Biden
Bleah.
UPDATE: A good round-up of stuff on Biden here.
I should also point out that Obama could have picked worse; Biden is one of those Dems who sometime you cheer and sometimes you scream at for being an idiot.
Further, I think it likely that Biden will help Obama win-- so from Obama's perspective it was a good choice though not so exciting to the partisans, he really helps win over the critical pundit/blowhard crowd.
But of course, overall Obama is a huge disappointment to anyone wishing for justice after the past eight years of thuggery and criminality from the White House.
If Obama wins, it will be because he is one of "them"-- what the Democrats typically are in the past thirty years: slicker and more reasonable-sounding psychopathic warmongers.
UPDATE: A good round-up of stuff on Biden here.
I should also point out that Obama could have picked worse; Biden is one of those Dems who sometime you cheer and sometimes you scream at for being an idiot.
Further, I think it likely that Biden will help Obama win-- so from Obama's perspective it was a good choice though not so exciting to the partisans, he really helps win over the critical pundit/blowhard crowd.
But of course, overall Obama is a huge disappointment to anyone wishing for justice after the past eight years of thuggery and criminality from the White House.
If Obama wins, it will be because he is one of "them"-- what the Democrats typically are in the past thirty years: slicker and more reasonable-sounding psychopathic warmongers.
posted by spooked at 8:13 AM
33 Comments:
Nov. 2008
Ron Paul, President
Morgan Reynolds, Vice President
It sure looks like you gave yourself away, David Howard.
How can you explain how you--a supposed "nuclear911truther"--advocate Reynolds who is a staunch intel asset who ONLY supports the ludicrous, evidence-free "DEW hypothesis"?
The latter "Anonymous Physicist" demonstrated was created solely to try to hide the nuclear destruction of the WTC and the China Syndrome Aftermath.
Do not answer with your usual "stuff," like "Google this or that."
Answer like a real human being. Or not at all to confirm the above.
We already have posted here an intel agent. If he comes to defend you now, it will confirm things.
click on howard's name and it leads directly to a link endorsing wtc nuked and resulting china syndrome.
incidentally, i would rather see morgan reynolds in office than mccain.
No, it doesn't. Clicking on his name leads directly to these 8 blog links:
Stoelting Ultrascribe polygraph
Mena cocaine
The Fake Oil Crisis of 1973
9/11 and October Surprise scandal
ADX Florence
we got nuked on 9/11
Arrest Bush 41
Stoelting Ultrascribe polygraph
If you then read all those 8 links and picked "we got nuked on 9/11" to click on, that leads to his blog of that name which has the Ace Baker $100,000 challenge at top.
Then below that, yes indeed finally is a link to Spooked's blog http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com/ which includes A.P.'s nuclear 9/11 articles.
If Reynolds got in office instead of McCain, and they both work for the same PTB, do you really think there would be much difference in what they would be doing, especially behind the scenes (until the appropriate moment?
Just one related example. While some talk about impeaching and criminally publishing the shrub [and I don't object to that], do not people realize that 9/11 likely took years for all aspects of it to be planned?
And the moron shrub had only been "president" for 9 months--not sufficient IMO.
9/11 was well planned during slick Willy's administration. So the problem is much deeper, and we don't need anyone who is part of the PTB to "rule" over us.
And the so-called Ron Paul Revoltion was named that because of the fear the PTB have that the people would wake up and realize they need to make a REAL revolution.
And what did Ron Paul say about 9/11?
He said he believes totally in the "truth" of the O.C.T.
So again I ask how could any 911truther support Paul or Reynolds (vehemently opposed to the nuking mechanism)?
i will vote for the lesser of two evils regardless of whether he admits that the wtc was nuked or not and regardless if voting is futile or not.
8:50 PM
anonymous p's understanding of how
politics works in a democracy is woefully unsophisticated, even amateurish.
Making unsubstantiated, evidence-free
charges against people who are publicly known doesn't exactly inspire confidence, does it?
Can it possibly be true that everyone who disagrees with him is
a "staunch intel asset" or "intel goon"?
I don't know about you, but I rarely see true progressive thinkers using disrespectful labels for those who disagree with them.
That tactic is more commonly used, in my experience, by rightwingers.
