Does anyone else feel a little queasy?

[hang a left]

I guess this is as a good a place as any to share my thoughts.


You know, something just doesn't feel right here. I posted about this last week with my gut feelings about the Spain disaster and other leaders coming out against *Bush's Iraq fiasco.

Here we go again. There is a non-stop assault on *Bushco. It is just too good to be true. Whistle is getting his clock cleaned everyday all day long. WTF is up. It is like it was all planned this way. I remember in the run-up to the war, questioning the dem motives, and at one point actually thinking, they are setting *Bush up. They are gonna let him have his war, knowing that it will end in his demise.

Yes, I am a big time foiler. But really, Leslie Stahl, the Bildeberger, it is like this has been the plan all along.

I am very uneasy with recent remarks made by Kerry on Iraq, Venezuela, and others. It is like I can feel the manipulation in the air. Don't get me wrong, I am glad this administration is getting it's comin' uppins, but something feels very very wrong. It is mutiny on the bounty big time. I feel queasy inside.

edit for a ?

[Andy_Stephenson]

1. I am with you...

can't put my finger on it...but it is way to planned out. Like a stage show.

[aquart]

9. Because some great mastermind is pulling the strings of Spain?

And all the rest of us? We're just being perfectly manipulated into doing what.......WHO......wants?

Bush was ALWAYS a train wreck. Nobody believed us while the money lasted. But the money has run out. He gave it away. He's giving away our air, water, health, and lives. And you think it's odd that someone notices?

The fiscal conservatives have pulled away from Bush. Of course they were going to free up some of their attack dogs to go after him. They didn't care that he lied to us. They are pissed as shit that he lied to them.

Weren't you expecting this? I was.

As for Kerry's remarks.....well, he ain't ideal. But he's had a lot of time to think about what he wants for this country, maybe he'll be all right. Maybe they'll grind him down. Maybe it's too late to save us. Maybe he'll turn out to be as dangerously power mad as Bush. Doesn't matter. We have to give him the chance. We have to pry BushCo loose.

[hang a left]

13. Agreed.

But there has been a lot of people on to Mr. Amtrack for a long time. Don't tell me congress and the media weren't either. We are not the only watchful ones in the country, at least I hope not. But nobody was saying squat. The house rolled, the senate rolled time and time and time again. What about portions of Patriot II getting stuck inside appropriations bills? "Oh....we'll go back and fix that......later." Yeah.........right.......OK. This is just one of many examples. Our constitution has been hammered, our bill of rights has faced assault, courts have been stacked, industries deregulated, medicare raped, and on and on and on ad infinitum.

[rucky]

2. We're just not used to winning

it's been awhile.

tho i must admit that globalization is the #1 problem that we won't be addressing anytime soon.

[Andy_Stephenson]

4. globalization is the #1 problem that we won't be addressing

No we won't...and why not? Lack of political will? Big Corporate donors to both parties set the agenda. We sure as hell don't. We need to take our leaders to task. If they will not represent the people...they need to be replaced with ones who will listen.

[Robbien]

3. If your question is

will the corporate monied men of the globe be satisfied with either Bush or Kerry. As each day passes, my guess is getting closer to a definite yes. Optimism has left the building.

[worldgonekrazy]

5. What would be wrong with that?

The Dems knew they couldn't attack Bush after 9/11, so they had to wait for the right time. In the meanwhile, why not help Bush dig the hole deeper and deeper so that when the shit really hits the fan (like it looks like it will any second now) he will really be FUCKED. I hope this was a plan by the Dems, because at least it would show they are finally wising up to the BFEE and are ready to fight back.

Of course, it would concern me that they allowed the Iraq War to happen just to bury Bush, but could they have stopped it anyway?

[hang a left]

6. I think that part of my point that you missed

was that it appears that Kerry is being hoisted up to wear the crown. Not because of *Bush ef ups, but because he is the one that will finish the job. Bush came in and did alot of damage during his term. Now they are sending the country a savior (a wolf in sheep's clothing?). I have always suspected that this would be the case. But now it is becoming very clear.

[Andy_Stephenson]

8. Hope you have your flame shields up....

your going to need them.

SnB Good Cop Bad Cop...Problem Solution....

[Robbien]

11. It is surprising how many are now expressing their doubts

Before the Iowa Caucus, Kerry was barely a blip on the radar. All of a sudden out of the blue, he is the at the head of the pack. I have been wondering why ever since.

[hang a left]

15. Yep. Remember when his campaign got shook out.

Very very fishy.

