legitimate to our own self-worth. But a deeper reason exists with regard to what we choose to believe. And let me preface this by admitting I've been saying this for a long time, and haven't found all that many who agree with my opinion.

Don't you want to fit in, Kaminsky?
:wink:

Maybe Kaminsky is just better than those others. Let us thank our lucky stars that he grew up without fluoridated water.
I hope that Poligrip doesn't contain chemicals that might make up the difference ...

But that doesn't stop me from repeating it. I believe that religions are ultimately debilitating to the spirit, because they try to make us believe things that we know are not true, and in accepting the tenets of any religion, we leave ourselves open to a pattern of behavior that accepts things on faith, without examining them rationally. And this process habituates us to accepting lies as truth, as long as they emanate from an authority figure we have conditioned ourselves to respect.

What "spirit" does Kaminsky refer to, that he is able to except his own religion from his own broad-brush treatment of religions?

Once you are willing to accept something that deep in your psyche you know goes against what you perceive to be rational truth - e.g., Jesus died for our sins and rose again from the dead - THEN YOU CAN BE MADE TO BELIEVE ANYTHING, whether it is true or not, as long as it comes from an authority figure to whom you have given credibility in your mind. I believe this is a central component in the phenomenon of a majority of the American people believing the government's bogus story about 9/11, and in their willingness to accept the psychotic carnage in Iraq as being somehow relevant to their own well-being.

Some folks believe that they are both responsible for the actions of the US government and yet not at all responsible for those actions, OTOH.

Kaminsky is engaged in an ad hominem fallacy, FWIW.

Thus, according to the tenets of the psychological process known as transference (in which we take the feelings of trust and dependence that we feel as children toward our parents and transfer them as adults to a relationship with an imaginary sky god to maintain our inner feelings of security), we want to accept what George W. Bush tells us because we have embedded ourselves in American society, and our whole meaning becomes challenged and distorted when we lose that focus by realizing that probably everything that has come out of Dubya's mouth in his whole life has been a cynical and sarcastic rich boy's lie.

Therefore, if Bush told us to put on aluminum caps to help shield our thoughts from aliens we would do it?
Kaminsky's a crackpot. He grossly oversimplifies even if he's not spouting the purest tripe. Bush is believed because what he says makes sense in the context of knowledge available to the majority of Americans--and I daresay that probably has virtually nothing to do with belief in the resurrection of Christ, per se.

Therefore, challenging his public statements can be disorienting to those who are not committed to their own integrity or trapped in the psychological prison of a fictitious belief system that can be proven false, should such believers suddenly develop the courage to confront the lies they are telling themselves.

Sounds like Kaminsky's calling me a coward.
Let him try it to my face.
:smile:

In some cases, confronting these lies can totally shatter a person's sense of self, which is why the majority choose not to do that. Unfortunately, not confronting these lies is very likely to shatter our world into little radioactive bits, a profoundly ugly process we see happening - and accelerating - as we speak.

So, apparently the US is the threat of nuclear war, let alone the fact that we haven't nuked an enemy since Japan (over fifty years, by my reckoning).
Kaminsky has apparently ruled out evil intentions on the part of those developing nuclear weapons in China, N. Korea, and Iraq.
Either that or they are mere puppets of the United States, I guess.

The man's a loon, IMHO.

[Benster]

Genetics.

[Captain Ochre]

Genetics.

The answer that answers nothing, unless we suppose that perhaps a Benster among us transcends his genetics.

To the point:
If ~Benster fails to "see" because of genetics and Benster "sees" purely on the basis of genetics, then how is it seen which is correct between that seen by Benster and ~Benster?

[Benster]

[QUOTE=Captain Ochre]The answer that answers nothing, unless we suppose that perhaps a Benster among us transcends his genetics."

No, I was merely giving an answer to this question:

"I am wondering, what is it that makes most people "uneducable?"

[Captain Ochre]

[QUOTE=Captain Ochre]The answer that answers nothing, unless we suppose that perhaps a Benster among us transcends his genetics."

No, I was merely giving an answer to this question:

"I am wondering, what is it that makes most people "uneducable?"

Bringing us back to my observation that your answer answers nothing unless we suppose that perhaps a Benster (to name one of many potential examples) among us transcends his genetics.

Are we in an infinite loop, now?

[revivalfire]

I think my brain exploded.....:lol: Anyway....I agree the Kaminski is a crackpot...no proof in any of the examples he listed or any of the slams..if he doesn't believe in religions..why does he believe in a spirit? Spirit's come from religions, pal.. Uneducable people, I believe, are those like Mr. Kaminski who are so bound up in their own opinions and ideas they can't see past there nose.. Parental influence also has an affect (this is the same as a home life)... There are, in fact so many factors, that the question is unreasonable.. Is the person average, advanced or slow? Does the person come from upstanding home or not. Does the person have parents who care? Is this person's personality easily influenced by outside forces? I think it is an unfair question and just the fact the Mr. Kaminski answered it shows that he has no idea what the answer is because, in fact, he is uneducable himself. What happened to all the book worms?