There would not have been attacks on 9/11 or the assassination of JFK, if George Bush Sr. had never been born.
What has happened and continues to happen to this country (with voting, or hoping) is SELF-
EVIDENT. The rest of the world has no trouble recognizing that therre is blatant fascism in America now, and that the American people tolerate that change.
Two additional things come to mind.
1. The founding fathers did not "vote", they knew the only way they could stop what was being perpetrated against them was the armed revolution they did. And President Jefferson said true patriots would have to do the very same thing EVERY 20 YEARS, if Americans wanted to preserve their republic/democracy.
This is over 200 years late.
2. Things have clearly only gotten worse with "voting", and the voting is all electronically manipulated--and that is KNOWN to those pushing some "candidates".
This implies that these folks pushing for such Candidates--who may well be bogus--are actually beleiving that doing the same thing will cause change.
And there is the well known definition of Insanity:
Doing what you have always done, and expecting that something other than what you have always gotten will ensue.
Insanity or collusion.
From D.H.: "There would not have been attacks on 9/11 or the assassination of JFK, if George Bush Sr. had never been born."
While Poppy Bush is pure evil (and involved in both events as you imply), I feel sorry for you if you actually believe that 9/11, or the assassination of JFK, would not have happened without GHWB.
He himself is just another perp (easily replaced) in a vastly deeper (and more horrible) thing that has been made clear in this Ultimate Truths blog:
www.anonymous-physicist.blogspot.com
There have been countless wars and assassinations and false-flag terror ops long before Poppy Bush was born. It's all been tied to gether.
Avoiding or denying the Ultimate Truth of all this unfortunately does not lead to those in charge (of these Ultimate Truths--and the World) from dealing with those in denial of them!
The People need to learn this and counter it.
A.P.
My goal is to make polygraph test results admissible as evidence in courts worldwide.
and still one candidate is the lesser of two evils and i will show up at the polls and make my mark regardless of the futility of it all.
"learning this and countering it" is all well and good but my experience with trying to promote truth has taught me that the average john Q just does not give a fuck.
as to revolution, i am fully prepared to protect my family.
a revolution today would be a whole different ball game than revolution of 250 years ago.
Yes, revolution is different today, but great change has never been easy, and we should never let that be an excuse for not trying.
Yes, I agree with you, the average Joe doesn't give a fuck, unless and until s/he is shown that they and their children are about to be next, and just what their regime has done to its own citizens--such as the nuking of the WTC and the China Syndrome Aftermath.
I guess you prove my point about voting even thugh you know it is futile. It gives people an excuse that they are doing something when they are doing nothing, as the machines are rigged and virtually all candidates are owned.
As Stalin said, "it's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes."
RE Polygraphs, as I always suspected with this, just today this came out on Rawstory:
"A polygraph is not foolproof as a screening tool. The test gives a high rate of false positives on innocent people, and guilty subjects can be trained to beat the system, according to expert Charles Honts, a psychology professor at Boise State University."
From: http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Pentagons_intelligence_arm_steps_up_lie_0823.html
Who do you think undergo expert training in lying for the polygraph? The perps you would like to place in jail. Intel scum and the like, and top politicians if the need ever arose..
So I don't think this will go anywhere.
But maybe you could also expose how they will do this.
I coin a new term now, staying ahead of the news.
Polygraphfakery. It could become "big."
Anonymous Physicist
No one is capable of deception, that is undetectable, when using a Stoelting Ultrascribe polygraph, and the FBI polygraphers know it.
4:12 AM
If you are a representative example, then progress IS possible. I noticed that you said "intel scum" - apparently, as a way to distinguish
rogue intelligence agents ("cowboys"
from the overwhelmingly vast majority who perform an honorable service for
the country.
There's good and bad in every line of work and profession, and none of us like to be unfairly tarnished just because a few of our fellow workers are "bad apples".
What's the difference between fascism and "blatant" fascism?
D.H.
What, if anything, is different about the Stoelting Ultrascribe polygraph?
Where is the evidence that this one can't give false positives and/or that trained perps couldn't learn how to lie under it?
I note the polygraph expert I cited (above, Dr. Honts), did not say that the Ultrascribe was exempt from his analysis of the defects in using any polygraphs.
