Treason, Be It Warmonger Team A or Warmonger Team B

  • 6packabs

    Posts: 216

    Oct 28, 2012 12:16 PM GMT
    Dems and Repubs are the same. Behind closed doors they run the same cursed policies despite election year bamboozling of a stupid populace that buy into bull crap lies again, and again, and again.

    Obama is Bush on steroids. Obama and Romney are on the same team. It's all a bunch of staged crap. Even the leaked memo of the staged debates between the two campaigns collaborating doesn't make it into the mind numbed collective groupthink of all the sheeple. It's a shame most Americans get caught in the false choice between Council on Foreign Relations candidate A vs Council on Foreign Relations candidate B.

    Kick back with popcorn sometime if you want to begin to leave the idiocy of the staged political game and consider the content of this film. All if the Romney vs Obama crap is just geared to divide and conquer stupid people by taking their eyes off the ball to the fact that the same policies will continue unabated regardless of which TelePrompTer reading stooge is placed in the White House.

    Stereotypically, gay men are politically as dumb assed and incapacitated for common sense as any segment of the population, including professing Christian warmongers who spit all over the doctrines of the Prince of Peace.

  • 6packabs

    Posts: 216

    Oct 28, 2012 12:20 PM GMT
    Oops. Excuse the typos. Posted via cell phone and missed a few errors.

    While making another post, here is another telling vid:

  • MikeW

    Posts: 6061

    Oct 30, 2012 4:23 AM GMT
    6packabs said /snip/ Stereotypically, gay men are politically as dumb assed and incapacitated for common sense as any segment of the population, including professing Christian warmongers who spit all over the doctrines of the Prince of Peace. /snip/


    Hello. Pleased to meet you here.

    Indeed it is rare to come across anyone with a similar political perspective to my own, regardless of their sexual orientation.

    My journey down the rabbit hole began with the Kennedy assassination. I was in high school at the time. Although I was suspicious of the event from the get-go, what pushed me over the edge was two things: 1) LBJ had the presidential limousine DISMANTLED and 2), although this was reported in the news at the time, no ADULT around me seemed the least bit concerned. This blew my mind. Arguably the most significant piece of forensic evidence short of the murder weapon(s) in a capital crime of State is not merely 'tampered with' but destroyed. And no one blinks?

    That was one of my first political WTF moments. There would be many throughout the 60s 70s and on up to the present.

    In the early '90s I met author and scholar Peter Dale Scott, who coined the phrase "Deep Politics." Although I wouldn't say we are friends, we have socialized more than once. He lives in my neighborhood. He has written quite a bit about 9/11 but is careful to steer clear of 'illuminati' type preoccupations.

    A few years after that ('96?) I met ex-LAPD narcotics investigator Michael Ruppert and participated (mostly lurked) in a yahoo-email group established by him and other researches in this nefarious arena called 'copvcia'.

    It was during this time that I and others began to suspect that (what would later be called) a 'catalyzing event' was soon to occur. The way I reasoned it out in my own head at the time was: “If what I believe I’m seeing is true, then the next likely move will be an ‘event’ that will allow certain groups in our society to take a giant step in a long range agenda.” It didn’t take a genius to figure this ‘event’ would come in the form of a ‘terrorist attack’ ™.

    The Friday just before 9/11, Ruppert sent out an email alert that he believed ‘something’ was about to happen. This concern was based primarily on his monitoring certain banking and other Wall Street venues. However, Ruppert’s observations led him in the direction of believing this would be an economic event. It wasn’t until after the fact of 9/11 that we began to understand the economic ramifications of the closing of Wall Street for a week afterward, not to mention the destruction of the SEC mainframes during the demolition of Building 7. Ironically, the economic bubble Ruppert anticipated didn’t come to ‘fruition’ until 9/11/08.

    This preparation allowed me to perceive 9/11 in quite a different light from everyone else I knew – regardless of their sexual preference, gender, race, religion, level of education or political leanings. I made it a point from day-1 to insure that my closest personal friends didn’t fall completely under the media spell.

    Even to this day, however, few of them truly ‘grock’ the significance of the event and what it tells us about where we are as a society and a civilization. This is a theme perhaps we may discuss at some length.

    I became very active online doing my best to educate other people about the discrepancies concerning the media’s narrative of 9/11. It was an uphill battle.