[Zeluvia]

Gonna jump in here... No I dont think 9/11 was an inside job, however since the Bush Admin as a whole didnt follow the Clinton Admin format for the regular security meetings, and just kind of thought they knew better, and didnt replace the working system actually put in place by Reagan (I believe) that Clinton and Bush Sr. had followed, I would say the Admin was certainly cupable.

However I would like to point out something I noticed over the Tsunami Disaster.

I happened to be up that night, when it was first reported. I watched the news off an on most of that night and morning...

At one point on sunday the following was in the scroll at the bottom of FOX and CNN headline news:

European Union pledges 3 million to disaster aid, US pledges 50,000.

This scroll continued well into Monday.

Now we have a whole OTHER news issue where someone said not enough and someone else got pissed and all this stuff going back and forth pretending to be news.

Its my contention that when the UN guy addressed the UN, he had only read the ticker on CNN, and trusted the news to be accurate. But now he is being bitched at for insinuating the US was being miserly.

No one in the news has explained who got that 50,000 figure they posted nor where it came from nor even if it was a typo, yet it ran for more than 24 hours as a fact.
No one even references that ticker as a possible cause of the issue.

I really would rather know where that figure came from on Sunday morning than watch the white house and the UN play rhetorical games.

Little things like this make me wonder.

[Captain Ochre]

Gonna jump in here... No I dont think 9/11 was an inside job, however since the Bush Admin as a whole didnt follow the Clinton Admin format for the regular security meetings, and just kind of thought they knew better, and didnt replace the working system actually put in place by Reagan (I believe) that Clinton and Bush Sr. had followed, I would say the Admin was certainly cupable.

You'd suggest that things would have been different with more meetings and the replacement of the existing system during Bushes first eight months in office?
Based on what evidence? 'Cause meetings like that did such a good job in keeping the US from terrorism attempts in the past? :huh:

However I would like to point out something I noticed over the Tsunami Disaster.

I happened to be up that night, when it was first reported. I watched the news off an on most of that night and morning...

At one point on sunday the following was in the scroll at the bottom of FOX and CNN headline news:

European Union pledges 3 million to disaster aid, US pledges 50,000.

This scroll continued well into Monday.

Now we have a whole OTHER news issue where someone said not enough and someone else got pissed and all this stuff going back and forth pretending to be news.

Its my contention that when the UN guy addressed the UN, he had only read the ticker on CNN, and trusted the news to be accurate. But now he is being bitched at for insinuating the US was being miserly.

No one in the news has explained who got that 50,000 figure they posted nor where it came from nor even if it was a typo, yet it ran for more than 24 hours as a fact.
No one even references that ticker as a possible cause of the issue.

I really would rather know where that figure came from on Sunday morning than watch the white house and the UN play rhetorical games.

Little things like this make me wonder.

If the UN guy delivered a speech based on the information in a news ticker, then he deserves criticism for that, IMHO.

I don't find your suggestion plausible.

[Magdalenbrother]

I don't believe it's possible to hijack a plane full of heroic and courageous Gringos with a card-board cutter. I don't believe Egyptian passports can resist temperatures that are supposed to have led to the melting of the iron framework of the WTC. I don't believe that there exist flight manuals in modern Arabic. I don't believe you can retrieve the DNA of passengers when the plane in which they were sitting is said to have totally disintegrated on hitting its target (the Pentagon crash affair). Etc., etc.

You see, the rulers of this world, they don't just tell lies, they tell them big. The bigger the better, so that intelligent people really must put aside their clever brains to remain spiritually and physically safe. It's a test, just like the "Jesus is God" thing in Christianity. It must be difficult to believe...otherwise, what's the fun? Otherwise, how do you know who is a true follower? If you can have 50 million or more people believe that Mohammed Atta's passport wasn't destroyed in the raging flames of the WTC, next time you can invent an even greater lie such as "we live in the greatest democracy on earth" while everyone is in fact living in a concentration camp with cameras, identity controls and media censorship everywhere.

The criminals and psychopaths who rule the US and the other great powers of the world (doesn't the Bible say Satan controls the whole field of politics and economics?) want to infantilize you.

Next time I'll post some hot stuff by David Icke. Maybe something on his reptilian theory. That is even more disconcerting and frightening. But not without Biblical confirmation...

Viva Chavez!
Viva la Revolucion Bolivariana!
Viva Venezuela libre!

[Captain Ochre]

I don't believe it's possible to hijack a plane full of heroic and courageous Gringos with a card-board cutter. I don't believe Egyptian passports can resist temperatures that are supposed to have led to the melting of the iron framework of the WTC. I don't believe that there exist flight manuals in modern Arabic. I don't believe you can retrieve the DNA of passengers when the plane in which they were sitting is said to have totally disintegrated on hitting its target (the Pentagon crash affair). Etc., etc.