So if you have one particular url, please post it here. (googling did not lead to anything I could see that supports a great difference with this one.)
Please post your best URL.
There is also another problem with saying any polygraph is a solution to our problems.
If it were infallible, as you claim (and I doubt), who is going to use it?
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, would have to be charged with crimes first, and that won't be happening, unless and until--as I summarized--some type of real revolution first takes place.
All the Dems and Reps would have to be replaced, as they are all bought and paid for. Anyone good and truthful--like Wellstone gets assassinated by the intel agencies. Pelosi, Conyers all chickened out or bought and paid for or otherwise totally controlled.
Probably a pardon will be coming, but won't include potential international charges
from the World Court, but again who is going to charge these perps so that a lie detector could be used on them?
The whole world would first have to have a revolution, which us why I write on the most Ultimate Truths--which you did not comment back on.
And Morgan Reynolds--I heard his interview of Spooked not long ago. What a joke--a DEWhugger despite the fact that that evidence-free nonsense was created solely to hide the nuking of the WTC, and the CSA (China Syndrome Aftermath).
Anyone who could claim to support (and actively promulgate) DEW, after my articles a year ago showed what this hangout is all about, is almost certainly working for the same source--Langley, London, Rome and beyond.
As was/is the case with the Kennedy Assassination, the virtual entirety of "911truthers" are intel putting out their hangouts to hide the Ultimate Truths of these events.
Anonymous Physicist
The FBI polygraphers will clean-up this mess.
As with most so-called Ultimate Truthers, the virtual entirety of them are almost certainly
either "intel" or else paranoid
weirdos. Or both.
Thanks D.H. for making things "clear".
No one would have been happier than me to have someone genuine promote the truth of the nuking of the WTC.
But when asked for a single URL for something you have been promoting all over place for some time--the "Ultrascribe polygraph"--you don't list a single URL?
And you keep including the FBI--one of the gestapo agencies totally controlled by the PTB--as trustworthy?
You are supposedly a 911truther and especially a nuclear911 truther but promote those who either say the OCT is absolutely correct (Paul) or those who are clearly DEW-intel promoters (Reynolds).
So how do you explain such contradictions?
And, very importantly, please explain to us how Rick Siegel alters your posts, or completely erases them (I have seen this recently in real time), or puts a foul or incorrect headline on posts that relate to A.P.'s nuclear911 articles.
Thank you very much.
For now, think about this: the people dying of radiation-induced cancers ...
http://www.911researchers.com/node/917
In politics, the end justifies the means.
Besides, a lot of people who become innocent collateral damage go on to
become fine agitators and activists.
D.H.
You always prove my point, not yours.
The only time Siegel ever allows (indirectly) anything written by "Anonymous Physicist" is after he doctors it, and/or puts a nasty title on it.
First the one you just gave, "...Pay no attention to the man with the nukes behind the curtain." A reference to "anonymous physicist". And posted by the "Saigirl".
The next one was "Houston we have a problem," posted by an obvious British female MI6 agent who along with her male MI6 agent partner just listed a bunch of lies trying to counter the nuclear 911 truth. She said there were no explosions (what a proveable, stupid lie), and there was no light seen (which may not be true from some of the videos), and even if so, do you see any light during the equivalent underground nuke tests?).
So Siegel who tightly censors everything at his "forum" allowed this lying, foul anti-nuclear911 post.
Then the latest one that you put up which has the title "Evidence of advanced fusion devices at the WTC:"
I have watched as comments were deleted by Siegel in real time. And the links do not go where they should--to Spooked's posting of A.P.'s articles. So that's either your errors or Siegel's doctoring.
And we should thank his supervisor for denoting "Advanced Fusion devices". This helps prove A.P.'s conjecture that the tritium finding was a red herring, and there was no fusion, just fission with the China Syndrome Aftermath!
And everyone promoting the elusive "advanced fusion only" from the likely bogus tritium "finding" is likely intel.
But I trust that the title was Siegel's and not yours, DH.
I also love how Siegel has said he "couldn't care less what mechanism destroyed the towers" (or words to that effect) and denounced "those who do" for writing on the Kennedy Assassination, and the Apollo Hoax,and the alien issue.
