Yes, with funding from the CIA and Bush senior. We have had our hands in the middle east since the fall of the Ottomans, man. Nothing changed with junior taking over.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh please ... gimme a &lt;deleted&gt;' break!

Bush senior was head of the CIA for less than 12 months (30Jan76-20Jan77), basically as a fill-in between the end of the Ford and start of the Carter administrations, yet all you lefties want to blame all the troubles of the middle east as being root caused within that tenure.

What a bunch of crap!

BTW, why is this the only thing you choose to comment on?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because your arguments are so full of holes, I couldn't spend a week responding to all of them. So I chose one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You know Spee, you caught me on a bad day, so

You do not know one ###### thing about me. Lefty? How do you know I am lefty? Do you know who I voted for? Do you know if I even voted? Why do you have to reduce every political issue down to left and right? Is that the only why you can think it through? Is good vs. evil the only concept of politics your capable of processing? Is that truly the limit of your cognitive powers?

This isn't some little game. You choose sides and have it out with each and may the best man win B.S. This politcs and history in the making. And instead of looking for truth and weighting opitions you post at your keyboard like your following a football game. Cheer for your favorite team, hurrah, hurrah.

You call me me lefty with out knowing what I stand for. You call me lefty over a couple lines posted in forum. But you my judgmental friend have displayed your colors clearly. So, I know about you Spee. You have placed blinders on your head and have followed the party line like the sheep you are. Left wing and right wing, both traitors, both parrots for the parties the so devoutly support. Why, Spee, why support them so? Why support them over the good of the people? Is it because this party defines you? Is is because your parents were the same? Is it because you don't like the people of the opposite side of the poilitical spectrum? What petty reasons do you have for being such a sheep, Spee?

P.S. Even the History Channel has shows on the CIA funding of Saddam, so what rock have you been living under. Holes you say? Come on Spee, fill up then. Fill 'em up with the latest party line.

Lefty? How do you know I am lefty?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok, fair enough. Remove the word lefty and replace with bush-hater. Is that better?

Now why don't you respond to the actual post with something better than a full blown rant? Do you honestly believe that Bush-1 in a 12-month stand-in tenure as CIA head was responsible for establishing all the middle east troubles and insider conspiracies that you and others commonly attribute to him?

If you had any idea of how DC politics and the 3-letter agencies work, then you would realize how nonsensical such a stance really is.

Is good vs. evil the only concept of politics your capable of processing?

This isn't some little game.

This politcs and history in the making.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, history in the making and yes, it is more than a game. What of it? What would you have preferred, eight more years of namby pamby pandering of radical elements that threaten the safety and security of the American public as a whole?

You know how "everyone" says that the US should back down in international involvement in favor of the United Nations stance and position. That's all well and good and a position that I would favor, if it were at all remotely realistic. The problem was that Saddam thumbed his nose at and said get-f*cked to the UN when they sanctioned him and told him to disarm. What then?

The guy became completely out of control. He only remained in power in the 80's because he was more or less under control. But that all went out the window when he went he invaded a staunch US ally in 1991.

The UN was basically left powerless to do anything under Boutros-Gali and Annan. The UN could have and should have gone in and disarmed Saddam. But they failed to do so. By their failure, they set the course of the UN back to square one and left the US no option but to take the guy down.

Why, Spee, why support them so? Why support them over the good of the people? Is it because this party defines you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I support some of their actions, yes, but I am hardly a full-blown kool-aid drinker like so many on the far right and far left fringe element. The current administration has plenty of flaws as I've stated many times before.

However, do I think that they are doing the right thing by taking the fight to the bad guys in their back yard, rather than have them have their way in the US's back yard? Yes, in a heartbeat.

Do I think there are long term consequences for these actions? Yes, of course, there always are consequences to any action when it comes to international politics. But the question is whether or not the long term results will be better for the American people. IMHO, they will be.

P.S. Even the History Channel has shows on the CIA funding of Saddam, so what rock have you been living under. Holes you say?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are distorting the subject. You clearly suggested that the CIA under Bush-1 put Saddam into power. That is pure b*llsh*t!