Bomb threats were the key to the hijackings, as I understand it (along with the assurance that nobody was to be harmed).
To the point, however, I don't believe that you have provided any evidence pertaining to your claims of incredulity.

You see, the rulers of this world, they don't just tell lies, they tell them big. The bigger the better, so that intelligent people really must put aside their clever brains to remain spiritually and physically safe. It's a test, just like the "Jesus is God" thing in Christianity. It must be difficult to believe...otherwise, what's the fun? Otherwise, how do you know who is a true follower? If you can have 50 million or more people believe that Mohammed Atta's passport wasn't destroyed in the raging flames of the WTC, next time you can invent an even greater lie such as "we live in the greatest democracy on earth" while everyone is in fact living in a concentration camp with cameras, identity controls and media censorship everywhere.

I know it's hard to believe, but Magdalenbrother is one of the rulers of this world (hence, he's telling huge lies).
The very fact that it is unbelievable is what makes it so convincing.
Wow, what an easy technique to employ!

The criminals and psychopaths who rule the US and the other great powers of the world (doesn't the Bible say Satan controls the whole field of politics and economics?) want to infantilize you.

Next time I'll post some hot stuff by David Icke. Maybe something on his reptilian theory. That is even more disconcerting and frightening. But not without Biblical confirmation...

Viva Chavez!
Viva la Revolucion Bolivariana!
Viva Venezuela libre!

:cuckoo:

[Magdalenbrother]

Captain Ochre is now on my HIL.

If you want to understand the whole circus, nothing beats Orwell's 1984. Read it and you will know all there is to know about politics.

[Captain Ochre]

Captain Ochre is now on my HIL.

Probably not coincidentally, that leaves Mb's fever-swamp pronouncements just as defenseless as they were before he put me on ignore.

If you want to understand the whole circus, nothing beats Orwell's 1984. Read it and you will know all there is to know about politics.

Hmmm.
I've read that book.
Therefore, I understand the whole alleged circus.
Therefore, Magdalenbrother ought to listen to me.
:lol:

Mb probably knew that he could not defend what he's written so far, hence the title of his latest screed.

[flipper]

Or, you can suspect the mentally debilitating effects of fluoride, chemtrails, and food additives - not to mention the omnipresent radioactivity increasing in our atmosphere by the day, or the conscience-numbing aphasia of antidepressant drugs - as possible reasons for this detached malaise that causes many people to be completely disinterested in the vital processes that control and diminish their own lives.

On no account will a Commie ever drink water, and not without good reason... Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face?

General Jack D. Ripper.

[revivalfire]

Captain Ochre is now on my HIL.

If you want to understand the whole circus, nothing beats Orwell's 1984. Read it and you will know all there is to know about politics.
If you base your entire political viewpoint on one source, a source that is probably biased, and never looke elsewhere...then Mr. Kaminski now has a someone he can look up too....:lol: Really, provide proof for these outrageous claims and please find a better source on politcs then just one biased book

[revivalfire]

Do you think the commies would really waste their time creating fluoride? I'd much sooner believe that they have infiltrated as what we call Liberals then by using fluoride...sheesh.... hey, what religion are you? Are you a Kerry fan??? Flip-flop!!!:lol: :lol:

[Zeluvia]

Based on what evidence? 'Cause meetings like that did such a good job in keeping the US from terrorism attempts in the past?Actually I think they did help. Certainly not having ANY meetings after taking over the Administration couldnt have been HELPFUL

I will admit however I base part of this on Clark, who I think is a bit suspect, and part on the 9/11 commission's report, and part on the terrorist attempts that were actually foiled.

It still doesnt change the fact, where did that 50,000 number come from, who reported it, why was it in the news?

We had a time delay here, because the earth spins on it's access...but still, I want to know WHERE that number came from.

Even if the UN agency didnt get it from the news, is it indeed the number he was told by someone in our government early sunday morning?

What pigeon brained news source would put that number up on the screen knowing it had to be a preliminary number with our main people still sleeping?

What pigeon brained government worker pledged 50,000?

too many pigeons !!

I had no doubt we would respond to the crisis like we have always responded. My issue is a "fake" news issue of the UN vs the USA based on what looks to me like pigeon shit.

[Captain Ochre]

Actually I think they did help. Certainly not having ANY meetings after taking over the Administration couldnt have been HELPFUL

I had asked you to base your opinion on evidence for us. You edited out my request and refer us to Clark, whom you admit to considering a dubious source, yourself.
Are you trying to convince anybody apart from yourself? If so, consider changing tactics.

I will admit however I base part of this on Clark, who I think is a bit suspect, and part on the 9/11 commission's report, and part on the terrorist attempts that were actually foiled.

My impression is that Clark saw his work in the piecemeal-style terrorism response doctrine of past administrations preparing to die on the vine in favor of a more aggressive and comprehensive doctrine. His reports seem colored by the politics of the situation.

It still doesnt change the fact, where did that 50,000 number come from, who reported it, why was it in the news?

I don't know, and I don't find that issue as compelling as you do since I never saw the ticker to which you refer.