NeoCon Agenda Middle East - the Empire is Dying at Last

It can't get any clearer than that.

Some photo's showing Bush, Ahmadinejad and more famous people making the same satanic hand signs:

Signs of Satan!
Well known people showing off the hand signal which represents Satan.
[link to www.jesus-is-savior.com]

SO I GUESS YOU ARE ADMITTING THAT GEORGE BUSH WANTED TO STEAL, ER...PRIVATIZE, SOCIAL SECURITY MONIES THAT HE HAS NEVER PAID INTO, NOR HAS HIS FAMILY.

Hi Oannes,

I see you did research. I can only guess how big your picture is. lol

Maybe you are a modern hippie, this week i learned on glp how tptb tried to control the "hippie" movement with drugs etc, Zappa, the Doors. Niel Young, suddenly all pop-artists sound suspicious to me.

Inside The LC: The Strange but Mostly True Story of Laurel Canyon and the Birth of the Hippie Generation
Thread: Inside The LC: The Strange but Mostly True Story of Laurel Canyon and the Birth of the Hippie Generation

Notice the original article was printed in the Asia Times - it's so accurate that not one single Western mainstream media outlet would dare to print it. I don't know which is more frightening, the NeoCon Agenda itself or the complete lack of formidable opposition in the West.

Divinity

Must be
The second time today some one caled me a hippie.
How about George Michael
[link to www.youtube.com]

Hi Div, what frightens me, if anything, is denial.

From my understanding the "nwo" has been around for many years already. Tptb have long standing plans to destroy all empires, all nations, all religions etc and replace it with their next schemes. They always want bigger, except with the number of humans. They want to reduce the population to 500 million. They are expecting earth changes will do that.

The one thing they fear most is the individual. The individual has the power to destroy years of their planning in the wink of an eye, they are powerless to the individual, beyond their control.

Just did message... to a third of them
in a first step

love 2 U message

and to All in Oneness


Div... greatfull for your service dear Systa and has i said and u recieve.... the message is beein spreaded in Electro magnetic light envirmounts

lol

sory ma english

Think about what you just said, It's OK for our government to make shady deals and then screw us with high gas prices. Look at all the large oil companies and they are raking in the profits, it doesn't appear that our end of the deal was really in their best interest. The balance sheet just doesn't balance.

$4.00 a gallon = Oil profits = 1,000,000 deaths and dieing infrastructure

Somebody made a lousey bargin, I just don't believe it was Bush.

oil facilities that Exon and BP developed off Venezuela shores..to the tune of 33 Billion plus plus plus dollars...so why did you delete important facts concerning assets of the United States that were stolen from the United States by middleast arab raiders who always sacked each otthers villiages, to plunder the wealth kill the citizens and then enslave the villages citizens....throughout all of ancient history to present day.........

Ummmm those assets would belong to US Corporations not citizens of these United States.

oh oh, too much truth here, you're gonna get picked on.

Thread: *** Halliburton Charged with Selling Nuclear Technologies to Iranin (What have you done Dick?)

Ref. Acolyte's thread....Cheney, Halliburton, Iran Nukes, and more scamming....

May the Truth Set You Free
Div
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE JOYS OF DISCUSSION, EVEN WITH BONEHEADS PARTICIPATING.

I STILL CANT GET OVER JUST HOW MANY SEEK TO JUSTIFY BEING ROBBED, DEFRAUDED AND GENERALLY ABUSED.

GL

Peace to you cosmo,I was told at a early age if you beleive you can move a mountian it would be a good start,Trully i have seen its wisdom,for it forms with all mass elements of universe and of earth.As my quest for bar controll continues.Today a feather for u.For it to is carved in stone.

[link to www.newsroomamerica.com]

US NEWS
U.S. Set to Establish Diplomatic Presence in Iran: Report
2008-07-17 03:11am


The United States is set to establish a diplomatic presence in Tehran, the Iranian capital, for the first time in 30 years, a British newspaper reported Thursday.

The Guardian said Washington would open a U.S. interests section next month, the first step in establishing an embassy.

"The Guardian has learned that an announcement will be made in the next month to establish a U.S. interests section in Tehran, a halfway house to setting up a full embassy," the unsourced report said.

"The move will see US diplomats stationed in the country," it said.