    In 2006 I was one of the first people to comment on Dylan Avery’s film, “Loose Change.” Apparently several of us emailed him around the same time and he very quickly re-edited his youtube presentation in a second edition.

    In May 2006 I had the pleasure of meeting Dylan, his friend Corry and Jasson Bermas (who produced the first video in this thread) over hamburgers, fries and a coke. The occasion was the first public showing of Loose Change in a theatre (Grand Lake, Oakland, CA). Having lived with at least one foot down the rabbit hole for so long, I had to see for myself ‘who’ these young fellows were.

    By the end of 2006 I was deeply embroiled in a forum where the primary focus of investigation was the events at the Pentagon. This remains the most contentious and divisive area of the whole 9/11 discussion. There is more I could say about this but, frankly, I’m choosing to leave most of it behind me. I am happy, however, to have played some small part in the articulation and organization of the NSA video. Craig and Aldo of Citizen’s Investigation Team, have my utmost respect. They are the real deal.

    ETA date typo in third to last paragraph above.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 30, 2012 4:33 AM GMT
    I'm well aware that they're both on the same team. Unfortunately, there's no way to vote either of them out.

    One of them doesn't give a fuck about us. The other has vowed to make our lives miserable.

    Equal rights have nothing to do with either of their higher objectives, yet one of them has made it an objective to remove equal rights.

    This is the choice we're faced with...vote for the evil black man who wants to fuck us over, or vote for the eviler white man who wants to make it illegal for us to fuck.

    Your choice. icon_wink.gif
  • MikeW

    Posts: 6061

    Oct 30, 2012 4:53 AM GMT
    paulflexes saidI'm well aware that they're both on the same team. Unfortunately, there's no way to vote either of them out.

    One of them doesn't give a fuck about us. The other has vowed to make our lives miserable.

    Equal rights have nothing to do with either of their higher objectives, yet one of them has made it an objective to remove equal rights.

    This is the choice we're faced with...vote for the evil black man who wants to fuck us over, or vote for the eviler white man who wants to make it illegal for us to fuck.

    Your choice. icon_wink.gif


    I think everyone must do what their conscience bids them to do. If you believe voting matters, you should definitely vote.

    I'm of the opinion that if voting truly mattered (and by *truly* I mean in terms of the actual power structure behind the political facade) it would be made illegal. Rather than do that and risk insurrection, however, the masses are controlled by being allowed to believe their vote matters. But of course, it isn't the votes that count; it is who counts the votes that truly matters. In an age of paperless voting via the HAVA of 2002 (after the installation of the first Chimpanzee in the White House by none other than the Supreme Court) voting, especially at the national level, has largely become untraceable.

    So far as particular issues are concerned: It all looks like 'good cop / bad cop' propaganda to me. The idea is to keep the society divided against itself: Right against Left, men against women, working class against upper classes, white against black against who ever, straight against gay, religious against agnostics and atheists, etc. etc. etc. So long as everyone is yelling at everyone else, no one takes the time to contemplate who benefits from all this discord. And, too, it keeps the money pouring into the big party coffers from 'the little people' who are concerned about anything and everything from abortion to gun control to labor relations to gay (or whatever) rights.

    Again, let me hasten to say that if you are deeply concerned about any of these issues then, by all means, go for it. I'm not saying what I'm saying to dissuade anyone to engage in political struggle. I've certainly spent a good share of my life (since the Vietnam war) in those trenches. All I'm doing is recording MY perspective on it all.
    Frank Zappa“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 30, 2012 5:12 AM GMT
    MikeW said
    paulflexes saidI'm well aware that they're both on the same team. Unfortunately, there's no way to vote either of them out.

    One of them doesn't give a fuck about us. The other has vowed to make our lives miserable.

    Equal rights have nothing to do with either of their higher objectives, yet one of them has made it an objective to remove equal rights.

    This is the choice we're faced with...vote for the evil black man who wants to fuck us over, or vote for the eviler white man who wants to make it illegal for us to fuck.

    Your choice. icon_wink.gif


    I think everyone must do what their conscience bids them to do. If you believe voting matters, you should definitely vote.

    I'm of the opinion that if voting truly mattered (and by *truly* I mean in terms of the actual power structure behind the political facade) it would be made illegal. Rather than do that and risk insurrection, however, the masses are controlled by being allowed to believe their vote matters. But of course, it isn't the votes that count; it is who counts the votes that truly matters. In an age of paperless voting via the HAVA of 2002 (after the installation of the first Chimpanzee in the White House by none other than the Supreme Court) voting, especially at the national level, has largely become untraceable.