Saddam intimidated, kidnapped and assassinated his way to the top. That is a fact! Admit it or keep yourself in a state of delusion, the choice is up to you.

It was all about ooooooooil and making a fortune off of war!

I've never tried to read into this documentary too much, other than viewing it as the lessons learnt of an (obviously) very intelligent man who has seen a few things in his time and is imparting his knowledge. How we choose to interpret his advice is our own business.

Would also recommend reading Colin Powell's book 'A soldiers way' written just after he retired from the joint chiefs of staff. Very good read.

Lefty? How do you know I am lefty?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok, fair enough. Remove the word lefty and replace with bush-hater. Is that better? I don't hate either Bush. They are to me no different then any other suit in DC. I am mad at Junior though. He has weaken our position in the international arena, made us look stupid, ruined the economy, and as far as I am concerned has put us in more danger of terrorist attacks and now more of our freedoms are being lost to protect us.Now why don't you respond to the actual post with something better than a full blown rant? Do you honestly believe that Bush-1 in a 12-month stand-in tenure as CIA head was responsible for establishing all the middle east troubles and insider conspiracies that you and others commonly attribute to him?

If you had any idea of how DC politics and the 3-letter agencies work, then you would realize how nonsensical such a stance really is.

I give you that Bush Sr. did not fund, that was laziness on part. I was not careful when I posted this. However, the CIA has funded him. I am not saying this was a bad or good thing. I am saying that other people know this, and this effects our stance, our reputation, and our word, when we start going after him for being a threat.

Is good vs. evil the only concept of politics your capable of processing?

This isn't some little game.

This politcs and history in the making.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, history in the making and yes, it is more than a game. What of it? What would you have preferred, eight more years of namby pamby pandering of radical elements that threaten the safety and security of the American public as a whole?

You know how "everyone" says that the US should back down in international involvement in favor of the United Nations stance and position. That's all well and good and a position that I would favor, if it were at all remotely realistic. The problem was that Saddam thumbed his nose at and said get-f*cked to the UN when they sanctioned him and told him to disarm. What then?

The guy became completely out of control. He only remained in power in the 80's because he was more or less under control. But that all went out the window when he went he invaded a staunch US ally in 1991.

The UN was basically left powerless to do anything under Boutros-Gali and Annan. The UN could have and should have gone in and disarmed Saddam. But they failed to do so. By their failure, they set the course of the UN back to square one and left the US no option but to take the guy down.

On all these points I agree with you. Saddam did need to go down, but the way in which it has been handle is poor indeed. Senior had a much better plan that he didn't go through with. This was arming the Kurds and letting them take the fight to Saddam. For him to say in power he would have to become even more brutal. The UN would've at some point wanted to interfere over human rights violations than the US would have been called in as heros, like when we pushed him out of Kuwait (sp?). We also wouldn't be viewed as setting up some puppet government, Saddams enemies would have seen to that. We would have viewed as a passive force the by the grace of the UN, NO BAD PRESS! And operating from Afgan lands would have given us the proximity to be able to fund, arm, and train anti-Saddam forces right in the back yard.

It's like this, as far as Iraq is concerned this administration kicked in the front door with guns blazin' like an old western, not caring what the consequences were. If he was a good leader this whole operation would have been pulled off with America's hands clean. We would not be viewed as attacking Islam and playing imperial power games. In modern day politics we need leaders with Machiavellian qualities. Bush as put us in a world of sh1t which we could have avoided and still taken Saddam out if him and these people who work for him would wise up.

Why, Spee, why support them so? Why support them over the good of the people? Is it because this party defines you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I support some of their actions, yes, but I am hardly a full-blown kool-aid drinker like so many on the far right and far left fringe element. The current administration has plenty of flaws as I've stated many times before.

However, do I think that they are doing the right thing by taking the fight to the bad guys in their back yard, rather than have them have their way in the US's back yard? Yes, in a heartbeat.

Do I think there are long term consequences for these actions? Yes, of course, there always are consequences to any action when it comes to international politics. But the question is whether or not the long term results will be better for the American people. IMHO, they will be.