Senior U.S. diplomat William Burns told Congress last week the U.S. was examining the possibility of opening an interests section in Iran but had not yet made a commitment to do so.

The Guardian said the development was "a remarkable turnaround in policy by President George Bush who has pursued a hawkish approach to Iran throughout his time in office."

The U.S. severed diplomatic ties with Iran when a mob of students led by Muslim extremists took over the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979, holding 52 U.S. diplomats hostage for 444 days.

(c) 2008 Newsroom.

i figured out when they invaded iraq they were going to leave the usa for a ghetto and the mideast would become their new palm springs...until they foul up that nest too bad, then i wonder where they would go?

Dalak

The neo-cons were too dumb too understand how to pull this off. When it was their turn to fight they ran and hid, now they are chicken-hawks.

There was no reason to take iraq out. Iraq was Sunni and the only buffer between Sunni Arab countries and Shia Persian Iran. Once they took that buffer out they were doomed. Stupidity at its finest. Saddamm was their boy and would have done as he was told. They should have known that the US was near the end of its finacial capabilities. They should have went after iran first.

The Dark Side: Jane Mayer on How the War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals
By Eric Umansky, ProPublica
Posted on July 17, 2008, Printed on July 20, 2008
[link to www.alternet.org]


As much as any other reporter, The New Yorker's Jane Mayer has helped expose the post-9/11 system of detention, rendition and abuse of 'enemy combatants.' Her book out today, The Dark Side, significantly expands on her reporting. We talked to Mayer about how the move to the system started with bureaucratic bungling and the curiously passive role of President Bush, who kept "disappearing from the frame."

Editor's Note: Umansky's reporting is briefly cited in the book.


Before you even get to torture, you suggest that the move to a more aggressive war paradigm was ill-considered. A lot of the mistakes before 9/11 weren't about being insufficiently aggressive you suggest but were just the result of bureaucratic bungling.

One of the things that struck me in talking from interviewing lots of people involved in the war on terror is that we weren't hit by al-Qaida on September 11, 2001 because we had been unable to torture people before. That wasn't the problem. When you look closely at the record, it wasn't that the laws were inadequate. In fact, the U.S. did amazingly well prosecuting terrorists as criminals. And the FBI did pretty well in keeping on top of the expanding al-Qaida's operations.

What went wrong was both simple and complex: First, there was ordinary incompetence. Most importantly, the CIA forgot to tell the FBI that two al-Qaida suspects had entered America more than a year before 9/11. They just dropped the ball.

And complicating things was a lack of political will. At the White House, arguments went round and round about whether to use lethal force against al-Qaida. Nobody really wanted to step up to it and so nobody really did.


One thing that has always struck me -- putting aside for a moment the treatment of enemy combatants -- was the near-total lack of process in deciding who was one.

That was huge. Some of these things were just amateur mistakes. And it sprang from when they threw out the Geneva Conventions, which includes a process for screening POWs, so you can figure out who's truly an enemy and who's just an innocent bystander. When they got rid of the Geneva Conventions they threw out the screening process -- Article 5 hearings. And when they stopped screening, inevitably, they made a lot of mistakes.


You pointed to the irony that the administration was focused on expanding presidential power when in fact a lot of these decisions weren't emanating from there…

It is an irony. The big argument being made by the vice president, his lawyer, David Addington, and the Justice Department was that the commander-and-chief needed almost unfettered powers to win the war on terror. And yet when you really examine the record, it's frequently not the president who's making many of these calls; it's the vice president.

The president, it's funny, I asked a lot of questions about him when I was doing interviews, and he keeps disappearing from the frame of the picture. He is described as distracted by one of the people who briefed him. Colin Powell tells a friend who I interviewed he sees the president not as being stupid but as being too easily manipulated by Cheney, who knew how to push him around.


You write that after the Supreme Court's Hamdan decision in 2006 -- which said detainees were covered by portions of the Geneva Conventions -- the president initially appeared to be against proposing legislation to overturn the decision.

Yes, he actually makes the call against Cheney and Addington at that point -- after having been lobbied Condoleezza Rice and Karen Hughes. In this case , when he did get all the facts, he decided against Cheney and Addington. And that was pretty unusual from what I could see.


And yet, then the Military Commissions Act happened -- Congress did overturn the Court's decision.