[Andy_Stephenson]

19. Very fishy...indeed n/t

[54anickel]

45. Hi Robbien

:hi: As we've shared before, I was thinking the same thing again.

[worldgonekrazy]

18. I dunno, Kerry's got a pretty long record that indicates otherwise

If he's in on this massive conspiracy then why did he go after the Reagan administration so vehemently during the Iran-Contra scandal? Why did he go after the first Bush Administration for the BCCI bank scandal (which could tear the whole damn thing down)? It just doesn't make sense.

I will say though that you do have good points about the Patriot Act II and such. It sure seems like a faction of the Dems are complicit in these plans...but maybe they were just helping Bush dig the whole deeper so he would be burried even further when the timing became right?

[hang a left]

22. Yes he did. But ultimately who went to jail?

The big fish still swim. Perhaps this was all part of Kerry's grooming.

[worldgonekrazy]

25. True...but that would be a MASSIVE CONSPIRACY

I mean this whole thing would have had to have been planned out twenty fucking years ago!

Good lord, I just don't know what to believe anymore.

[hang a left]

28. Who was it that said "Nothing in politics happens on accident."

Was that Truman?

[Robbien]

26. And just because all the big fish are swimming in the same pool

doesn't mean there are not squabbles among them on who get the best bits of the scrum.

[hippiechick]

41. Ding, Ding, Ding !!!! We have a winner !!!

:toast: 'Zactly.

:hippie:

[JohnyCanuck]

7. Remerber what a well known tin foil hatter predicted back in July '03

Mike Ruppert July 2003: the decision has already been made by corporate and financial powers to remove George W. Bush, whether he wants to leave or not, and whether he steals the next election or not.




July 1, 2003 1600 PDT (FTW) -- Let's just suppose for a moment that George W. Bush was removed from the White House. Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Wolfowitz and Rove too. What would that leave us with? It would leave us stuck in hugely expensive, Vietnam-like guerrilla wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It would leave us with the Patriot Act, Homeland Security and Total Information Awareness snooping into every detail of our lives. It would leave us with a government in violation of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th Amendments to the Constitution. It would leave us with a massive cover-up of US complicity in the attacks of 9/11 that, if fully admitted, would show not intelligence "failures" but intelligence crimes, approved and ordered by the most powerful people in the country. It would leave us with a government that now has the power to compel mass vaccinations on pain of imprisonment or fine, and with no legal ability to sue the vaccine makers who killed our friends or our children. It would leave us with two and half million unemployed; the largest budget deficits in history; more than $3.3 trillion missing from the Department of Defense; and state and local governments broke to the point of having to cut back essential services like sewers, police, and fire. It would leave us with a federal government that had hit the debt ceiling and was unable to borrow any more money. And we would still be facing a looming natural gas crisis of unimagined proportions, and living on a planet that is slowly realizing that it is running out of oil with no "Plan B". Our airports however, would be very safe, and shares of Halliburton, Lockheed and DynCorp would be paying excellent dividends.

This is not good management.

Leaving all of these issues unaddressed is not good management either.

And this is why, as I will demonstrate in this article, the decision has already been made by corporate and financial powers to remove George W. Bush, whether he wants to leave or not, and whether he steals the next election or not. Before you start cheering, ask yourself three questions: "If there is someone or something that can decide that Bush will not return, nor remain for long, what is it? And if that thing is powerful enough to remove Bush, was it not also powerful enough to have put him there in the first place? And if that is the case, then isn't that what's really responsible for the state of things? George W. Bush is just a hired CEO who is about to be removed by the "Board of Directors". Who are they? Are they going to choose his replacement? Are you going to help them?

Beyond Bush Part I

October 20, 2003 1000 PDT (FTW) --Since Part I of this series was published, the credibility of the Bush administration has - as predicted - been assaulted on a variety of fronts. W's approval rating has dropped below 50%. The Republicans are worried about whether he is re-electable. The political, military and economic situation in Iraq has worsened. The US economy staggers on the brink of meltdown, in debt and an anemic dollar. The reality of Peak Oil and Gas has been acknowledged in a number of mainstream publications including CNN, The Independent, and Jane's Intelligence Summary. Recent stories have confirmed reports that actual oil reserves may be 80% smaller than previously reported. The US has experienced the first of many major power blackouts yet to come. American military morale is plummeting as quickly as is its readiness for additional (inevitable) conflicts. And the military situation in Iraq and Afghanistan remains as dangerous, and uncertain, as Iraqi oil remains undeliverable.