People remember these things. How they remember is important. Almost everyone here has said that Muslims still bring up the crusades as an example of western aggression. So, what do you think will happen if people remember us as such in Iraq? Machiavelli even wrote that those remember their freedom, will always want to go back to that. They hate Saddam, not Iraq. If people there view the government as weak because it is a puppet to yankees they will want to remove those elements. The want to make sure that it is an Iraq government. Another Saddam may rise to do this. If you are the bad guy you act like the good guy. If people remember you as such they will have little reason to hate you, even if you were the aggressor.

P.S. Even the History Channel has shows on the CIA funding of Saddam, so what rock have you been living under. Holes you say?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are distorting the subject. You clearly suggested that the CIA under Bush-1 put Saddam into power. That is pure b*llsh*t!

Saddam intimidated, kidnapped and assassinated his way to the top. That is a fact! Admit it or keep yourself in a state of delusion, the choice is up to you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now, do you see what I am getting at. This whole operation was handled by fools. As a result, we will have problems in the future after Bush is out of office and dosen't have to deal with it. The American people are now at a disadvantage with this patriot act and our economy is screwed. Mistake have been made that should have, they were easy to avoid and this administration didn't.

The cost of war will be around 300 Billions for nothing.

I am sure Saddam would have left the country if he was given 150 Billions in cash instead

Now, do you see what I am getting at. This whole operation was handled by fools.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No I don't see it at all. Who specifically are the fools? What specifically have they done that you think is foolish? You admitted that Saddam needed to be taken down, yet you criticize the method. How would you have done it differently?

The American people are now at a disadvantage with this patriot act and our economy is screwed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How are the American people at a disadvantage with the Patriot Act? I'll even make it easy for you. Here is a link to some statements of the key provisions of the Patriot Act.

http://www.dailypress.com/dp-civilboxsep08,0,1121695.story

Other than the bad guys, who is disadvantaged by these provisions?

How is the American economy screwed (by Bush's actions in Iraq)? Again, I'll do your homework for you. Attached below is a link to the leading economic indicators and other key economic data, their recent performance, and commentary by a respected analysis company.

http://www.smartmoney.com/economywatch/index.cfm?story=intro

Let me know if find anything in there remotely indicating that the American economy is screwed? I surely didn't see anything in there to indicate anything other than the truth, which is that the American economy is quite strong.

This last point reminds of all the TV chicken-littles around this time last year, saying to get one's money into Euro's because the dollar and the pound are tanking against it. Well here we are one year later and gee ..... guess what???

The dollar is about 12% stronger v. the Euro than this time last year. The pound is a few percentage points stronger, but essentially unchanged. So much for bold predictions!

The cost of war will be around 300 Billions for nothing.

I am sure Saddam would have left the country if he was given 150 Billions in cash instead 

300 Billion for nothing? How could you make such a statement? It wasnt for nothing. Do you know how many defense companies made crazy money off of this war? It wasn't 300 Billion for nothing. Lots of people had their pockets lined up real nice from this. Surely these people working for particular companies, such as Halliburton, are real happy the way things turned out. No way, it wasn't for nothing, you just have to look in a smaller circle to find the people that are pleased with the outcome.

Now, do you see what I am getting at. This whole operation was handled by fools.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No I don't see it at all. Who specifically are the fools? What specifically have they done that you think is foolish? You admitted that Saddam needed to be taken down, yet you criticize the method. How would you have done it differently?

Didn't you read? I said Bush sr. plan to arm the Kurds was better idea.

The American people are now at a disadvantage with this patriot act and our economy is screwed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How are the American people at a disadvantage with the Patriot Act? I'll even make it easy for you. Here is a link to some statements of the key provisions of the Patriot Act.

Disadvantage, because our info can be accessed without going through the proper channels. It has become guilty until proven innocent.http://www.dailypress.com/dp-civilboxsep08,0,1121695.story

Other than the bad guys, who is disadvantaged by these provisions?

