Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

User Name Thread Name Subject Posted
GUEST,Dreaded Guest BS: Maybe Bush is right. (59* d) RE: BS: Maybe Bush is right. 07 Mar 03

CAROL, you said..."I think some of the information you're getting is probaby correct, but some of the sites you're getting it from, that are drawing conclusions about that information, have agendas that are not in my interests."

Some of the information probably IS correct, but some is probably incorrect, too. But you can't be everywhere and see for yourself, so you have to rely on reportage. I try to rely on overseas, non-US sources, because the US media has become a govt mouthpiece. There were never any hard questions asked about the Sept 11 hijackings, for example, except by foreign journalists. That really woke me up as far as sources...give me foreign journalism anytime. And some of the sites I use gather info from a wide range of sources, and some ARE agenda driven...but at least they gather info on the topics that interest me and put it in one place. As long as they can still link back to the original story, I look at them pretty closely. Best source of information of all is the legislation and the govt sites themselves. And THOSE are the places you find the agendas REALLY against your interests. Some of the conclusions drawn from those sites (wording of legislation, etc.) may seem far-fetched, but they're not. If an abuse is POSSIBLE in the wording of a law, then that abuse was put there FOR A PURPOSE and will occur once the law is passed. Guranteed. And if you think traditional, comfortable old US news sources are looking out for your interests, you have Diane Sawyer (member of the CFR...anti-American) entertaining discussions about the absolutely unexceptable...torture. EVERYONE has an agenda. I only want to point out the U.S. has been taken over by non-Americans and is being destroyed from within, and I use a wide range of reportage and commentary to make my points. I don't ask folks to believe it all...just consider it.

And let's way the govt-controlled media defuses govt detractors is to dillute the really damaging stories. Bohemian Grove, for example. Before the internet, word about Bohemian Grove could not be spread effectively. But now I can point to a film made by a man commissioned by a British news team to sneak in and get video of the 'Creamation of Care' ritual. Once a year, world leaders participate in this, and THAT is one of the reasons why we seem to be ruled by sociopaths with no conscience...they cleanse their conscience once a year with this ceremony.

All that was denied until the men sneaked in and got film of the ritual, then it was finally admitted by Bohemian Grove but passed off as 'frat boy' stuff. And suddenly there are HUNDREDS of sites which tie Bohemian Grove to UFOs and Aliens, etc. The kernel of provable truth...that our leaders engage in a human sacrifice sandwiched in between the unprovable and thus rendered 'speculative' to most readers. So yeah, it's hard to work through all the garbage and the conflicting agendas.

You also said..."But I also think that the sites whose conclusions you adhere to are trying to make the UN look bad because it's good for their agendas and bad for the rest of us."

No. I would support the U.N. a hundred percent if they were the benign organization they're PR people have made them out to be. But they're monsters bent on absolute, tyrannical control of the planet. They have hundreds of on-going programs to murder people and destroy nations at the that comes to mind is genetically-modified grain in Africa. Hybrids that can't reproduce. Would be just as easy to give the farmers seed that they can re-plant next year, the natural way, but the U.N. doesn't want that. They want the villagers dependent on them year to year for food. The grain will grow THIS year, but if you want to eat NEXT year (another shipment of sterile grain), you have to teach your children this and that and make sure a percentage of your girls and boys are set aside for the brothels run by the U.N. for U.N. soldiers. And to their credit, most of the Africans are refusing to go along with the grain program.

Another U.N. story which comes to mind concerns the 8,000 Muslims killed in Serbia when a handful of Dutch 'peacekeepers' were assigned to guard a 'safe zone' (just type 'Dutch U.N. muslim massacre' etc. into google to turn up the story). The people killed were SET UP by the U.N. The U.N. is in the business of killing people. These 'accidents' happen over and over and over and over wherever the U.N. gets involved. The U.N. is the closest thing we have to world govt., and it's acting the part of the 'bumbler' right now just to deceive the on-lookers and to reduce world population. World population reduction is one of the U.N.'s primary stated missions, and war is one of the most effective population-reducers. The world govt coming our way is tyrannical and deceitful. The U.N. is a monster organization, and I don't have to try too hard to make it look bad. It is NOT working in your is working in the interest of the people who established it, just like any other business.

LURKER, you said "Explain to me how an organization known for being ineffective will have its power boosted by being ignored and proven ineffective once again. Further, what possible gain could your conspiracy realize from such a gain in power? The UN would be delegitimized by taking any action that the populace disapproves of. "

How is the U.N. being ignored? It is in the news every day. Every hour. Constantly. And it is probably in the news constantly so some upcoming dramatic moment will be seen by every eye on the planet. You don't build up something like the Iraq war this dramatically unless there's a big conclusion.

Personally, I think at the last minute the U.N. will sign on to war with Iraq, thus looking like they held back the U.S. all along. The world will view this as U.N. control of the US, thus empowering the U.N. in the future. I think it's all a done deal and the bitching nations involved are just posturing for the homefolk. In the end, Kofi Annan (who is DIRECTLY responsible for the murder of 800,000 Rwandans by using 'peacekeepers' like I described above, with the Dutch), will reluctantly give the nod and GWBush will then begin the process of securing the oil the U.N. so desperately needs.

And if the US DOES go to war alone, it will weaken the US by creating a slaughter which will repel the world, and the world will turn to the U.N. to put a stop to the 'last superpower's' rogue actions. Then a TRUE coalition of pissed-off European nations and Asian nations will infuse the U.N. with troops and money, and the U.S. will go the way of Iraq.

This is just a variation of what Bush # 1 did...that long process of 'coalition building' before Desert Storm. Only this time, Bush # 2 is building a coalition AGAINST the U.S. rather than FOR the U.S.

Back to the Main Forum Page

By clicking on the User Name, you will requery the forum for that user. You will see everything that he or she has posted with that Mudcat name.

By clicking on the Thread Name, you will be sent to the Forum on that thread as if you selected it from the main Mudcat Forum page.
   * Click on the linked number with * to view the thread split into pages (click "d" for chronologically descending).

By clicking on the Subject, you will also go to the thread as if you selected it from the original Forum page, but also go directly to that particular message.

By clicking on the Date (Posted), you will dig out every message posted that day.

Try it all, you will see.