    So far as particular issues are concerned: It all looks like 'good cop / bad cop' propaganda to me. The idea is to keep the society divided against itself: Right against Left, men against women, working class against upper classes, white against black against who ever, straight against gay, religious against agnostics and atheists, etc. etc. etc. So long as everyone is yelling at everyone else, no one takes the time to contemplate who benefits from all this discord. And, too, it keeps the money pouring into the big party coffers from 'the little people' who are concerned about anything and everything from abortion to gun control to labor relations to gay (or whatever) rights.

    Again, let me hasten to say that if you are deeply concerned about any of these issues then, by all means, go for it. I'm not saying what I'm saying to dissuade anyone to engage in political struggle. I've certainly spent a good share of my life (since the Vietnam war) in those trenches. All I'm doing is recording MY perspective on it all.
    As a Desert Storm vet (1990-91) you have my utmost regard.

    In your perspective, do you find it better to vote for someone who is obviously and openly against us and is willing to constitutionally ban us - nationwide - from being ourselves, or someone who wants to let each state decide what's best for us?
  • 6packabs

    Posts: 216

    Oct 30, 2012 2:49 PM GMT
    MikeW,

    I would never have suspected to read on such a site (again, gay men stereotypically as politically dumb as a box of rocks and easily manipulated therefore by treacherous politicians as any segment of the population,) such a cogent and refreshing view and background.

    Yes, from the get go you were one smart kid. Somehow the vicious school system hadn't dumbed you down to think for yourself and ask questions that should have been obvious to every stupid adult in your world as a youth.

    I laugh and laugh at what is to be found by research. I laugh at how soundly defeated are the assertions made by government textbook writers and propagandists by other sources.

    On economics, I love the Mises.org website. What a great discovery that was for me back in 2002. I also delighted a few years before that to discover the lone Constitutionalist Congressman, Dr. Ron Paul of Texas. What delightful weekly columns he's put out for the decade plus that I've been aware of him.

    I've been "unlearning" much of the brainwashed propaganda fed me in government school since before I left K-12. Actually, for some reason I've been like you, and never simply bought up the government line and propaganda. History textbooks, for example, teach that war is good for us economically. It was WWII that finally gave government reason to spend all that money which ended the Great Depression, right? Hahaha. Come on! That is total bull crap that any kid should find as falacy. I certainly did. Reading and studying non-government economists and history textbook sources soundly defeat the intellectual bankruptcy of a thousand issues taught me in government enforced (mandatory) schooling. To say war brings a nation out of depression is beyond stupid and only the un-educated imbecile would push such a line. The machinations of the Federal Reserve Bank (privately held) is where one need only look to discover the source of the depression---which was man made by these elitist bankers. Strangely, textbooks don't seem to like to let the reader consider the central bank in any of these things.

    I've too met Dylan Avery. Fun to hear you helped him get on to a re-write.

    I was privy to see the Oklahoma City Bombing as something with government fingerprints all over it. A month after it happened, I had shared with me the article in the New American Magazine by the foremost bomb expert (oh, I should look up his name, it eludes me now,) who trashed the official story. But by the time that article was published, Slick Willey had broken Federal Law and demolished the crime scene which debrit today, I understand is yet buried and under armed guard. Yes, government moved super fast to demolish the Murrah Federal Building and hide its forensic remnants forever.

    Government did the same with all the steel in the WTC.

    I love that the "Architects and Engineers" for 9/11 Truth is now approaching 2000 members. What stellar people those are. WTC 7, for me is so obvious. A good chunk of Americans yet don't even know of that building and its near free fall collapse on the afternoon of 9/11. I've spent hundreds of hours reading and researching 9/11 as an inside job since 2002. It is the American Reichstag, and stupidly, Americans are about as bright as Germans of the 1930's who embraced vipers, lying and murderous politicians.

    Today, we have the Nobel Peace Prize winner dropping "humanitarian bombs" on Libya? Orwellian to the max!

    I can talk to Obama supporters, those who---rightly---frothed at the mouth against the policies of G. W. Bush, but somehow when "their man" is in the White House they turn stupid and support those very policies that they only 4 years ago rabidly opposed. Truly, most people are dead asleep. The public school system is roundly successful at producing intellectually incoherent adults incapacitated for intelligent comprehension of current events and the machinations of the "shadow government" as some would refer to the Elite power structure behind the scenes choosing CFR Team A vs CFR Team B in a false contest every 4 years.

