Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Avalon Magic Plants
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   Left Coast Kratom Premium Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Bulk Substrate

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL.
    #2006063 -

Communism, however noble in intention, was a flawed system. Quite frankly, some people are just too greedy, selfish, and hungry for power to indefinitely maintain a system in which the masses surrender so much of their personal liberty for the greater good of society. When the state controls the market, decisions are made which ultimately sacrifice efficiency and the incentive to quality quickly erodes (particularly when people in a concurrent system have so much more "butter").
.
Capitalism has endured because it accommodates for greed. In fact, it runs on it. This is not to say that there are no merits to a free market system. Obviously, if you work well within such a system, you can enjoy many material pleasures and technological advantages, and have more free time to pursue your individual interests. Unfortunately, if you don?t enjoy the blessings of circumstance and are not one with an intense drive to "succeed" you can easily become trapped in a life as human capital.
.
The United States has risen to its current position in the world primarily because of the power and allure of capitalism. We are the richest country (all things considered), the most influential of nations, and consider ourselves, for the most part, to be a model for the world.
.
One of the main aspects of our country, which we consider essential to our identity, and have used as a justification for many of our actions abroad, it that we stand for democracy. Democratic principles have been used, in part, as justification for pretty much every conflict the U.S. has been involved in during the past century. But are we really a "democracy," and what implications can we draw from a "democratic" system?
.
The Process of Politics
.
Integral to the democratic process is voting. In the U.S., every citizen, by birth, is guaranteed the right to vote. We elect our representatives and they make the decisions relevant to the daily and future management of our country. If we don?t like the decisions they make, or the decisions we think they will make, we just vote against them in the upcoming election.
This sounds like a pretty straightforward, fair process. But is it?
.
One of the main requirements, if not the main requirement for political participation is money. Money may not make the world go round, but without it, your chances of becoming a politician are slim to none. This is particularly true in our two-party system, where each side tries to "out-market" the other. If you want people to listen to your ideas, you have to pay to have them properly promulgated.
.
Money, however, is essential for more than just a career in politics. If you don?t want to run for office, but would rather just influence someone who already is in office, you better be extremely lucky, or extremely wealthy. Politicians generally want to remain politicians. The ability to contribute millions of dollars to a politician?s future campaign will definitely increase your chances of persuading him or her to vote in your favor. It?s true that a politician has to be concerned with public opinion, and will shy away from voting in a way that may evoke an unfavorable response from his/her constituency. But with enough money, it?s easy to make the public forget about any given vote, if they ever knew about it in the first place.
.
Some politicians are faced with term limits. These individuals may be less likely to pay attention to campaign contributions, but even they may be swayed by the promise of a prestigious career with a private company, especially if it involves very little work (i.e. as an "advisor" or "consultant").
.
The power of money is particularly relevant as the political office becomes more prestigious. In the race for and maintenance of the presidency, for example, it is paramount (although political affiliation is integral as well).
.
Money can also influence information. What the public knows about a particular candidate or issue is almost entirely influenced by what they see on TV, or read in the newspaper. If you have enough money, and if it is in the corporate controlled media?s best interest to promote you, your public image can be made quite favorable. It can become as much an issue of what is printed as what is not printed.
.
So, who really runs the country? Some would say it?s the people. Those slightly less na?ve would say it?s the politicians on behalf of the people. Ultimately, however, it is (admittedly, with some rare exceptions) those with money. Democracy, then, seems to be a system best suited to those with money. If you have money, you have influence. For the people, by the people? Get a job.
.
But what does that have to do with Kyrgyzstan?
.
The United States has, for some time now, been attempting to instill "democracy" into other parts of the world. The masses who support these actions typically believe that America is acting as a noble entity, concerned with spreading the blessings of freedom and liberty to all the people of the world. (Ahh, how nice!) Beneath the surface though, righteousness is, again, merely the guise of greed.
.
The corporate controlled American political system has now begun to sneak out into the rest of the world. "Globalization" is just an excuse for companies to tap into new markets and to seek new ways of producing products for less than their competitors, often at the expense of the native population. "Democracy" is just a way to force foreign governments to open their doors to corporate control. This is not a conspiracy, per say, but it is a trend that is consciously being promoted. The government is not trying to spread democracy to liberate the foreign masses, they?re just responding to the influence of the corporate elites who want to make more money.
.
Additionally, we are now witnessing the rise of the Multi-National Mega-Corporation (MNMC). These companies are so diverse in their holdings, and so powerful in their influence, that they are beginning to dwarf actual nation-states in their position in world affairs. MNMC?s have the distinct advantage of transcending the traditional nation-state in that they don?t actually exist within any defined set of borders and are far less visible in their doings. The MNMC is also able to carry out it?s will via actual governments. By using their financial clout, MNMC?s can influence government policy to their advantage (deregulating industries, easing labor laws, etc.) and can even play a part in a government?s use of force against another country (if that country won't comply with the MNMC).
.
Many people around the world view the United States as a nation bent on imperialism. Many feel the U.S. is an evil empire lusting for world domination. Those with power have tried to band together to gain leverage (as in the EU, for example). The powerless strike at us any way they can (terrorism).
.
I definitely believe that there is much validity to the distrust and animosity towards "America", but I feel that it misses the point. The U.S. government is no longer an autonomous state-authority. The "democracy" which has for so long distinguished our country has now led to it?s almost complete loss of true power. The government of our country has been purchased, essentially, by the current band of top MNMC?s. They control our political system, directly and indirectly, and they also control the information that the public receives via the mainstream media. They may not have ultimate power over everything, but, to be sure, that which is most relevant to their interests they invest in heavily.
.
So what are you trying to say?
.
If the United States government appears to be imperialistic, think again. The United States is only the means. It?s the super-wealthy elites who are imperialistic. They continue to band together, forming larger and larger MNMC?s with an ever increasing amount of control. Their quest for world domination is a quest to monopolize all available profit. It is only their continued positioning to outdo one another that keeps them somewhat in check. Eventually, however, their merging will lead to a handful of super MNMC?s that will, effectively, run the world. It will be the complete opposite of a communist planet. And who can say how truly terrible that day will be?
.
Conspiracy theory? Think again. Look around you. Show me one thing that isn?t "sponsored". Even this war is one big commercial?and trust me, it too is sponsored. In our corporate society, people are encouraged to either work super hard to make someone else even richer, or to submit to a life of minimum-wage servitude. The gap between the two groups in terms of power and prosperity continues to widen.
.
The war with Iraq was (is) not about America vs. Saddam's regime. It?s not even about America really. It?s about controlling an essential element of the means of production?oil, gaining access to new markets, and positioning our forces to eventually do the same to some other "hostile" regime nearby.
.
Somewhere, some small band of super wealthy elites are licking their lips and grinding their greedy little teeth as they rub their fat hands together in delight. Soon they will control even more. The U.S. is just their tool. For now, it?s quite the cash cow, and oh what a strong and righteous cow it has been.
.
.
.
One more thing: Saying the media is liberal is like saying that the people that work at McDonald?s are liberal. It doesn?t matter how left wing the ones feeding you that shit are, the ones you really should be worried about, the ones you don?t see, the ones who actually call the shots, are about as liberal as this website is conservative.


