RIAA wants the Internet shut down

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 01:52 PM

Still waiting for some response to the David Rockefeller thing. He was lumped in with tin foil hats and black helicopters, I posted some of his more sinister quotes, and now people are having trouble focusing. This is an interesting type of denial device (the term 'avoidance' comes to mind) but I'm afraid I have to insist we stay on topic here. I sense a breakthrough. Tell me:
1) did I imagine David Rockefeller said those things? And,
2) if he said them, are they threatening statements?

We really can't proceed with your treatment until these hurdles are cleared.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: bobad
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 01:59 PM

"What's the wavelength, Kenneth?"

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: MMario
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 02:02 PM

1) You may have - oor someone may have. I don't *know* that he did or didn't. I suspect he may have. whoopee. People claim to have invented the internet who didn't.

2) not particularly.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Ebbie
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 02:24 PM

Have you latched on to David Rockefeller because he is the last remaining Rockefeller brother? Whether or not you are aware of it, the Rockefellers have been vilified in this country for generations.

Why are you not able to accept that there are people and groups of people out there who, far from being treasonous and satanic, genuinely are concerned with the stability and wellbeing and the future prosperity (in all senses) of the world? Surely you accept that not all people go from day to day seeing only what is happening TODAY? Surely, if people did look forward and foresee the world's current course culminating in a place that is not be sustainable or at all what we need and want, you would consider them/us remiss? Do you understand that sentence at all?

Ebbie Hystericus, Madame

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 04:27 PM

You've proven the hysterical part, Ebbie, hence the naming of one of the categories of denial after you. As I recall, you and I last interacted when I mentioned Jeb Bush put Florida under martial law (for no reason and for the first time in its history) just days before 9-11, 2001. So, on 9-11, GWBush was in a safe state on maximum alert, while another of his other brothers, Marvin, was running security at the World Trade Centers. For some reason you questioned the veracity of the martial law statement, I directed you to the order itself, posted on the internet, and you exited the discussion. Hysterical deniability. Sad, but maybe the most excusable form of deniability out there. Just a glandular thing, perhaps. Something physical. But I'm not sure of causes on the deniability, I'm just trying to identify the different types. As far as your defense of a man who praises mass-murderer Mao Tse Tung, that gets into the realm of brainwashing. Whole different ballgame.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 04:46 PM

Sorry, GUEST, no cigar.

I have notice how quickly you changed the subject when your tirade about the RIAA was shot down. Since the RIAA is not a government agency, they don't have the power to shut the internet down. After all, the internet is a world-wide phenomenon. The genie is out of the bottle, and it's really questionable if even governments could stuff it back in. When that straw-man collapsed, you turned your guns on the Council on Foreign Relations, a think-tank (also not a government agency) that's existed since the 1920s.

As to your breakdown of the categories of people who disagree with you, you're guilty of a couple of fallacies right out of the box. First of all, "begging the question:"   begging the question (contrary to popular belief) is not asking that a question be asked, it consists of assuming that your conclusion is correct before you even examine the evidence. I leave it to you as an exercise to look up "begging the question" in a good logic textbook or web site and read up on it in detail. Second, your whole category argument consists of "argumenum ad hominem:"   that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong because they are ignorant, afraid, have a vested interest, and/or are one of the "enemy." Actually your third and fourth categories are essentially the same. Redundant.

I can't answer for everyone else, but I can certainly set you straight as far as I am concerned. Let's take your accusations point by point.

1) You're truly ignorant.

Definitely not ignorant in the way you mean it. College-educated, majored in English literature and music, with courses in philosophy, psychology, political science, the liberal arts in general, with a couple of courses in astronomy and cosmology. I also spent two years at a music conservatory. I am well read: some fiction, but mostly nonfiction. I am very knowledgeable in history, and I keep up on current events. Books read recently include Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, by Michelle Goldberg (I also read her columns on Salon.com), and I am currently reading Imperial America: Reflections on the United States of Amnesia, by Gore Vidal. One of my favorite books within recent years was the March of Folly, by Barbara Tuchman. Written a few decades ago, it is still very current and relevant. I do watch the evening news, but I also watch programs such as the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, Washington Week in Review, Now with David Brancaccio, Frontline, and P.O.V. And having cable, I often watched The National on CBC. In addition, I often watch C-SPAN and C-SPAN 2. I get a lot of my news from overseas through the internet, such as the Guardian and several other European newspapers, and in my e-mail I receive such things as the MoveOn, DefCon (Defend the Constitution), and Backbone Campaign newsletters, and AlterNet Headlines several times a week.

On the other hand, everyone is ignorant of some things. I'm fairly good with math and algebra, but I've never studied calculus. And I am a very poor cook. Nor do I know if there are earthlike planets in the Alpha Centauri system (nearest stars to our solar system), but it would be nice to think there are.

2) You're terrified of the changing world and you think that if you parrot the govt's lies you'll be able to extend your existence.

Terrified of the changing world? That verges on the downright silly. I am an old fart. I was born fairly early during the Great Depression, and you probably haven't a clue as to the number of radical changes I've seen take place over the past seven decades. When I was born, Hoover was president. I lived through four terms of FDR, and of course, World War II. I leave it to you as an exercise to look up the number of presidents I have lived through since then, and the number of regime changes that have taken place during that time. While you're at it, you can look up the number of wars this country has been involved in over that time. Communism was on the rise when I was born, I've seen it grow into a major world power, and I saw it collapse. I've seen the development of nuclear weapons and the threat of the nuclear war. At the age of six I became fascinated with the Buck Rogers comic strip in the Sunday "funnies." I was told at the time, "That's just fantasy. Space travel is impossible." In 1969, I watched on television (which didn't exist when I was a kid; I grew up with radio), as Neil Armstrong stepped off the ladder onto the surface of the Moon. Since then we've landed several exploratory probes on Mars and sent spacecraft out beyond the Outer Planets. I also seen the descendents of former slaves began to take their rightful place in society, and I have seen women move out of the kitchen and into a position where we may very well have a woman president after the present regime is retired from office in 2008. Or we may very well have an African-American president. Neither of these things was even conceivable a few decades back.