    Yes, so much we could discuss. I would imagine hours of great conversation.
  • MikeW

    Posts: 6061

    Oct 30, 2012 3:36 PM GMT
    paulflexes said
    MikeW said
    paulflexes said
    snip I've certainly spent a good share of my life (since the Vietnam war) in those trenches. All I'm doing is recording MY perspective on it all.
    As a Desert Storm vet (1990-91) you have my utmost regard.

    In your perspective, do you find it better to vote for someone who is obviously and openly against us and is willing to constitutionally ban us - nationwide - from being ourselves, or someone who wants to let each state decide what's best for us?


    First, I want to make sure you didn't misunderstand what I was saying. I've never served in the military. I was classified 4-F (unfit for duty) during my draft age years (1966-70) because I was gay. That said, you have my utmost regard. I have no issues with individuals within the military per cet. The way the military is often used as a bloody tool of empire, however, is another matter. The "trenches" I was speaking of were my involvement in ant-war activities from that era onward.

    As for voting, I no longer do.

    I live in a rather genteel neighborhood surrounded by professionals, academics, most of them in my age group or older and most of them upper-middle class liberal Democrats. On the occasion of her birthday five years ago (prior to the Democratic convention in which Obama was nominated) a neighbor and good friend, high profile in polite social circles, asked me what I thought of Obama. My reply was simple: "He's alright." She proceeded to practically gush that "we" (meaning people like her) were going to get Obama elected and, "Take our country back."

    I looked square at her and said, "You are delusional." She was quite shocked because it was very obvious I wasn't being the least bit humorous. "No doubt he'll be placed in the White House as it serves certain monied interests to do so. However, don't mistake this for 'taking our country back.' We lost that a long time ago."

    To help people understand where I'm coming from, I like to refer them to an article written in 2004 entitled, "Paranoid Shift." I'll quote a central section:

    Perhaps the biggest hidden reason people don't make the paranoid shift is that knowledge brings responsibility. If we acknowledge that an inner circle of ruling elites controls the world's most powerful military and intelligence system; controls the international banking system; controls the most effective and far-reaching propaganda network in history; controls all three branches of government in the world's only superpower; and controls the technology that counts the people's votes, we might be then forced to conclude that we don't live in a particularly democratic system. And then voting and making contributions and trying to stay informed wouldn't be enough. Because then the duty of citizenship would go beyond serving as a loyal opposition, to serving as a "loyal resistance"—like the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War, except that in this case the resistance to fascism would be on the side of the national ideals, rather than the government; and a violent insurgency would not only play into the empire's hands, it would be doomed from the start.

    Forming a nonviolent resistance movement, on the other hand, might mean forsaking some middle class comfort, and it would doubtless require a lot of work. It would mean educating ourselves and others about the nature of the truly apocalyptic beast we face. It would mean organizing at the most basic neighborhood level, face to face. (We cannot put our trust in the empire's technology.) It would mean reaching across turf lines and transcending single-issue politics, forming coalitions and sharing data and names and strategies, and applying energy at every level of government, local to global. It would also probably mean civil disobedience, at a time when the Bush regime is starting to classify that action as "terrorism." In the end, it may mean organizing a progressive confederacy to govern ourselves, just as our revolutionary founders formed the Continental Congress. It would mean being wise as serpents, and gentle as doves.

    It would be a lot of work. It would also require critical mass. A paradigm shift.


    The events of 9/11/01 constituted a domestic and foreign policy coup d'tat. A "loyal resistance" on behalf of the ideals embedded in the Constitution would now be characterized as a domestic terrorist insurgency. Being "wise as serpents, and gentle as doves" means thinking outside the political "boxes" that have been constructed in our brains over a lifetime. But, that is the only way we'll ever "take this country back."
  • MikeW

    Posts: 6061

    Oct 30, 2012 4:44 PM GMT
    6packabs said
    /snip/
    I can talk to Obama supporters, those who---rightly---frothed at the mouth against the policies of G. W. Bush, but somehow when "their man" is in the White House they turn stupid and support those very policies that they only 4 years ago rabidly opposed. Truly, most people are dead asleep. The public school system is roundly successful at producing intellectually incoherent adults incapacitated for intelligent comprehension of current events and the machinations of the "shadow government" as some would refer to the Elite power structure behind the scenes choosing CFR Team A vs CFR Team B in a false contest every 4 years.