--------------------
There he goes, one of God's own prototypes--some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too wierd to live, too rare to die.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: havatampa]
    #2006127 -

Food for thought:
.
Did you know that Saddam Hussein was once given the key to the city of Detroit?
.
Did you know that Saddam came to power, largely, with the unofficial backing of the U.S., who used him as a means of striking at the Iranians?
.
Did you know that the weapons of mass destruction Saddam possessed were often either American made or based on American (donated) technology?
.
Did you know he used these weapons against the Iranians with the silent backing of our government?
.
Did you know that tens of thousands of Iranians were subsequently slaughtered with such chemical agents?
.
Did you know that our oil money helped Saddam maintain his power?
.
Did you know that as a result of the post Gulf War (1) embargo against Iraq, instigated primarily by the U.S, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi women and children lost their lives? (True, Saddam could have bent to our will and avoided all those deaths, but we know that wasn't Saddam's style well before we enforced the sactions)
.
Did you know that when asked about the tragedy, about the thousandS and thousandS of innocent people who had died, former Secretary of State Madeline Albright said, "That's a price we're willing to pay."?
.
Did you know that Israel has weapons of mass destruction?
.
Do you know how the Arabs feel about that?
.
Do you know whose tax dollars pay for many of the Israeli bullets that end up in Palestinian childrens' heads?
.
Did you know that during Saddam's reign there were regimes elsewhere that were even more murderous and "evil", which the United States did little to stop (e.g. Uganda, Rwanda, Indonesia, Cambodia, Sudan, etc.)?
.
Did you know that Vice President Cheney's former company Haliburton (which, according to a recent article in the NY Times, he still has financial ties to) was awarded the first oil-related contract in Iraq, before the war was even over, without even having to bid?
.
Do you know how much longer the world will tolerate our hypocrisy and continue to believe in our "good intentons"?
.
Do you know that the only reason I ask these things is because I love my country and don't want to see it destroy itself?
.
Those who blindly follow this administration as it greedily herds us off a cliff are about as unpatriotic as can be. Those who stand up and say, "enough of this bullshit!", those are the true patriots.


--------------------
There he goes, one of God's own prototypes--some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too wierd to live, too rare to die.

Edited by havatampa (10/14/03 08:22 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: havatampa]
    #2006198 -

That's a great list, I saved it. After reading your posts, I'm curious, do you believe there is a force driving us toward one world government, or do you believe it's solely corporate greed trying to tap new markets.

And you're right on with money buying politicians and elections (i mean most people know this but just gloss over it). I think it's funny that Grey Davis, who like every other politician, pandered to the special interests groups that donated to him, was the one politician challenged after he had the balls to call Bush on deregulating the energy comapnies (also on Bush's undermining of the EPA), really the single cause of a lot of power issues lately- then he gets recalled, kind of fishy to me.

I really identify more with the REAL republican ideology, but is there an honest republican leader other than guys like Ron Paul that get no media attention.

Also, you said that a lot of the weapons going around the middle east are american- so true, American arms dealers had been (maybe still are) selling arms to many nations, I remember hearing at one point (can't back it up for sure thought) American arms companies were selling both to Israel and Palestinian militants!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: havatampa]
    #2006228 -

Politics is just that, politics, we stab each other in the back, then wipe the blood off on their best friend's shoulder, the strive for fame has dug us into a hole we can never get out of. Humans are so worried about what they need, and who they can save, for their own self gratitude of course. In example, we belive the freedom of speach is the last step in the march of victory to freedom. We forgot that although the right to free speach is an important victory in the battle against OLD restraints, modern man is in the position where most, if not all, of what "he" thinks and says are the things that every one else thinks and says; that he has not aquired the ability to think originaly -thats is- for himself - which alone gives meaning to his claim that nobody can interfere with the expression of his thoughts. We are so proud that we have over comed the external authorities, who tell us what to do and where to be. But we have neglected the role of anonymous authorities such as public opinion "and "common sense", which are so powerful becase of our profound readiness to submit to the expectations of everybody has about ourselfs and our equally profound fear to be diffrent. We are so occupied with the growth of freedoms outside of ourselfs, and are blinded to the inner restraints, complusions, and fears. Until we figure these things out, and fight to gain our own freedom, we will never be able to work together to create something diffrent from our current hell on earth.

As far as the media goes, its who you want to belive, right wingers who will say anything to get you on thier side, or the lefters, (www.indymedia.org) who will do ANYTHING to prove a rightwing nut wrong. They both have their dirty tricks. But if you ask me, the media is NOT liberal, I didn't think that was a debatable issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: havatampa]
    #2006396 -

Hitler was Time's man of the year for being good.

Ford gave him 50 grand a year cuz of his great efforts.

Hitler saved millions of people from depression.

Yep him and saddam. great guys

Did you know that asking painfully obvious questions tailored to suit your own motives does not make you look smarter?


--------------------
I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends.

bang bang

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2007187 -

An article regarding US arms in Iraq

IN A SIX-MONTH investigation, teams of immigration agents tracking what was left of Iraq?s military have found signs not of Iraqi violations but of something entirely different ? weapons components that appeared to have been made in the United States, which would be illegal to sell to Baghdad.
?We?ve gotten approximately 14 good leads on U.S. companies that may have been involved in illegal transactions of material that wound up in Iraq,? Michael Garcia, director of the Homeland Security Department?s new Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), said in an interview.
Specialists said weapons smuggling was notoriously difficult to investigate because agents can seldom trace a sale all the way to the final buyer. It took three years, for example, to build a case against a California liquor dealer, Fadi Boutros, who was eventually convicted in 1999 of trying to buy military-grade night-vision goggles for Iraq.
In addition, arms shipments usually go through several countries before reaching their destination, complicating the paper trail for investigators.
Since the United States launched its war to disarm Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in March, teams of U.S. inspectors ? like the U.N. teams before them ? have found no clear evidence to back U.S. and British claims Saddam had secret caches of weapons of mass destruction.


....snip


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: havatampa]
    #2007833 -

Did you know that Saddam came to power, largely, with the unofficial backing of the U.S., who used him as a means of striking at the Iranians?

proof?

here's something you may find interesting:

"Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Find out how you can help support Wikipedia's phenomenal growth.

General Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr (1914 - 1982) was President of Iraq from 1968 to 1979.