You must be very young. Me, terrified of the changing world? Don't be an idiot!

3) You're protecting your investment in the system (a pension, a job, some imagined "standing" in the community, etc.),

I have long since established my "standing in the community" and it is not "imagined." I have no worries about that. I am retired, so that takes care of the "job" part of it. Part of my income is derived from my monthly Social Security check, which even Bush can't take away without starting what you seem to want—bloody revolution. I don't have a pension (never worked at any one place long enough to qualify), but I invested in some IRAS and I have income from a few other investments (carefully selected mutual funds) made some time back. Nothing big, but nothing that the government can touch. I'm not wealthy by any means, but I'm comfortable and secure.

4) You work for the govt as an active employee, or you serve as a passive employee doing some kind of community service assigned to you by the court system.

As I said, I'm retired. Through most of my life, I was a professional musician, doing concerts, television, club dates, and coffeehouses. I also taught classic and folk guitar, and I had a full schedule of students. I have also worked for the Boeing Airplane Company as a technical illustrator (commercial airplane devision—non-government). I spent eight years as a radio announcer and newscaster. I have also worked at the telephone company as an operator. And the nearest thing to a government job that I've ever had was working as a technical writer under contract to the Bonneville Power Administration. The BPA was regulated by the Department of Energy, but it was local agency rather than Federal. I support community service through a local church—although I am not particularly religious. The church is very liberal and socially oriented (it sponsors free meal programs and finds housing for homeless and low income folks, among other services to the community), and I see it as a way of maximizing my own efforts.

So much for that.

I became aware of the penchant that some people have for conspiracy theories, early on. My father was a health professional, and like many such, he wound up on a lot of mailing lists. One of the "newsletters" he used to receive regularly was from some paranoiac who was convinced that the drug companies were taking over the world. There were no such things as germs. This was a fiction promulgated by the drug companies to sell you expensive and ineffective drugs. Who was behind this plot? The Rockefellers! All of these drugs, the writer said, were made from petroleum products which are supplied by Standard Oil, which, of course, was owned by the Rockefellers.

There were other newsletters. One proclaimed that the Jews are taking over the world. It contained many quotes from a thing called "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion." This kind of nonsense fell into disrepute, toward the end of World War II and the discovery of the death camps. People began to realize just how evil a thing anti-Semitism and other forms of religious and/or racial prejudice can be. Although, of course, it still goes on.

Then we were warned about the Masons. And we were warned about the Illuminati. Then suddenly "flying saucers" began making headlines, and we were warned of imminent alien invasions. And then we were warned about government agencies denying the existence of "unidentified flying objects" because either the government was in on the plot, or it was afraid that the populace might panic if they knew how grave the danger of invasion was. And then, when it was discovered that people who drink water with naturally occurring fluoride in it had fewer cavities, and there was a move to add fluoride to the drinking water of communities which were not so naturally endowed, we were warned that this was a government plot to turn our brains to mush and make us all malleable and obedient slaves. And then there were men in black suits. And chemtrails. And plots to control the weather. And the mysterious black helicopters.

I have heard it all!

Now this is not to say that there are not real conspiracies going on. After Goldwater's abysmal loss in his bid for the presidency, conservative Republicans put together a quite efficient plan. They got all of the factions of the Republican Party together, and talked them into putting aside their miscellaneous minor differences, and working together under "the big tent." Their first major success was the election of Ronald Reagan. A bit of a setback when Clinton was elected. But the more conservative factions within the Republican Party conspired to find anything they could, true or otherwise, with which to discredit the Clintons. The next major success was the election of the organ grinder (Cheney) and his monkey (Bush). Karl Rove's lifetime career is conspiracy.

The Democrats are conspiring to take back the government. The Green Party is conspiring. The Libertarian Party is conspiring. The Constitution Party is conspiring. The Socialist workers Party is conspiring. Various independents are conspiring. The Project for the New American Century has been conspiring for some time to take over the world. Right now, they're keeping a low profile, because their last attempt, through the Bush administration, turned out to be such a pig's breakfast that they'd rather not call attention to themselves.

There are liberals and progressives who are conspiring to take over the country. I know, because I'm one of them.

Muslim fundamentalists are conspiring to take over the world. Christian fundamentalists are conspiring first to take over the nation, and then to take over the world.

The Council on Foreign Relations is undoubtedly conspiring to take over the world. But they're just like everybody else who's trying to cram their way through the revolving door.

Stay alert. Be watchful. Be politically active. But don't be so naïve as to focus on only one thing. And for Chrissake, DON'T PANIC!!

Don Firth

P. S. Just as a point of interest, writing this didn't take any where near as long as one might assume from its length. I just sat here, drinking my morning coffee, and dictating it into the computer with Dragon NaturallySpeaking, a voice recognition program. I'm saving my fingers for practicing on the guitar this afternoon.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST, Ebbie
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 05:13 PM

Don Firth, I'm proud to meet you.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 05:48 PM

Yes, Don Firth is a Category 3. The thought of losing a pension inspires visions of bloody revolution. Seems I've become pretty adept at nailing the types over the years. About time I got down to serious classification.

As far as the internet being immortal, it's not. The internet is already dying under the weight of its own traffic. No real upgrade of existing servers is happening. What IS happening is the development of Internet 2. Maybe the confusion here is due to a misunderstanding of terms. Don't you folks know about Internet 2? It's a whole different internet system. It's been set up with all kinds of lock-outs and taxation methods in mind. It is controlled by the U.N. And as the traditional internet breaks down, new companies and old companies wanting to survive will be forced over to Internet 2. Look at some of the URLs you use. www2. It's already here, but you don't know about it? The internet you've come to love is dead, folks. Two years from now, this mudcat forum will have to either toe the line politically, and delete anti-govt posts, or it'll be history. So the RIAA action is quite relevant. One more body blow against our beloved old internet. And obstinate denial won't change the situation.

Regarding thread drift, I became more interested a few posts back about the lengths to which people will go to deny the obvious, so I started the drift. The categorization stuff. Then Firth went off about the Rockefellers and tin foil or whatever, and that seemed a good time to offer an example of the undeniable, as an experiment...David Rockefeller's crowing about his megalomania, in his own words. Pretty in your face, but still people rationalized and denied it. The experiment produced helpful results.

