← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · TexasAnarch

BOLTON = ZIONAZI (neocon) POISON

Thread ID: 18258 | Posts: 4 | Started: 2005-05-15

Wayback Archive

TexasAnarch [OP]

2005-05-15 22:52 | User Profile

I have just linked this to the [url]http://www.danieldrezner.com/blog/[/url] website, asking permission to lay out the full case here. It is of the final importance, and I am acting from sense of public duty, taking responsibility for what it has been given to me to know, by research available to all, but requiring sustained focus.

[B]Bolton = Zionazi (neocon) Poison [/B] (A blog/essay demonstrating how those responsible for the Iraq war have pushed Bolton because (1) he is the ‘good-for the-Jews’ go-to guy; and (2) he has the crazy-twisted killer mentality required to save the U.S../Israel situation from charges of high-crimes -- including making false statements to the U.N. General Assembly to justify war. Written over a three-day period.)

[B]His Tough Guy act …
    --- now empowered by other tough guy ‘Repubes’  (‘a man Trump himself would fire…!’ oy vey)

        --- dedicated by James Baker III and Ed Meese to the service of Zionnuts (worse than Catholic Nazis)

        --- associated with hyping, if not instigating, fake terror threats to justify war …..

CANNOT REPRESENT THE U.S. IN THE UN[/B]

1. [B]BOLTON’S APPOINTMENT WOULD HEIGHTEN NATIONAL INSECURITY[/B] illustrated by coincidence by what happened in Washington D.C. as the Senate sub-committee prepared to vote .

   The New York Times’ editors certify that “senate committee hearings exhaustively document” John Bolton’s [I]“habit of trying to force intelligence analysts to conform to his ideological preconceptions and then trying to punish them when they refuse to comply[/I]” (May 13). However, rather than spelling out the implications of having someone with these habits addressing the UN for the U.S., the editors segue to an even more eye-popping admission. “[I]That Mr. Bolton did not succeed in taking revenge is no comfort – only a sign that he did not wield as much power as other officials who did manage to skew intelligence reports to suit an ideological agenda[/I].” In other words, they are stipulating “we know that others, as well as himself, fixed intelligence to fit pre-determined policy; he got pinched and they didn’t only because he lacked their power to cover up.”

   These are amazing admissions. The fact that they are not taken to add up to a thunderous disqualification, of him and them as well, indicates confusion, cowardice, cronyism or, at worst, conspiracy. :

[B] 2. THE SPECIFIC THREAT RAISED WOULD BE BIO-CHEMICAL (POISON) ATTACK[/B] Several circumstances link Bolton to heightening threat of bio-chemical -- generically referred to here as poison – attack.

First,  Wednesday, as the Senate sub-committee on foreign relations was set to vote next day, a stray plane wandered accidentally, it was said, into Washington D.C. airspace, with federal buildings clamorously evacuated.  Michael Chertoff, newly appointed head of Homelad Security appeared in charge of  national security (the President’s phone was unplugged, it was announded.)  Asked why the disruptive and clamorous evacuation was order if it was determined early on the tiny Cessna airplane was merely off course, a spokesman replied it was a post 911 precaution in case it was carrying biological or chemical weapons, which took time to determine.

One kind of data Bolton is certified to have skewed was poison threats by Cuba. This shows willingness to act with the paranoids – arming delusionally arming enemies in order to defend heroically against them. Fingers like his on the trigger Wednesday might well cause massive irreparable damage.

In connection with the disastrous Cuba Bay of Pigs fiasco, it has just come to light that the CIA had, in fact, drawn up a 911- type scenario to justify attacking.

For those unfamiliar with it, here is an example of a pre-9/11 plan to create fake terrorist attacks and use them as a pretext for war. These plans from 1962 had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff but, fortunately, were rejected by the Kennedy administration. You can see the actual memo relating to this proposed operation here: [url]http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/11_20_01_northwoods.pdf[/url]

Matt Everett.

U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba Book: U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba By David Ruppe Sep. 30, 2004 - In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba..

***/ The fact that such a criminal enormity as this could occur, as a kind of thinking, or mentality, staggering any sane imagination. But the post-911 anthrax attack in 2001 offers almost certain proof that it has been carried out. The deadly weaponized anthrax sent through the mailto liberal Senators Leahy and Daschle was made in the U.S.A. – Ames, Iowa, to be exact, though the printed letters purported the target to be America and Israel, enemies of “Allah”, as if the sender were a Muslim Islamic poison terrorist. This impression has been allowed to persist, Richard Perle even going so far as to claim Iraq could not be ruled out as the source after it was known differently. This fits the pattern of creating a false terror attack, then using it as a pretext for war. In this case, by inference from the faked motive, the attacker would be someone dedicated to linking U.S. and Israel so socio- psychopathically as to arrogate to themselves the right to kill others, for “a larger goal”.