The last development is perhaps the biggest of all the Neocon blunders, but it still accomplishes the primary objective laid out by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard: The oil and many rebuilding contracts have been denied to any powers "that might seek to usurp the US on the world stage". Even as the US has gone hat-in-hand to the UN asking for help in Iraq (and been rebuffed), it has made it clear that it intends to retain absolute control of Iraqi resources. Europe and Russia will not play that game. Oil in the ground is oil in the bank and, at least for the moment, by tweaking supplies and conflicts around the world, the US can maintain enough supply from other sources to keep the house of cards from falling. Within three to five years, that may not be possible.

Beyond Bush Part II

[hang a left]

10. Yep, read that back then.

Thanks for reminding me. Absolutely no short term memory.

[aquart]

14. Sorry, I don't follow the argument.

Bush is being replaced ...why?

I certainly don't think Kerry will act to disband Homeland Security or sunset the Patriot Act. I think he likes the power and that worries me. As to this grand corporate cabal? They're making a big mess. I don't know anyone who is going to clean it up.

[worldgonekrazy]

21. Bush is being replaced because everything associated with him...

...will be discredited when the people finally figure out what a massive fucking shame they have been sold. It would certainly happen at some time if Bush were to get a second term. Then everything he did (Homeland Security, Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, etc.) would go out the window as well. If you replace the figurehead with someone else you can keep the apparatus.

[JohnyCanuck]

32. Bush is being replaced - Why?

I think the following is pretty fair assessment of Ruppert's arguments, however to be fair, I think you should read the articles and draw your own conclusion.

Bush and his gang did the dirty deed of getting the US involved in Iraq and presumably in control of some very (and ever increasingly) important oil resources. However he is now becoming a liability in that the rest of the world and increasingly US citizens see him for being a lying, war mongering, sock puppet of the special interests who arranged to make a 3rd rate Texas governor with minimal qualifications President of the USA.

However once the dirty deed has been done and the US military ensconced in Iraq, the US and the world is stuck with a fait accompli and they will be there to stay regardless of who takes over from Bush. The new leader will be able to present a kindler, gentler face to the world and make much of the claim that he would have done it differently himself, but too bad my incompetent predecessor, Georgy Boy, was such a fuck up and got us stuck in this quagmire. Now we have no choice but to stay here with our troops as we try to sort it all out while watching over that precious oil and build strategically imporant military bases from which we can launch future military operations into other strategic Middle Eastern and/or oil rich countries as necessary.

If Ruppert and the rest of the Peak Oil theorists are correct about world oil production about to peak in the not too distant future it also becomes somewhat more understandably why the movers and shakers that run the show would be so anxious to get into Iraq. It could also help explain (among other factors as well) why Bush and his gang were so hot to trot after Saddam from day 1. It was more than just because Saddam tried to kill poppy, or simply to make Iraq a testing ground for the PNAC strategy. It's worthwhile to note that one of the prominent members of the Cheney Energy Task Force, investment banker Matthew Simmons, is a Peak Oiler.


The uh, I think basically that now, that peaking of oil will never be accurately predicted until after the fact. But the event will occur, and my analysis is leaning me more by the month, the worry that peaking is at hand; not years away. If it turns out I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. But if I'm right, the unforeseen consequences are devastating. But unfortunately the world has no Plan B if I'm right. The facts are too serious to ignore. Sadly the pessimist-optimist debate started too late. The Club of Rome humanists were right to raise the 'Limits to Growth' issues in the late 1960's. When they raised these issues they were actually talking about a time frame of 2050 to 2070. Then time was on the side of preparing Plan B. They like Dr. Hubbert got to be seen as Chicken Little or the Boy Who Cried Wolf....

– Investment Banker Matthew Simmons

(Matthew Simmons has been a key advisor to the Bush Administration, Vice President Cheney's 2001 Energy Task Force and the Council on Foreign Relations. An energy investment banker, Simmons is the CEO of Simmons and Co. International, handling an investment portfolio of approximately $56 billion. He has served previously on the faculty of Harvard Business School)

Above quote by Matthew Simmons at: http://www.peakoil.net/iwood2003/MatSim.html

More info on Peak Oil at:
http://globalpublicmedia.com/SECTIONS/ENERGY/oil.depletion.php

[worldgonekrazy]

20. Why would the Corps want to destory the U.S.?

We are their biggest consumer base, after all. I'm not saying you aren't on to something, but I just don't understand what the motive would be. Have any idea?

[hang a left]

24. They have already cashed in.

THey have already stolen all the money. There will be other markets. China for one.

[54anickel]

46. GACK! I've only read the intro part of your post and I'm almost too

afraid to read any further. Do I dare open the links? These are the types of things that run thru the back of my mind a lot.
And here I was just blaming it on my meds.

