← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · TexasAnarch

March of the Judeo-Gay White House, cha cha cha

Thread ID: 19143 | Posts: 11 | Started: 2005-07-14

Wayback Archive

TexasAnarch [OP]

2005-07-14 07:02 | User Profile

Why, its.. dat ol’…

WHITE HOUSE JUDEO-GAY FROG MARCH cha cha cha (CNN)

Talking Points

-The aggressive “hair splitting” defense of Karl Rove by the Republican National Convention is a continuation of the same process that led to the lying war on Iraq and to the London bombings.  For which they are to be held responsible for eternity.

-The attempt to bring the Bush White House criminals to justice over the Rove affair is being deliberately impeded by CNN.

 Item:  they give the pro-death Bush BTK boys unlimited TV air time to shove the RNC’s “talking points” to save Rove’s ass up everybody elses. (ex:  “he only referred to  Wilson’s “wife”, didn’t know Valerie Plame was her name, so how could he have violated the law against leading names?”)  When it comes to what “is” is – re-defining situations to fit their needs -- this should be regarded as is equivalent, in legal terms, to what blasphemy is for theologians.  “Copin’ a plea” by sign-use (“splitting hairs”).  The larger criminality is deceiving public opinion on threats from weapons of mass destruction to justify war).  The modus operandi, this time, is to sneak around  planting stories obtained from sources about personal facts to defeat truth-telling.

-John Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, was shown on CNN for about 1 minute, explaining four laws had been broken. This was yesterday, Tuesday.  Today – total return to the Rover boyz.  Only Nancy Pelosi, coming on like a Grande Dam  for once – is shown saying there will be Congressional hearings into the White House attempt to impede Fitsgerald’s investigation.

-The parent company of CNN is TIME-WARNER, another of whose offspring is TIME magazine, holder of emails proving their employee Matthew Cooper’s source on the Valerie Plame story was Karl Rove.  No one, but NO ONE in the mainstream media of mass communication is pointing out these connections (between the parent companand its bastard off-spring -- the ubiquitous channel news network, and the weekly mag), and the disinformation they have dumped into the minds of the public. It was CNN’s Novak who first broke the story using Valerie Plame’s name and identity; but male homowhore Jeff Guckert turned up with the same info about then, too (April ’03).  This connection, arousing images of butt banging in Lincoln’s bedroom as the common source, may explain the White House’s thunderous silence on the case.

Conclusion thus far: CNN/TIME-WARNER are skewing the facts to favor Republicans the way Bolton, Libby, Novak and up (to Rove), among many others, cooperated in skewing the facts to deceive the nation into war. Democracy, in whose name this president claims to be fighting in Iraq, was already stabbed in the back before the killing began. Opposition was silenced just like they are silencing John Dean now.

Bottom Line: This is conclusive evidence of ongoing massive intent on the part of these entities named to deceive the public about justification for war.

Now it has appeared, not astonishingly, that the use of homosexual degredation as prisoner torture of Arabs BECAUSE THEY HATE IT SO MUCH was part of was conceived in advance, and nust be regarded as part of the motive. Their regard for such acts as a religious abomination matches the general sense of many elsewhere, so it is necessary for them to do a double doo-wop negative ditty – stirring up homosexual hatred here, by shameless self-hating rightwing homosexual, then inflicting it onto Arab-Muslims. [url]http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1071042005[/url]

****/ -Judy! Judy! Judy! And the NEWSWEEK link.

The above scenario is consistent with:  -   decision is made inside TIME-WARNER, who owns Novak, who consults with Rove, to implicate NEWSWEEK, by supplying its competitor with an offer it couldnn’t refuse – scooping the nets by breaking news of  the actual Novak-Rove emails that has come into its possession.  Then, they both implicate their rival and define the cross-hairs of the issue in public discourse.  Sic’ em, Michael.  CNN gets to cover the ensuing political circus, wherever it goes.  The ensruing hate-driven dynamic is it’s to control, as well.  Friends, and I hope there are some, here is where Americans must either come together or part ways permanently..

Those who take the Republican/CNN position on this issue, even to discuss it in their terms (while nevertheless totally aware of what these are, as a didactic grammar), will not confront, will split-off, cavil, reverse themselves, deny, blame the accuser, as long as they control the communications. To accept their grammar of discourse is to accept the situation of them instructing you (“Didactic”: - to teach, instruct) on the subject matter, whatever it is, by grounding the tokens of its text to group-fantasies assumed to be shared, consciously or unconsciously. (The “WE = I = YOU” merger fantasy in which the sadist/killer identifies with the victim, “doing it to themselves”, or “making me kill you”. There are actual cases of mothers wielding knives over the heads of 3-year old brats, screaming “YOU WANT TO KILL ME, DON”T YOU!” – that is, reversing the adult-child situation by regressive identification, as if the projected child-in-themselves were threatening THEM with a knife…it is a certain psychotic state.)