    Yes, so much we could discuss. I would imagine hours of great conversation.


    Yes, I'm familiar with Ron Paul, the Federal Reserve, CFR, the Red Shield and much more. Like I say, I've been down the rabbit hole most of my life.

    Your observation that "most people are dead asleep" is what I find most disturbing. I would put it more precisely: Most people are in a perpetual hypnotic trance. This cuts across every demographic one can think of and it includes far more than political awareness.

    One of my mottos: "Who ever controls your perception of reality controls you. Whatever you believe to be true will be the basis upon which you make your life choices and decisions, whether it is true or not." The totality of domestic population control -- full spectrum dominance -- lies in the arena of perception control.

    This became very clear to me as I began educating people around me about 9/11. One of the more common responses was that what I was saying couldn't possibly be true because people couldn't keep a lie of that magnitude hidden. Never mind Joseph Goebbels, “The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it.”.

    I came to understand that deception is the rule; it is how we are ruled, and this awareness has now soured me on just about everything regarding so-called "civilization."

    For me the tipping point was 9/11. I already knew that social reality was a construct and could be shaped and molded, however not always gracefully.

    From a historical POV, what happened on 9/11, compared to all the other blood letting by our masters over the centuries, was but a drop in the proverbial bucket. But what struck me was how OBVIOUS it was. Although they did a lot of attention re-direction and dissembling for their global audience, the obvious absurdity of the events themselves should have immediately alerted many to the fraud.

    That it did not (not ONE pre-existing institution be it academic, scientific, technological, media, military, religious -- you name it -- has stood up against this travesty) underscores the somnambulation of our species.

    I have now come to the uncomfortable realization that my fellow human beings PREFER lies to truth.

    The significance of this fact is most unsettling. For one thing, it has made it impossible for me to take seriously so many of the concerns of the people around me.

    For example: Who will win the next election? TBH I've barely followed it at all. My prediction is they'll reinstall Obama. He's done a bang-up job for his white CFR masters so far, why would they change horses in midstream?

    This prediction is in part based on my small awareness of the Republican Clown Car pre-Romney nomination. Our overlords have become masters at population and perception control. You want to pit 'right' against 'left' and get both of them to fear the consequences should 'the other' win. This keeps the money pouring into the coffers and keeps people feeling there is something of value actually at stake.

    My prediction is as stated, Obama in 2012. 2016, however, will probably see a Republican win. Most likely Paul Ryan (assuming his character isn't assassinated in the next four years).

    There is the off-chance, however, that there are other, unknown (to us), reasons why our overlords (not a monolithic group but consist of competing factions) would wrangle a Republican win this election. However, what ever these unknown reasons may be, I'd be very surprised if they have anything to do with the deliberately contentious social issues put forward to keep the sheep at each others throats.

    My overall perception is they are not interested in giving the population any reason for insurrection. A frontal attack on social rights could do just that and they know it. No, their intention is to keep the 'pot' on a constant, slow boil. The average citizen should never be either too comfortable nor too uncomfortable. The middle ground is excruciating enough but they think its their fault or 'just the way things are' so that's alright.

    That said, however, IF they know major economic/environmental/social dislocations are on the immediate historical horizon (and that is a real possibility), they may feel that having an overt fascist in the White House would be their best bet.

    That said, there is always good reason to keep a smiley happy liberal face on any repressive regime.

    We shall see.

  • 6packabs

    Posts: 216

    Nov 19, 2012 5:10 AM GMT
    Mike, you're an absolute marvel.

    Wow, I would have amazing conversations with you.

    You know about so much, and correctly so. I'm in awe at what I've just read and much more so, because it was a gay man who wrote it. Stereotypically and by experience, gay men are about as stupid politically or more so than any segment of the population, easily manipulated into mindless support of single issues and sheister candidates.

    You have great depth and maturity with insights that very few ever even begin to obtain. You're a gem and man would I enjoy having you as a neighbor to talk over the fence with.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 19, 2012 3:55 PM GMT
    The only thing I agree with in this thread is that 9/11 has been used as an excuse for the dismantling of civil liberties, by administrations of both parties.

    But the whole "new world order" thing, and thinking that 9/11 has the US government's fingerprints on it, are crazy. Literally.