[BeHereNow]

12. You are correct and not alone.

I highly recommend this authors' articles.
You can read several of them by going to
his page on the axis of logic site.
TONS of information that most people
don't want to know...
That is why we are screwed.

From Axis of logic archives:
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_5164.shtml

"In the end, "things that matter," -- globalization,
corporate mergers and acquisitions; jobs lost and
companies "a-going-off-shoring" to avoid U.S. wages
and benefits; regional wars, oil exploitationist
expansionism -- the American-led empire’s global
corporate agenda will continue onward, forward, no
matter who resides in the oval office.

In the end, "things that don’t matter" to empire, you will
still have to yourselves to debate, argue, vote over,
fret over, over and over again: abortion, gun rights,
gay marriages, pornography, local tax issues; all our
"moral issues" we take issue with, with everyone else,
are ours to keep.

In the end, it was the "things that mattered," that didn’t
matter to most, so in the end, you always get the
government you deserve."
Craig B. Hulet?

BIO on Mr. Hulet, (the man they really don't want
you to hear from because he has connected
ALL the dots. His site is overwhelming but a MUST visit.
I really recommend his books and interview recordings.
He will blow your mind, and make you feel even queasier,
however you WILL be more informed than most.)

Craig B Hulet was Special Assistant for Special Projects
to Congressman Jack Metcalf (Ret.); he is periodically
a consultant to federal law enforcement (ATF&E with
Homeland Security); he has written four books on
international relations and philosophy, his latest The
Hydra of Carnage: Bush's Imperial War-making and
the Rule of Law, 2002; he can be reached through
www.kcandassociates.org

[Karenina]

17. SIGH!!!

:kick: MUST READ if you are able.

[worldgonekrazy]

23. It is true that Empires exist only to sustain themselves

And inevitably Empires have always fallen from within when the people simply got tired of the massive costs to the citizenry associated with Empire. Could be that the powers that be have decided to pre-empt that by making sure that we have no voice in making any decisions that might effect the health of the Empire.

[BeHereNow]

27. Oh yeah baby-

These folks have thought EVERYTHING
as far as preventing anything that might
block their agenda.
AND unlike the fallen before them, they
have technology, REALLY scary technology.
They have also perfected the art of smoke
and mirror distractions that they continuously
flash before a brain dead audience.
BHN

[hang a left]

31. Stop it now

You are scaring me :-(

I know it, you can't watch the events, the rapid destruction and desent into hell of the past 3 years, and not feel like, uh oh here it comes.

[BeHereNow]

44. Actually, I think it is here...

and what is coming is the wake up to the nightmare
that is firmly entrenched and happening.
Other people on the planet KNOW "it" is here.
They are dying to "it" daily.
Americans simply have not understood that
"it" will deal no differently with them than it
is currently dealing with those "other" people
that Americans are so ignorant of.
They will let us continue to fuss with things
that don't matter to them, have "elections"
and get into debt buying crap we don't need.
We can keep our hideous TV shows and
talk radio, but in the end- "it" will control
everything that matters, and our lives will
continue to deteriorate until we are in the same
boat as the people who are suffering all over the
world. I do not believe the American people
will fully comprehend what is happening until
they are hungry and homeless, and let's face it- there are
more and more of those people here every day.
BHN

[shoopnyc123]

16. Truth and Honesty are unsettling...eom

[kaitykaity]

29. My problem is after 3-1/2 years of this crap,

I can't believe anything is actually going to change. I keep waiting for the sweep-aside, the document dump, the distraction, you know what I mean? I sure seems like *'s nuts are in the vise, but they always get pulled out by something.

So yeah, I'mm with you . . .

[Kazak]

30. Yes...

and have for some time.

:scared:

[starroute]

33. The Establishment has no real party loyalties

What they value most is power and money. But unlike the Bushies, they at least have the sense not to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. They tend to prefer Republican presidents, but when things go really back under Republicans (Hoover, Nixon), they're perfectly willing to cut bait and let the Democrats clean up the mess.

Over the past thirty-some years, there have been two types of Democratic presidential candidates: liberals who lose, and moderates who win. But this isn't because liberals are naturally unelectable. It's because the Establishment finds it a convenient way of manipulating the outcome of elections.

Last fall, Dean was being covertly promoted by the Establishment as a classic can't-win Democratic liberal. (Even though by most standards he was a moderate.) But the moment it became obvious that Bush was in real trouble over the WMD claims, Dean miraculously fell apart and Kerry came roaring back from near-oblivion. A sure sign of the Establishment switching its bet.

