[CTRL] Bring it on
-Caveat Lector- Fine. If these Illuminati sons-of-bitches want to drag out this farce all fall, bring it on. Have your fun with the goddam Ohio election psychodrama. Feed your propaganda organs with more and more psy-op bullshit. This just means we have two more months before the U.S. House votes on the next President. Two more months for the truth of 9/11 to emerge and expose the murderous rot infecting the body politic. Bring it on. Bitches. -- www.total411.info www.libertythink.com www.total911.info www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Bring It On!
-Caveat Lector- http://www.vdare.com/fulford/late_amnesty.htm#bring Bring It On! There's a new propaganda film called "A Day Without a Mexican," [Trailer] by Sergio Arau, based on the offensive idea that Americans are unable to function without Mexican help. Ruben Navarette [email him], another professional token media Hispanic in the Roger Hernandez mold, claims in his syndicated column that: Mexican immigrants could bring America to a standstill by not picking up a hoe, washing a dish, swinging a hammer or doing any of the multitude of tasks for which foreigners are now responsible on an average day. So the filmmakers asked: What if there were suddenly a day without Mexicans? We get the answer after a mysterious fog sweeps across California, removing all Latinos and leaving behind economic distress, food shortages, work stoppages and civil unrest. The fog also leaves behind scores of helpless Anglos who have grown so accustomed to being catered to by their Latino maids, gardeners and nannies that they have forgotten how to take care of themselves. [A day without Mexicans is like Oh, my God, May 26, 2004] This is nonsense, of course. The United States got along fairly well without a massive invasion of Mexican peasants for two hundred years. But, like the similar films [The Day After and The Day After Tomorrow] made as anti-American and as environmentalist propaganda, it will convince many of the its more gullible viewers to believe things that aren't true. The title obviously leads to the following game, which you can play at home, if you like. Complete this sentence: "A day without Mexicans is like a day without ."? Here are some of VDARE.com's answers: "A day without Mexicans is like a day without ." Unemployment Higher Taxes Armed Robbery Diplomatic Intrigue Welfare Fraud Sprawl Street Gangs You try it! It might give you some ideas www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Bring 'Em On?
-Caveat Lector- http://www.rense.com/general38/bringEmon.htm "Bring 'Em On?" By Stan Goff Counterpunch,org 7-5-3 A Former Special Forces Soldier Responds To Bush's Invitation For Iraqis To Attack US Troops... In 1970, when I arrived at my unit, Company A, 4th Battalion/503rd Infantry, 173rd Airborne Brigade, in what was then the Republic of Vietnam, I was charged up for a fight. I believed that if we didn't stop the communists in Vietnam, we'd eventually be fighting this global conspiracy in the streets of Hot Springs, Arkansas. I'd been toughened by Basic Training, Infantry Training and Parachute Training, taught how to use my weapons and equipment, and I was confident in my ability to vanquish the skinny unter-menschen. So I was dismayed when one of my new colleagues--a veteran who'd been there ten months--told me, "We are losing this war." Not only that, he said, if I wanted to survive for my one year there, I had to understand one very basic thing. All Vietnamese were the enemy, and for us, the grunts on the ground, this was a race war. Within one month, it was apparent that everything he told me was true, and that every reason that was being given to the American public for the war was not true. We had a battalion commander whom I never saw. He would fly over in a Loach helicopter and give cavalier instructions to do things like "take your unit 13 kilometers to the north." In the Central Highlands, 13 kilometers is something we had to hack out with machetes, in 98-degree heat, carrying sometimes 90 pounds over our body weights, over steep, slippery terrain. The battalion commander never picked up a machete as far as we knew, and after these directives he'd fly back to an air-conditioned headquarters in LZ English near Bong-son. We often fantasized together about shooting his helicopter down as a way of relieving our deep resentment against this faceless, starched and spit-shined despot. Yesterday, when I read that US Commander-in-Chief George W. Bush, in a moment of blustering arm-chair machismo, sent a message to the 'non-existent' Iraqi guerrillas to "bring 'em on," the first image in my mind was a 20-year-old soldier in an ever-more-fragile marriage, who'd been away from home for 8 months. He participated in the initial invasion, and was told he'd be home for the 4th of July. He has a newfound familiarity with corpses, and everything he thought he knew last year is now under revision. He is sent out into the streets of Fallujah (or some other city), where he has already been shot at once or twice with automatic weapons or an RPG, and his nerves are raw. He is wearing Kevlar and ceramic body armor, a Kevlar helmet, a load carrying harness with ammunition, grenades, flex-cuffs, first-aid gear, water, and assorted other paraphernalia. His weapon weighs seven pounds, ten with a double magazine. His boots are bloused, and his long-sleeve shirt is buttoned at the wrist. It is between 100-110 degrees Fahrenheit at midday. He's been eating MRE's three times a day, when he has an appetite in this heat, and even his urine is beginning to smell like preservatives. Mosquitoes and sand flies plague him in the evenings, and he probably pulls a guard shift every night, never sleeping straight through. He and his comrades are beginning to get on each others' nerves. The rumors of 'going-home, not-going-home' are keeping him on an emotional roller coaster. Directives from on high are contradictory, confusing, and often stupid. The whole population seems hostile to him and he is developing a deep animosity for Iraq and all its people--as well as for official narratives. This is the lad who will hear from someone that George W. Bush, dressed