Yes, then the MCA happens. Also, when the president gives his speech about closing down the CIA's black sites, rather than it becoming a means of criticizing those policies [as Mayer writes an initial draft reflected], the vice president finds a way to convince him to keep the black sites open at least in theory.


Talk a bit about the challenges of doing all this reporting when there have been so few prosecutions and such little congressional inquiry.

That's true, though there are beginning to finally be stirrings in Congress. Carl Levin's office did an 18-month investigation that released some really interesting documents recently. Without a subpoena reporters are left to beg. I've done a lot of begging over the last few years.

Luckily there are a number of people inside the administration, certainly within the military and FBI who were upset enough about of some of these policies that they felt it was important to get word out.

I'm not sure people realized how much of a fight it was inside the government. I mean, we had [former administration lawyer] Jack Goldsmith's book, and [former Deputy Attorney General] James Comey's testimony about the NSA wiretapping -- which was one of the most amazing things I've ever heard. But what I tried to do was connect the dots. And tell more about the struggle -- how it went from a fight over America's security to a fight over its soul.


You write about a CIA official going down to Gitmo in 2002 and concluding that many of the prisoners were innocent; it's been one of the things pegged as news. And yet reports of that have been bouncing around for a long time. I wonder if that's because the detainee and torture story keeps coming out in bits and parts, and so we forget …

You're wondering whether the same news keeps getting recycled. You know, part of the challenge to me was to take a lot of the reporting that has been out there -- and there's been some fantastic reporting on this whole area. The stories have broken out of order, so it's hard to make sense out of the whole narrative because you learn fragments of it here and fragments of it there. What I was trying to tell in the book was the story from start to finish, as best as I could.

If you put it in order it somehow has more impact, because people begin to understand it better. I also think the country was kind of in a numb state and resistant to thinking about this for a long time. The zeitgeist has changed a bit and there's a bit more openness toward being critical. So now I think people are thinking about it freshly again, even though some of the material has been out there before.

I've been covering this for three years. And I didn't understand a lot until I put it all together. I really truly didn't understand, for example, the relationship between things happening in Washington and for instance, the interrogation of Manadel Al-Jamadi in Iraq. That there was a fight in Washington over what standards could be used for his interrogation and whether the Geneva Conventions applied in Iraq.

When the CIA interrogated him to death, basically, it all took place within a vortex of legal confusion -- with the CIA crying in Iraq for legal guidance, asking for a lawyer. Only when you put all the pieces together do you really begin to understand the story.

For instance, I hadn't realized that Special Forces had handled the early part of the interrogation, then he was handed over to the CIA, then he dies in their hands -- at Abu Ghraib. And then that picture of him -- the famous "iceman" photo -- that is part of the packet of shots from Abu Ghraib that come out and startle the world. There's this whole connection between all of these events that's really hard to see until you try to tell it as a story.

[link to www.alternet.org]

[link to www.alternet.org]

Why Karl Rove Should Go to JailBy Rep. Linda T. Sanchez, Huffington Post
Posted on July 17, 2008, Printed on July 20, 2008

[link to www.alternet.org]

Again last week, we saw the arrogance of former White House advisor Karl Rove when an empty chair sat for him in front of the House Judiciary subcommittee where he was required by subpoena to testify. Not only did he refuse to appear before the committee -- let alone testify -- but he defiantly left the country thereby blatantly ignoring his obligations under the congressional subpoena served on him. When he did return to the country, Rove found the time to gab with TV reporters on a summer press tour in Beverly Hills, but failed to stop by the Judiciary Committee in Washington.

After my ruling that Mr. Rove's claims of immunity are not legally valid, Congressman Conyers and I gave him one last chance to comply with the law. He ignored us. As he let yet another deadline slip by this week, Mr. Rove's disregard for Congress has become intolerable. Mr. Rove needs to understand that he is not above the law and should obey a subpoena just like any other American is required to do.

Mr. Rove should not be able to hide behind the president to avoid the American public. Americans are fed up with this administration flaunting the law. They expect Congress to hold people accountable and that is exactly what we intend to do. Letting Mr. Rove get away with this would set a dangerous precedent. I have recommended that we hold Mr. Rove in contempt of Congress. If we need to revive the inherent contempt procedure which gives Congress the authority to arrest those who defy Congressional subpoenas, then so be it.