I apologize for treating you folks like guinea pigs, but SOMEONE has to get to the root cause of this insane drive to deny the police state growing up all around us. All I'm trying to do is approach the problem methodically. Your continued input is appreciated.

Let's see...I need another undeniable story or statement. I'll search for something that has immediacy and get back to you. Meanwhile, do some research on Internet 2. It's an eye-opener.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 07:10 PM

The interesting thing is, when I was a young idealist I believed passionately in the desirability of developing a "One-World" united society on this planet, and getting past the era of competitive nationalism that has spawned so many terrible wars. I envisioned a World Bill of Rights, a World Minimum Wage, a World Justice System, a World Parliament, and so on...

BUT....what I was envisioning was a good world government which would give everyone freedom and equal rights and equal economic and educational opportunities!

That's not what's in the works. What is in the works is a form of business-driven, money-driven globalization which elevates a tiny financial elite into a position of unparalleled power and turns the rest of humanity into worker-bees, slave labour, criminals and unwitting dupes of the $ySStem.

It's natural that human beings should work toward larger cooperative associations. It's been happening all through history...although there is sometimes a backlash against the large centralized organizations, and a breaking up into smaller units. "Balkanization", in other words. So it swings back and forth at times like a pendulum.

The main problem right now is that it is very unscrupulous people who are in charge of globalization, and they are doing it for their own benefit, not for the benefit of the general public.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 07:19 PM

Yes, Little Hawk, exactly. I need to work up a thing on the Real I.D. Act tonight and thought I'd check in here first, and I'm glad I did. Your overview is right on target. I wish it weren't, but it is.

I wanted the Utopian future too, but the gangsters running the world are shoving a Dystopian system down our throats. Rather than positive reinforcement, they're using negative. And their threats aren't idle. We will be expected to go along with their system 100%, or we'll be eliminated through death or imprisonment.

It seems WAY too many people want to deny this, so I truly have developed an interest in this deniability. If you have a flat on your car you fix it, you don't keep driving. And we have a flat, folks. We need to stop and fix it.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST, Ebbie
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 07:26 PM

"I need another undeniable story or statement." Guest

Here's one: You are a silly man.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 07:32 PM

It's not a bit surprising they would want to deny it. ;-)

My grandfather was living in Czechoslovakia in the late 30's, with Germany making stronger and stronger noises about coming in and takin over.

"That will never happen," he said. His wife disagreed, and sent my father and his brother to school in England (they were teenagers at the time).

After Munich the Germans came into the Sudetenland. And they didn't stop there, as they had promised, they quickly took over the whole country.

"We have to leave now!" said my grandmother. "No," said my grandfather, "nothing is going to change here. I have my business here, and we must stay put. It's the only safe thing to do."

A day after the Germans arrived in Prague, the Gestapo came to interview my grandfather at his office...he had a large business selling foreign luxury autos. They informed him in no certain terms that he had 2 choices:

1. Become a Nazi, and a part of the New Order, and do what he was told, and all would be well.
2. Refuse and lose everything (including, by implication, his life).

He was terrified, and promised to cooperate. They shook his hand, congratulated him on making the right choice, and departed.

That evening he and his wife flew from Prague airport to England, carrying nothing but some clothing and her personal jewelry. They were very lucky to get out. The Germans had not yet completed all travel security arrangements in the country, and they appeared rich and respectable and had the necessary travel documents, so no one stopped them.

Now, what do you do when there is no "England" anywhere left to fly to?

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 07:33 PM

GUEST, trying to put me in you're category three is desperately grasping for straws, in addition to being inaccurate. Do you have a reading disability? One can quibble as to whether a monthly Social Security check is a "pension" or not, but the only kind of income I have that the government has any control over is the Social Security check. And if I were to lose mine, millions of other Americans would be losing theirs at the same time. Do you seriously think the government would dare do anything like that? And even if they would, first, it would leave things a bit tighter for me, but I would not be without income; and second, it would cause one hell of an uproar in the population in general, and much can be done, far short of the bloody revolution you so earnestly desire, to restore the monthly Social Security check.

By the way, GUEST, there is that reading disability again. Internet 2, currently in the process of being developed, will be a fiber-optic inter-university network geared primarily for university research departments and is made up of a consortium of 208 universities. It is not intended to be a replacement for the current Internet system (which, admittedly, is cobbled together with duct tape and baling wire, but it nevertheless works quite well), it is in addition to the current network.

When Internet 2 is eventually up and running, some university students may have access to it. RIAA's primary bitch is with Internet 2. Being fiber optics, the system will be so fast that the RIAA folks have horrible visions of college students downloading whole CDs and full-length DVD movies at flash speeds. They are unhappy with the standard Internet, but they are especially horrified at this prospect. So it would appear that two of the bogeymen who haunt the scary world of your imagination are going to be duking it out in the courts. It won't have much effect on us normal folks.

It would be really nice if we all had a system this fast, but it is in the works sometime in the not too far distant future, as local telephone companies (DSL) and cable systems gradually switch over to fiber-optics. It'll be just like what we have right now, only faster. Some European countries have fiber-optic systems already.

You'd better stop wasting your time trying to scare us poor ignorant sheep and get busy digging your bomb shelter.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 08:14 PM

GUEST is definitely not playing with a full deck - there are quite a few of the 'Reason' & 'Logic' suits missing.

I am not in denial over Orwell's 1984 - neither am I doing nothing about it. If I told you GUEST, what I am doing, then I'd have to kill you, my mission is so secret!

Don, pleased to meet you - a slightly older similarly self educated person to myself.

The only real difference, is that while certain 'conspirators' among the bunch of drunks and psychotics at my workplace were working at getting me sacked, or retired 'for insanity', they made the mistake of referring me to expensive professionals who replied that
1, I was not insane,
2, my IQ put me in the top 1000 people in the population of Australia, and that because of my special skills and slight physical disabilities, I was wasted as a low level grunt worker, and should immediately be promoted to high management level.