in a suit with a belly full of rich food, just hurled a manly taunt from a 72-degree studio at the 'non-existent' Iraqi resistance. This de facto president is finally seeing his poll numbers fall. Even chauvinist paranoia has a half-life, it seems. His legitimacy is being eroded as even the mainstream press has discovered now that the pretext for the war was a lie. It may have been control over the oil, after all. Anti-war forces are regrouping as an anti-occupation movement. Now, exercising his one true talent--blundering--George W. Bush has begun the improbable process of alienating the very troops upon whom he depends to carry out the neo-con ambition of restructuring the world by arms. Somewhere in Balad, or Fallujah, or Baghdad, there is a soldier telling a new replacement, "We are losing this war." --- Stan Goff is the author of "Hideous Dream: A Soldier's Memoir of the US Invasion of Haiti" (Soft Skull Press, 2000) and of the upcoming book "Full Spectrum Disorder" (Soft Skull Press, 2003). He retired in 1996 from the US Army, from 3rd Special Forces. He lives in Raleigh. He can be reached at: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[CTRL] Bring on the Talebans!
-Caveat Lector- http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,929399,00.html Bringing aid and the Bible, the man who called Islam wicked Evangelists Fears that US Christians will inflame situation Matthew Engel in Washington Friday April 4, 2003 The Guardian It could only happen with an American invasion. Poised behind the troops, waiting for a signal that Iraq is safe enough for them to operate in, are the evangelical Christians - carrying food in one hand and the Bible in the other. All the groups, generously funded by American churchgoers, are likely to do a magnificent job in offering water, food, medical help and comfort to a traumatised population. But they are causing alarm among Muslims, who fear vulnerable Iraqis will be cajoled into conversion, and Christians, some of whom warn that the missionaries will be prime targets in an unpacified Iraq. Muslim worries have been heightened because the man leading the charge into Iraq is the Rev Franklin Graham, who delivered the invocation at President Bush's inauguration, the son of Billy Graham and a fierce critic of Islam. He is on record as calling it a wicked, violent religion, with a God different from that of Christianity. The two are different as lightness and darkness, he wrote. He runs an organisation called Samaritan's Purse, whose workers are in Jordan, waiting to move into Iraq. It has a strong record of charitable help built up over more than 30 years, but its official aim is clear: The organisation serves the church worldwide to promote the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Of late, Mr Graham has avoided inflammatory statements and declined to speak to the Guardian. He did, however, write an article for the Los Angeles Times yesterday designed to mollify his critics, insisting that Samaritan's Purse will offer help to Iraqis without religious strings attached. Sometimes the best preaching we can do is simply being there with a cup of cold water, exhibiting Christ's spirit of serving others, he said. Ibrahim Hooper, of the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations was unimpressed, saying the groups involved were despicable and deceitful. Of Mr Graham, he said: This guy has repeatedly stated that Islam is intentionally cruel. I fail to see how such a person can be a positive influence in a Muslim country. Humanitarian relief is just a cover. Their basic motivation is conversion. These groups train workers to go in under the guise of relief to convert people away from their faith. I know this because I've been on their training courses. There's a technique known as contextualisation. You never say directly you're Christian. You take chairs out of the church to make it look like a mosque. You grow a beard. You dress your wife in Islamic attire. They know they're not welcome. Also moving into Iraq are the Southern Baptists, the second largest religious group in the US after the Catholics and the most powerful component of the Christian conservative movement. They are perhaps the strongest pro- Bush, pro-Iraq war and pro-Israel political force in the US. Their coordinator in Oklahoma, Sam Porter, insists that humanitarian aid is the prime objective of the Iraqi relief operation; the church has 25,000 trained volunteers who help in disaster relief in the US and elsewhere. But he added: If someone says 'Why would you to come to Iraq to serve in an impoverished, war-stricken country?' we would say it was because of the love that the Lord Jesus Christ put in our hearts. If a country opens up for evangelical missions to go there, we go. We believe strongly that Jesus Christ is the son of God and we intend to proclaim that. Some Christian commentators are alarmed that missionaries blundering into an unstable country of which they know little would be in danger. Three Baptist missionaries were shot and killed in Yemen last December by a Muslim extremist, who said he did it because they were preaching Christianity in a Muslim country. One evangelical writer, Richard Mouw, of beliefnet.org, warned the groups: We must do this with a genuine desire to serve human needs. If this is viewed as a pretence for evangelism it will only hurt the Christian cause, and perhaps further endanger the lives of the 600,000 Christians in Iraq. Jonathan Bonk, editor of the International Bulletin of Missionary Research, says that many strong evangelicals cannot separate their charitable work from spreading their faith. It's not a crafty attempt to proselytise. It's an earnest attempt to share what they hold most dear. That's true of all the proselytising religions, including Islam. The difficulty in Iraq won't be because the evangelists are Christian, but because they're western. If they aggressively evangelise, that's a problem. But they're going to be in danger whether they say anything or not. As symbols of the west, and what the west represents, they are targets. Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003 Forwarded for your
[CTRL] Bring on the virgins!
