Open Discussion

[James H. Fetzer]

Sandy has suggested that we have a space for open discussion of topics that may be off-topic. That's fine with me. Let's see if the "Discussion" option will serve that purpose. Please give it a shot. Jim

[sandy rose]

search you tube North Tower Exploding,

 

    if you are not already familiar with.   i have issyoos with archies

and engies for plane related biaseees, but this is still good video

to show the uh, what they did thing.  be hard for a plane to make THAT.

[Mark E. Smith]

 

I'm watching the Toronto Hearings on 9/11 streaming live online:

 

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/thetorontohearings#utm_campaign=t.co&...

[Shallel Octavia]

I don't listen to Punnet, but Russ Baker was sure no relief. This show was chock full of misinfo and disinfo; I am hardly surprised. Horrible. Who the hell is Wells? 

Thoth II said:

I don't know about youall but I am about ready to OD on the MSM 911 and JFK lineups this weekend, it has been absolutely unrelenting from history channel to national geographic channel to military history channel, unbelievably airing a Gary Mack piece of deception (when Humes/Boswell were involved) and now coast to coast is in on the act:

 

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/

 

I think Punnett with not give 911 truth a fair shake but Wells might relieve our suffering by interviewing Russ Baker, generally a good journalist, an honest and thorough one.  

 

I keep getting astounded how low, lowlife this country's propaganda machinery has become, how robotlike its people.  I would contend Joseph Goebbels and NAZI germany did not even reach these operatic heights, they only were in business 12 years, this machine has been in business since after WWII.  I guess Russ Baker will be the only relief other than this website for now.  

[Thoth II]

Shallel,

 

I did not hear the Russ Baker interview, but it doesn't surprise me.  He is a very careful researcher, and never goes out on the slightest limb, so he is maybe too careful.  I do believe he did a good book about the Bush involvement in JFK though.  

 

Terrible, Coast to coast has gone down the same rathole as the rest of the MSM, horrible from a show purported to be "thinking outside the box", they are not in any box except the monotonous MSM line.

 

John Wells is an occassional coast to coast host, and I've actually heard him say some pretty good things in the past, maybe they got to him too now.

[Shallel Octavia]

You can listen here (have barf bags ready):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppYE3-Sl1XU

Theme: Blame Saudi Arabia

Favorite quote: (John Wells), "I've made cell phone calls from planes."

actually one or two callers get through with some zingers, or should I say ziongers...

[Thoth II]

A typical example of how the establishment controls intellectual thought in the country can be viewed at CPAN BookTV marathon coverage of the national book festival live from our nation's capitol mall.  All the authors spout the establishment views, and even one young author, Sarah Vowell gave a good account of Hawaii's history, but very standard, non-questioning of European/USA imperialism.  Peter Slen is the intrepid guide through the weekend, I've met him and like him, but he is the standard suit spouting the party line.

[Jeannon Kralj]

 

I have not had cable or watched TV at home for about one full year.  I certainly do not miss it at all and in many ways, my life is much better.  I remember seeing a show on Book TV by Dr. Jack Cashill who wrote "Deconstructing Obama" that was pretty good, but for the most part, as you say, BookTV is the standard suit spouting the party line.

 

Historians generally tow the party line.  It was all a big lie.  I have a lot of respect for Dr. Dennis Cuddy who has a Ph.D. in history but even he, who purports to explain how the plan for a "new world order" has always been the plan of the major players, the "power elite", throughout USA history never elaborates on "European / USA imperialism" as such and certainly never mentions anything remotely related to the concept of "Zionism." and the role it may play.

 

We used to start reading our History assignment in college dorm as a good way to fall asleep fast.

[sandy rose]

egads, does it look like the yoo ess of aye is getting ready to pull

the Iran card?   the signs seem familiar, try to get the population

enraged about some made up terror threat   (far's i'm concerned, the

only terrorists i know are in our current or former gummint administration)

seems creepily familiar....uggg.  made up terrorists, looming doom, yikes,

trying to unite the world in our quest to conquer it..............................um,

what's wrong with this picture??

       answer, unfortunately, everything.    oh, is there no escape...?
      for those of us in the yoo ess of aye, isn't it constantly nauseating, to

live in a cuntry that would kill anyone if it would suit their purposes,     to

spend billions of dollars on constant war, war, war, even as our schools

don't have enough munny to operate properly, our people get kicked out

onto the streets when they lose their jobs, which have been shipped off

to a cheaper country..... 

     power i say to the people who are getting out there on the streets bitching

about our corporate whores....    that seems to be a growing trend and i like it!

 

      and still the whores in this purely demented gummint cover up the truth

about 9/11, play the stupid card in every instance,.... and oh gawrsh, perish the

thought of a nuther repulsican as preddidint.   haven't we had enough horror already?

 

        yikes.  good thing we have each other.  sticking together is good.  love, sandy

 

ps i tried to copy and paste a thing about Iran from clg, but it wouldn't let me, but

it's the same old crap, different country.  red flags all the way. 