GUEST, I KNOW conspiracies of the stupid, by the stupid, for the stupid exist, because I was thereafter made redundant.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 08:41 PM

Only on the blahg sites. Nothing seems to be on reputable news outlets.
One would have to see the trial transcript, and then throw out the little legal feints and threats (popcorn) the lawyers use to try and mislead a jury.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 08:47 PM

Glad your having fun with your flatulence recognition system, Firth. Glad you're one of Australia's brainiacs, Foolstroup. And did you ever look up the martial law directive, Ebbie?

And there's nowhere to go, Little Hawk. You and I know that. And on January 14 the U.S. begins the old Soviet practice of selectively denying exit from the country:

"The Department of Homeland Security proposed new rules back in July that would fundamentally undermine the right of American citizens to travel abroad. Public carriers--airlines, cruise lines, even fishing boats--will be required to submit the names of all passengers to Homeland Security prior to departure and to obtain permission from Homeland Security to board those passengers. These new rules will take effect January 14, 2007...."

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_ezekiel_061104_homeland_security_ti.htm

All Americans will be on the "no-fly list."

Hey, that's a good one. Do you folks believe this rule is going into effect in January, or do you deny it? And if you admit it's going into effect, do you think it's a GOOD thing or a BAD thing? I'm truly interested in hearing what answer the TV has told you to regurgitate.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 09:07 PM

And 'tis a pleasure to meet you, too, Ebbie. And you also, Foolestroupe.

And by the way, Robin, I love that shot of you and the l'il curtain climber in the "Member Photos and Info" section. What a little charmer in she is!

Yes, I, too, read Orwell's 1984 early on (I wonder if GUEST has?). And back in the late 60s, I read a slim volume entitled Report from Iron Mountain (no author indicated on either the spine or the title page) along with a whole lot of other people. It caused quite a furor. In fact, it was quite a wake-up call! It didn't really matter that the "Report" turned out to be a hoax. The alarm it sounded was loud and clear, and hoax or not, it opened the eyes of a lot of people to the nature and purpose of a lot of governmental shenanigans. I doubt that GUEST has even heard of it.

It's obvious that GUEST does not read very thoroughly. He/she obviously missed (or simply ignored), where I say in my long post above, "Stay alert. Be watchful. Be politically active."

Just because I don't squawk a lot and run around like a headless chicken doesn't mean that I am politically naïve or unaware.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 09:18 PM

Incidentally, that quote about Homeland Security's travel restrictions comes from a blog, wound up being cut-and-pasted on several other blogs, and was originally written by someone who calls himself "Ezekiel."

In the interest of full disclosure.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 09:22 PM

The point I'm making here, GUEST, is that I would like to see a more authoritative source than a blog.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Ebbie
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 09:34 PM

Incidentally, Guest, yes, I did find and read that 'military directive' that Jeb Bush allegedly put out. It never was enacted. Did you know that?

The reason I didn't come back to discuss it is that I discerned that you #1, would not read what I said; #2, if you did, you would not be able to grasp it; #3, you would abandon the subject and go on to another wild 'un.

I decided that it just wasn't worth the effort.

You seem not to have internalized the first step in reasoning: Anyone - anyone can say anything.

The second step in wisdom: Saying something does not make it true.

When I call you 'silly', I really mean 'foolish'. Pick your battles, man.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 10:42 PM

GUEST seems to hear jackboots marching down the street at this very moment. Despite the fact that I have asked him/her several times, I still haven't seen an answer.

GUEST, what do you suggest we do?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 12:31 AM

GUEST - One thing I'm curious about...you have mentioned at one time or another that the people steering the New World Order are "communists". You have characterized them as "Trotskyite communists" and suggest that they are planning a war against Russia...Russia being presently run by "Leninists" such as Putin.

Well, I'm genuinely curious what you mean exactly when you use the term "communist" to identify these people? I don't ask that in order to ridicule it, I'm genuinely curious about your definition of "communist" in that context.

I think that an eventual war against Russia might be part of the overall plan of the PNAC, but I'm not sure about it one way or another at this point. Certainly there has been a concerted effort by the West to mortally damage Russia ever since the 80's, beginning by funding the Afghan resistance to the Russian occupation...which helped lead (indirectly) to the downfall of the entire Soviet system in '89...then gutting Russia socially and financially with the help of that dipsomaniac Yeltsin and the Russian Mafia...and using Muslim fundamentalism to help cause the breakup of the southern Soviet regions so that all the "Stans" would become independent entities and the western oil companies could move in and exploit the oil in the Black Sea area.

All those have been arrows aimed at the heart of Russia, and the Russians have a lot to be angry about right now.

But your characterization of the forces behind it as "communist" puzzles me. I would call them "coporatist" forces. They don't represent the Communist Party or the theories it was founded on. They represent a consortium of international banks and huge multinational corporations (particularly I should think the oil industry, the arms industry, the medical industries, the scientific industries, and the large media outlets). Those organizations are in business to make money, not to push the Communist Manifesto...so why do you say they are "communist"?

One thing they do have in common with communists, though: They want to secure massive, centralized power in the hands of a small elite. They want all of the power, not just some of it. They want a de facto monopoly on political power, the broadcasting media, and the international marketing systems.

And that, of course, can be done if one controls most of the money and most of the military firepower. And it is being done, step by step. Pre-emptive war is part of the package...the part that is used on anyone who will not unconditionally surrender and cooperate 100% with the $ySStem.

That's the same approach the Nazis used on Czechoslovakia, Poland, and their other targets of choice...and on my grandfather when they sent their Gestapo hatchetmen to talk to him.

Anyway, please explain to me your use of the word "communist" in regards to the New World Order, the PNAC, etc...

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 12:47 AM

Work's done.

Let's see. More denial from Ebbie. More denial from Don. Both of you are pretending you never heard of search engines. That's a pretty unimaginative way to deny things.

Okay, for the Florida martial law situation, you can go here, Ebbie:

http://www.rense.com/general14/jebdeclared.htm

Florida went under martial law when Jeb Bush declared a "state of emergency." But it sounded better on the news to report a "state of emergency," so that's what the controlled media fed you. Read the article and you'll understand the sleight-of-hand semantics involved. Then you can revert to your hysterical deniability.

