who are "they"

[lord_casek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXGz3dVi-vk

[lord_casek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAKFMceeOzM

[En Sabah Nur]

this thread is very specific. i always just considered "they" to be any white person.

[lord_casek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyG4B3AJvbM&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fprisonplanet%2Ecom%2Farticles%2FAugust2006%2F220806Carlyle%2Ehtm

[Stereotype V.0002]

you do know we have one of the most tightly controlled news medias in the world dont you?

 

When compared to Cuba, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Russia, North Korea?

[lord_casek]

not quite, but it's getting there stereotype.

see "OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD"

[TheOh]

When compared to Cuba, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Russia, North Korea?

 

no. but for a country that purports to be the beacon of freedom and democracy, and with 90% of media being controlled by 5 or 6 mega corporations, it is an absurd notion to believe that it is not one of the most tightly controlled. what makes it worse is that the establishment act like and many people believe that it is free and diverse.

[fermentor666]

Of course it's free and diverse. I mean, we can get our Paris Hilton news any time we want!

[Stereotype V.0002]

I guess it boils down to your definition of media, most of the cable news networks are much closer to professional wrestling than news. Its entertainment, thats what people want and thats why corporations emerge and control most of it (more for profit than some sort of nefarious plot but thats just my opinion). And there are still left leaning shows on cable news, like Olberman’s show or the the daily show. My point is we are able to search out other news sources from anywhere in the world if we want, through the internet or purchasing a satellite or whatever..as opposed to some countries where being in the possession of a typewriter can land you in jail for several years.

 

And casek, wasn’t that more around the cold war days than the present?

[lord_casek]

Time Life is owned and operated by CIA operatives. my guess is that it's still going on to this day.

[Stereotype V.0002]

Isn't Time Life a pop culture catalogue? How would the CIA gain from selling "Elvis's Greatest Hits" to middle America?

http://www.timelife.com/home.jsp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Life

[fermentor666]

Don't you get it? The CIA were the ones to have Elvis killed, thus deifying him. They're making millions off of those greatest hits compilations and collecter's dinnerware.

[lord_casek]

pop culture and psy-ops go along pretty damn well, don't you think?

make it popular to get an rfid chip, etc etc.

 

 

and have you ever heard of TIME magazine? there was LIFE magazine at one time, but

it's gone away now.

[fermentor666]

Time is completely biased and fluff, but I highly doubt that they are owned by the CIA and are an integral part of their plan for world dominance. LIFE still does photobooks, they were a great magazine in the first half of the century, amazing photojournalism. There shit is about money, not world dominance. The two are sometimes connected but I don't think so in this case. I mean, you could just start throwing out those accusations at anything: "CNN was owned by the CIA; The CIA owns News Corp, Inc and American Airlines as well as Airtran; The CIA owns the New York Times and Comedy Central, they're using reverse psychology with the Daily Show to desensitize dissenters to shocking ideas such as RFID chips and stolen elections."

 

It does get ridiculous at a certain point.

[lord_casek]

well, the CIA is involved heavily in media. see bushes 1.4 billion spending for media propaganda that leaked over to us? it was supposed to. not blaming it only on the bush regime,

the CIA has been involved in media for a long long time. about CNN.....yes, them too.

during operation mockingbird, they got alot of the spook fools in the media and just never bothered to get them out. they still get people in. and it's not about world domination, it's about keeping the machines gears greased and ready. you can't have any rusty cogs fucking the whole thing up. you've got to have disinformation, fake conspiracy theorists, news reports mirroring white house agenda (fox news <cough>)....

 

the world domination thing is a whole other ballgame. that is about very powerful, very rich, very maniacal people doing us in. that is the scary part.

oh yeah, and i agree with the thign about LIFE having great photojournalism spreads.

[fermentor666]

Those old issues have wonderful photos. My dentist's office has a few issues from the 30's-50's or so, amazing stuff.

[lord_casek]

do you have any of the old coffee table books? i recall one on vietnam that was astounding.

hard to believe that a still photo can conjure up so much emotion. war is hell.

[lord_casek]

i think i'm going to start going in to detail of the royal families soon.

i haven't researched them enough and feel like i should know more.

so should you. so bear with me.

[lord_casek]

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20060614/index.htm

[fermentor666]

Nah, all I have is the 2005 photo collection. They still take great photos, but nothing like the WW2 and Vietnam era.

[lord_casek]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=786048453686176230&q=terrorstorm

[lord_casek]

i watched "america: from freedom to fascism" today.

very insghtful on the whole scheme of things,

 

i suggest all of you see it a.s.a.p. and maybe all the things you

think i'm crazy for saying will start to make a little more sense.