This is easily recognized as the last step in a psychological process deteriorating to pure psychosis. Such a mentality has gone beyond the point of being able to stop itself, but must interpret every attempt to confront it as “evil”, “treason”, proceeding from “terrorist enemy”. They must bully or cajole whoever is reluctant to go along – or else provoke them to attack, providing them with an excuse to kill. And that is how they think to get by; indeed, how they MUST think to get by, now, having come so far and put all their historical chips in the pot.

[B]3. BOLTON’S APPOINTMENET WOULD GREATLY HEIGHTEN LOATHING AND HATRED OF AMERICA[/B] , Already raging to the boiling point of convulsively violent phobia among many Islamic/Arabic popultions, for perceived religious desecrations. Unconvincingly denied, after Abu Ghraib (which would surely have been covered up, also, if the torturers had had the power.)*

A significant amount of increased hatred would come from his linking America with Zionism.

James Baker III and Ed Meese III, in a New York Times op-ed article, refer to Bolton’s success in getting the UN General Assembly to reverse its “Zionism was a form of racism” dictum as “the clear articulation of the philosophical position of the United States.” (May 11. ’05)

[B]TO THE CONTRARY !! BE IT KNOWN FROM THENCEFORTH FORWARD

THAT: NO SUCH THING AS “THE PHILOSOPHICAL POSITION OF THE UNITED STATES” RELATING TO ZIONISM, OR FOREIGN POLICIES TOWARD ZIONIST ISRAEL EXISTS.

THAT: IF THERE WERE, IT WOULD BE THE OPPOSITE OF THEIR POSITION, IF RATIONAL (see below)

THAT: THE FACT THAT BAKER AND MEESE PUBLICALY STIPULATE TO THIS FALSEHOOD, SENDS A SIGNAL THAT BOLTON WILL PRESS POLICY BASED ON THIS LOATHSOM PHILOSOPHICAL ABSURDITY ON THE UN.[/B]

And THAT is unacceptable. In fact, since it amounts to hi-jacking the government, turning its offices over to the use of a foreign power and ideology, it is grounds for charging all who are connected with his promotion with high treason.

The alternative, now that what and who he represents has become known, is to accept as an accomplished fact a situation was, and is, knowingly devised to manipulate, deceive, contradict every value bred into the America spirit; and intimidate with threats of violence whoever speaks the truth. .

. (Note: the same day Baker and Meese published their stipulation, AP writer Barry Scheid coincidentally used the phrase “philosophical underpinning of Israel” in referring to Zionism. So the same term turns up, coincidentally, used “philosophically” twice, once by powerful Republican politicians; again, in news reports”.)

***/
[B]THIS INCREASES LOATHING BECAUSE IT LINKS AMERICA, OTHERWISE UNENCUMBERED, WITH THE HATE-PROVOKING SHADOW OF ZIONIST SUPREMACY. .. RECOZNIZING A GROUP AS ‘GOD’S CHOSEN PEOPLE’ . [/B]

It does not matter that defenders of Zionism deny such intent. Supremacy is its effect. For those overwhelming multitudes who do not regard the Bible as sacred text, and resent the conceit of its thoroughly refuted historical conceits and apportionments…. (For example, the story that mankind descended from “Adam and Eve”, Eve being created from Adam’s rib; also featuring a talking snake who brings sin. Side note: Jung cites an alchemical legend that Adam escaped from E.DIN with a mall amount of the metallic element, Antinomy, a super-blackening agent, used by the Chinese, also, for vivid dies.) … this is an INTOLERABLE PROVOCATION. What it means, that this intolerable. provocative affront to other’s religion should be represented as a “philosophical” branmd is an act of self-violation, taking onto itself the implacable hatred, loathing, outrage the very word “Zionism” evokes among many.

1. [B] IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR BOLTON TO REPRESENT AMERICA[/B].

[I]The impossibility is logical, based on the principle of non-self-contradiction as a condition of truth. [/I] It is impossible for John Bolton to represent America for three reasons: a. Zionism assumes a reality incompatible with that which bonds American citizens to each other; it cannot, therefore, represent any point of unity between them. b. The people are the final source of authority in America; however, they have not been informed that these manipulations are taking place, and must not be presumed to approve what is wafted under their noses, from thence into accepted common usage. He cannot represent America because it cannot be said that the people of American employ him, he works for other interests. c. When (or if) he sits behind a desk marked “Unites States”, that will be a lie, doubled on itself. Like a living sight-gag, a walking self-contradictory Janus anus, a bastard, part human/part animal creature, he will show what it is “to be”, for others, precisely what the one showing is not. The American in Reverse.