How is the American economy screwed (by Bush's actions in Iraq)? Again, I'll do your homework for you. Attached below is a link to the leading economic indicators and other key economic data, their recent performance, and commentary by a respected analysis company.

http://www.smartmoney.com/economywatch/index.cfm?story=intro

Let me know if find anything in there remotely indicating that the American economy is screwed? I surely didn't see anything in there to indicate anything other than the truth, which is that the American economy is quite strong.

This last point reminds of all the TV chicken-littles around this time last year, saying to get one's money into Euro's because the dollar and the pound are tanking against it. Well here we are one year later and gee ..... guess what???

The dollar is about 12% stronger v. the Euro than this time last year. The pound is a few percentage points stronger, but essentially unchanged. So much for bold predictions!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We are just now starting to get these put together. Did you miss the reposts given by Greenspan a few years back. That is why everyone was worried.

The cost of war will be around 300 Billions for nothing.

I am sure Saddam would have left the country if he was given 150 Billions in cash instead 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

300 Billion for nothing? How could you make such a statement? It wasnt for nothing. Do you know how many defense companies made crazy money off of this war? It wasn't 300 Billion for nothing. Lots of people had their pockets lined up real nice from this. Surely these people working for particular companies, such as Halliburton, are real happy the way things turned out. No way, it wasn't for nothing, you just have to look in a smaller circle to find the people that are pleased with the outcome.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was assuming 300 billions for regional peace and to save Iraq from its own people since this is not going to happen anyhow

Fictions are necessary to the people, and the Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to contemplate it in all its brilliance. In fact, what can there be in common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? The truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason.

- Illustrious Albert Pike 33°

Sovereign Grand Commander

Mother Supreme Council of the World

THE SUPREME COUNCIL of the ThirtyThird and Last Degree

Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Morals and Dogma, page 103 -

Fictions are necessary to the people, and the Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to contemplate it in all its brilliance. In fact, what can there be in common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? The truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason.

- Illustrious Albert Pike 33°

Sovereign Grand Commander

Mother Supreme Council of the World

THE SUPREME COUNCIL of the ThirtyThird and Last Degree

Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Morals and Dogma, page 103 -

So Mote It Be...

Fictions are necessary to the people, and the Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to contemplate it in all its brilliance. In fact, what can there be in common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? The truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason.

[i]- Illustrious Albert Pike 33°

Sovereign Grand Commander

Mother Supreme Council of the World

THE SUPREME COUNCIL of the ThirtyThird and Last Degree

Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Morals and Dogma, page 103 -[/i]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Could you explain all this please? It sounds serious.

Could you explain all this please? It sounds serious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Watch "3 Days of the Condor"

Fictions are necessary to the people, and the Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to contemplate it in all its brilliance. In fact, what can there be in common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? The truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason.

Illustrious Albert Pike 33°

Sovereign Grand Commander

Mother Supreme Council of the World

THE SUPREME COUNCIL of the ThirtyThird and Last Degree

Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Morals and Dogma, page 103 -

[/color]

Could you explain all this please? It sounds serious.

Basically, what Mr. Pike is saying is that lying to the majority of the population in a nation is needed because they are too ignorant to absorb the real truth. Futhermore, lying is also needed because what is really happening, what the real agenda of nations is, would not be accepted by the masses easily. If they knew how badly they were being screwed over, they would most certainly revolt.

Basically, what Mr. Pike is saying is that lying to the majority of the population in a nation is needed because they are too ignorant to absorb the real truth.  Futhermore,  lying is also needed because what is really happening, what the real agenda of nations is, would not be accepted by the masses easily.  If they knew how badly they were being screwed over, they would most certainly revolt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is the NeoCons original idea that "necessary" lies or myths will serve the public better than the truth. Read Strauss.

Basically, what Mr. Pike is saying is that lying to the majority of the population in a nation is needed because they are too ignorant to absorb the real truth.  Futhermore,  lying is also needed because what is really happening, what the real agenda of nations is, would not be accepted by the masses easily.  If they knew how badly they were being screwed over, they would most certainly revolt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is the NeoCons original idea that "necessary" lies or myths will serve the public better than the truth. Read Strauss.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Didn't know that Levi was a writer...you learn something every day eh!