And Firth...what do we have here? Oh...the sources don't check out. Again, pretended ignorance of search engines. But you don't even need to do much on this one. The article says, "This list will be checked against a Homeland Security list of citizens approved for international travel, and the carrier will be ordered not to board those who are not approved." The article also has a link to the new rules where the list is described...the boarding manifest:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=40035&dbname=2006_register

So, now your name is going to be run through Homeland Security's database, before the plane leaves the ground, and if you're not a "trusted traveler," you'll be yanked off the plane. Just like in the Soviet Union. That starts January 14 in the U.S.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 12:58 AM

Guest obviously thinks that he will not be a "trusted traveler." Good! I would hate to have him in the next seat.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 01:29 AM

Will do, Little Hawk. Saw your posting after I entered the above. A bit tired now, but yeah, this really is fascinating stuff.

Basically though I think "communism" is a misnomer. A misdirective term. We're inundated with terms that change their meanings or mean the opposite of what they claim, and communism has a screwy history. You would think it's meant to mean collectivism, and I guess it does to a lot of people, but by communism I mean totalitarianism. Which both Lenin and Trotsky subscribed to. They just bickered about who should be in charge. Lenin won in the short term, but Trotskyism is insidious, like rising damp, and it has the brighter future of the two because the Bush neo-cons are practicing Trotskyites. Bush's neo-con advisors studied under America's leading Trotskyite professor and then set out to take over one of America's leading political parties. They now control the Republican White House.

Hold on...tired...let me look back. Yes, America backed the anti-Russians in Afghanistan to damage Russia... man I'm tired. Going to miss something, but yes, America has been and will ALWAYS be at war with Russia, until one or the other triumphs.

But the communism thing...the Bush neo-cons are supporters of Israel. Zionists. And some people call Trotskyites "Jewish communists." They were badly treated in Leninist Russia, so now it's time for payback. Use Bush and the American military to thump Russia. That's the simplest view. Occam's Razor.

But nothing's that simple. Neither country would survive the clash, so who wins ultimately? Who would benefit from the clash of the U.S. and Russia? Brings me back to David Rockefeller beginning the transfer of American wealth to China in 1973. Today America has been stripped of it's industrial production and is cleared to be used as a battlefield. All valuable industry has been moved overseas, mostly to China, thanks to Rockefeller and his friends.

This isn't addressing any of your questions. I'll have another go tomorrow. I guess you've heard though that communism was the creation of the monarchies. When the rising middle class began to expand, the royalty got worried that the power of money would threaten their positions. So they looked around for a financial steam valve and hit on Karl Marx' writings. They saw communism as the perfect "foe" of capitalism/mercantilism and initiated a period of "anarchy" and "communist agitation" to capture headlines and draw people to the communist cause. Then when the Czar of Russia wouldn't do business with the powerful banking families of Europe (his own COUSINS fer chrissake), they killed him and installed Lenin as the leading proponent of Marxism. And the deal clencher was the "gold train" that took the Czar's palace guard an estimated 100 million dollars in gold, as a bribe. Carried to Moscow on a Red Cross train. The Red Cross was a new "charitable" organization formed by the Rockefellers, and one of their first official acts was to act as a money conduit during a revolution. That's a whole other interesting history...the Red Cross with their predilection for blood. Vampire symbolism, bloody crosses...creepy. Not at all what they seem to be.

Anyway, let me know if I came anywhere near answering a question. Doubt if I did. Be glad to try again.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 01:53 AM

You're desperation is showing, GUEST. Ignorance of search engines? That's a pretty lame thing for you to say. It's my use of search engines that have helped me expose the spuriousness of your sources.

In the light of the stipulations of the Patriot Act, I don't see that clearing the passenger manifest adds much to what's already on the books. And believe me, if I want to get out of the country, approved or not, I can get out.

"He panics at mosquitoes while tigers roam free!"
                                           —old jungle saying

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, you still haven't said what you think everyone should do.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST,Voice of Sanity
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 02:10 AM

When challenged on one fantasy, he switches to another. And his fantasies get more and more elaborate with each switch. This last is a reworking, with some geographic changes, of the Illuminati myth.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 07:21 AM

Hey! I object to GUEST being called a fool - it could give me a bad name....



What's the one advantge of being an ICE addict?


Only TWO SLEEPS till CHRISTMAS!

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Ron Davies
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 08:00 AM

It's never worth debating a Ghost.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 09:42 AM

Let's see...name-calling, self-proclaimed victories. Signs of denial again.

I'll look back later, Little Hawk, at your question. When I have more time. I know I didn't answer it...got sidetracked on Ebbie's revered Rockefeller clan.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: jeffp
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 12:44 PM

Do you think we could get this guy to play dueling paranoia with Shambles? Could be quite entertaining.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 12:53 PM

You are so full of it. Goodbye

The History of the Red Cross
(Also Visit Our National Online Museum Here!)

In 1862 Henri Dunant, a young Swiss businessman, wrote "A Memory of Solferino" in which he described the horrible carnage he had witnessed on a battlefield in Italy in 1859. Dunant proposed a neutral organization devoted to the care of the sick and wounded of armies at war.

In 1863, Dunant's efforts let to the formation of the International Committee of the Red Cross and the convening of an international conference in Geneva, Switzerland. The symbol of the Red Cross on a white background (the reverse of the Swiss flag) was chosen to represent the organization. From this conference evolved the Red Cross Convention of 1864.

During this period the United States was being ravaged by Civil War. Clara Barton, a schoolteacher, was one of many individuals who volunteered to help care for the wounded of both sides through an organization called the United States Sanitary Commission. She went to Europe after the war where she learned of the Red Cross Movement and participated in relief efforts for both soldiers and civilians during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71.

Upon returning home, Clara worked to form a Red Cross Society in the United States. In 1881, with the help of friends, she founded the American Association of the Red Cross. The following year, the United States ratified the Geneva Convention, giving the Red Cross official sanction.

