It's no exaggeration.



A crazy warmonkey has hijacked the Pentagon and is flying us all toward Doomsday.

Here're the liars:



There are many good reasons the Founders made a free Press the only business mentioned by name in the Constitution. It is to our nation's shame that so few in Corporate McPravda, the US Government, or the nation's citizenry remember that.

Thanks for giving a damn, T.Ruth2power. Really love the graphics, too!

From an address to a joint session of the US Congress: President George W. Bush.

"Americans are asking ``Why do they hate us?'' They hate what they see right here in this chamber: a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other. " George W. Bush, 20 September, 2001
http://www.indystar.com/library/factfiles/crime/national/2001/sept11/transcripts/0921bush.html

From Goebbels' New Year address to Germany

They hate our people because it is decent, brave, industrious, hardworking and intelligent. They hate our views, our social policies, and our accomplishments. They hate us as a Reich and as a community. They have forced us into a struggle for life and death. We will defend ourselves accordingly. All is clear between us and our enemies. Goebbels 31 December 1939
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb21.htm





Much more on the pipeline through Afghanistan at: http://www.alternet.org/story/12525/

"..people should realize when we are talking about chemical and biological agents, we are not just talking about, you know, washing powders and detergents"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8957268309327954402 at 19:00 minutes starting at 17:00 minutes

Rec!

No volunteers needed. We are professional liars, now.



We know who the problems are. Thanks for giving a damn, LibertyorDeath.

Very informative article here

Subverting Terrorism

Muslim Problem or Covert Operations Nightmare?

by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed

http://www.gnn.tv/B12624

Cheers Octafish !

From the late, great and sorely missed Covert Action Information Bulletin:



Gee. That's a lot of money to toss at Corporate McPravda -- back in 1979. The Rendon Group and Hill and Knowlton may know how much it is today.

Thanks for giving a damn, TheGoldenRule. Little by little, slowly but surely, we're getting the word out on these treasonous turds.

:applause:

Originally published in Rolling Stone, October 20, 1977.

How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up

THE CIA AND THE MEDIA
BY CARL BERNSTEIN

...ROLE OF THE CHURCH COMMITTEE

DESPITE THE EVIDENCE OF WIDESPREAD CIA USE OF journalists, the Senate Intelligence Committee and its staff decided against questioning any of the reporters, editors, publishers or broadcast executives whose relationships with the Agency are detailed in CIA files.

According to sources in the Senate and the Agency, the use of journalists was one of two areas of inquiry which the CIA went to extraordinary lengths to curtail. The other was the Agency’s continuing and extensive use of academics for recruitment and information gathering purposes.

In both instances, the sources said, former directors Colby and Bush and CIA special counsel Mitchell Rogovin were able to convince key members of the committee that full inquiry or even limited public disclosure of the dimensions of the activities would do irreparable damage to the nation’s intelligence‑gathering apparatus, as well as to the reputations of hundreds of individuals. Colby was reported to have been especially persuasive in arguing that disclosure would bring on a latter‑day “witch hunt” in which the victims would be reporters, publishers and editors.

Walter Elder, deputy to former CIA director McCone and the principal Agency liaison to the Church committee, argued that the committee lacked jurisdiction because there had been no misuse of journalists by the CIA; the relationships had been voluntary. Elder cited as an example the case of the Louisville Courier‑Journal. “Church and other people on the committee were on the chandelier about the Courier‑Journal,” one Agency official said, “until we pointed out that we had gone to the editor to arrange cover, and that the editor had said, ‘Fine.’”...


http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/cia_press.html

Everytime I write something along these lines in LTTE's people look my name up and telephone number. Part of the country knows and the others call to harrass. I really like the color graphics showing the pipelines. Excellent piece and a recommend.

Here's a good story ABCNNBCBSFoxNoiseNutwork seems to have missed:



Thanks for giving a damn, mmonk. If you remember, please let me know about the reactions to your next LTTE.

So much of what the administration used especially from political dissidents from Iraq was knowingly bogus and backchanneled. But lies are useful in selling a war for nefarious purpose. Everything has been running on manipulation.

My last LTTE mentioned Unocal and Karzai and in reference to Iraq, Bremer order #39. This prompted calls from strangers, some curious and positive, some asking me to call but not giving their disposition to my writing.

Thanks for the posts. Keep it up for as long as it takes.