 

      

 

 

 

[Jeannon Kralj]

Bomb bomb bomb Iran is something that is defintiely on the agenda of "the establishment."  Many of the big news items/discussions now being thrown at us are meant to distract us from something and keep us busy "dialoging" about the "issues" that they have served up to us.

The Red Team / Blue Team garbage is finally being shed light on and the jig is up for that scam.

 

The OWS people and the End the Fed protestors are beginning to see that they are on the same team because Wall Street IS the Fed and the Fed is the gummit.

 

We just need to shine the light, through various means - forums, steet activism - all of those - on this beast that intends to take down economies and kill off most people on the planet.

 

Speaking truth whereever and whenever you can, no matter what the risk or cost, is something the "universe" smiles upon and each of us that do that will experience light and joy in their personal lives for having done so.

[sandy rose]

yes, thank you, you have said true stuff. 

 

     i like to see war protesters. i like to see corporate greed protesters,

man, are we screwed.  i mean............................BOY, would we think

we were screwed if we,....um.....uh......drrrr.........man, are we screwed.

tho, yeah, if all the people who were pissed and fed up and disgusted

and repulsed came together as one big boisterous all over the world group,

.................................well, we don't have as much munny as they.  or

power.  or guns or warplanes or unlimited powers, but still as a people we

are many and all over the freakin world.   i long for the day that the masses

get so dang fed up that we are ALL protesting in the streets.  but still, i

don't think we can blame the people.  i think deep down inside we are all as

one and all on the same page.  some people just say it louder than others.

maybe we need a worldwide rage.   who is to say?   but all i can say is that

it is VERY hard to live in a cuntry where evil is king and lies are the news.

it is a wonder that any of us here are still sane, and yet................................

     ya just never know what the future holds.

 

     tho it's probly just more of the same.

     by the way, if i have not said so enough, i appreciate your comments on this

forum and would love to see more general participation here in the future.   lovies, sandy

 

 

 

 

[sandy rose]

this might sound weird, but does anyone else have suspicious thoughts

about things that are said on the Weather Channel?   heh heh, i know that

sounds funny, but i'm not kidding.  you know the old 'IT COULD HAPPEN

TOMORROW'  fear thing they got going on? 

     well, now they are airing one saying something to the effect of, look

what happened on 9/11, and then look what happened in New Orleans

(and i for one believe that a lot of that was intentional and not just mother

Nature, and even that they blew the levees, and absolutely that they

intentionally botched everything after that), and then they predict a great

horrific earthquake in California.  and now that we know about haaaaaarp,

and the shit it can do, i can't help wondering if they're giving us hints about

the next one they plan to pull.   it's just something that scares me, and

yes, i know earthquakes can occur without the help of mass murderers,

i just wonder if anyone else thinks that might be their next 9/11, so to speak.

 

[sandy rose]

got this from clg

 

Washington and Iran: The reckless policy of provocation

14 October 2011

At a White House press conference Thursday, President Barack Obama said his administration would make Iran “pay a price” for an alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States. He described it as “part of a pattern of dangerous and reckless behavior by the Iranian government.” In the same remarks, Obama stressed that his administration will not “take any options off the table in terms of how we operate with Iran”, a phrase that is universally understood as a threat of US military aggression.

 

The remarks signaled Washington’s decision to utilize this bizarre incident, about which there are far more questions than answers, as a pretext for escalating tension with Iran to the point of saber-rattling threats of war.

 

The more that emerges about the purported Iranian “terrorist plot” to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States, the more it appears to be a crude concoction by elements of the American state apparatus to blackguard Iran and create the pretext for an escalation of US aggression.

 

Even the media, outside of the inevitable hyper-ventilating by CNN and Fox News, has taken a skeptical view of the allegations of the White House and the US Justice Department. For example, the Financial Times editorialized: “It is far from clear, however, that the plot enjoyed the backing of the Iranian regime. Indeed, there are reasons to be skeptical that it did.” To put it bluntly, nothing about it makes any sense.

 

The administration has been compelled to note the wild character of its allegations. FBI Director Robert Mueller said the Justice Department indictment “reads like the pages of a Hollywood script.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton referred to the improbable connections in the case, with Iran’s secret service supposedly asking Los Zetas, a Mexican drug cartel, to carry out the assassination as a paid hit, only to find itself dealing with a Drug Enforcement Agency informant. “Nobody could make that up, right?” she asked rhetorically.

 

As a matter of fact, they can and they have. Paid FBI informants posing as terrorists entrapped the so-called Liberty City Seven in Miami in a fabricated plot to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago. There was the case of the Newburgh Four, in which a veteran FBI agent-provocateur, offering large amounts of cash, entrapped four young African-American men in a plot to put explosives in New York area synagogues. Like dozens of such incidents, these plots never involved any real threat and would never have existed without government agents creating them as part of the phony “war on terrorism.”

 

In the alleged plot to kill the Saudi ambassador, the supposed “mastermind” of the conspiracy is one Manssor Arbabsiar, an Iranian-American failed used car dealer from Texas. He was previously arrested for passing bad checks, and college associates recall him as being hostile to the Iranian regime. That Iran’s Quds Force, considered by most analysts to be one of the world’s more professional covert agencies, would entrust what ostensibly would have been the first act of Iranian terrorism on US soil to such an individual is preposterous on its face.