The American National Red Cross was chartered by the Congress of the United States to:

1.   Assist the government in fulfilling obligations undertaken in signing the Geneva Conventions,

2.   Serve as a link between members of our armed forces and their families, and

3.   Provide relief for victims of disaster in this country and abroad and to prepare for disasters.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 02:06 PM

Guest - Yes, I think I see what you mean. If you mean "totalitarianism"...for sure. That is what is in the works. Large scale world totalitarianism, done through the power of money and controlling the means of production. I wouldn't call it communism exactly, but I would call it totalitarianism. I don't necessarily equate the two. I think there are a number of varieties of communism, and they would not all necessarily be totalitarian. Talk about it some more when you've had some rest.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 04:00 PM

Ever since John D. Rockefeller discovered that the black goo bubbling up and ruining his potato patch was actually good for something, started Standard Oil, and proceeded to make a huge fortune, the Rockefeller family has been the target for every freak-o conspiracy theory that paranoids and other people who had nothing better to do could hatch up. The Rockefellers have been blamed for everything from the 1918 flu epidemic to the assassination of John F. Kennedy and beyond. And now we have David Rockefeller, moving all the wealth and industry of the United States to China to clear the North American continent to be used as a battlefield in some massive future war with Russia. Well now. . . .   I find that bloody fascinating!

That's one hell of a scenario for a science-fiction novel! Very promising. Future Earth type stuff. Good for a least a trilogy, quite possibly a whole series of novels. And think of the movie possibilities! Like the "Mad Max" movies, only on a much more sweeping scale. Maybe you could even get Mel Gibson to star. As whom? David Rockefeller? Probably not. David Rockefeller is 90 years old. That would be really casting against type. I know! He could play GUEST, trying heroically to warn the heedless and sheeplike public of the impending Apocalypse. And then there is the war itself. Spectacular, mind-boggling computer-generated special effects! The blockbuster to overshadow all blockbusters! In comparison, it would make the whole Star Wars series look like a Porky Pig cartoon!

Robert Heinlein and L. Ron Hubbard must be pea.-green with envy as they spin in their graves!

Mind boggling! You've really got something there GUEST! I am truly impressed!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 04:13 PM

Yeah, it would make a dandy Mel Gibson movie vehicle...no doubt about it. ;-)

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 08:21 PM

To repeat:

"Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure---one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
--David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 405

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The super-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
---David Rockefeller, at a 1991 Bilderberger meeting

"Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history."
---David Rockefeller, statement about Mao Tse-tung in The New York Times, August 10, 1973

In the first statement above, Rockefeller admits to being part of a secret cabal, and a traitor to the U.S. In the second statement he thanks mainstream media for helping to keep the cabal secret. In the third statement he praises the mass-murderer of 50 million people. Rockefeller is the controlling presence in U.S. society, and his stated goal is to "model" the U.S. after communist China.

As for the Red Cross, it is a decent do-good organization on the surface (like the Masons), but the people in control have a hidden agenda. They should be outlawed.

http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/apocalypse/red_double_cross.html

"My name is Dr. Leonard Horowitz. What I am about to share with you is deeply disturbing, yet potentially life-saving. The American Red Cross is not what it appears to be. . . . And I urge you to continue reading so that you learn what the ARC really represents....

Founded in 1881 by American humanitarian Clara Barton, the American Red Cross (officially named The American National Red Cross) was first chartered by the U.S. Congress in 1900. A second charter, still in force, was granted in 1905. Not long after, however, John D. Rockefeller pirated the entire blood banking industry, along with the administrative leadership of the ARC. As you will soon learn, this quintessential coup de tats represented more than a glorious economic opportunity. The takeover of the ARC, and the entire blood industry, was apparently required to fulfill a far more sinister, even occult-linked, political objective-eugenics management for a racially purified planet...."

This guy has the credentials and this is one of the most hair-curling things you'll ever read. No wonder Ebbie Hystericus is in such denial. She's working for vampires.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 11:38 AM

"In the first statement above, Rockefeller admits to being part of a secret cabal, and a traitor to the U.S. In the second statement he thanks mainstream media for helping to keep the cabal secret. In the third statement he praises the mass-murderer of 50 million people. Rockefeller is the controlling presence in U.S. society, and his stated goal is to "model" the U.S. after communist China."

no, that is NOT what he is doing and/or saying. Crap, Guest...you need a job as a spin-doctor for Republican politicians. It takes a lot of chutzpah to re-interpret someone's quotes that way! People like you constantly use that technique of taking the most extreme possible interpretation possible of a comment and assuring the world that the author meant it the way YOU'D like to believe. Gotta have a hobby, I suppose.

"The truth is out there; the lies are in your head."

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 01:36 PM

But the second statement supports the first. In the first he admits that what has been said about him is true, then in the second he thanks the people who protected the secrecy. He's part of a secret cabal with internationalist aims. He admits it. He's even proud of it. He's chortling. He's tickled that he's getting away with it.

And then there's that blood stuff. Lord, how sick is that? And Winthrop Rockefeller was Governor of Arkansas, by the way, where Bill Clinton later sold HIV tainted blood to Canada.

HAMILTON (CP) - Tens of thousands of Canadians infected with AIDS or hepatitis C got an apology from the Canadian Red Cross on Monday after the charity pleaded guilty to distributing tainted blood in exchange for dropped criminal charges....

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1413439/posts

For more on how Bill Clinton infected tens or hundreds of thousands with AIDS, just search for Clinton Blood Scandal...something like that. The Clintons and Rockefellers using blood as a weapon. Sick, sick people. And now Morticia Clinton is being hailed as the future of the Democratic party. Man o man.

The Red Cross is the opposite of what it claims to be. The Rockefellers are mass murderers. Not spin. Fact.

I'll work on that communism thing later, Little Hawk. Gotta deal with these no-brainers as they come up.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 01:42 PM

Fortunately, they are only a small percentage of the population, but I've lived long enough to have met a number of loonies like GUEST. There's no helping them. They invariably think that if you don't agree with them, you're either too stupid to go on living or that you are part of the conspiracy yourself.

GUEST has displayed these characteristics all through this thread. Typical.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 02:39 PM

I find that most people are neither all right nor all wrong in what they believe. Therefore I continue to observe, learn what I can, and keep my mind open to the possibilities. There's a lot of strange stuff going on out there, and anyone would be foolish to think they knew it all.