The courts have made clear that no one, not even the president, is immune from compulsory process. Any person who scoffs at the law and who has committed an offense that is punishable by jail time should be put in jail. This includes Karl Rove.

If nations were a group of people living in a small neighborhood and one person came claiming to wish to help (by developing their yards and homes) but was found to be a manipulator and thief wouldn't people seek to claim their homes and land back from him and throw the deceiver and thief out? What if that perceived thief used tactics to constantly divide the neighbors against one another to maintain control, and some of the neighbors found out that even in the thief's house he kept his own family divided for control. What would God do with such a person, much less the victims of this man? Let him that be a thief be stolen from, let him that bring ruin be ruined, let the judges be judged.

I think, Mr Rove should be taken to some far away love nest in another country and treated to some nice waterboarding. I mean, after all, it's not illegal and it is well documented for extracting nothing but the honest gospel. Heh he he...


@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@



He's America's Joseph Goebbels. As a 21-year old Young Republican in Texas, Karl Rove not only pimped for Richard Nixon's chief political dirty tricks strategist Donald Segretti but soon caught the eye of the incoming Republican National Committee Chairman, George H. W. Bush. Rove's dirty tricks on behalf of Nixon's 1972 campaign catapulted Rove onto the national stage. From his Eagle's Nest in the West Wing of the White House, Rove now directs a formidable political dirty tricks operation and disinformation mill.

Since his formative political years when he tried to paint World War II B-24 pilot and hero George McGovern as a left-wing peacenik through his mid-level career as a planter of disinformation in the media on behalf of Texas and national GOP candidates to his current role as Dubya's "Svengali," Rove has practiced the same style of slash and burn politics as did his Nixonian mentor Segretti. Many of us remember the Lincolnesque Senator Ed Muskie breaking down in tears during the 1972 campaign over Segretti-planted false stories in a New Hampshire newspaper that accused Mrs. Muskie of being a heavy smoker, drinker, and cusser and accused Muskie of uttering a slur in describing New Hampshire's French Canadian population. Rove's hero also forged letters on fake Muskie campaign letterhead, disrupted rallies and fundraising dinners, and spread false stories about the sex lives of candidates. Segretti's brush also smeared George McGovern, George Wallace, Shirley Chisholm, and McGovern's first vice presidential choice, Senator Tom Eagleton. Segretti of course did not go on to a high-level White House job -- he was sentenced to six months in federal prison for distributing illegal campaign material.

In many respects, however, the apprentice Rove has far exceeded the chicanery and evil-mindedness of his mentor Segretti. Rove is a tech-savvy puppet master for Bush. Take, for example, last June's discovery of a "lost" CD-ROM in Lafayette Park across from the White House. Contained on the CD was a PowerPoint presentation given by White House political director Ken Mehlman to Rove on the strategy for next Tuesday's off-year election. The slide show showed First Brother Jeb Bush being vulnerable in Florida. Jeb Bush later joked that the disc was part of a plot cooked up by him and his brother to make it appear that he was vulnerable in order to rally an otherwise complacent GOP base in the Sunshine State. Or was it a joke? Jeb Bush and his political minions like Katherine Harris have shown us that if anyone thinks what the GOP has done in Florida is funny they have an incredibly sick sense of humor.

Rove's own tendency to be sick-minded originates with his mentor Segretti. The 2000 GOP primary was a chance for Rove to hone his skills in dirty tricks. His target then was Senator John McCain who appeared to be within striking distance of Dubya in South Carolina after the then-GOP maverick's surprise upset victory in New Hampshire. Rove's operation proceeded to target McCain with false stories: McCain was a stoolie for his captors in the Hanoi Hilton (this from a lunatic self-promoting Vietnam "veteran"); McCain fathered a black daughter out of wedlock (a despicable reference to McCain's adopted Bangladeshi daughter); Cindy McCain's drug "abuse"; and even McCain's "homosexuality." In the spirit of Segretti, Rove engineered a victory for Dubya but at the cost of trashing an honorable man and his family. Muskie, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Hart, Tsongas, Clinton, Biden, Dole, Perot, and others had all seen the Segretti/Rove slash and burn tactics before.