A leading member of the Ba'ath Party he orchestrated the 1963 coup that overhthrew Iraq's military leader Muhammad Najib ar-Ruba'i. A few months later the Ba'athists were in turn deposed by another coup. In 1967 a third coup occurred and the Ba'athists returned to power, installing al-Bakr as Iraqi's fourth president.

Al-Bakr is best known for appointing Saddam Hussein as his Vice President. As the president got older, more and more authority was gradually delegated to Hussein, and by the mid 70's the vice president had established virtual de facto rule over the entire nation.

On July 16, 1979 the 65-year-old Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr stepped down and Saddam Hussein assumed the presidency in a move that was widely regarded as little more than a formality."

Wikipedia: Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr

the US-friendly shah of iran did not fall until 1979.

Did you know that the weapons of mass destruction Saddam possessed were often either American made or based on American (donated) technology?

i would like to see a catalogue of these weapons technologies, and the dates when they were given to hussein.

Did you know that our oil money helped Saddam maintain his power?

does this mean that we purchased oil from him? the horror!

Did you know that as a result of the post Gulf War (1) embargo against Iraq, instigated primarily by the U.S, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi women and children lost their lives? (True, Saddam could have bent to our will and avoided all those deaths, but we know that wasn't Saddam's style well before we enforced the sactions)

wow. the second part of that (in paranthesis) was strikingly honest. i would like to ask the author what should have been done, back in the 90's, about hussein's non-compliance.

Did you know that when asked about the tragedy, about the thousandS and thousandS of innocent people who had died, former Secretary of State Madeline Albright said, "That's a price we're willing to pay."?

ah... there it is. the infamous madeline albright quote...

Do you know whose tax dollars pay for many of the Israeli bullets that end up in Palestinian childrens' heads?

absurdity. the questions of whether israel is too heavey-handed in its fight against arab terrorism, and whether or not it's getting a little out of line, are far deeper questions than can be summed up by "isreali bullets that end up in palestinian childrens' heads".

israel itself spends 9 billion of its own funds on its military per year anyway, far more than it receives in US aid.

here's an article about US aid to israel:  Oh so much money...

Did you know that during Saddam's reign there were regimes elsewhere that were even more murderous and "evil", which the United States did little to stop (e.g. Uganda, Rwanda, Indonesia, Cambodia, Sudan, etc.)?

they weren't sitting ontop of oil. this is important for two reasons:

1. without a massive source of revenue, like hussein had, such regimes cannot become very powerful on the international playing field.

2. there is no self-serving reason for the US to attack such countries.
there: the united states attacked iraq because it felt iraq was not only threatening the safety of the US and that of the region (read israel), but threatening our access to oil as well. we attacked for selfish reasons. doesn't change the fact that millions of iraqi people were freed from hussein.

we are not the world's policeman. we are not a liberation-for-free armed force. it was not in our interests to get involved in rwanda, sudan, cambodia, etc. is it our job to topple ruthless dictators everywhere, out of the kindness of our hearts?

Did you know that Vice President Cheney's former company Haliburton (which, according to a recent article in the NY Times, he still has financial ties to) was awarded the first oil-related contract in America without even having to bid?

i don't recall reading that. halliburton was founded in 1919 and is one of the world's largest and most capable oil infrastructure contractors. it makes sense to contract them for the job. i can't think of another company better suited. can you? can the author of this list?

Do you know how much longer the world will tolerate our hypocrisy and continue to believe in our "good intentons"?

pppbbbbthhththh.  :razz:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2007909 -

Did you know that Saddam came to power, largely, with the unofficial backing of the U.S., who used him as a means of striking at the Iranians?

proof?


I don't have proof, though I'm sure I could find something on the web. I thought this was almost common knowledge, I think the CIA was an instrument in saddam getting into power because they "thought" he would be less extremist and a tool of the U.S.- good call guys.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2007958 -

The CIA have always referred to the installation of Saddam in power as "our favourite coup".


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2007963 -

i would like to ask the author what should have been done, back in the 90's, about hussein's non-compliance.

So where are the WMD? Exactly what didn't Saddam comply with?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2008212 -

I don't have proof, though I'm sure I could find something on the web. I thought this was almost common knowledge, I think the CIA was an instrument in saddam getting into power because they "thought" he would be less extremist and a tool of the U.S.- good call guys.

hussein slowly grabbed more and more power through the 70's until he was pretty much in charge. in 1979 the old and ailing ba'ath president stepped down and appointed hussein the head of the state, which he for the most part was already.

at the time the ba'ath party came to power, and at the time hussein was gaining control of the party, the US had a friendly government in iran. the idea that the CIA 'installed' hussein just doesn't make any sense. he climbed the ranks of the ba'ath party all on his own, before khomeini gained control of iran.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2008214 -

It's not cvommon knoledge to people who block out knowledge they don't want to hear..

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2008215 -

It's not common knoledge to people who block out knowledge they don't want to hear..

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: Bhairabas]
    #2008226 -

it isn't "common knowledge", it's a common myth. the idea that the CIA installed hussein to mess with iran is inconsistant with easily verified historical events. the fact is that hussein climbed the ranks of the ba'ath party on his own, during a time when there was a US-friendly government in iran.

now... as for those that block out knowledge they don't want to hear...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: Xlea321]
    #2008298 -

I would like to thank all those who have responded to my initial post. Perhaps, as some of you have suggested, I have no idea what I?m talking about and am just trying to sound smart. Or perhaps, as most of you seem to have indicated, there is some truth to my assertions. Either way, I would like to offer a rebuttal to some of the comments attempting to debunk my claims.

?Hitler was Time's man of the year for being good.?

This was used, I think, as a justification for why we shouldn?t care that Saddam was supported by our government. First of all, two wrongs don?t make a right. Secondly, having the endorsement of a magazine or even that of a corporation such as GM is not tantamount to the financial and technological support we gave Saddam. Hitler was never given the key to the city of Detroit, nor was he given money by our government to kill the Jews.

?Did you know that asking painfully obvious questions tailored to suit your own motives does not make you look smarter??

It is not logical to attack the person making the argument. In organized debate, it is the sign of a weak position. Besides, aren?t you doing the very same thing by asking that question? Not trying to get into a tit for tat, just a comment.

?On July 16, 1979 the 65-year-old Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr stepped down and Saddam Hussein assumed the presidency in a move that was widely regarded as little more than a formality? the US-friendly shah of Iran did not fall until 1979.?

There is a difference between taking office and gaining POWER. We helped Saddam come to power, even if he had already positioned himself to assume that office. Furthermore, why do you think he was such a shoe-in that it was merely a formality for him to take office? Perhaps because he had red, white, and blue friends in high place? I?m not suggesting we put Saddam in power to fight Iran, but we did influence him to strike at the Iranians by helping him gain and maintain POWER (realpolitik).

?i would like to see a catalogue of these weapons technologies, and the dates when they were given to hussein.?