[lord_casek]

Who actually owns the Federal Reserve Central Banks?

 

Rothschild Bank of London

Warburg Bank of Hamburg

Rothschild Bank of Berlin

Lehman Brothers of New York

Lazard Brothers of Paris

Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York

Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy

Goldman, Sachs of New York

Warburg Bank of Amsterdam

Chase Manhattan Bank of New York

[lord_casek]

 

olbermann keeps knocking them out of the park.

call 201-583-5000

ask to speak with mr. olbermann, you will be forwarded to a voice mail.

say, "this is for mr. olbermann" and then your message.

 

support this guy. msnbc needs to know that keith olbermann is an

asset to them.

[lord_casek]

How Hitler Became a Dictator

 

 

 

by Jacob G. Hornberger

 

 

 

Whenever U.S. officials wish to demonize someone, they inevitably compare him to Adolf Hitler. The message immediately resonates with people because everyone knows that Hitler was a brutal dictator.

 

But how many people know how Hitler actually became a dictator? My bet is, very few. I’d also bet that more than a few people would be surprised at how he pulled it off, especially given that after World War I Germany had become a democratic republic.

 

The story of how Hitler became a dictator is set forth in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, by William Shirer, on which this article is based.

 

In the presidential election held on March 13, 1932, there were four candidates: the incumbent, Field Marshall Paul von Hindenburg, Hitler, and two minor candidates, Ernst Thaelmann and Theodore Duesterberg. The results were:

 

Hindenburg 49.6 percent

Hitler 30.1 percent

Thaelmann 13.2 percent

Duesterberg 6.8 percent

 

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, almost 70 percent of the German people voted against Hitler, causing his supporter Joseph Goebbels, who would later become Hitler’s minister of propaganda, to lament in his journal, “We’re beaten; terrible outlook. Party circles badly depressed and dejected.”

 

Since Hindenberg had not received a majority of the vote, however, a runoff election had to be held among the top three vote-getters. On April 19, 1932, the runoff results were:

 

Hindenburg 53.0 percent

Hitler 36.8 percent

Thaelmann 10.2 percent

 

Thus, even though Hitler’s vote total had risen, he still had been decisively rejected by the German people.

 

On June 1, 1932, Hindenberg appointed Franz von Papen as chancellor of Germany, whom Shirer described as an “unexpected and ludicrous figure.” Papen immediately dissolved the Reichstag (the national congress) and called for new elections, the third legislative election in five months.

 

Hitler and his fellow members of the National Socialist (Nazi) Party, who were determined to bring down the republic and establish dictatorial rule in Germany, did everything they could to create chaos in the streets, including initiating political violence and murder. The situation got so bad that martial law was proclaimed in Berlin.

 

Even though Hitler had badly lost the presidential election, he was drawing ever-larger crowds during the congressional election. As Shirer points out,

 

In one day, July 27, he spoke to 60,000 persons in Brandenburg, to nearly as many in Potsdam, and that evening to 120,000 massed in the giant Grunewald Stadium in Berlin while outside an additional 100,000 heard his voice by loudspeaker.

 

Hitler’s rise to power

 

The July 31, 1932, election produced a major victory for Hitler’s National Socialist Party. The party won 230 seats in the Reichstag, making it Germany’s largest political party, but it still fell short of a majority in the 608-member body.

 

On the basis of that victory, Hitler demanded that President Hindenburg appoint him chancellor and place him in complete control of the state. Otto von Meissner, who worked for Hindenburg, later testified at Nuremberg,

 

Hindenburg replied that because of the tense situation he could not in good conscience risk transferring the power of government to a new party such as the National Socialists, which did not command a majority and which was intolerant, noisy and undisciplined.

 

Political deadlocks in the Reichstag soon brought a new election, this one in November 6, 1932. In that election, the Nazis lost two million votes and 34 seats. Thus, even though the National Socialist Party was still the largest political party, it had clearly lost ground among the voters.

 

Attempting to remedy the chaos and the deadlocks, Hindenburg fired Papen and appointed an army general named Kurt von Schleicher as the new German chancellor. Unable to secure a majority coalition in the Reichstag, however, Schleicher finally tendered his resignation to Hindenburg, 57 days after he had been appointed.