I hope that DUers read this article, and both of the additions -- by TRG and Mr. Bamford.

is what Tony Blair's former environment minister, Michael Meacher, said back in 2003.

This war on terrorism is bogus

The 9/11 attacks gave the US an ideal pretext to use force to secure its global domination

Michael Meacher
Saturday September 6, 2003
The Guardian

Massive attention has now been given - and rightly so - to the reasons why Britain went to war against Iraq. But far too little attention has focused on why the US went to war, and that throws light on British motives too. The conventional explanation is that after the Twin Towers were hit, retaliation against al-Qaida bases in Afghanistan was a natural first step in launching a global war against terrorism. Then, because Saddam Hussein was alleged by the US and UK governments to retain weapons of mass destruction, the war could be extended to Iraq as well. However this theory does not fit all the facts. The truth may be a great deal murkier.

We now know that a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice-president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), Jeb Bush (George Bush's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences, was written in September 2000 by the neoconservative think tank, Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says "while the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document attributed to Wolfowitz and Libby which said the US must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role". It refers to key allies such as the UK as "the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership". It describes peacekeeping missions as "demanding American political leadership rather than that of the UN". It says "even should Saddam pass from the scene", US bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently... as "Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has". It spotlights China for "regime change", saying "it is time to increase the presence of American forces in SE Asia."

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html

Wow! Thanks for the heads-up, JohnyCanuck. Meacher paints a most interesting portrait of a poodle and his mistress.



May the murderers who killed Dr. Kelly face Justice in this world. We'd find they work for the international elite who make money off of war and gain power from death.

The Wizard of Oil...







You understand people, 'Dreamy. I love the Irish.

Call it "Enhanced Publicity".

And don't call Bush-Cheney's policies "Fascism".

It's simply "Enhanced Conservatism".

:sarcasm:

The cause requires all kinds, even plagiarizers.

From waaaaay back when:



Thanks for the heads-up, CJCRANE. Really appreciate you giving a damn, too.

who else benefits from the 'war on terra'?



Bush's Turkey shoot
Pepe Escobar


November 6, 2007


http://uruknet.info/?p=m37914&s1=h1

<snip>

Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq opened a Pandora's box that only now starts to be seen for its true incendiary potential. Turkey threatening to strike Iraq to protect its national security is a carbon copy of Bush invading Iraq in 2003. Moreover, "Iraq" is actually no more; it's been smashed into three virtually independent statelets - exactly what Israel wanted in the first place.

Israel is so keen on an independent Iraqi Kurdistan because this is the way towards a new Kirkuk-Haifa oil pipeline (the old one was shut down in 1948) - which will pass though three American bases and cross US-friendly Jordan. A complicating factor is that at the same time Tel Aviv avidly coddles racist, Kurd-hating Turkish generals.

Turkey badly needs oil, as much as Israel. Turkey most of all cannot stand an independent Iraqi Kurdistan because it is focused on Mosul and Kirkuk's oil wealth. For any Turk with an Ottoman Empire memory, Mosul's oil fields, only 120km from the border, should belong to Turkey; after all they were stolen by the British Empire as it drew the artificial borders of Iraq in the early 1920s.

Both the treaties of Sevres (1920) and Lausanne (1923) did everything to exclude Mosul and Kirkuk - both with a Turkman majority - from Turkey, so the new republic would be deprived of oil. It's not hard to imagine Turkish generals dreaming of a modern Turkey swimming in oil wealth as a certified regional superpower, spreading its wings over the Middle East, the Balkans, the Caucasus and as far as Central Asia. The equation is inescapable: if Washington could invade Iraq to grab its oil, why not neighbor Turkey, who owned the oil in the first place?


:hi:

BINGO!

The rear-view mirror gives us an excellent perspective. Remember Fleshy Liar up on the podium?



Whatever happened to the forged Niger documents? Any repurcussions? Any real investigation? Nah.



Thanks for sharing, leftchick. You got these PNAC turds pegged.

The PKK will be nuetralized. The Oil will be shared. There will never be a Republic of Kurdistan in the Iraqi Territory. It may be a State within a weak Confederation controlled by the US & Israel. The Plutocracy of America will prevail. The majority of the American populace has been convinced that The War On Terror is real. The PR job was a success. Imperialism is a word that only Leftists embrace.

"Misled" means "lies by a 'lee-durr.'"