Ponce

2005-05-16 02:03 | User Profile

Incredible but true, the US are sending reps to the big AIPAC meeting on May 23 and Condi Rice will be there.

Those people keep on kicking us in the balls and the US keeps on saying "thank you oh master"........there is sucker being born every minute but does the U S has to be one all the time?

TexasAnarch

2005-05-16 05:45 | User Profile

Hey Ponce. Did you get that side-bar on Cuba? I'm sure you knew, but there it is again. The chips are down on this one. Here is a Times Watch continuation.

[B]P.S. COMPLICITY OF THE NEW YORK TIMES[/B] In actions constituting high crimes against America, humanity, being itself.

Summary of its behavior in the Bolton matter, 5.10-14. (Tuesday-Saturday)

[I]Peculiar happenings, yeah mightily over thar where once, ‘twas said, was kept an old grey mare [/I] . 5.10 [B]Tuesday [/B] “No.2 at State Dept. Was Said To Put Restrictions on Bolton” – insubordinate to Powell’s diplomatic style; the content is not mentioned. That concerned the pro-war hype, leading to false statements made to the UN about threats from weapons of mass destruction.
5.11 – [B]Wednesday[/B] – “[B]The UN needs John Bolton”, [/B] Baker & Meese; underpaged, with dark-light double heads, one facing left, the other right, by “[B]The Tipping Point[/B]” – comparing John Bolton’s temperament to criminal’s (“serial abuser”, one co-worker had called him); “Felon of diplomat? It’s all in the mix” says the article. In effect, saying: people like that can be OK; they’ll “get the job done”.
5.12 – [B]Thursday[/B] Sure enough “[B]A Turning Tide for Bolton[/B]" shows up over the name of neocon David Brooks. Looks like the point tipped. In their minds. (They are running a ringer; pulling a fast one – we are catching them in the act)

Sure enough, the Senate sub-committee reports out a party-line split vote, Voinovich whinning and all.  If the issue of U.S.-Israel policy came up at all, and Bolton’s suitability to stand for America came up at all, it wasn’t reported.  In other words, the Zionazis slud into third base (at bat: Rice, Negroponte, Chertoff, Gonzales, Rove, Gukert, Finklestein (Arthur), Shiavo, ….Curveball, BizzaroWelt,

5.13 -- [B]Friday[/B] – Time for the editorial touch, partly quoted above. Obliged to tacitly admit what they all deserve the death penalty for doing – faking terror threats to justify making war – heh heh heh – and noting “the only reason that Mr. Bolton did not succeed in taking revenge” against those who crossed him is because he lacked the power of associates “who did manage to skew intelligence reports to suit” Zionist interests, announced the previous day by none other than the top Repube Dogs in the maket place 5.14 OP-ED: ‘CAN DO’ -- BIG HORSHOE pictured.

Sunday WEEK IN REVIEW TOPPED ALL! – Caution ! – THE FOLLOWING IS ONLY FOR HARD-CORE CONSPIRACY BUFFS. OTHERS ADVISED FURTHER READING RUNS RISK TO YOUR SANITY. THE CHIPS ARE DOWN

They’ve shoved “all in” in the high stakes Texas Hold ‘Em war crimes trials war. Americans - as in, True Americans .. must be on the side of the UN that opposes John Bolton and everything – everything --he stands for.

5.15 – New York Times guest columnist David Greenberg (“Blogging as Slogging” wk 5) provides a keyword tip to “a popular libertarian-conservative blog DanielDrezner.com. for “aggressive bloggers reporting on a pet issue (he’s got me down) “…those who scavage the internet for every shard of information on a hot topic, like John R. Bolton’s chances of becoming ambassador to the United Nations or /stop/ Tom DeLay /dueling hatebrots, that’s high style for high crime these days/.

(I thought to myself, “Self?... this is odd”.)

Quickly punching up DanielDrezner.com, got

[url]http://www.danieldrezner.com/blog/[/url] scrolling down ….

BOLTON BULLETIN My computer crashed while I was pecking out a long piece on Bolton, so I'll take that as a sign and keep this short. I have written a top 10 list of reasons I do not believe Bolton should be confirmed (drafted in early April, before the revelations of intimidation of intelligence analysts) as well as a set of 10 things I believe are at stake in this fight. Tonight I am going to address just one point: the claim that Bolton is the right man because the UN needs reform. The evidence most often pointed to in support of this contention relates to Bolton's role in securing the repeal of the UN's notorious Zionism is Racism resolution in 2001. I do not minimize that achievement for a moment. It was extremely tough to accomplish and, as I address in a forthcoming article for Dissent magazine (out this summer), addressing Israel's situation at the UN is a key part of bringing the organization into the twenty-first century. */

Plus – posted on his site between 11:30 -12:40 am (as if expecting a torrent of hits after the Times reference; well, he got some from me)