 

On January 30, 1933, President Hindenburg appointed Adolf Hitler chancellor of Germany. Although the National Socialists never captured more than 37 percent of the national vote, and even though they still held a minority of cabinet posts and fewer than 50 percent of the seats in the Reichstag, Hitler and the Nazis set out to consolidate their power. With Hitler as chancellor, that proved to be a fairly easy task.

The Reichstag fire

 

On February 27, Hitler was enjoying supper at the Goebbels home when the telephone rang with an emergency message: “The Reichstag is on fire!” Hitler and Goebbels rushed to the fire, where they encountered Hermann Goering, who would later become Hitler’s air minister. Goering was shouting at the top of his lungs,

 

This is the beginning of the Communist revolution! We must not wait a minute. We will show no mercy. Every Communist official must be shot, where he is found. Every Communist deputy must this very day be strung up.

 

The day after the fire, the Prussian government announced that it had found communist publications stating,

 

Government buildings, museums, mansions and essential plants were to be burned down... . Women and children were to be sent in front of terrorist groups.... The burning of the Reichstag was to be the signal for a bloody insurrection and civil war.... It has been ascertained that today was to have seen throughout Germany terrorist acts against individual persons, against private property, and against the life and limb of the peaceful population, and also the beginning of general civil war.

 

So how was Goering so certain that the fire had been set by communist terrorists? Arrested on the spot was a Dutch communist named Marinus van der Lubbe. Most historians now believe that van der Lubbe was actually duped by the Nazis into setting the fire and probably was even assisted by them, without his realizing it.

 

Why would Hitler and his associates turn a blind eye to an impending terrorist attack on their national congressional building or actually assist with such a horrific deed? Because they knew what government officials have known throughout history — that during extreme national emergencies, people are most scared and thus much more willing to surrender their liberties in return for “security.” And that’s exactly what happened during the Reichstag terrorist crisis.

Suspending civil liberties

 

The day after the fire, Hitler persuaded President Hindenburg to issue a decree entitled, “For the Protection of the People and the State.” Justified as a “defensive measure against Communist acts of violence endangering the state,” the decree suspended the constitutional guarantees pertaining to civil liberties:

 

Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications; and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.

 

Two weeks after the Reichstag fire, Hitler requested the Reichstag to temporarily delegate its powers to him so that he could adequately deal with the crisis. Denouncing opponents to his request, Hitler shouted, “Germany will be free, but not through you!” When the vote was taken, the result was 441 for and 84 against, giving Hitler the two-thirds majority he needed to suspend the German constitution. On March 23, 1933, what has gone down in German history as the “Enabling Act” made Hitler dictator of Germany, freed of all legislative and constitutional constraints.

The judiciary under Hitler

 

One of the most dramatic consequences was in the judicial arena. Shirer points out,

 

Under the Weimar Constitution judges were independent, subject only to the law, protected from arbitrary removal and bound at least in theory by Article 109 to safeguard equality before the law.

 

In fact, in the Reichstag terrorist case, while the court convicted van der Lubbe of the crime (who was executed), three other defendants, all communists, were acquitted, which infuriated Hitler and Goering. Within a month, the Nazis had transferred jurisdiction over treason cases from the Supreme Court to a new People’s Court, which, as Shirer points out,

 

soon became the most dreaded tribunal in the land. It consisted of two professional judges and five others chosen from among party officials, the S.S. and the armed forces, thus giving the latter a majority vote. There was no appeal from its decisions or sentences and usually its sessions were held in camera. Occasionally, however, for propaganda purposes when relatively light sentences were to be given, the foreign correspondents were invited to attend.

 

One of the Reichstag terrorist defendants, who had angered Goering during the trial with a severe cross-examination of Goering, did not benefit from his acquittal. Shirer explains:

 

The German communist leader was immediately taken into “protective custody,” where he remained until his death during the second war.

 

In addition to the People’s Court, which handled treason cases, the Nazis also set up the Special Court, which handled cases of political crimes or “insidious attacks against the government.” These courts

 

consisted of three judges, who invariably had to be trusted party members, without a jury. A Nazi prosecutor had the choice of bringing action in such cases before either an ordinary court or the Special Court, and invariably he chose the latter, for obvious reasons. Defense lawyers before this court, as before the Volksgerichtshof, had to be approved by Nazi officials. Sometimes even if they were approved they fared badly. Thus the lawyers who attempted to represent the widow of Dr. Klausener, the Catholic Action leader murdered in the Blood Purge, in her suit for damages against the State were whisked off to Sachsenhausen concentration camp, where they were kept until they formally withdrew the action.

 

Even lenient treatment by the Special Court was no guarantee for the defendant, however, as Pastor Martin Niemoeller discovered when he was acquitted of major political charges and sentenced to time served for minor charges. Leaving the courtroom, Niemoeller was taken into custody by the Gestapo and taken to a concentration camp.

 

The Nazis also implemented a legal concept called Schutzhaft or “protective custody” which enabled them to arrest and incarcerate people without charging them with a crime. As Shirer put it,

 

Protective custody did not protect a man from possible harm, as it did in more civilized countries. It punished him by putting him behind barbed wire.

 

On August 2, 1934, Hindenburg died, and the title of president was abolished. Hitler’s title became Führer and Reich Chancellor. Not surprisingly, he used the initial four-year “temporary” grant of emergency powers that had been given to him by the Enabling Act to consolidate his omnipotent control over the entire country.

Accepting the new order

 

Oddly enough, even though his dictatorship very quickly became complete, Hitler returned to the Reichstag every four years to renew the “temporary” delegation of emergency powers that it had given him to deal with the Reichstag-arson crisis. Needless to say, the Reichstag rubber-stamped each of his requests.

 

For their part, the German people quickly accepted the new order of things. Keep in mind that the average non-Jewish German was pretty much unaffected by the new laws and decrees. As long as a German citizen kept his head down, worked hard, took care of his family, sent his children to the public schools and the Hitler Youth organization, and, most important, didn’t involve himself in political dissent against the government, a visit by the Gestapo was very unlikely.

 

Keep in mind also that, while the Nazis established concentration camps in the 1930s, the number of inmates ranged in the thousands. It wouldn’t be until the 1940s that the death camps and the gas chambers that killed millions would be implemented. Describing how the average German adapted to the new order, Shirer writes,

 

The overwhelming majority of Germans did not seem to mind that their personal freedom had been taken away, that so much of culture had been destroyed and replaced with a mindless barbarism, or that their life and work had become regimented to a degree never before experienced even by a people accustomed for generations to a great deal of regimentation.... The Nazi terror in the early years affected the lives of relatively few Germans and a newly arrived observer was somewhat surprised to see that the people of this country did not seem to feel that they were being cowed.... On the contrary, they supported it with genuine enthusiasm. Somehow it imbued them with a new hope and a new confidence and an astonishing faith in the future of their country.

 

September 1, 2006

[lord_casek]

Blood borders

How a better Middle East would look

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899

[lord_casek]

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1970

 

HEARINGS

before a

 

SUBCOMMITTE OF THE

 

COMMITEE OF APPROPRIATIONS

 

HOUSE OF REPESENETIVES

 

NINETY-FIRST CONGRESS

 

first session

 

Subcommitte on Department of Defence Appropriations

 

GEORGE H. MAHON, Texas, Chairman

 

Robert L. Sikes, Florida Glenard P. Lipscomb, California

Jammie L. Whitten, Mississippi William E. Minshall, Ohio

George W. Andrews, Alabama John J. Rohdes, Arizona

Daniel J. Flood, Pennsylvania Glen R. Davis, Wisconsin

John M. Slack, West Virginia Joseph P. Addabbo, New York

Frank E. Evans, Colorado

 

PART 6

 

CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE

 

--------

PAGE 104

--------

 

MONDAY, JUNE 9, 1969

 

Witnesses

 

DR. D. M. MacArthur, Deputy Director (Research and Technology), D.D.R. @ E.

 

DR. B. Harris. Deputy Assistant Director (Chemical Technology), D.D.R. @ E.

 

DR. K.C. EMERSON, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of The Army, (R @ D.)

 

BRIG. GEN. W. S. Stone, JR, Director of Materiel Requirements Headquarters, U.S. Army Material Command

 

COL. J. J. Osik, Chief Systems and Requirements Division Directorate of CBR and Nuclear Operations, Office of The Assistant Chief of Staff For Force Development

 

SYNTHETIC BIOLOGICAL AGENTS

 

Dr. MacArthur: There are two things about the biological agent field I would like to mention. One is the possibility of technological suprise. Molecular biology is a feild that is advancing very rapidly, and eminant biologists believe that within a period of 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.

 

Mr. Sikes: Are you doing any work in that field?

 

Dr. MacArthur: We are not.

 

Mr. Sikes: Why not? Lack of money or lack of interest?

 

Dr. MacArthur: Certainly not lack of interest.

 

Mr. Sikes: Would you provide for our records information on what would be required, what the advantages of such a program would be, the time and the cost involved?