And Rove's penchant for fascistic demagoguery and outright lying continues to this very day. After Paul Wellstone's sons asked that Vice President Dick Cheney not attend the Minneapolis memorial service for their father, mother, and sister, the White House explained that the real reason wasn't the surviving Wellstone family's abhorrence for Cheney but the fact the family didn't want Cheney's Secret Service protection to interfere with public access to the service. Of course, the Rove and Ari Fleischer disinformation machine forgot to take into account that two attendees, Bill and Hillary Clinton, had their own Secret Service details. But such is the case with a White House that takes its lessons from Goebbels and the editorial staff of the old Soviet News Agency Tass.

Rove's dirty fingerprints could also be seen in the Iowa Senate race between Tom Harkin and GOP candidate Greg Ganske. A few months ago, a story was leaked that the Harkin campaign had employed a spy within the Ganske campaign. To put this in a Rove context, we must go back to the 1986 Texas gubernatorial race in which Rove's candidate Bill Clements was taking on Democratic Governor Mark White. Just before a debate between the two candidates, Rove spun the story that his office had been bugged. No proof. But the insinuation that White's people had carried out the bugging was reported by the media. In the election, Clements defeated White. Rove stashed away more political capital into his already heavy knapsack of ill-gotten IOUs.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, we were obviously treated to more Rove chicanery when the following Associated Press story hit the wires: "A woman who worked for a media company that produced ads for President George W. Bush's campaign was indicted for secretly mailing a videotape of Bush practicing for a debate to Vice President Al Gore's campaign." Yes, that videotape, along with a 120-page briefing book, just happened to turn up in Gore's headquarters as fast as the CD-ROM turned up in Lafayette Park. The sourcerer Segretti must be very proud of his apprentice. In 1980, no Republican bemoaned the fact that Jimmy Carter's debate briefing book was swiped and found its way into the hands of the Reagan-Bush campaign. In Rove's world, its only an affront when someone "steals" your own campaign secrets and not when your are on the receiving end of a heist.

"If you're not with me, you're against me." Bush's binary view of "good and evil" and "friend and enemy" sits well with the Rove strategy. Georgia's conservative but libertarian-minded Representative Bob Barr found out about this in last August's primary when his GOP primary opponent John Linder began spreading around stories that Barr was "soft on terrorism." Because Barr was skeptical about a number of aspects of the Bush-Ashcroft USA PATRIOT Act, he became a target for the Rove machine. However, it was likely that Barr became a target earlier on when he supported Steve Forbes against Bush in the 2000 primary. Bush apparently means to say, "If you've not always been with me, you're against me." It must have really been a dilemma for Bush and Rove to have to come to the support of John Sununu, Jr. in the New Hampshire Senate race. Although Daddy made George W. unceremoniously give the axe to Sununu's father as White House Chief of Staff during the Bush 41 administration, the man who the junior Sununu defeated in the primary, Bob Smith, was even more of a problem. He had the temerity to quit the Republican Party in 2000 and run against Dubya for President. So in Bushspeak, which is obviously borrowed from Forrest Gump's scripts, "if you're less with me than the other guy, you're more against me."

Undoubtedly, Rove was also behind the campaign to "get" Georgia Representative Cynthia McKinney who was the first nationally-known politician to question what Bush may have known beforehand about 9-11. She was defeated by a former Republican state judge who had supported the wacky Alan Keyes for President in 2000. Never mind, McKinney was "less with Bush" than Keyes, so it was more important to get McKinney who was "more against" Bush.

In all seriousness, rewarding the GOP on November 5 will only increase the appetite of Rove to amass more and more power into the White House. The advent of a Democratic-controlled Senate and House might even begin to spell the end of the road for Segretti's star pupil. German opposition figures in the mid-1930s often lamented the fact that they could have stopped the rise of the Nazis if only they had been more united in a common front when they had a chance. However, they fell prey to the media manipulation of Goebbels and fought among themselves more than they did against the menace from the far right. We Americans also have an early opportunity to stem an out-of-control and anti-constitutional regime with the Rasputin-like Rove at the after steerage helm of our ship of state. That opportunity presents itself next Tuesday--Election Day.

We are sick and tired of the constant manipulation by the MSM. Surely the "newspeople" know the truth and that they are being used too! The following link is to a satirical video that addresses this point.

"People Are Nuts"
[link to www.youtube.com]

who is sick-em.