*HELLO, BEMUSED NEW YORK TIMES READERS I'd like to thank Suzanne Nossel and David Greeberg for holding down the fort here at danieldrezner.com while I was away at my brother's wedding. Contrary to David's fears, their tag-team of insightful and provocative posts kept my traffic levels at very respectable levels. Furthermore, I see that David made the most of his experience by writing about his experience in the New York Times. "You should have a blog." Apparently I push my opinions on my friends rather aggressively, because I often hear this remark. Last week, I had my chance. My wife and I agreed to be "guest bloggers" - the online equivalent of what David Brenner used to do for Johnny Carson - for Dan Drezner, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, who runs a popular libertarian-conservative blog, DanielDrezner.com. How hard could blogging be? You roll out of bed, turn on your computer, scan the headlines, think up some clever analysis while brushing your teeth, type it onto your site and you're off. But as I discovered, blogging is no longer for amateurs or the faint of heart. Blogging - if it's done well - has evolved into an all-consuming art...."""""" **/ NOT JUST THAT – IT CREATES A NEW TECHNOLOGICAL PHENOMENON: AN INSTANT FEED-BACK FORENSIC FEED-BACK LOOP: LOOK WHAT YOU’VE DONE…

This whole thing – It’s out of Dan Brown.  But even Opus Dei – especially Opus Dei, if it controlled Hanssen –cannot steer this one. The Janus anuses are everywhere visible now.  All that is needed is a sustained shining search light, clearly and distinctly marked “forever”.

***/ Final Note: “Zionazi” as term of ab/use. –It is the conjunction of abomination-opposites at work in post WWII history (Jung), reviving stories of secret collaboration between Hertzl and Hitler. –The Archetypal configuration is the two-faced Janus (cf. the two light-dark, left-right facing heads in NYTimes 5.11 Op ED): In Dan Brown’s Demons and Angels, it is the Pope’s camerlengo, who winds up misguidedly killing him to save the Church –bride of Christ; a Freudian theme). Turns out the one he kills is not just his spiritual, but also his biological Father. The conception he found out about, unconnected to himself, was an artificial insemination which he took to be carnal knowledge, an unforgivable stain on Her honor. A pure defender of the faith since youth, he is pinned on the horns of a dilemma: If he remains true to his Father, he is complicit in defiling the Church (=mother and bride); If faithful to Her, he must kill the Father. The flock, seeing his passion, think he is filled with saintly spirit. Those who know the story see it as the flaming out – literally – of psychosis. He has been behind both sides, setting up the murder of not only the Pope but four leading cardinals, while directing the law enforces chasing them. Like Rolo Tomasi in LA Confidential. The Janus priest: one face brightened with light/life; the other showing hideous death.

The third and clinching reason “ZIONAZIS” names those supporting Bolton is the history of what happened to the German people who fell victim to the unconscious group-fantasy of Jews as poisoning their racial blood.  It is a staple idea of a large segment of informed psychohistorical opinion that this was the driving force of the psychosis:  the compulsion to cleanse Aryan blood of threat of Semitic corruption, at two levels:  to prevent intermarrying, and to purge national communications of alien influence, especially Hebrew.

The Reichstag fire made Hitler a Janus. Beyond that, he and his psychosis were identical all the way through.

The Bolton Neocon Nazis, however, never having enjoyed the credibility and rapport Hitler had with the German people with Americans, have been Januses from the git go. It is Bolton, friend of Zion, who represents toward enemies today the same cruelty Nazis directed against the Jews. Zionist + Nazi = ZIONAZI. Poison in the bloodstream of American communication.

Now, to treat Bolton as a “philosophical link”, is to turn a two-headed psychotic monster loose on the world with the name “America” forged on it.

Author: TexasAnarch Original Dissent Forums

edward gibbon

2005-05-16 17:53 | User Profile

[url]http://slate.msn.com/id/2117827/[/url] John Bolton – War hawk John Bolton, Wimp A Vietnam hawk who remained stateside. By Timothy Noah Posted Friday, April 29, 2005, at 6:01 PM PT [QUOTE]Scratch a saber-rattler, find a war wimp. You can just about set your watch by it, can't you? So it's entirely unsurprising to read the following about John Bolton, Yale '70, in the Yale Daily News:

Though Bolton supported the Vietnam War, he declined to enter combat duty, instead enlisting in the National Guard and attending law school after his 1970 graduation. "I confess I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy," Bolton wrote of his decision in the 25th reunion book. "I considered the war in Vietnam already lost."[/QUOTE]Much like his boss: [QUOTE]"I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada," [George W.] Bush explained to The Dallas Morning News back in 1990. "So I chose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanes."

[url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4271520/site/newsweek/[/url][/QUOTE]Have your seen your children lately?