Gabrielle

2005-07-14 11:21 | User Profile

OH PLEASE! Some people will believe anything! :closedeye

TexasAnarch

2005-07-14 17:38 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Gabrielle]OH PLEASE! Some people will believe anything! :closedeye[/QUOTE]

"Those who voted for Bush and Blair are responsible for the London slaughter.

They will also be responsible for American deaths if FBI director Mueller's "inevitable" prediction of suicide bombers here comes true."

How does it feel to be responsible for all those deaths?

Must make a person want to blame others for something bad. Right? The more disgusting, grotesque and criminal the better. Might make Bush voters look a little bit good by contrast?

But there is nothing more disgusting, grotesque and criminal than what Bush voters have brought ... by the way they are.

"Boy, you are going to carry that weight a long time." [I]The Beatles[/I]

Angeleyes

2005-07-15 04:46 | User Profile

[QUOTE=TexasAnarch]*** "Those who voted for Bush and Blair are responsible for the London slaughter.

They will also be responsible for American deaths if FBI director Mueller's "inevitable" prediction of suicide bombers here comes true."

You logic, as in the cause and effect chain, does not cut the mustard. No one can MAKE someone else do something. They have to choose to act in a particular mode. The folks who set off the bombs in London were not forced to do anything. They chose to blow up the trains. That was the form of action they chose for their political ends.

Bush chose to invade Iraq. He was not forced to. 9-11 did not force Bush to order the invasion of Iraq.

Neither caused the other. In both cases, an active choice was made when other alternatives were availble.

TexasAnarch

2005-07-15 07:14 | User Profile

To 'eyes. ? Go ahead .... soften it up for the killers. They see anybody who doesn't hate them as weak anyway.

Causes aren't 'forces' and John Calvin already had the answer to what seems to be bothering you. Free choice doesn't mean there aren't causes, nor vice versa. But how can that possibly apply here? No one made anybody vote for Bush, its just the way they are -- pathological liars and psychotic killers. If you don't defend yourself they will kill you. And lie about it. Its what they are about.

You put GOPUSSY BUSH in the White House, you start getting people killed. Its only a matter of time before the maggots start showing up. You slaughter, you get slaughtered, that's how it works, which is one reason not to do it unless you want to die. When there is a war there are two sides, not just one, and the aother side will get its say sooner or later because people won't take being killed indefinitely without fighting back, unless they are american wimpshitz who, as far as one can tell, will take anything, so deserve whatever they get. It looks like they would have some care for others, though, as a matter of mere humanity -- like Londoners -- even if they don't care how many they kill here.

It's a stretch of common sense -- no, more than a stretch, it's actual idiocy -- to think that London was destined by Almighty God to get their tubes blasted anyway whether Britain helped Bush slaughter Iraqi's or not. But that is what follows from saying peole who voted for Bush didn't cause the deaths.

Try to think in terms of causes, not effects.

il ragno

2005-07-15 08:19 | User Profile

It was the Cath-o-Jews, obviously.

DAMN YOU, CATH-O-JEWS!!

Angeleyes

2005-07-15 15:41 | User Profile

Anarch:

Please explain to me your take on the attacks by Al Qaeda, and other Islamacists, from 1993-2002, before Iraq was invaded. Who made them do that? If you want to posit the attack on London as being similar to Madrid, a counterattack via assymetrical means, there is considerable merit to that reasoning. The act itself still requires a choice from among a variety of options.

Also, GW Bush entered the White House in 2000. I have yet to see compelling proof that the 9-11 attacks were inflicted by other than an external agency. The method of terrorist style attacks on Westerners goes back to 1972 and Munich. So, terrorism in a general sense is not caused by GW Bush.

If you assert that it is a reaction to Zionism, a reaction to the existence of the State of Israel and its support is various western capitals, we will certainly agree. It is still a chosen course of action, chosen because conventional means, war, attack to re occupy a territory deemed occupied by the Jewish invaders, failed three times. 1967, being a pre emptive strike, was a fourth failure of invasion, but since the Israelis stole a march on their opponents, is often characterized as defense versus Israeli aggression.