 

The most plausible explanation for this unlikely set of circumstances is that Mr. Arbabsiar became entrapped in a drug deal by US agents, who then made him the lynchpin of a US frame-up of Iran on terror charges.

 

It is due to the improbable character of this “Hollywood script” that US officials, from President Obama on down, have joined in branding the Iranian regime as “reckless.”

 

Senator John McCain, Obama’s Republican opponent in 2008, stressed Thursday that the “ridiculously inept” character of the alleged plot only proved how “reckless” Iran is, and what a “real serious problem” its acquiring of nuclear weapons would pose.

 

Apparently, Washington’s definition of “reckless” refers to any action taken by another government that cuts across US interests and so might make it a target for US aggression. For a decade Iran has faced a relentless war of nerves with the US, the most powerful imperialist power on the planet, which has occupied neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan, surrounding Iran with a ring of US military bases. How can Iran’s behavior be described as “reckless”, outside of its failure to obey American dictates?

 

If the word “reckless” applies in this case, it is to the policies of Washington itself. Once again, US imperialism is seeking to advance its global interests by means of crude provocations and threats of military aggression. The fabricated “terror plot” is not an isolated event.

 

Obama waxed indignant at his Thursday press conference about Iran allegedly acting outside “accepted norms of international behavior.” But the US itself is the only country that has asserted the “right” to assassinate anyone in the world it deems a potential threat, including its own citizens. It has even created a secret sub-committee of the National Security Council to draw up “kill lists” of those to be murdered by Predator drones, in gross violation of international law.

 

Iran has been on the receiving end of these kinds of operations, with a string of assassinations of leading scientists involved in its nuclear program, as well as lethal terrorist attacks by CIA-backed armed groups. In 2008, it was revealed that the Bush administration had issued a presidential finding authorizing a covert CIA destabilization campaign against Iran, which Congress then funded to the tune of $400 million. This operation continues under Obama.

 

After a decade of military debacles in Afghanistan and Iraq, Washington is now threatening to launch a new war against the country that lies between them, Iran, with its 75 million people and the world’s fourth-largest proven oil reserves. This turn to war is driven by both the strategic failures of Washington’s previous adventures, and the ever-sharpening contradictions of crisis-ridden American capitalism. A war against Iran would prove a far bloodier and more catastrophic enterprise than those that preceded it.

 

Iran has not backed down to Washington’s onslaught. Instead it has denounced the charges as “vulgar” and “fabricated”, while asserting, with much justification, that the entire affair is meant to divert public attention in the US from the country’s deepening economic crisis and mounting social unrest.

 

The way in which the US has moved towards open confrontation with Iran together with the domestic context calls to mind the manner in which internal crisis drove the Nazi regime that headed imperialist Germany to war in the 1930s.

 

The late British historian Tim Mason wrote in his Nazism, fascism and the working class the following about the turn to war by Hitler’s Third Reich:

 

“The economic, social and political tensions within the Reich became steadily more acute after the summer of 1937; while it seems safe to say that Hitler himself understood very little of their technical content, it can be proved that he was informed of their existence and was aware of their gravity. If the existence in the winter of 1937-8 of a conscious connection in Hitler’s mind between this general crisis and the need for a more dynamic foreign policy cannot yet be established, functional relationships between these two aspects may nonetheless be suggested…

 

“The only ‘solution’ open to this regime of the structural tensions and crises produced by dictatorship and rearmament was more dictatorship and rearmament, then expansion, then war and terror, then plunder and enslavement. The stark, ever-present alternative was collapse and chaos, and so all solutions were temporary, hectic, hand-to-mouth affairs, increasingly barbaric improvisations around a brutal theme.”

 

Obama is not Hitler and the US has not fallen to fascism. Nonetheless, similar “functional relationships” can be detected between, on the one hand, the economic and social crisis gripping the United States and, on the other, the increasingly reckless character of the operations of the US military and intelligence apparatus on the world stage.

 

Changing what needs to be changed, there is the same “temporary, hectic, hand-to-mouth” character of the US administration’s policies. They too are characterized by wild and “barbaric” improvisations, from the drone war and political provocations in Pakistan, to the war for “regime change” in Libya and now to a belligerent confrontation with Iran.

 

The turn toward war abroad and the promotion of “terror” scares at home is driven largely by domestic considerations. Increasingly nervous over mass social discontent and the threat of renewed class struggle reflected in the nationwide demonstrations against Wall Street, the American ruling elite is desperate to somehow change the subject. This consideration undoubtedly played a pivotal role in the decision to make public the mad allegations of an Iranian “plot” to kill the Saudi ambassador.

 

This strange case constitutes a serious warning. The decision to turn it into an international confrontation is indicative of increasing disorientation at the highest levels of the American state. No one knows precisely how the events flowing from it will unfold, but it seems that question is not if, but when, another major war will be sprung upon the American people.

Bill Van Auken