So would I. Unfortunately, I don?t have access to the Pentagon?s records regarding under the table agreements. Perhaps we should ask Oliver North to help us get them.

?i would like to ask the author what should have been done, back in the 90's, about hussein's non-compliance.?

How about something which wouldn?t have caused 100,000 + innocent women and helpless little children to die miserable deaths? Is that too much to ask?

?israel itself spends 9 billion of its own funds on its military per year anyway, far more than it receives in US aid.?

Do you know how much money we give Israel? I do not support Palestinian terrorism, but I do think that the only difference between the Palestinians and the Jews in that area that the Jews are the ones wearing shoes (thanks, in part, to our tax money).
Check out this site for more info: www.is-pal.net/usaid.htm

?halliburton was founded in 1919 and is one of the world's largest and most capable oil infrastructure contractors. it makes sense to contract them for the job.?

First of all, check out this website: http://www.corpwatch.org/issues/PID.jsp?articleid=6288

Halliburton doesn?t even make the Pentagon?s top ten list. Furthermore, here is an article about Cheney?s continued involvement with this company: http://money.cnn.com/2003/09/25/news/companies/cheney/?cnn=yes



Look, I don?t know how you?ve come to the conclusions that you have. Maybe it?s because you were raised in a conservative household and have just never questioned things as an independent individual. Maybe it?s because the government?s story seems so convincing. Maybe you feel scared that people will think you are unpatriotic if you question the government. Maybe you are just still blinded by anger after what happened on Sept. 11. Or, maybe you just don?t want to think about it because it?s too unpleasant.

Whatever it is, I understand. I don?t hate you for believing what you believe and I forgive you if you have animosity towards those who stray from the herd. The point is, while many Americans agree with you, most of the world does not. The most important question we need to ask is not ?how do we keep people from hurting us?? it?s ?how do we keep people from hating us??

I admit that I may be wrong, but please, please consider that I may be right.


Related Sites:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/
http://pnacrevealed.com/



--------------------
There he goes, one of God's own prototypes--some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too wierd to live, too rare to die.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: Xlea321]
    #2008301 -

what didn't Saddam comply with?

7 August 1991 International inspectors discover a previously unknown and unexpectedly sophisticated facility for the production of centrifuges for use in uranium enrichment outside of Baghdad. US officials say the operation is one of four approaches followed by Iraq in its attempt to develop nuclear weapons. (Washington Post, 8 August 1991, A30)

8 August 1991 Iraq reveals that it tried to hide 17.6 pounds of irradiated nuclear fuel from UN inspectors. (Washington Times, 9 August 1991, 7)

23 September 1991 Iraq detains 44 UN inspectors for 13 hours after they discover documents detailing Iraqi nuclear weapons program. Iraq releases inspectors after confiscating suspect documents, charges that UN team leader David Kay works for US intelligence. Three days later, Iraq agrees to release documents. (CRS, 31 March 1992, 17)

25 January 1992 UN Secretary General releases report to Security Council highlighting Iraqi recalcitrance in complying with UN resolutions regarding its weapons programs, military activities, and financial disclosures. (CRS, 31 March 1992, 33)

5 February 1992 UN Security Council votes to extend economic sanctions against Iraq because of "serious evidence" revealing Iraqi non-compliance with UN resolutions. (Washington Post, 6 February 1992, A21)

1 March 1992 After Iraq refuses to destroy ballistic missile manufacturing equipment, British Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd hints that UK will not rule out the use of air strikes to force Iraqi compliance with UN resolutions. Press reports assert that Bush administration is also considering using a military strike to coerce Iraq into complying with UN demands to dismantle its ballistic missile production facilities. (CRS, 31 March 1992, 39)

11 March 1992 The UN Security Council charges Iraq with noncompliance with Resolution 687, because of its continued refusal to reveal the whereabouts of all its nuclear, chemical, biological weapons and production facilities. Russian ambassador in Washington endorses the use of military force to compel Iraq to destroy its weapons of mass destruction. (Washington Post, 12 March 1992, A1; CRS, 31 March 1992, 42-43)

14 March 1992 US officially threatens to use military measures to force Iraqi compliance with UN demands. (CRS, 31 March 1992, 44)

9 August 1994 Hussein Kamel Hassan, son-in-law of Saddam Hussein and senior member of the ruling circle in Baghdad, defects to Jordan and attempts to form an anti-Ba'ath resistance movement. Kamel reveals extensive details of Iraq's continuing biological, nuclear, and missile programs to UN and US intelligence officials. (Oldaker 1996, 2)

7 December 1995 United Nations officials disclose that Jordan has seized a cache of Russian-made missile guidance systems that were being smuggled into Iraq across the Jordanian border. Russian officials deny any involvement in the shipment. (National Public Radio, 7 December 1995; Washington Post, 15 December 1995, A30)

7 March 1996 Jordan announces that it has seized another shipment of military spare parts en route to Baghdad. (New York Times, 8 March 1996, A12)

24 October 1997 The UN Security Council passes a US, UK-backed resolution condemning Iraq for continuing to hinder UNSCOM weapons inspectors and threatening a travel ban on responsible Iraqi officials if the obstruction continues. In response, the Iraqi National Assembly calls for the suspension of ties with UNSCOM until the UN sets a timetable for lifting sanctions; Iraq announces American inspectors will be given one week to leave the country. (Journal of Commerce, 27 October 1997, 8A; Financial Times, 29 October 1997, 8; Washington Post, 30 October 1997, A01)

End October 1997 Iraq refuses entry to three Americans on a team of UN arms inspectors, and warns Iraqi anti-aircraft guns might fire upon US U-2 spy planes if surveillance flights continue. The UN sends a high-level diplomatic mission to resolve the budding crisis and Iraq delays the expulsion order against the American inspectors. (Washington Post, 3 November 1997, A1; Financial Times, 5 November 1997, 6)

12 November 1997 The UN Security Council unanimously approves a travel ban for senior Iraqi officials and demands that Iraq stop interfering with UN weapons inspectors. Iraq insists that the weapons teams have fewer Americans. When Iraq refuses to comply with UN demands, the weapons inspectors leave the country. Fears mount that Iraq could revive chemical and biological weapons programs without the oversight of the international community. Russia and France push for a diplomatic solution to the crisis, while Washington does not rule out a resort to the use of force. The United States increases its military presence in the Gulf. (Washington Post, 13 November 1997, A1; Washington Post, 18 November 1997, A22)

21 November 1997 After intense diplomacy by Security Council members, particularly Russia, Iraq agrees to allow UN weapon inspectors back into the country. Russia agrees to push for concessions, such as the easing of the UN sanctions, in return. The Security Council rebuffs a Russian request to declare Iraq free of nuclear weapons and nearly free of prohibited missiles. (Washington Post, 21 November 1997, A1; New York Times, 22 November 1997, A1)

16 January 1998 A weapons inspection team leaves Iraq after being barred for three days from conducting an inspection. The UN Security Council deplores Iraq's decision, which constitutes a clear violation of UN resolutions. (CRS, 6 March 1998, 3)

17 January 1998 Saddam Hussein announces that Iraq will expel all weapons inspectors if sanctions against Iraq are not removed within six months. (CRS, 6 March 1998, 3)

29 April 1998 UNSCOM chief arms inspector Richard Butler reveals that experts discovered mustard gas in Iraqi artillery shells found at an ammunitions depot in 1996. The discovery raises new questions about similar shells that remain unaccounted for. (New York Times, 29 April 1998, A10)

23 July 1998 Iraqi authorities refuse to give UNSCOM documents that list weapons used by the Iraqi Air Force during the war with Iran. (Washington Post, 24 July 1998, A28)

5 August 1998 Iraq restricts activities of IAEA and orders an end to all UNSCOM inspections, except for those specifically approved by the Iraqi government. It allows long distance monitoring with video camera, as well as air, water and soil sampling, to continue. President Hussein demands that UNSCOM be restructured, Butler replaced, and that UNSCOM move its headquarters out of the United States. (Financial Times, 6 August 1998, 1; USIS, 6 August 1998; New York Times, 15 September 1998, A3; Wall Street Journal, 2 October 1998, A16)

9 September 1998 In the face of Iraqi intransigence on inspections, UN Security Council votes to end periodic reviews of the sanctions on Iraq, meaning they will not be lifted. (Reuters, 27 September 1998; New York Times, 10 September 1998, A10)

14 September 1998 Iraq's National Assembly threatens to end all cooperation with inspectors unless the Security Council resumes regular reviews of the sanctions. (New York Times, 15 September 1998, A3)

31 October 1998 Iraq stops all cooperation with weapons inspectors, banning arms inspectors from visiting sites that have already been inspected and were being monitored by UNSCOM. Baghdad says sensors and monitors placed in sites can continued operating and also exempt the IAEA from its latest decision. (Financial Times, 2 November 1998, 1; Wall Street Journal, 2 November 1998, A4)

5 November 1998 The UN Security Council votes unanimously to condemn Iraq for its stance towards the weapons inspectors. Russia and China stress that the resolution does not mention the use of force to make Iraq comply. (New York Times, 6 November 1998, A1; Washington Post, 6 November 1998, A31)

20 November 1998 Shortly after UNSCOM inspectors resume their duties in Iraq, the Iraqi government refuses to provide 12 documents relating to weapons inventories. Iraqi Deputy Foreign Minister Riyadh al-Qaysi accuses the inspectors of "unjustifiably" prolonging their work, thereby extending the embargo. (Washington Post, 24 November 1998, A25; 18 November 1998, A33; Financial Times, 24 November 1998, 6)

15 December 1998 Butler reports to the UN that Iraq continues to block it from performing its duties. Of the 12 sets of documents asked for by Butler immediately following the crisis, Iraq has handed over only one, and that one does not appear to meet UNSCOM's demands. (Washington Post, 16 December 1998, A16; New York Times, 16 December 1998, A4)

16 December 1998 Without consulting the UN Security Council, US President Clinton and UK Prime Minister Blair initiate military action against Iraq. Some Republican congressmen and politicians, including Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, criticize the timing of the action, which comes the day before the House of Representatives is scheduled to begin debate on articles of impeachment against the President. Other Republican congressmen, however, join with Democratic leaders in supporting the attack. On the first night of "Operation Desert Fox", over 200 cruise missiles are fired at Iraqi targets. (New York Times, 17 December 1998, A1; Washington Post, 17 December 1998, A1)

21 December 1998 Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Aziz reiterates earlier statements that the weapons inspection regime is finished as a result of the bombing. He claims 62 officers and soldiers were killed, 180 injured, and that civilian casualties were "much higher." The American military disputes the claim there was much damage to civilian sites, emphasizing that the US had left "dual use" civilian-military sites off the target list to avoid hurting civilians. (New York Times, 22 December 1998, A14; Washington Post, 22 December 1998, A31)

30 November 1999 Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz visits Moscow in effort to ensure Russia's continued opposition to renewed weapons inspections. (Financial Times, 1 December 1999, 4; New York Times, 6 December 1999, A12)

15 December 1999 Iraq refuses to allow IAEA inspectors to check Iraq's uranium stockpile as required under the 1968 nuclear nonproliferation treaty. (New York Times, 15 December 1999, A13; 16 December 1999, A5)

19 December 1999 Iraq officially rejects resolution 1284 and demands unconditional lifting of sanctions. (Washington Post, 19 December 1999, A54)

8 January 2000 Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan urges visiting Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz to cooperate with UN weapons inspections. (Washington Post, 8 January 2000, A14)

26 November 2001 President Bush declares that countries developing weapons of mass destruction could be a target in the US war against terrorism. He warns Iraq to let UN weapons inspectors back into the country or face the consequences. (New York Times, 27 November 2002, A1; Washington Post, 27 November 2001, A7)

January 2002 Iraq allows IAEA into the country for an inspection of a nuclear research center. The move comes at a time when Iraq is seeking to revive dialogue with the UN. However, since 1998 Iraq has not allowed IAEA to conduct more wide-ranging inspections necessary to verify that Iraq has no weapons-grade material. (Wall Street Journal, 28 January 2002, A10)

July 23, 2002 Following third round of unsuccessful talks with Iraq on 5-6 July, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan announces that he will not hold further talks until Baghdad shows some willingness to readmit UN arms inspectors. (Washington Post, 6 July 2002, A13; 24 July 2002, A14)

http://207.238.152.36/research/topics/sanctions/iraq.htm

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: havatampa]
    #2008337 -

There is a difference between taking office and gaining POWER. We helped Saddam come to power, even if he positioned himself to assume that office. Furthermore, why do you think he was such a shoe-in that it was merely a formality for him to take office? Perhaps because he had red, white, and blue friends in high place? I?m not suggesting we put Saddam in power to fight Iran, but we did influence him to strike at the Iranians by helping him gain and maintain POWER (realpolitik).

if the US did help hussein to power (still waiting on proof of this... or even evidense.. hell, even a motive maybe?) in order to influence him to strike iran, this would be awfully strange, as that during his climb to power, there was a US-friendly regime in iran.

So would I. Unfortunately, I don?t have access to the Pentagon?s records regarding under the table agreements. Perhaps we should ask Oliver North to help us get them.

so your proof of your allegations lies where?

How about something which wouldn?t have caused 100,000 + innocent women and helpless little children to die miserable deaths? Is that too much to ask?

something like the military action undertaken several months ago?

Look, I don?t know how you?ve come to the conclusions that you have.

mostly what i've been doing is asking you how you've come to the conclusions you have. as far as me making conclusions, i think i was pretty good about citing sources. you were not.

Look, I don?t know how you?ve come to the conclusions that you have. Maybe it?s because you were raised in a conservative household and have just never questioned things as an independent individual. Maybe it?s because the government?s story seems so convincing. Maybe you feel scared that people will think you are unpatriotic if you question the government. Maybe you are just still blinded by anger after what happened on Sept. 11. Or, maybe you just don?t want to think about it because it?s too unpleasant.

come off it. what i've done here is mostly just stated verifiable historical facts and asked you to cite sources.

it may interest you to know that i've actually held a similar take on things as you seem to at one point in my life. i've been a socialist before. i've been an anarchist. i've lined up with the america haters, the bush haters, and the capitalism haters. i've sympathized with hussein's iraq. i've involved myself in anti-government\police activities in the past that i'd rather not even talk about on an internet message board.

i've seen enough debate, had enough time to think, and been exposed to enough truth to see the logical failings of positions i've held in the past. i think the way i do now not because my eyes are closed, but because they are open. give me a break, and come off your high horse. you don't know me at all.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2008350 -

It was requested he didn't make WMD, he hasn't made any. Which part of that isn't compliance?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2008359 -

if the US did help hussein to power

But you agree the US helped sustain him in power once he was there? With full knowledge that he was a cruel dictator?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: Xlea321]
    #2008388 -

Quote:
Alex123 said:
It was requested he didn't make WMD


It was also mandatory he provide proof the weapons had been destroyed. He did not do so.

Quote:
, he hasn't made any.


Proof? Don't bother, I know you don't have any.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: Xlea321]
    #2008395 -

It was requested he didn't make WMD, he hasn't made any. That's pretty comprehensive proof of compliance to me. Isn't it to you?

so the fact that nothing has been found in iraq (and even this is debatable) is enough to discout his history of bold defiance of weapons inspections for an entire decade? husseins compliance with inspections came and went throughout the decade, but the underlying reality was that he was always doing just as much as he could get away with. i think maybe it might have been bad timing to go to war with him when we did- it seems evident that he was, at the time, cooperating more than ever before. i don't think he was done though. he'd have been back at it again as soon as the heat was off.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: Xlea321]
    #2008399 -

But you agree the US helped sustain him in power once he was there? With full knowledge that he was a cruel dictator?

i don't know. i don't think that the US helped sustain his regime, but i'm really not sure. they did provide aid... how substantial it was, and what it's effects were on his grip on power, are things i must admit i know little about.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2008464 -

there- Saddam rose to power with CIA help!

If PBS says he did it with CIA help then I guess we could pretty much call this a proven fact now. Like I said, first result I checked off a google search had it.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/saddam/

This report presents an intimate portrait of Saddam Hussein's life, examining what has made him a master survivor -- from his days as a young hit man in the Ba'ath party to his rise to power with CIA help; from his successful exploitation of superpower rivalry in the 1970s to his miscalculations in invading Kuwait 20 years later; from CIA-backed coup attempts and internal rebellions against him throughout the 1990s to his successful standoff with U.N. weapons inspectors.

Will people start reseaching things for themselves before they start saying prove it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2008469 -

Again, the lesser of two evils. We had Saddam, who at this time wasn't pushing anti-Us sentiment, or funding Hamas suicide bombers, versus Iran, who hated us. 

Since the liberals hate America, I can see why they wouldn't want us acting to defend ourselves, but, tough shit :smile:


--------------------
In response to an attack killing 15 American Servicemen
PsiloKitten said:
Just give em a little more time, the iraqis are making great progress. And this is unorganized. Wait till they get organized.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: lysergic]
    #2008501 -

You guy's are fucking hilarious!!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: lysergic]
    #2008531 -

It's beyond being liberal or conservative or republican or democratiic anymore, at least for me, those are games and the people playing them are pawns. The war was a strategic move to topple the middle east, establish foreign markets, extend U.S. dominance, try to get a better footing in progressing the relationship between Israel/Palstine situation, remove a madman, and send a message to other lunatics like Kim Jung Iil. My problem with it is that one more peice of land falls into this socialist-NWO agenda. George Bush could have gotten away with this if he just didn't say WMD- they ahd plenty of other weapons and a terrible human rights record, and the war (much as I hate the military industrial complex) was fought brilliantly- don't let some quacks blowing up cars now tell you otherwise- it's obvious who they are. My point is that the CIA and American government have a history of getting involved with these dicators/extremists (even on U.S. soil in the case of extremist groups) and then a war results over it- too many times for it to be a coincidence for an intelligence agency.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2008550 -

the ba'ath party gained power in iraq with the help of the CIA. the dictator at the time was looking like he was going communist, so they helped the ba'athists overthrow him. at the time, the ba'ath party was nothing like it later became. it had nothing to do with iran, and at the time, hussein was pretty low on the rungs of power. he worked his way up, and transformed the ba'ath party into his own oppressive regime, without US help.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2008594 -

hey I never said that the U.S. had anything to do with the direction he took his country, I simply stated that the CIA was involved with him before he took power, and helped him gain power- they wanted him in power. You're wrong man, just give it up. Just like they set up Ho Chi Mihn and started a silly war with him years later. Just been proven fact that we were involved with the Chilean coup in 1970, only we (the mass public) were kept in the dark about it for 33 years. And there's others too, and I could go into even more detail. The CIA or the United States Government/"elite philanthropists" want chaos, out of which comes their bullshit version of order.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2008643 -

The CIA did not help Hussein to gain power. He managed that all by himself. Simply claiming they helped him doesn't make it so.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: Phred]
    #2008679 -

I just posted a PBS link with the exact wording "to his rise to power with CIA help."

Ok. the CIA fucking helped him. It isn't debatable. It isn't a conspiracy- fucking PBS reports it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2008689 -

By "without U.S. help" do you mean before or after the war with Iran started?

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/2002/0923monster.htm

http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/saddam.htm

http://www.jamesglaser.org/2003/p20030416.html

http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0301c.pdf

http://www.freep.com/news/nw/saddam27_20030227.htm

It seems like you're trying to confuse the issue. No, the U.S. did not create Saddam from scratch. Yes, Saddam had already assumed his office before the U.S. began to take considerable interest in him. But YES the U.S. did support him and did help him come to POWER (and by power I mean absolute power, after he already was in office). We gave him money, plain and simple. (see links, please)

You want me to provide evidence? Do you look at the links I attach? No, obviously I don't have the reciepts from when we sold Saddam chemical agents. No, I don't have a printout of the record from when we gave him money. Oh, but wait, you don't have any WMD either, do you?

But still, you miss my point. I don't deny Saddam was a bad person. I don't deny that he had WMD. I don't even deny that he needed to be taken out of power. What I do deny is the notion that the U.S. didn't have a part in creating the problem in the first place. I also deny that, as you say, we would still be bothering with Saddam at all if Iraq wasn't sitting on top of all that oil.

The point of my post was that our "good intentions" are usually just a cover for our secret (corporate) interests and that control over decisions relating to foreign policy is shifting more and more from an informed general public to the hands of elite mega-corporations. Who are you defending??? The very same people who would exploit you in an instant? The very same people who would send you to die because they miscalculated 20 years ago?

I've lived for several years in Turkey and I've seen some of the things I'm talking about first hand. If we continue down our present course, we will destroy ourselves. I approach this conversation from a perspective of love and concern, not hatred and anger. Above all, remember that.


--------------------
There he goes, one of God's own prototypes--some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too wierd to live, too rare to die.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2008931 -

start25 writes:

I just posted a PBS link with the exact wording "to his rise to power with CIA help."

It may interest you to know that not everything PBS states is factual.

Ok. the CIA fucking helped him.

The CIA did not help him rise to power. That he did on his own. Once he had consolidated his position as the supreme authority in Iraq, I have no doubt that the US provided him intelligence (some of which may have been gathered by the CIA) which he put to good use in his war with Iran. But that is not what we are discussing here.

It isn't debatable. It isn't a conspiracy- fucking PBS reports it.

Your faith in the infallibility of the media is touching, but misplaced.

Ask yourself this -- how did the CIA "help" him? Did they intimidate voters in Iraq, or finance a pro-Saddam election campaign? No, that can't be it -- he was not elected. Did they murder political rivals of his? No, there have never been claims (even by the Noam Chomskys of the world) that the CIA was ever involved in any "wet work" in pre-Saddam Iraq. Help us out here -- what is your theory on the specific actions the CIA performed to help Hussein seize power?

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: havatampa]
    #2008944 -

Love?

Yer talking to some of the wrong people.

So, what would it take for some of you:

silversoul
Alex
Gern
Leary
Zahid
and so on and so forth

To get off this mind rotting bulletinboard and start doing something? Im not saying you arent doing anything.. Im not judging.. dont get all defensive.

Im saying.. let's start a revolution. From my vantage, I dont understand why we cant. What else do you have to do?

Any other volunteers? Any ideas? Let's turn all of this wasted effort fighting with the same 5 people who have alot of time on their hands, into bringing our collective abilities together to effect a change.

What do you think?

What has been the downfall of past and even current movements?

Let's deconstruct and reconstruct people. We are running out of time.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: Phred]
    #2008976 -

secret agents, propaganda, a thought out plan on how to get Saddam into power when they planned on staging the coup when Saddam was studying law in Cairo, financial backing, promising of weapons. They also selceted the bathist party as well in 1963 to foil Russia's control and bring them to power- all done with CIA, American funding, and American groundwork- so they were already involved with the bathists to begin with, before Saddam ever came on the scene. You're wrong man, flat out wrong. And the reason I said that about PBS is because any information that people disbelieve they say some conspiracy quack came up- i thought that since you don't read alternative news sources that you may take PBS more seriously. Obviously you just want to be right. well, sorry, you're wrong, the CIA was highly involved not only in bringing saddam to power, but even the bathist party almost 20 years earlier.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: PsiloKitten]
    #2008978 -

i must say i agree with just about everything you said. its wut ive been thinking for a while. but the real question is wut the fuck can one do about it. :frown:


--------------------
Mice have feelings

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: JameZTheNewbie]
    #2009021 -

Here are some ideas:

www.adbusters.org -- they have a kick ass magazine and adbusters tv. They accept submissions. Im working on a bathroom book that can be included as an insert in their magazine. It covers a wide variety of topics related to the govt and economy with simple diagrams and wording ( not childish) -- just reviving the art of memes.

They also brought back the idea of culture jamming -- tagging billboards, putting gas hog stickers on SUVs.. flying the corporate american flag.

Im also working on an ad for a prescription drug to combat affluenza, all procter and gamble/ eli lily style.

So, there are so options of creative things that anyone could do. Even if they didnt do it for adbusters, you could go stick your creations up in your local malls, on street signs.. etc. ( a website would be a good thing to have with this tactic)

#2, Most walmarts have to allow solicitors on their property. If you notice, they usually have signs outside that say something to this effect
Let's get a platform, make a handout.. make a website.. and use the shroomery to network with people all over the US who can give the handouts to their geographic area. You could give them out on campus, at a concert... whereever. But the way I figure, the shroomery has people from all over, why not use that to our advantage.

Of course that means, we must pick a topic of focus and not let it get diluted and spiral out of control like most movements do. I've got a shitload of links to various guides and experiences that we could maybe filter and fiber through.

#3, toying with this idea.. but working within the system.. everyone always swears this is the way it must be done and maybe they are correct. I want to incorporate a movement. Like Peace(tm). I want to use and abuse the laws of corporate personhood in realtion to the ever growing Patriot Act..

I think there are alot of options out there and technology makes even more possible. If you could get this started, you could align with fringe groups to accomplish even more.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2009048 -

start25 writes:

secret agents, propaganda, a thought out plan on how to get Saddam into power when they planned on staging the coup when Saddam was studying law in Cairo, financial backing, promising of weapons.

So you can't answer the question. I thought not.

They also selceted the bathist party as well in 1963 to foil Russia's control and bring them to power- all done with CIA, American funding, and American groundwork- so they were already involved with the bathists to begin with, before Saddam ever came on the scene.

There is credible evidence that the US preferred the Ba'athist party as it existed in the early Sixties to other alternatives in Iraq at that same time, yes. It would not surprise me to hear that CIA agents would have had a hand in the transfer of useful information and perhaps even funds to the Ba'athist party.

You're wrong man, flat out wrong.

Saying so is easy. Back it up with some facts if you want to be taken seriously.

And the reason I said that about PBS is because any information that people disbelieve they say some conspiracy quack came up- i thought that since you don't read alternative news sources that you may take PBS more seriously.

I do read alternative sources -- almost nothing but alternative news sources. As a matter of fact, I get 99% of my day-to-day news information from the Internet, since I read no mainstream newspapers and have no television or radio. Maybe three or four times a year I get my hands on a discarded Time or Newsweek magazine. They are useful for telling me which diet is the most trendy at the moment.

As for taking PBS seriously, it is apparent from the statements you have made here that it is you who doesn't take PBS seriously -- you haven't bothered to actually read the link you provided to us. I suggest you do so before making your next post -- especially this section:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saddam/interviews/aburish.html

Obviously you just want to be right.

No more than you. Unfortunately, you choose not to back up your assertions with fact. I do.

well, sorry, you're wrong, the CIA was highly involved not only in bringing saddam to power...

If you had actually bothered to read the link you provided us, you would know that statement is incorrect.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: Phred]
    #2009155 -

i have to go study, but I'll post back a full rebuttal tomorrow night.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2009170 -

Why waste your time? You arent going to change their minds.