Thanks for the heads-up, The Stranger. The BBC's still got something left in the tank.

I'm too depressed to even think about it. x(

It will never penetrate to the majority of Americans.

are the two most popular ones.

:banghead:

It IS depressing, my Friend.

Karen Kwiatkowski spreading the word about these traitors is good for morale.



Why doesn't Corporate McPravda like to talk about the Office of Special Plans?

Are they worried about competition from the Lie Factory?

BLOOD
FOR
OIL!!!

Here's a heapin' helpin' of Truth the Corporate McPravda seems to want to keep buried:



Thanks for giving a damn, malaise. These NAZI gangster warmongers know they can't keep a lid on the truth much longer.

It was NEVER about the Terrorism, was it? I wonder how Pakistan is going to figure in all this?

Man, I've got about two years reading to catch up on all your posts and links I've bookmarked.

:toast:
:hi:

Proof Bush Fixed The Facts

By Ray McGovern

May 04, 2005


"Intelligence and facts are being fixed around the policy."

Never in our wildest dreams did we think we would see those words in black and white—and beneath a SECRET stamp, no less. For three years now, we in Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have been saying that the CIA and its British counterpart, MI-6, were ordered by their countries' leaders to "fix facts" to "justify" an unprovoked war on Iraq. More often than not, we have been greeted with stares of incredulity.

It has been a hard learning—that folks tend to believe what they want to believe. As long as our evidence, however abundant and persuasive, remained circumstantial, it could not compel belief. It simply is much easier on the psyche to assent to the White House spin machine blaming the Iraq fiasco on bad intelligence than to entertain the notion that we were sold a bill of goods.

Well, you can forget circumstantial. Thanks to an unauthorized disclosure by a courageous whistleblower, the evidence now leaps from official documents—this time authentic, not forged. Whether prompted by the open appeal of the international Truth-Telling Coalition or not, some brave soul has made the most explosive "patriotic leak" of the war by giving London's Sunday Times the official minutes of a briefing by Richard Dearlove, then head of Britain's CIA equivalent, MI-6. Fresh back in London from consultations in Washington, Dearlove briefed Prime Minister Blair and his top national security officials on July 23, 2002, on the Bush administration's plans to make war on Iraq.

SNIP

Actually, politicization is far too mild a word for what happened. The intelligence was not simply mistaken; it was manufactured, with the president of the United States awarding foreman George Tenet the Medal of Freedom for his role in helping supervise the deceit. The British documents make clear that this was not a mere case of "leaning forward" in analyzing the intelligence, but rather mass deception—an order of magnitude more serious. No other conclusion is now possible.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/proof_bush_fixed_the_facts.php

reprehensor Donating Member (1000+ posts)


Deconstructing "al Qaeda"

You know, "al Qaeda";

"Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians." - British MP, Robin Cook (deceased).


The decision to use the Mujahideen (Muj) as a proxy army was cooked up by the CIA, and approved at the tail end of Jimmy Carter's administration. This was admitted by Robert Gates and later Zbigniew Brzezinski during an interview in 1998, translated for Anglos non-fluent in French, by writer William Blum (Blum uses a truncated version of this transcription in the introduction to his book "Rogue State"):

"According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul." - Zbigniew Brzezinski.


After having some success with the Muj, CIA Director William Casey decided to kick it up a notch, getting behind a program to recruit Islamic radicals from around the globe to do the United States' foreign policy wet work. This is chronicled by author Ahmed Rashid in his influential book, "Taliban";

"...in 1986, CIA chief William Casey had stepped up the war against the Soviet Union by taking three significant, but at that time highly secret, measures. He had persuaded the U.S. Congress to provide the Mujaheddin with American-made Stinger anti-aircraft missiles to shoot down Soviet planes and provide U.S. advisers to train the guerrillas. Until then no US-made weapons or personnel had been used directly in the war effort. The CIA, Britain's MI6 and the ISI also agreed on a provocative plan to launch guerrilla attacks into the Soviet Socialist Republics of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, the soft Muslim underbelly of the Soviet state from where Soviet troops in Afghanistan received their supplies. The task was given to the ISI's favourite Mujaheddin leader Gulbuddin Hikmetyar. In March 1987, small units crossed the Amu Darya river from bases in northern Afghanistan and launched their first rocket attacks against villages in Tajikistan. Casey was delighted with the news, and on his next secret trip to Pakistan he crossed the border into Afghanistan with President Zia to review the Mujaheddin groups.