Basically, what Mr. Pike is saying is that lying to the majority of the population in a nation is needed because they are too ignorant to absorb the real truth.  Futhermore,  lying is also needed because what is really happening, what the real agenda of nations is, would not be accepted by the masses easily.  If they knew how badly they were being screwed over, they would most certainly revolt.

This is the NeoCons original idea that "necessary" lies or myths will serve the public better than the truth. Read Strauss.

Strauss is one of my favorite writers and a very smart man. He is directly influenced by Machiavelli, another great influential man.

This practice is not exclusive to NeoCons. GOPers and Libs both use this tactic because in actuality, the real political power of governments comes from people you never hear or see from. The tactic is so effective that everyone that has even half a brain will implement it.

What is currently happening in American foreign policy was something clearly outlined by Strauss. Strauss thought that the best way for ordinary human beings to raise themselves above the beasts is to be utterly devoted to their nation and willing to sacrifice their lives for it. He recommended a rabid nationalism and a militant society modelled on Sparta. He thought that this was the best hope for a nation to be secure against her external enemies as well as the internal threat of decadence, sloth, and pleasure. A policy of perpetual war against a threatening enemy is the best way to ward off political decay. And if the enemy cannot be found, then it must be invented.

What is currently happening in American foreign policy was something clearly outlined by Strauss.  Strauss thought that the best way for ordinary human beings to raise themselves above the beasts is to be utterly devoted to their nation and willing to sacrifice their lives for it. He recommended a rabid nationalism and a militant society modelled on Sparta. He thought that this was the best hope for a nation to be secure against her external enemies as well as the internal threat of decadence, sloth, and pleasure. A policy of perpetual war against a threatening enemy is the best way to ward off political decay. And if the enemy cannot be found, then it must be invented.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Seems like the period we are living, doesn't it ? incidently his ideas are shared with religious fundamentalists and even the most extreme islamists.

One of Strauss main point was religion and how it served a nation. He might not be entirely wrong but you have to question the rationale behind all this. Protecting society from itself is a noble cause but the price to pay might be too high if this entitles the "elite" to use this as an excuse to loot society.

What is currently happening in American foreign policy was something clearly outlined by Strauss.  Strauss thought that the best way for ordinary human beings to raise themselves above the beasts is to be utterly devoted to their nation and willing to sacrifice their lives for it. He recommended a rabid nationalism and a militant society modelled on Sparta. He thought that this was the best hope for a nation to be secure against her external enemies as well as the internal threat of decadence, sloth, and pleasure. A policy of perpetual war against a threatening enemy is the best way to ward off political decay. And if the enemy cannot be found, then it must be invented.

Seems like the period we are living, doesn't it ? incidently his ideas are shared with religious fundamentalists and even the most extreme islamists.

One of Strauss main point was religion and how it served a nation. He might not be entirely wrong but you have to question the rationale behind all this. Protecting society from itself is a noble cause but the price to pay might be too high if this entitles the "elite" to use this as an excuse to loot society.

The ultimate goal of utilizing this Strauss-infused method is to keep the power where it currently is, with the richest 1% of a nation. Status quo must be maintained at all times or the structure is jeopardized.

Fictions are necessary to the people, and the Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to contemplate it in all its brilliance. In fact, what can there be in common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? The truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason.

Illustrious Albert Pike 33°

Sovereign Grand Commander

Mother Supreme Council of the World

THE SUPREME COUNCIL of the ThirtyThird and Last Degree

Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Morals and Dogma, page 103 -

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[/color] This stuff right here. What does all these titles mean?Could you explain all this please? It sounds serious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Basically, what Mr. Pike is saying is that lying to the majority of the population in a nation is needed because they are too ignorant to absorb the real truth. Futhermore, lying is also needed because what is really happening, what the real agenda of nations is, would not be accepted by the masses easily. If they knew how badly they were being screwed over, they would most certainly revolt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, no I got that. I meant the stuff in yellow. Where does all that come from?