I mean really, you arent.. and they arent going to change yours.

Go blow bubbles instead.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: start25]
    #2009315 -

the CIA helped the ba'ath party, as it existed in the 1960's, come to power. at the time it was actually a pan-arab organization with the goal of arab unity. at one time, democracy was even one of its ideals. yes, during the 1960's, the CIA helped the ba'ath party overthrow the ruling dictator and establish a new government in iraq.

no one is refuting that. it is historically accurate and easily verifiable.

what is being refuted is US involvement in saddam hussein's rise to power through the ranks of the ba'ath orgranization. what sources you may have, showing evidence of CIA involvement in power shifts inside the ba'ath party itself, and hussein's climb to the top, i will be waiting to see.

psilokitten, i invite you as well to provide evidence of this.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2009448 -

Ive already provided evidence of this before. Can you not even remember the conversations you have been involved in?

Saddam didnt even join the baath party officially until 57.. he and a group tried to kill Quassim. ( he botched it there are UPI articles all over the place about this).. but this was sponsered by the CIA, they also made sure he didnt get his ass killed when the hit went wrong. They sheltered him and trained him in Cairo and Syria for 4 years. The man did not even have a highschool diploma, he was no more then a tony montana of iraqi baathist.. but the US educated him. And through the alliance the weapons flowed for the death of Quassim after which Saddam returned and went up the ranks..

The US took Saddam to the sidelines, under their wing. Just like Bin Laden, they educated him. If it was not for the CIA, he would not have had the support, the weapons or the alliances to push out Bakr. They were PIVIOTAL in his rise, the Baathists had chose their leader already, hell Saddam was jailed by the Baathists at various times.

You can live in your illusion that the CIA support and gifts did nothing for Saddam's rise. But Im tired of revisiting the same ole shit.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: PsiloKitten]
    #2009470 -

i don't remember talking about any of this with you before. all of what you just said is news to me. where's you get that info?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2009524 -

There are several articles about this published by the UPI

http://www.upi.com/history.htm

You should read the history of this media think tank.

http://www.rise4news.net/Saddam-CIA.html
This is a site that had the time to type one of these articles up or copy and paste it while it was still active. I dont know what the site is, what it is about.. what it's thoughts are. All I care about is the fact that it was the fastest article I could find, since I have already read it.

Oh, it was findable on a search engine. On the first page, nonetheless.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: lysergic]
    #2010198 -

Quote:
Since the liberals hate America,



AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAH

it's too sad for me to confront the reality that there are people in this country or even the world who have minds that work this simply, so instead of crying I'm just going to laugh it up because your entire mentality and concept of the world is so fucking small, there are probably 11 year olds out there with a more mature and sensical view of the world.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: ]
    #2010201 -

DOOOOOOO

I must be a liberal if I just said that!!!

Right?

If I don't agree with the trash you spout, I have to be a liberal, because otherwise your entire view of the world would crumble.

Except I'm not!

I realize that to someone like you, that makes about as much sense as 2+2 = 5, but that's the way it is.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: PsiloKitten]
    #2010239 -

The big picture is for observing, discussing, analyzing, things like that. I have little faith in linear approaches to "fixing" its problems. For me it's best kept in the peripherals while I focus on what is real to me--family, communities, relatively narrow-focussed domains. I can't say this should be a universal belief, but it's what is preventing me, with my exceptional swordsmanship and basic understanding of munitions, from enlisting in your army.

In Distrust of Movements

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: hongomon]
    #2010652 -

Damnit, and I really needed a ninja swordsman and a munitions expert.

Fuck a duck.

Maybe I can outsource the revolution.

But really, I agree with your idea about movements.

That's why I dont want to start a movement, I want to start a LLC and then Incorporate. Ill have to sit down and explain the whole thing some time.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: PsiloKitten]
    #2011165 -

PsiloKitten,

The links you posted were interesting.

-J


--------------------
There he goes, one of God's own prototypes--some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too wierd to live, too rare to die.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: havatampa]
    #2011957 -

Well. The stuff you are talking about is called oligarchy. It means a small group of people, yada, yada, yada.

The one who owns media, ownd a public opinion. Public opinion is misinterpreted as a public interest. Chomsky wrote a good part about Vietnam and two sides that where in the media. It is a clasical trick. You make two sides, all other sides are irelevant for the media, and all the public is taking a side. Others who do not do that shit, have no chance to be heard. Eventulally, they get a tard nick. And the public never gets the real thing.

And the stuff that is not in media is politically irelevant. Cause you have no chance to know what other people know. Maybe a couple of your frineds. But who are they? They are not majority. Majority is what media says majoritiy is. And the most funny stuff is cause it becomes majority. Because of the sheep state. Its a solid state, btw :laugh:.

Anyway, those who believe that they do decidion by voting, have to know that decidion making means need for being informed. That is imposible, cause media have the monopoly over information.

Second thing, those who think they are infromed, think again. What do you REALLY know? Why do you REALLY vote for those you vote for? Do you know what are the REAL problems of your nation?

Third thing. Even if you where informed, democracy means active principle of underastanding politics. Means you are political subject, not object. How many you do you feel that way? Anyway, political subject wont vote for less bad. The subject will vote for his own interest. Nobodies else.

All in all, we are going toward democracy. Every regime we pass, we are closer and closer. In the moment we get the REAL democracy, we will open the gate of the new era. 

Edited by Crobih (10/15/03 04:35 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Democracy is an illusion and the media is NOT LIBERAL. [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #27722890 -

Trying to get ten posts. How bout them cowboys


--------------------
Well he said, "Your minds infected," but I said, "You lack perspective." -Ben Caplin

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   Left Coast Kratom Premium Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Bulk Substrate

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Media: Liberal Bias or Conservative Bias? Baby_Hitler 1,047 10 02/25/03 05:31 AM
by Evolving
* The Rise of Illiberal Democracy FrenchSocialist 1,564 8 04/10/22 09:13 AM
by Brian Jones
* Liberal Bias In The Media
( 1 2 3 all )		 luvdemshrooms 4,385 41 07/30/03 01:52 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* What do you believe threatens our democracy the most?
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 beatnicknick 3,812 71 11/07/06 07:10 PM
by Economist
* When Democracy Failed: The warnings of history trendalM 1,230 15 03/19/04 03:59 PM
by Anonymous
* US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible"
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Edame 6,917 79 08/19/03 08:29 AM
by GernBlanston
* democracy is dead, and politics are a waste of time
( 1 2 all )		 Moonshoe 3,373 33 04/06/22 06:36 AM
by how.psilly.of.me
* France the enemy of democracy Los_Pepes 2,409 13 08/17/05 05:35 PM
by Divided_Sky

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,934 topic views. 2 members, 1 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.046 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 16 queries.