 

Dr. MacArthur: We will be very happy to. (The information follows:)

 

The dramatic progress being made in the field of molecular biology led us to investigate the revevence of tthis feild of science to biological warfare. A small group of experts considered this matter and provided the following observations:

 

1. All biological agents up to the present time are representatives of naturally occurring disease, and thus know by scientists, euther for offensive or defensive purposes.

 

2. Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic process upon which we depend to maintain our reletive freedom from infectious disease.

 

3. A research program to explor the feasibility of this could be completed in approximately 5 years at a total cost of $10 million.

 

4. It would be very difficult to establish such a program. Molecular bioligy is a relatively new science. There are not many highly competent scientists in the field. Almost all are in university laboratories, and they are generaly adequetly supported from sources other than DOD. However, it was consisered possible to initiate an adeguate program through the National Academy of Sciences- National Research Council (NAS-NRC).

 

The matter was discussed with the NAS-NRC, and tenative plans were made to initiate the program. However, decreasing funds in CB, growing critisism of the CB program, and our reluctance to involve the NAS-NRC in such a controversial endeavor have led us to postpone it for the past 2 years. It is a highly controversial issue, and there are many who believe such research should not be undertaken, lest it lead to yet another method of massive killing of large populations.

 

FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

 

A Higher Form of Killing- J. Paxman/ R. Harris

Gene Wars- Pillar/Yamamoto

Bad BLood-J. Jones

Acid Dreams-M.A.Lee/ B. Shlain

AIDS and the Doctors of Death- Dr. A. Cantwell

Project Paperclip- C. Lasby

Scientific American- June 1991, Retrovirus Infections

Scientific American- June 1991, Poxvirus Infections/ Immunizations

and Chemotheropy for Viral Infections

Current Medical Diagnosis @ Treatment- 1991 Viral Diseases, and

Infections with Slow

Viruses.(visna)

Basic @ Clinical Immunology- 1991- Human T-Cell Leukemea (Bovine)

[lord_casek]

Rice: World must not abandon Afghanistan

 

STELLARTON, Nova Scotia (AP) -- U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice acknowledged "difficult going" fighting a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan but insisted Tuesday that the world cannot afford to pull out now.

 

"We owe it to the people of Afghanistan to help them finish the job," Rice said as she thanked Canada for its role as a leader of NATO forces in the country.

 

Canada's combat role is unpopular at home, as is the U.S.-led war in Iraq. (Full story)

 

Afghanistan is struggling with the deadliest militant violence since U.S.-led forces toppled the hard-line Taliban regime five years ago. The United States blamed the Taliban for incubating al Qaeda as a terrorist force and for harboring Osama bin Laden after the September 11, 2001, attacks.

 

Canada has 2,200 troops in Afghanistan and has lost at least five soldiers there.

 

Opponents of the Afghanistan mission suggested Rice's visit to Canada was an attempt to persuade Canada to commit more forces. But Rice and her host, Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay, said she made no such request.

 

"I know it's very difficult going in Afghanistan," Rice said in an address to Conservative supporters and others in Stellarton, a small town north of Halifax.

 

MacKay invited Rice to accompany him to his home district where polite but cheeky protests greeted the pair.

 

"Condi, We Don't Want Your War Machine," read one sign hoisted along the road to a museum Rice and MacKay visited. Other signs made light of the tandem visit by the two unmarried diplomats. "Condi + Peter Make Love Not War," read one, decorated with a large, red heart.

 

During a news conference with MacKay, Rice said the United States left too soon after supporting Afghanistan in the 1980s civil war. "Afghanistan became a failed state" and a haven for terrorism, Rice said. "We all came to pay for that."

 

The deadliest fighting since the fall of the Taliban government has killed more than 500 people, mostly militants, since mid-May and confirmed fears of a Taliban military resurgence in southern Afghanistan, where NATO took command from a U.S.-led coalition on August 1.

 

Britain, Canada and the Netherlands have taken lead roles, pumping in around 8,000 troops and bringing NATO forces in Afghanistan to about 20,000. The alliance claims to have inflicted grave insurgent losses, including more than 250 in an offensive near Kandahar this month.

 

But at least 35 British and Canadian soldiers have died in a little more than a month, and militants show no signs of giving up.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/09/12/rice.canada.ap/index.html

 

Opium Harvest at Record Level in Afghanistan

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/03/world/asia/03afghan.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print

 

to log in to nytimes, use bugmenot.com

[lord_casek]

anderson cooper = cia

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2006/09/anderson-coopers-cia-secret.php

[lord_casek]

Palast Charged with Journalism in the First Degree

http://www.gregpalast.com/