The thing about the HIV tainted blood sales to Canada is true...according to material I have read. I doubt that people in the USA are much aware of it. Certainly most ordinary people in Canada are not...these days. It could have been a VERY big story, but our media gave it only a moderate amount of attention, and it has mostly been forgotten since then. Except by the people who got infected, of course.

One of the things I do in life is avoid getting things like vaccinations, drugs, blood, etc...from the professional medical community, unless I absolutely have to. I have good reasons for dong so, and it certainly seems to be working well so far in terms of keeping me in excellent health.

I have never had a flu shot, for example. I note that this practice has not made me vulnerable to the flu. Interesting.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 04:01 PM

"One of the things I do in life is avoid getting things like vaccinations, drugs, blood, etc...from the professional medical community, unless I absolutely have to. I have good reasons for dong so, and it certainly seems to be working well so far in terms of keeping me in excellent health.

"I have never had a flu shot, for example. I note that this practice has not made me vulnerable to the flu. Interesting. " Little Hawk

So, Little Hawk, you think the rest of us get vaccinations, drugs and blood when we don't "absolutely have to"?   In what way does that make you unique? Weird opinion you have there, m'friend.

(This subject reminds me of a few years ago when I had a hernia repaired. Post surgery it became clear that I reacted negatively to just about every pain killer, i.e., morphine made me vomit; another drug whose name I forget made me dizzy; vicodin sent me into an absolute tailspin- scared my nurse who said urgently, Lie down, go to sleep. It will make you sleep. Lie down. And I did, and that's the last I remember for three hours when a friend rapped on the door. Later my surgeon came in. She said, dismissively, Obviously you're not used to narcotics. And I thought: If I WERE used to narcotics, I'd have a different problem on my hands.)

I have not ever gotten a flu shot either- nor have I gotten the flu. In the last 10 years I've gotten perhaps three colds- none at all in the last 5 years.

My theory:
1) People who have withdrawn somewhat from life and other people don't get as physically close to conditions where the viruses and bacteria circulate, cutting down the likelihood of infection.
2) When the day comes that I get the flu or a cold, I'll know where and when I got it.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: jeffp
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 04:22 PM

I have never had a flu shot, for example. I note that this practice has not made me vulnerable to the flu. Interesting.

No, meaningless. Even during the great Spanish Flu pandemic (when there was no such thing as flu vaccine), most people weren't infected. In fact, during the many years before flu vaccine was invented, most people didn't get the flu. Just because you don't get it doesn't mean you aren't vulnerable. It just means you didn't get it.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 06:14 PM

Nobody "absolutely has to" get a flu shot or any other kind of medically supplied immunization. I, also, have never had a flu shot. Many a flu season has gone by and I haven't caught it. As a matter of fact, the only thing I've ever had a shot for was hepatitis B when I found out that I'd been exposed to it. I've had my share of various kinds of crud, but in general, I'm very healthy.

This does not mean that I am immune to the flu or a whole bunch of other diseases. When I was two years old, I did get nailed by the polio virus, but they didn't have a vaccine for it back then. Believe me, I would never advise anyone not to get immunized.

I know perfectly well that I'm playing the percentages. If I ever do come down with a bad case of the flu, or some other disease for which medical immunization is available, I will undoubtedly wish that I had got the necessary shots.

Whatever you do, you don't want to kid yourself.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:08 PM

Yes, Ebbie, I think that a great, great many people take drugs they don't need to take and get shots they don't need to get. It's easier than eating properly, drinking enough water, and getting enough fresh air and exercise, right? ;-) It's easier than giving up your daily dose of caffiene, nicotine, and junk food, right?
In this sociey popping pills has become the lazy man's solution to his inability to take responsibility for his own health.

I know numerous people like that. I know people who take 10 or 20 pills every day (all of which are expensive and have troublesome side effects), and they do it mainly for psychological reasons. And without exception, they are not very well. I believe a contributing factor to them not being very well is that they are poisoning and overloading their body with a daily cocktail of drugs.

Modern medicine, instead of teaching people how to be healthy, has taught them how to be helpless drug addicts. And that's all to the benefit of the drug industry which is the biggest funder OF modern medicine. It's a vicious circle, and you will find a big dollar sign at the center of it.

I also know people whose health was permanently and severely damaged by taking ordinary vaccinations.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: jeffp
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:11 PM

Glad to see you don't indulge in sweeping generalizations.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: bobad
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:16 PM

This thread should be made a permathread as a repository for crackpot theories and paranoid conspiracy delusions.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:22 PM

Agreed, bobdad. It makes an interesting psychological study.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:39 PM

Let's see...evidence presented that John D. Rockefeller cornered the blood market for nefarious purposes, evidence presented that Clinton knowingly sold AIDS-tainted blood taken from the prisoners of Arkansas when he was Governor, evidence presented that David Rockefeller is part of a cabal intent on world government...and the best the deniers can do is cry "crackpot" and "conspiracy theorists." Man, you folks live in a vacuum.

And if I may offer the opinion, Firth's vacuum is the most hermetically sealed. Mention that the U.S. is going to go to the old Soviet system of not allowing people out of the country, and his response is that HE can get out of the country when he wants to. Mention sweeping, worldwide changes to the internet, and they won't affect HIM. I mean, that MAY be a sub-category of the 4 denial groups I've identified.

I've noticed a lot of the "Greatest Generation" have this intense focus on self. They've been told by television for decades now, while the republic crumbles around them, that they're the greatest. They beat Hitler, lived through a depression, so they're the "greatest." As if the Washington-Jefferson generation consisted of bums. And these coots today have come to BELIEVE they're the greatest generations to ever live. Isn't that incredible? A maniac administration threatening nuclear holocaust at the drop of a hat, and these American geezers are sitting back thinking their feces is aromatic. Amazing. The Rockefellers of the future will laugh at "the Greatest Generation," bought off with faint praise and pensions, made to sit back and deny there's a problem while they were their easy chairs were placed on the express tracks.