However, things may be different this time than they were in 1992 or 1976. For one thing, in the past, the Establishment has preferred Republican presidents as their default position. But now that it's being generally acknowledged that the economy and the stock market do better under Democrats, that may change.

Also, the shadowy force that I am calling "the Establishment," is most likely idental to the old East Coast Establishment. And there are signs that the ferocious struggle for control which has been going on between the East Coast Establishment and the Southern/Dixiecrat/Texas/oil/neocon/California/Reaganite wanna-bes is currently coming to a head.

If the East Coast Establishment triumphs, that might at least leave room for a government which is relatively open to progressive initiatives (universal health insurance, gay rights), if not to genuine popular power. But if it loses, we're all up shit's creek.

And beyond that, there are certain factors in play (such as the potential of the Internet for creating distributed networks) that might ultimately liberate us from all shadowy behind-the-scenes control.

So, speaking from the point of view of a mouse on the battlefield, I'm willing under the prevailing conditions to support a Kerry victory, no matter how manipulated and partial it may appear. My real concerns are with what happens afterwards.

[BeHereNow]

34. What happens afterwards...

is exactly when we will learn just how late it is,
as in it has been "too late" for quite some time.
Everything is set up for "auto-control" over the cliff,
who ever is in the driver's seat.
BHN

[hang a left]

37. Well I really don't think that we get to chose, do you?

"I'm willing under the prevailing conditions to support a Kerry victory, no matter how manipulated and partial it may appear."

And I am going to have to disagree with you here.

"And beyond that, there are certain factors in play (such as the potential of the Internet for creating distributed networks) that might ultimately liberate us from all shadowy behind-the-scenes control."

IMO the internet offers the populace an opportunity to educate themselves. It gives groups an opportunity to organize and raise money. It can get the word out. But as recent history has shown us, millions of people marching in the streets could not stop the Iraq slaughter. What makes you think the internet can liberate us from the "shadows?"

[starroute]

47. "Millions of people marching" is a symptom, not a solution

We live in an era of great centralization of power. This hasn't always been so. Even a hundred years ago, the average person lived and died in the same little town and married the girl or boy next door. Power was generated and applied locally, and the federal government barely touched people's lives.

All that changed in the course of the 20th century. The federal government became bigger and bigger, corporations became larger and more far-reaching, and big government and big business increasingly came to control even the most minute details of life. People themselves started to move around more and more, so that instead of being grounded in family and community, they were on their own as isolated individuals, dependent on the massive institutions with which they came in contact.

Naturally enough, the most common response to the abuses of big government and big business has been for people to come together and get big themselves. Mass political movements. Labor unions. Colossal demonstrations whose effectiveness is measured in terms of gross throw-weight.

But what if it didn't have to be that way? What if power in the 21st century turned out to be a result not of size, but of networking effectiveness? What if we started living our lives within a system of feedback mechanisms whose effect was to amplify meaningful statements and to damp out null-content ones? In that case, one person with something real to say -- and the ability to distribute their message instantaneously throughout the world -- could be more powerful than an entire media empire motivated only by the wish not to offend a single potential customer.

The real battle I see shaping up over the next ten years isn't about who controls the levers of old-style military and economic power. It's about whether the new power of peer-to-peer communication will be unleashed, or whether we will continued to be enslaved by the providers of top-down content and by self-appointed gatekeepers on the information highway. That battle is very real, and it has already started -- but it's going to get far more visible and far nastier before it's done.

That's the "afterwards" I'm interested in. If Kerry is good enough to save us from the worst of Bush's excesses and keep the world from blowing sky-high as the oil crunch starts, I'm satisfied to let him do it, no matter whose interests he really serves. I've got other things to worry about.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

35. They're emboldened because public sentiment is rising against Bush.

Before this - they were afraid to attack BushCo becasue the public would turn against them. Just my opinion...

[hang a left]

38. No offense intended but

that is a little naive. The media establishes opinion and sentiment. It is not the other way around.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

43. Both sides encourage and influence each other.

n/t

[StayOutTheBushes]

36. Skull and Bones conspiracy?

.

[hang a left]

39. No.

The vast right wing one.

[BeHereNow]

40. LOVE your DU Name!

Now THAT is a great name.
"Stayout(of)thebushes"
Is that the implication?
Welcome to DU- and I dont' think it is
a conspiracy really, rather a corporate business
transaction. Them against the rest of us-
any guesses on who is going to win?
My guess is they will end up controlling
everything that matters- resource wise,
and we will be at their mercy.
BHN

[John BigBootay]

42. yeah-- it was the clam dip. n/t