Now in the "911truth" field, a year and a half after A.P.'s writings, people are waking up to the relevancy of all these matters.
But the titles that Siegel writes and the selections of posts and comments that he doesn't remove, are very telling about him.
A.P. has written that there is not a single forum on "911truth"; or "JFKtruth" for that matter, that isn't intel-run.
Now we see there is a new forum run by someone who floats back and forth from DEW to nukes to DEW, and has written that "the nukes were flown into the towers on planes." And he's a no-planer?! A true "genius."
Nothing ever changes, the intel agencies have unlimited funds, and human filth is also unlimited--as we see here at this blog nearly everyday.
And 9:01:
Unfortunately you are in denial as to what the real END will be! (Or you are too gutless to chose otherwise.)
But in analogy to what you wrote, is this like when someone is first in military intelligence (did you know Fetzer in Korea?), then works 33 years (give or take a few for the legend) as an audio "processor", then "retires" (yeah right) to become a
really fine REMASTERMINDER/alterer of the truth?
And a truly great traitor and conspirator to boot (for 66 years.)
The 8:30 PM poster, "ap", calls everyone an "intel perp".
I don't know about others here (well, I do know about Spooked and "ap", but other than them), but whenever someone automatically engages in that kind of game, it makes me wonder about THEM, and whether THEY just might be tryin' to fooleum all of us.
After all, it's a tried and true practice to post outrageous theories in order to try and distract people from giving serious consideration to more realistic theories.
BTW - John McCain may very well have earned his "bones" when he was the Naval liason to the Senate. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Bob "Silent Coup" Woodward held a similar position and most people here know that you have to pay your dues if you want to play in the big leagues of national politics,
Good point 8:43.
That probably means that as soon as the remasterminder is finished remasterminding the audio tapes, Fetzer (his buddy?), will cite the bogus findings "found". Let's wait and see.
OK, 8:51.
Spooked and A.P. have stated what they think the evidence indicates what destroyed the WTC.
It's your turn now....
I'm just as anxious as you are to find out the results of Mr. McWilliams's work.
However, I believe that he is an honorable man who is highly credentialed in his field, and if his findings aren't what I would have hoped they would be, I won't call him
an "intel goon" or "intel perp" or whatever other disrespectful slander you will come up with.
The only one here doing any slandering and showing disrepect is you. For several years now.
You have variously called "Anonymous Physicist" insane, deranged, not a physicist, a liar, a high school kid, insulted his illness in countless ways, said he lied about his having taught Physics at Universities, and countless other lies and misrepresentations of what he and others have said.
Particularly foul though is your glee at, and the disgusting and false things you have said about his illness.
And YOU are the public figure here who has had newspaper articles and website articles published about yourself/"himself."
We respectfully asked simple questions because there were, and are, numerous items that were blatently false, and others that appear to be physically impossible to have occurred. And other issue that are contradicted by other historical information. These simple questions remain unanswered. They were met not with simple honest answers, but with evasions and foul insults.
And how could someone provide future results of some ongoing "analysis"?
You or "he" even refused to send in corrections to the newspaper article after you (or "he") admitted here that the "reporter got it wrong." Why did you not (and still not) send in corrections to the online article that would have been posted?
No one would be happier than us to have this place be one of mutual respect and honesty. The record is clear as to who has acted with slander, insult, threats, or with foul vituperations.
But the issue is bigger than any of us here. Any knowledge of historical importance and in regards to the assassination of our last President and the destruction of our democracy needs to be answered honestly and fully.
If you (or "he") is a man of honesty, please answer the questions--you are a public figure.
Thank you kindly.
All the best to you (or "him.")
When did you stop beating your wife?
At least ap sounds like he is going to cut down on the name calling and labeling, so that's at least some progress.
Maybe his sickness has something to do with it or maybe he's maturing in his middle age. Who cares? It's the result that counts.
Really?
Reading the above it sure seemed like "A.P." was saying you have to stop all your vituperations and falsehoods here.
Will old age help you to do that?
Ut oh. Maybe he ISN'T going to scale back and soften his powerful
rhetorical skills.
What about YOU, ap?
Barack Hussein Obama Bin Laden (Biden),lol nuff said...
Post a Comment
<< Home