-Caveat Lector- http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26299 WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War! -- -- -- -- Bring on the virgins! -- -- © 2002 WorldNetDaily.com The sound of fingernails scraping across a blackboard is less grating than the voices of those who claim human rights violations of the al-Qaida fighters being held at Guantanamo. That these captured combatants are still alive is a gift they do not deserve. The laws of God, nature and every nation declare the right of self-defense. When innocent people were viciously attacked by al-Qaida terrorists, the government of the United States was compelled to defend its citizens from future attacks â by any means it could muster. Those means included huge bombs that obliterated people. The al-Qaida fighters and Taliban who fell victim to American bombs and bullets would not likely consider the plight of their Guantanamo brethren to be such a terrible violation of their human rights. Indeed, these captured al-Qaida combatants have but one human right remaining â the right to be judged by their creator. And as a proud American soldier observed, our job is to make the arrangements. These people are not prisoners of war as defined by the Geneva Convention, as the U.N.'s Mary Robinson wrongly contends. Nor are they entitled to protections the treaty affords as a matter of international law, as Ramsey Clark insists. Al-Qaida didn't sign the Geneva Convention, and al-Qaida is not a nation. Its soldiers are not conscripted nor are they forced to fight. Al-Qaida is a club, joined voluntarily by people who are taught to hate America, who are taught to kill Americans, who live for the hope of dying while killing Americans. These people chose to abandon the rules of war fashioned by reasonable people; they are entitled to nothing more than the fate they try to impose on others. Americans are compassionate people, but we are not stupid. Amnesty International contends that the transport of the captured combatants while shackled and hooded was a violation of international norms. What norms? What's normal about people who hijack commercial jets and fly them into the World Trade Center, expressly for the purpose of killing as many Americans as possible? What is normal? If a rattlesnake sneaked out of its den and attacked your child, would it be normal to capture the snake, move it gently to a safe place, feed it and protect it from any discomfort? I think not. What's normal and prudent would be action that not only killed the snake, but also rooted out the den and totally annihilated all of the occupants. The treatment provided to the captured combatants at Guantanamo is far better than they deserve. Terrorist sympathizers such as Mary Robinson and Ramsey Clark are more eager to find an excuse to criticize the United States and President Bush than to pursue justice for those caught in the act of war against Americans. Americans demand that justice be exacted from those who inflicted death and suffering upon thousands of innocent people. The railings of terrorist sympathizers, magnified by a media eager to stir controversy, is only designed to weaken and unravel the voluntary coalition of anti-terror support built by President Bush. What are we to do with the captured combatants? Those who argue for the presumption of innocence and disposition through the American criminal justice system argue for foolishness. There is no presumption of innocence; these people were caught in the act of war against America. They are not criminals as defined by U.S. criminal code; they are not prisoners of war as defined by the Geneva Convention; they are captured combatants whose fate should be decided by the Department of Defense under the command of the president. The president has correctly decided that they will face a military tribunal. And then what? Should we deal with them like a den of rattlesnakes? Should they be imprisoned and kept away from society for the rest of their lives? Or should they be returned to their homelands and released to organize another army of hate against America? As this war against terrorism continues, thousands of terrorists may be captured. Robinson and Clark and their ilk will roar if we round up the terrorists and give them the rattlesnake treatment. If we keep them in prison, Amnesty International and their ilk will parade propaganda to the world about our inhumane treatment and Americans will soon grow weary of providing housing and food for our enemies. If we release them, they will reorganize and strike again. What a dilemma! Perhaps the only way to satisfy everyone is not to capture the combatants, but instead help them find the 70