Thirdly, Casey committed CIA support to a long-standing ISI initiative to recruit Muslims from around the world to come to Pakistan and fight with the Afghan Mujaheddin. The ISI had encouraged this since 1982 and by now all the other players had their reasons for supporting the idea." p.129, YALE NB edition, 2001.


In the above quote we can see that the CIA had already begun utilizing the Muj as a proxy for international destabilization (not just support of the local conflict in Afghanistan) in the mid-1980s. Also, the keystone and foundation are laid for the formation of what was to become "al Qaeda", the Arab Foreign Legion, call it what you will, "al Qaeda" was not borne of a fevered dream in Osama's cave, but was the fruit of the combined effort of intelligence services in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and nourished by the global reach of the mighty CIA.

But, you might argue, the CIA pulled out of Afghanistan and the US stopped messing around with the Muj!

Not so fast.

In Britain, there is one academic who boldly states the following;

From 1979 until 2007 ... this amorphous network designated by the term al Qaeda has functioned seamlessly as a mercenary proxy force mobilized in diverse strategic regions in the service of Anglo-American imperial expansionism. It hasn't ever had a break. The extent of it is absolutely shocking ... Western state sponsorship, indirectly and directly, of al Qaeda as a destabilizing force in strategic regions.

Meanwhile, innocent citizens are being killed. They are being killed since 1993 ... yet the policy has not shifted. On the contrary it's now escalating in the context of developling an even more catastrophic conflict with Iran.

This has damning moral implications. It means that at some level, policy makers are morally indifferent to the deaths of our own citizens in al Qaeda terrorist attacks. Other strategic imperatives, such as the control of increasingly scarce energy resources are more important. There has been a shift of priorities, something in the National Security structure, since 1979, has relegated civilian life way at the bottom.

- Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed, 7-13-2007.


Nafeez Ahmed is not a household name among North American intellectuals, but he should be. He has been noticed by Gore Vidal, among others;

On the subject `How and Why America was Attacked on 11 September, 2001', the best, most balanced report, thus far, is by Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed <1> . . . Yes, yes, I know he is one of Them. But they often know things that we don't -- particularly about what we are up to. A political scientist, Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development <2> `a think-tank dedicated to the promotion of human rights, justice and peace' in Brighton. His book, The War on Freedom <3>, has just been published in the US by a small but reputable publisher.

Ahmed provides a background for our ongoing war against Afghanistan, a view that in no way coincides with what the administration has told us. He has drawn on many sources, most tellingly on American whistleblowers who are beginning to come forth and bear witness -- like those FBI agents who warned their supervisors that al-Qaeda was planning a kamikaze strike against New York and Washington only to be told that if they went public with these warnings they would suffer under the National Security Act.


Ahmed is currently a PhD candidate at the University of Sussex in England, and has spent countless hours documenting the war on terror. When I say "documenting", I mean it. Ahmed backs up everything he says in minute scholarly detail, as an academic making radical claims must. When he says Western state sponsorship has continued unabated, up to the present day, he isn't conjuring a theory, he's stating the obvious. Obvious to anybody with the inclination to get informed on the most staggeringly ill-concealed covert operation sprung on the world since the Bay of Pigs, that is.

In an essay submitted for the Congressional record in 2005, titled "Ties With Terror: The Continuity of Western-Al-Qaeda Relations in the Post-Cold War Period", Ahmed details the steady stream of intelligence links to "al Qaeda" in the Balkans, North Africa, Asia-Pacific, and the Caucasus and concludes thus;

At every major strategic point in the world, we find that US and Western power is symbiotically melded – through financial, military and intelligence connections – with al-Qaeda; and further that al-Qaeda has in certain places been explicitly used as a military-intelligence asset by Western powers, particularly the United States and United Kingdom. This documentation indicates that international terrorism in the form of al-Qaeda is not merely an enemy to be fought, but rather an unruly asset to be, when possible, controlled and manipulated in the pursuit of quite specific strategic and economic interests. Worse still, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that certain elements of the policy-making establishment are perfectly cognizant that as a direct result of such policies, national security is being fundamentally and continuously undermined with repeatedly fatal consequences. Yet the same brand of policies persists. Without dwelling unnecessarily on the possible theoretical ramifications of this phenomenon, it is sufficient for me to note that these facts fundamentally challenge the entire paradigm of the ‘War on Terror’ as articulated and legitimized by the official narrative.


(The entire Congressional hearing is well worth reading, of which Ahmed's contribution is but a small part:
Download - 2.5 mb PDF: http://www.911podcasts.com/files/documents/20050722tran... )

Author, researcher, and sometime Congressional testimony giver himself, Peter Dale Scott puts it like this:

The American people have been seriously misled about the origins of the al Qaeda movement blamed for the 9/11 attacks, just as they have been seriously misled about the reasons for America’s invasion of Iraq.

The truth is that for at least two decades the United States has engaged in energetic covert programs to secure U.S. control over the Persian Gulf, and also to open up Central Asia for development by U.S. oil companies. Americans were eager to gain access to the petroleum reserves of the Caspian Basin, which at that time were still estimated to be “the largest known reserves of unexploited fuel in the planet.”<1>

To this end, time after time, U.S. covert operations in the region have used so-called “Arab Afghan” warriors as assets, the jihadis whom we loosely link with the name and leadership of al Qaeda.<2> In country after country these “Arab Afghans” have been involved in trafficking Afghan heroin.

America’s sponsorship of drug-trafficking Muslim warriors, including those now in Al Qaeda, dates back to the Afghan War of 1979-89, sponsored in part by the CIA’s links to the drug-laundering Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI).<3> It was part of CIA Director Casey’s strategy for launching covert operations over and above those approved and financed by a Democratic-controlled Congress.


This is just the tip of the iceberg.

If this is all new to you, I highly recommend Ahmed's essay, Subverting "Terrorism", for a broader base of enquiry, and a much needed penicillin shot of Truth.

Oh, and if "al Qaeda" strikes anytime soon, remember the example of Spain after the Madrid bombings:

"With the victims, with the constitution and for the defeat of terrorism".

The Jihad Schoolbook Scandal

Why has the US been Shipping Muslim Extremist Schoolbooks into Afghanistan...for 20 Years?

And why is President Bush hiding it?

By Jared Israel

SNIP

Washington Post investigators report that during the past twenty years the US has spent millions of dollars producing fanatical schoolbooks, which were then distributed in Afghanistan.

"The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system's core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books..." -- Washington Post, 23 March 2002 (1)

According to the Post the U.S. is now "...wrestling with the unintended consequences of its successful strategy of stirring Islamic fervor to fight communism."

So the books made up the core curriculum in Afghan schools. And what were the unintended consequences? The Post reports that according to unnamed officials the schoolbooks "steeped a generation in violence."

How could this result have been unintended? Did they expect that giving fundamentalist schoolbooks to schoolchildren would make them moderate Muslims?

Nobody with normal intelligence could expect to distribute millions of violent Islamist schoolbooks without influencing school children towards violent Islamism. Therefore one would assume that the unnamed US officials who, we are told, are distressed at these "unintended consequences" must previously have been unaware of the Islamist content of the schoolbooks.

But surely someone was aware. The US government can't write, edit, print and ship millions of violent, Muslim fundamentalist primers into Afghanistan without high officials in the US government approving those primers.

http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/jihad.htm

:hi:

The heroin drug trade from Afghanistan has been going swimingly since we bombed it:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=469983&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true




Also when you analyze the details of the Sibel Edmonds case you'll see that the heroin trade through Turkey and AQ Khan nuclear WMD network in Pakistan are related, and may involve high-level US government corruption. This is Iran/Contra with a vengeance, and involves many of the same players. Neocons want to take over the world and they will use all criminal means to achieve their goals.

Afghanistan is about the Natural Gas Line. $ Trillion of Natural Gas under the ground while the
Afghans barely eek out a living.

Seriously, I almost posted about the natural gas pipeline.

Yeah, all of the "liberation" going on is about little more than liberating indigenous people of their natural resources/wealth.

on edit: I'd love to see the BEST RW "rebuttal" of this article. I"m sure it's so full of bullshit and lies that you will vomit before you finish reading it.

Octafish, keep up the wonderful work, you rock ! :)

: )

The pipeline in Afghanistan was to be built by Enron. People don't talk about it. Particularly the Bush Administration. Enron appears not to have been that insolvent. It was merely put out of business.

Some believe the goal is to build an entire network of pipelines in the region with ports in India and Israel. Bypassing the Persian Gulf. And controlling major reserves in Iraq and possibly Iran. The only thing the Bushes have ever intended to "liberate" in the region is the oil.

It's fun to imagine Ken Lay enjoying the beaches in Brazil but some do wonder if in fact someone slipped something into his drink that night to induce a massive heart attack. To make sure if he knew, that he never told. Dead men, as they say, tell no tales.

They haven't had a problem bailing everyone else out - why didn't they bail Kenny Boy out? Everyone believes Enron was shut down and was insolvent and had no assets and that was the end of the story. It wasn't shut down, had and still has considerable assets, and that was not the end of the story. Why do they believe this? Because that is what the media has told them. Because that is what the media has been told.

In fact it is alive and well and despite the bankrupcty it is still in business and may emerge from the bankruptcy as another company. Or maybe just as Enron. But no, your stock will still be worthless. There will be new stock. Issued to the "equity holders" as I believe they're called but known more commonly as "secured creditors," some of whom probably paid into the settlements knowing they would get part of what they paid back, prior to the public issue of the "new stock" which is what they did with MCI. And the rich crooks get even richer. If that doesn't happen, the rich crooks will still get richer. By buying up the assets for 10 cents on the dollar. Time will tell. Although very little will actually be told by anyone. Not by the media anyway. Which will once again merely run the stories they are given to run.

But the story seems to be proof positive that there is some truth to the old adage about "Oh, what a tangled web we weave..."

...are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch. - Karl Marx, 1845 and still Right

Elite Propaganda = "news"

What bothers me is would the majority of Americans support this imperialism anyway if they were given the truth about it? Many could easily be sold some more lies about a safe future for America being provided by this war. I think, deep down, most Americans know by now it is about oil. They may feel temporarily duped when realizing it, then "Ah, oh well, it has to be done."

except for those of us who do understand and don't agree with this course of action, designed to enrich close friends and consolidate power for the oligarchy. If you really pay attention, it's not too difficult to understand: some people are driven by greed and a lust for power and will stop at nothing to satisfy them.

:shrug:

Terror is an old lie, well-worn by Reagan to invoke fear of the commie pinko invasion of Texas.
Here is a reminder of earlier Republican "terrorist" lies and how the term entered our lexicon:

Are the Sandinista terrorists on the Texas border yet? Rhetoric to haunt Freeepers.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x503712#504746

causes of domestic terrorism go unaddressed. A major US city drowns because we don't have adequate pumps or bridges fall because we don't have the money to keep them adequately maintained or fires destroy thousands of homes because we don't have the resources available to fight them early. While we pretend to be fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here....our society and our way of life is in danger of being destroyed. Want to fight terrorism at home? Get the organized crime syndicate, formally known as the RNC, out of power.

It is a marketing slogan for permanent war-- the ultimate wet dream of the military-industrial complex and America's captains of industry. The media have embraced the lie because it even generates profits for them. The WOT is just another scheme for mining public coffers and stealing resources from other nations.

a few minutes before Andrew "don't tase me bro" Meyer made sure nobody remembered what he said, but that's a pretty good analysis.

-bump-

Great post Octafish! :thumbsup:

Instead of developing mutual relationships with countries that posses "vital" resources the concept it that it is more expedient to overthrow their Govt.s by force of arms & install puppet Govt.s that will bend to the will of the US Multi-Corps. The problem is that most US Govt.s have aligned the US with Tyrants, who dominate their people & keep the distribution of wealth in the top tier of their societies, creating a massive class of Working Poor & unrest. Chomsky explains this so much better than I am able to do.

also, war-profiteering is almost an open priority. In WW2, Truman came to national prominence when he took action against excessive profit-taking during a time of war. Now it's beyond that: corruption, fraud, and outright theft get some attention, but where is the outrage and strong response? Enron is a dramatic example of how corporate "personhood" has made "citizens" who plunder society, yet they are given the right of economic free speech and thus can bring financial resources greater than some entire nations to bear on local elections, they can be forced by stockholders or hostile take-over to externalize costs to the commons, and by owning most of the media, have reduced most journalism to "presstitution" and propaganda. The fiction that empowered these immortal super-beings that dominate our world is based on an interpretation of the 14th Amendment, and actually goes counter to the Constitution ( more at HTTP:/www.reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/ )

.

:kick:

Let's keep it kicked!