Could you explain all this please? It sounds serious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Watch "3 Days of the Condor"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OH, what's that?

Could you explain all this please? It sounds serious.

Watch "3 Days of the Condor"

OH, what's that?

A movie?

Could you explain all this please? It sounds serious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Watch "3 Days of the Condor"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OH, what's that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A movie?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Gee, Boon, thanks for clearing that up. I would never have guess that.

Fictions are necessary to the people, and the Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to contemplate it in all its brilliance. In fact, what can there be in common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? The truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason.

Illustrious Albert Pike 33°

Sovereign Grand Commander

Mother Supreme Council of the World

THE SUPREME COUNCIL of the ThirtyThird and Last Degree

Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Morals and Dogma, page 103 -

[/color] This stuff right here. What does all these titles mean?Could you explain all this please? It sounds serious.

Basically, what Mr. Pike is saying is that lying to the majority of the population in a nation is needed because they are too ignorant to absorb the real truth. Futhermore, lying is also needed because what is really happening, what the real agenda of nations is, would not be accepted by the masses easily. If they knew how badly they were being screwed over, they would most certainly revolt.

Oh, no I got that. I meant the stuff in yellow. Where does all that come from?

Oh, I didnt know what you were asking about.

Albert Pike was one of the most respected leaders of the Freemasons in the 1800's. The "Scottish Rite of Freemasonry", which Albert Pike became the Grand Master, is widely believe to be one of the original schools originating out of the ashes of the Knights Templars when they went looking for refuge in Scotland. 33rd degree, which you see in his title, was Pikes rank. Every Mason is designated a rank through a degree and 33rd degree is the top ranking. With each new rank, a Mason is let in further into the secrets which the Masons know. Most of it is thought to be bulls**t until you start reaching the ranks of 30 degree and higher. This quote from Pike came from a book he wrote called "Morals & Dogma" like you see there.

If you want to know how powerful Albert Pike was so you can give credence to what he is saying, after the Civil War Pike was found guilty of Treason against the United States. Treason, or betraying your country for another, is one of the most serious crimes in the U.S. and is usually punishable by death. Pike was pardoned by fellow Freemason President Andrew Johnson on April 22, 1866, who met with him the next day at the White House. On June 20, 1867, Scottish Rite officials conferred upon Johnson the 4th to 32nd Freemasonry degrees, and he later went to Boston to dedicate a Masonic Temple.

They gave Johnson a huge jump in rank from 4th to 32nd degree, which is the second higest you can go. For Treason? Makes you think twice about who really pulls the stings in Washington doesn't it?

Well, there hasn't been a Freemason in office since Gerald Ford so I woldn't focus on that aspect.

Well, there hasn't been a Freemason in office since Gerald Ford so I woldn't focus on that aspect. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

better name for Freemasons is goat fcukers .....you would be surprised how high in society they are....and they always look after their own.

There may not have been a Goat shagger in office since Ford, but you could bet your bottom dollar that a good percentage of the decision makers and money donators are.

Could you explain all this please? It sounds serious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Watch "3 Days of the Condor"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OH, what's that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tremendous circa '73 movie well before its time, starring Robert Redford, Max Von Sydow et al. Redford works for the CIA as a reader researcher who reads "everything" to look for plots, links to plans, hidden codes, etc. He accidentally uncovers a CIA plot that was being considered for invading a middle east country to get the oil.

Redford's CIA handler lays down the facts that the plan would have worked and that when it really comes down to it, people need oil, people want oil and when push comes to shove, they won't care how oil is obtained, so long as it is obtained. In other words, they won't care what the truth is as long as the majority get what they think they want and need.

I won't say any more becuase it could ruin the movie which you would probably find interesting and entertaining.

I heard it another way in an espionage/subversion book that I read while doing a college research paper a long time ago. In it the author talks about various subversion and other techniques for controlling large groups of people. ONe of his key points is "A confused society is a controllable society."

All the more reason to believe none of what you hear, only half of what you see, and to think for yourself and believe and trust your own instincts.

Watch this