I have a couple of hours, Little Hawk...I'll work up something to clarify the communism statement. Should have done it long ago anyway.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:57 PM

"John D. Rockefeller cornered the blood market for nefarious purposes"

In the USA - blood is a 'for sale product' - in Australia, it is given as a 'donation' and you are not charged for using it - it is all done by the International Red Cross Blood Bank for free to the users. Don't want to make wild generalisations about the rest of the world without knowing 'the facts'.

Subject: RE: RIAA wants the Internet shut down
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 09:43 PM

LITTLE HAWK -- (The crux of your question) One thing I'm curious about...you have mentioned at one time or another that the people steering the New World Order are "communists". You have characterized them as "Trotskyite communists" and suggest that they are planning a war against Russia...Russia being presently run by "Leninists" such as Putin....

But your characterization of the forces behind it as "communist" puzzles me. I would call them "coporatist" forces. They don't represent the Communist Party or the theories it was founded on. They represent a consortium of international banks and huge multinational corporations (particularly I should think the oil industry, the arms industry, the medical industries, the scientific industries, and the large media outlets). Those organizations are in business to make money, not to push the Communist Manifesto...so why do you say they are "communist"?

ME -- Let's see. Primarily, I call them communist because it's a term most people can identify with. There has ALWAYS been a communist threat to the U.S., and the "wall coming down" didn't end the threat. Also, if you look at the Communist Manifesto's 10 Planks, you can see that all them have been either fully or partially implemented in America:

http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist-Manifesto-Planks.html

So, for convenience sake, I call the people who've done the job of destroying the American Republic "communists." They've laid down half of Marx's planks and the other half are being put into place. So why not give credit where credit is due? The communists are destroying America.

As far as labeling the Bush junta "communist," they are, technically. The people running the White House are Trotskyites. Technically communists.   The Marxist Leninists took control of Russia (with the help of the Rockefellers), and the Trotskyites were forced to flee Russia. They found refuge primarily in Mexico and the U.S. (Mexico is run by the same neocons you see in the White House today).

Trotskyites espouse a lot of the communist belief system, but then they believe in Friedrich Nietzsche's Uber-man, Superman stuff. One of the things I find most fascinating about the Bush junta is how its members believe it is their RIGHT to rule us. They think they are superior to the normal run of humanity, and they even believe it is their duty to cleanse the species of themselves and those they govern if they fail to subjugate the masses (hence the threat of total pre-emptive apocalyptic nuclear war). Truly, they believe in the Uber-man, and if they can't "perfect" the species, then they must destroy it. Friedrich Nietzsche's point of view. These are the supermen and they will either perfect us or destroy us. I can't imagine where such arrogance came from, unless it's cultic. It's not normal, sane thinking, and it's not UNGUIDED thinking, as the Bush-controlled press keeps telling us. This war of terror against Americans is leading only one place, and we all know it...to the destruction of America. That's the plum, as Marx and Lenin used to say, and the fall of America won't be by accident, it'll be by design.

For more on Bush's people being Trotskyites, go to congressman Ron Paul's speech, "Neo-conned." He tried to enter it into the congressional record, and his own Republican Party wouldn't record it as part of the written record, so he read the whole thing on the floor of the House of Representatives, in front of cameras, after which it HAD to be recorded. The speech accurately describes Bush's people as being followers of America's leading Trotskyite professor, Leo Strauss. He explains how Trotskyite communists hijacked the conservative party.:

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm

So that's why I call them communists, even though they're an amalgam of corporatist/fascist/Nazi/socialist/communist. They're Trotskyite communists. End of explanation.

As a footnote, let me add that the communist witch hunts in the U.S. were VERY on-target. And Joe McCarthy was largely supported by the media, while he was going after Leninists. But then he started turning up Trotskyites in his investigations, and the media began to demonize him. Some people claim that's because so many Trotskyites have Jewish names (the Jewish-controlled media brought him down, etc.), but that's BS. He was brought down because he was right. There WERE lots of communists in key positions in the U.S. govt., only, they weren't working for the USSR. They were working for the new state of Israel. So McCarthy went from hero to zero.

Jump to now, half a century later, and we have Bush surrounded by advisors with names like Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Edwart Luttwak, Henry Kissinger, Dov Zakheim, Kenneth Adelman, Robert Satloff, Elliot Abrams, Marc Grossman, Richard Haass, Robert Zoellick, James Schlesinger, Mel Sembler, Michael Chertoff, Joshua Bolten, Steve Goldsmith, Adam Goldman, Joseph Gildenhorn, Christopher Gersten, etc., etc. Most if not all of these guys are affiliated with extremist zionist groups (support a strong Israel). Many people argue that Israel has taken over the American government. It's hard to refute this argument. Half of Clinton's advisors were zionists, even more of GWBush's. The head of Homeland Security has dual American-Israeli citizenship.

I only bring this up because it would provide the simplest explanation for an American war against Russia. The Bush advisors are Trotskyites, and Trotsky was the child of a Jewish farmer. So, some people have come to call Trotskyism the "Jewish communism." If it's as simple as that, then the Jewish advisors who now run the White House would want to destroy Russia for what the Leninists did to the Jews (pogroms and purges). But it's not that simple, and it leads back in to Rockefeller's selling out America, and that's a whole other topic. War between Russia and the U.S. is a coming attraction, though.

I don't know, Little Hawk...the "communist" system IS about to defeat the "capitalist" system. America's been socialized beyond recovery. Small business start up is a thing of the past, big business will become government. It's over, unless we rid ourselves of the ticks that have latched on to us. Which seems unlikely, with so many people in denial about the state of the union. So the social engineers have probably won. The people I think of as communists. And they're working for an expanding fascistic state, so what do you call a mess like that? I call it communism. And communism WAS first elevated and made fashionable by the monarchies, the same monarchies that are about to start carving up North America as booty. King Juan Carlos has put in his order for 8,000 miles of toll roads in my home state. If he gets his way, I'll become his serf. So the communist/capitalist distraction served its purpose and brought us full circle back to feudalism. So sad.

Now I don't know if I should re-hash the history of blood for the knuckleheads around here or work on the history of television mesmerism. That's what I should do, I suppose, since this denial thing is becoming so pernicious. You knuckleheads support the murdering Red Cross if you want, but your kids may get AIDS as a result. It's a shame your kids won't grow up just because you never did.