[QUOTE=TexasAnarch]To 'eyes. ? Go ahead .... soften it up for the killers. They see anybody who doesn't hate them as weak anyway. [/QUOTE]You are probably right about that. Arrogance seems to be their strong suit.

TexasAnarch

2005-07-16 01:07 | User Profile

Any attack on the U.S. and its interests by Islam after Bush1's war on Saddam Hussein is justified, which is why the common sense of Oklahomans after the Murrah Federal building bombing said it was an Iraqi -- and even had a picture. Remember John Doe #2? The 'authorities' had to blame it on a single white guy acting in crazed revenge for the slaughter at Waco, no doubt setting him up to do it. Pins down the patriotic militias and silences sympathy for Koresh at the same time.

Same for l993 WTCI bombing. Inside help on all these.

Bin Laden told Bush not to put military bases and machines on the Saudi peninsula, it was sacred to Muslims like himself. If you attack soneone else's religion leaving them no way to fight back, terrorism is what you should expect. Its what you deserve for doing it.

Angeleyes

2005-07-18 15:01 | User Profile

The King of Saudi Arabia, you will note, went along with Americans being stationed in Saudi. Osama disagreed. King of Saudi is not a Jew. :cool: I was pleased to see the past few years trend of getting the American foot print in Saudi reduced. It needs to be zero. I suspect that the average Achmed on the street agreed with Osama on that score, and it took the King a few bombs and other bad things to get the message.

The Murrah Building bombing: I hear rumors of an alleged Arab connection. I find it hard to believe, given how long McVeigh was alive afterwards, Nichols as well, and the opportunities to exploit connections. Sounds like a red herring to me.

Or, is the suggestion that Zionist operatives, masquerading as Arabs, were involved? The 93 WTC is pretty much rag heads.

[QUOTE=TexasAnarch]Any attack on the U.S. and its interests by Islam after Bush1's war on Saddam Hussein is justified, which is why the common sense of Oklahomans after the Murrah Federal building bombing said it was an Iraqi -- and even had a picture. Remember John Doe #2? The 'authorities' had to blame it on a single white guy acting in crazed revenge for the slaughter at Waco, no doubt setting him up to do it. Pins down the patriotic militias and silences sympathy for Koresh at the same time.

Same for l993 WTCI bombing. Inside help on all these.

Bin Laden told Bush not to put military bases and machines on the Saudi peninsula, it was sacred to Muslims like himself. If you attack soneone else's religion leaving them no way to fight back, terrorism is what you should expect. Its what you deserve for doing it.[/QUOTE]

TexasAnarch

2005-07-18 18:08 | User Profile

Well, ..on OKC...Did you happen to read "The Ok.C. Bomb ing and the Politics of Terror" (Media By-pass press '98-- can't locate my copy dammit)? Excellect! -- my take comes mostly from that.

He connects '93 WTC as well as Murrah blasts to inside job ... finds same 'fingerprints' in downing of Pan AM over Lockerbie, Scotland.

"Zionist operatives masquereding as Arabs..."? --not in '95, though the JDL or one of those orgs. was shown in the book to have had advance warning, by printing a day ahead something only known by insiders... There was a settlement of Iraqi's in NE Oklahoma by Bush1 after GW1, and many, including local law enforcement, were quoted as automatically assuming it was Iraq revenge AND ACCEPTING IT AS COMMON SENSE THAT THEY WOULD.

The anthrax poisoning of liberal Sentaors Leahy and Daschle surely fits the quoted description.

The FBI ought to be excluded from every serious investigation of terrorism, as maybe other countries are catching on. Who knows how many well-dressed, gun-tottin' fine looking 'Mark's are getting Felt up inside there now as we speak. Anything they say is to be assumed a lie, maybe intra-agency warfare, as tbf documents in his important MOCKINGBIRD post under "politics" here (hinting he knows lots more than stuff).. I can't think the CIA was pleased by R.P. Hansson's finguring their men inside Russia, any more than they were Rove doing so to Plame/Wilson.

I accept what you said about the Saudi's.

Angeleyes

2005-07-18 22:30 | User Profile

[QUOTE=TexasAnarch]Well, ..on OKC...Did you happen to read "The Ok.C. Bomb ing and the Politics of Terror" (Media By-pass press '98-- can't locate my copy dammit)? Excellect! -- my take comes mostly from that. [/QUOTE] Thanks for the ref. Something to read on the plane next week. Will check local book stores. :smoke: