"If you can not dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit!"
There it was. Faded. Torn. Partially obscured by "Low prices" and "D.A.R.E." Stickers, but there none the less. If it hadn't of been for the American Flag mud flaps, I wouldn't have even noticed it. Honestly, the "support our troops" and "United we stand" stickers on 5mpg, no emissions, bondo colored trucks don't draw my attention anymore. Fortunately, flagrant irony still gets me and those mud flaps... One of these days I am going to patent American Flag presto logs. They'll sell huge in red states. "Burn a flag and show your patriotism!" Course I will use a more subtle slogan.
Where was I? Oh yeah, Blind and dumb patriotism. Laugh. Ok, back to my point. The bumper sticker that sums up the current Administration. Straight out of 1975, forgotten for 30 years, and eerily prescient of the Bush years. In 2002-03 our foreign policy followed the mantra perfectly. In 04 the GOP ran a Presidential Election on it. Swift boat, flip flop (also rehashed from the 70's) made no Goddamn sense campaign, but it does in in light of this philosophy, ...Baffle them with Bullshit. Rove is a retro guru. In 05, domestic policy got the flash back treatment and I fear for 06 and all the possibilities for this to be put into effect.
If nothing else, I hope that at least history will connect the two and the Bush Doctrine will for ever be defined as:
"If you can not dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit!"
IT would be funny, if it wasn't really happening to us.
Saturday, December 31, 2005
"If you can not dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit!"
Thursday, December 29, 2005
I've been asked quite, a few times, what got me into politics. I deny being into politics immediately. Then I tell the truth. Seeing people do things poorly gets to me. If the idiots in the Bush regime, their cohorts Congress, the Clinton Administration, and pretty much the majority of our Officials would put more effort into their lies, I wouldn't have started Blasted Reality. They insult us every day with their "Superman, no wait he's wearing glasses, Clark Kent" cover ups and conspiracies. Here's a perfect example. Take a good look at this picture. Bush is marked with the GW in case anyone is confused. Now take a look at the "Gonna need Botox in the future" grin on the guy above the T in telephone. Yep, you got it. Sad really. I have been saying for a while that not only was the 2004 election rigged electronically, but also that Bush ran against his Frat blood brother. Hedging the bets. Stacking the Deck. Skull and Bones has a very small membership list. Apparently no one found it odd that 0.25% of that list just happened to be nominated for President. Bush , everyone knows about. Kerry, is a different story. Odd that no one, aside from Tim Russert, questioned the life long connection these two had. Does make Kerry's instant concession and refusal to involve himself or his campaign in anything even resembling a challenge to the vote count, more understandable, don't it? Rig the Machines, poll tax the opposition, and, just in case, put a buddy up to run against. Two party system, my ass! It's one big party that you are paying for, but not invited to. It's really really loud. It's 4am and when you ask them to turn it down, they reply, "There's nobody home!" It's friggin' insulting. And the worst part is, you are the only one in the neighborhood that hears and sees a thing and you are not crazy. In the Kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man would be pissed if no one let him redecorate. So pissed in fact, that he might discard his, "Don't get involved until the outcome is certain" rules and start up Blasted Reality just to get the information out there. I don't know, I probably am crazy, but that does not change the facts in the slightest. Now what are you going to do about it?
Posted by Reverend X at 12:24 AM
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
I read the news today, again.
I couldn't find a thing about this world.
Seems there's another goin' on...
but now they know how many holes it takes to fill the head.
So they'll just tell you more
Misinformation, disinformation, this information will do
to make the holes they need to fill your head.
That way when asked- what's up? What's goin on?
you'll just shrug and mutter "Nothing", everytime.
I'd love to tell you more
but these big words get in the way.
"MIlitary Industrial Complex"...
don't you mean "War Profiteers"
Price gouging traitors...
Baby killers bankin' on fear?
To be afraid is brave?
Buy this shovel to dig your grave?
Spend your blood cuz Jesus saves?
Dont forget we're right behind you all the way
you'll get used to it.
It only hurts at first.
You might feel a slight sting
as they slap a barcode on your forehead.
Are you dreaming for your life?
Kill your Prozac, Wake the Dead!
Posted by Reverend X at 9:59 AM
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.
Archaic. Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete. Morally unrestrained; licentious.
A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.
[Middle English, generous, from Old French, from Latin lberlis, from lber, free. See leudh- in Indo-European Roots.]
Synonyms: liberal, bounteous, bountiful, freehanded, generous, handsome, munificent, openhanded
These adjectives mean willing or marked by a willingness to give unstintingly: a liberal backer of the arts; a bounteous feast; bountiful compliments; a freehanded host; a generous donation; a handsome offer; a munificent gift; fond and openhanded grandparents. See also synonyms at broad-minded
Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
Traditional or restrained in style: a conservative dark suit.
Moderate; cautious: a conservative estimate.
Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism.
Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement.
*(False by modern standards)Tending to conserve; preservative: the conservative use of natural resources. n.
One favoring traditional views and values.
A supporter of political conservatism.
Archaic. A preservative agent or principle.
Of or relating to treatment by gradual, limited, or well-established procedures; not radical.
adj 1: resistant to change [ant: liberal]
2: opposed to liberal reforms
3: avoiding excess; "a conservative estimate"
4: unimaginatively conventional;
5: (false by contemporary standards.) conforming to the standards and conventions of the middle class; "a bourgeois mentality" [syn: bourgeois, materialistic] n : a person who has conservative ideas or opinions
1:Moving forward; advancing.
2:Proceeding in steps; continuing steadily by increments: progressive change.
3:Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods: a progressive politician; progressive business leadership.
Posted by Reverend X at 3:22 AM
Friday, December 23, 2005
87% for impeachment and nothing. Flagrant disregard for International Law, Domestic Law, Christian Law, Hebrew Law, and has attempted to break Laws of Physics and Thermal Dynamics. To add insult to injury, he has referred to the US Constitution, the Document he has sworn to protect and defend, as ' just a goddamned piece of paper' . And what do we have going to stop this mad man? Censure, or more correctly, one Representative calling for inquiry which may result in Censure.
That's it! I'll do it! I officially volunteer to go do what's necessary to get this guy impeached. I need three things. A ticket to Washington D.C., a size 8 blue dress, and some god damn Chapstick!
Let's roll!! or Bring it on!! or whatever's appropriate here.
p.s. If someone could get me some mouthwash or a breath mint for later, I'd really appreciate it.
Posted by Reverend X at 1:30 PM
Thursday, December 22, 2005
We must have forgotten it. What it was. Not the America Bush talks about or Cheney plots to create, but the Old School idea that was referred to as the American Dream. Do you remember it? How did it go?
Here’s what I remember.
The American Dream- the freedom/right to find someone you love to share your life with. Do a decent weeks work for a decent weeks pay. Raise a couple of children in a house you own. Get those kids a decent education in a safe environment that will allow them to pursue their dreams. Retire at a decent age and enjoy your golden years in peaceful pursuit of your hobbies and interests.
That was it. So simple, so easy and so out of reach at this point it’s unbelievable. The powers that be in this country would have you believe that those goals are why the terrorists hate us. Why we need to spend over $.50 of every dollar on weapons to protect those goals. Most importantly, why we need to sacrifice our privacy, freedom and personal will in order to even attempt to achieve those goals. Why would people living in caves dedicate their lives to stop you from having any of those things? Why would people blow themselves up to stop you. I’d be hard pressed to blow myself up to cure cancer. Think about it. What would you explode for? It had better be a damn bit more than keeping a decent education out of the hands of someone else’s children.
The terrorists don’t want you to fail in getting the American dream. They want it too. It isn’t an American Dream in the first place. It is the inalienable right of all humans to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They want the same things we want, but on their terms. Our culture works for us, theirs for them. Bin Laden isn’t a terrorist because he hates the hours you work. He became who he is because in Saudi Arabia 1% of the population lives in unbelievable opulence while the remaining 99% suffer. Sure, the 99% could easily do what all other societies have done in the past and revolt. We did it 200 years ago. It’s the right thing to do in their situation. Unfortunately they can’t because the Saudi Royalty is protected by the full power of the US military. They can not go through the natural evolution their society desperately needs because our leaders use our money and our children to keep those people down. The military which we created in order to protect and defend freedom and democracy has been usurped. Who did this to us?
If the terrorists have the same goals we do, then who is the enemy? It’s hard to believe there even is an enemy to such inherently positive goals as ours. Who doesn’t want people to live out there lives in happiness and freedom?
If an individual operates without consideration of good or evil we call this individual a psychotic. We lock them up and drug them in order to protect society from them. If 10 individuals get together and operate without consideration of good or evil we give them tax breaks, subsidies and limited liability for their actions. Wait, that doesn’t make sense. At all!! How can this be true? Well, we call them corporations. They function solely for the benefit of themselves. They even use their psychotic nature to defend themselves in debate. Corporations will be the first to tell you that Right and Wrong have nothing to do with investment return, profit, and corporate expansion. A company which does not grow is considered a failure. Profit is the only goal of these people. What they have is never enough because they must always strive to create profit which only benefits their investors.
I can think of millions of examples of this behavior, but it was best summed up in the Movie Fight Club,
“We take the possible liability for the defective part, check it against the cost of a recall and if it is less, we don’t do a recall”
Doesn’t matter how many people die, have their families killed or lives destroyed. If it is not cost effective to save those lives, no corporation would decide to save them.
There you have it in a nutshell. We have gigantic ever thirsting psychotic entities prowling the earth with unlimited resources and no conscience. Tell me again who hates America, Freedom, the dream. It’s not the poor guys hiding in caves. It’s not the activists telling you stop animal testing. It’s not that guy down the street hugging the oak tree. It’s Corporate America.
Decent hours for decent wages translate into lessened profits for their investors.
Home ownership? You don’t own it till it’s paid off. Once it's paid off it becomes nonprofitable. An asset just sitting there without interest payments or resale until you die is an asset that doesn’t profit them. They must at all times profit. You are stopping them from feeding.
Decent public education? Means less money spent on higher education to a small extent, but more importantly it also makes for an educated, organized and hard to fool work force. That gets them where it hurts. How many countries with decent public education have sweatshops, human rights issues and workforces consisting mostly of children. By the way, that high percentage is due to there not being a large number of older workers. Toxic environments, long hours, these things shorten life spans considerably. Long life spans are arguably the greatest threat to corporate profits. Pensions, health care, and of course the wisdom of a population old enough to have seen that there is a better way to do things… Corporate power can not risk that.
There really are only three power bases on this planet. Corporate Power, Governmental Power and the Power of the People. 200 years ago our founding fathers did all they could to make sure the governmental power was firmly “of the people, by the people and for the people.” Their wishes are not open to debate. Unfortunately, 200 years of attrition and encroachment have put the power of government into the hands of the corporations. Deregulation, exemption, and the rest have cost us our primary defense against those who would turn the American dream into the nightmare of slavery. Just our primary defense though. Just the easy one. Don’t ever forget that in a world of people, only people have the power. We are the people and we are all in this together. They want us to see it differently. Racism, sexism, and intolerance are nothing more than weapons they use to divide and conquer us. It doesn’t matter whether you are sitting at home watching your favorite Rapper drink Crystal in his new Nikes while Rapping about Holiday Inn on BET or on your way to the Coca-Cola 500 of the Nextel Cup to watch your favorite Driver cross the finish line in his Budweiser #8 Car. You want your children to have the ability to achieve the American Dream. You want to work a decent job for a decent wage in a decent city with decent health care while you watch your children get a decent education in a safe environment and begin their decent lives with mostly the same goals you have. Well, my friend your desire for this makes you a dangerous extremist threat in the eyes of Corporate America. If you let them, they will nullify that threat. All you have to do is nothing at all.
Posted by Reverend X at 1:06 PM
Sunday, December 18, 2005
Here is a great example of a bad conspiracy theory. No evidence, supporting testimony, documented research, logical conclusions, links, or even as much as a clue as to it's creator. All that aside, Blogsnow shows it to be the 7th most linked to story on the internet. So in the free market news world of the "Blogosphere" (Somebody come up with a new name for this, please!! Anything would be better! Newstream, Diginfomedia, whatever...) this unfounded speculation or as I like to call it, BS, has achieved it's own imperative. The demand has been proven regardless of quality of the supply. I too am interested in "WTF happened to The Chappelle show". Eventually we will find out. That is the Nature of Information. It is contagious and self propagating. This Theory may actually turn out to be true. I do not doubt the possibility, just the documentation. In any case the Theory has brought to light a serious issue of modern America and I think it warrants discussion. How can we as a people hope to defeat Racism. Since the first episode, The Chappelle Show was accused of damaging race relations. Why? It engaged Racist ideology, mentality, and opinions. Words like "Nigger, White assed, Mexican" were spoken aloud on TV, rather than implied like most shows incorporate them. Racist themes and morals permeate our airwaves, but somehow admission of their terminology is going to inflame the world into a race war. Hardly. Ignoring racism has only inspired more racism. Legislating Racism with affirmative action and quotas has succeeded only in making thousands more racist. Education, tolerance initiatives and the rest have done no good either. On the other hand, Dave Chappelle's approach was actually effectively combating Racism in all it;'s forms. By pointing out that there are differences culturally, physically, and psychologically between different peoples he helped us to realize that these differences were trivial and unimportant to the overall Reality. We are not a species of color blind automatons unanimous in our opinions of the world. In fact, it is the difference of viewpoints which allows us, as a species, to thrive. If one approach to a problem fails, we have other choices readily available. In regards to racism, our approach so far has done more harm than good. I submit the Chappelle technique as a possible solution.
- Admit the problem. Everyone at some point in their lives has been racist. Whether we prejudged a persons personality using a stereotypical set of traits associated with their color or we avoided interaction with others for expectations of a stereotypical behavior, we made our decisions solely on our own racist beliefs. You can't judge a book by it's cover, but you also cant read the book in the store before purchasing it. In a perfect world this would not happen. In a perfect world, we would not exist. We do the same disservice to
others based on gender, social caste, lifestyle, etc.
- Mock the Hell out of Racist- Any ideology born of ignorance is an easy target for wit and wisdom. Just watch the Chappelle shows for a multitude of examples. My favorite skit. "Gay KKK". In one minute it encapsulated the ridiculousness of White Supremacy, Separatism, and Homophobia into one line "...And we were wondering if you, you know, wouldn't mind, you know going back to Africa?"
Perhaps this technique will fail. We won't know until we try. If you have a better idea, present it. Personally I think it will succeed in the ling run. This technique has it's roots in shows like "All in the Family" and hopefully it has a long and successful future.
One more thing. Regardless of what happened to the Chappelle Show. I, for one, want it back. The number of people discussing the aforementioned theory, proves that I am not alone. I realize that this is an insignificant problem when compared to issues like election fraud, war, poverty education, but I am doing everything I can about those also. So please allow me this one indulgence. I want MORE DAVE CHAPPELLE. If you know him, please pass along this message. "There are alternative mediums for your craft. The World needs you. We should discuss the possibilities. I am easily contacted."
Posted by Reverend X at 2:14 PM
Saturday, December 17, 2005
The World Trade Organization, a saintly group whose only interest is ensuring the protection and well being of the poor, needy and huddled masses of the World, is once again attacked by those inappreciative and spoiled poor, needy, and huddled masses. South Korean farmers armed with broken and dirty (bio weapons?) fingernails and armored with high tech life preserver vests, broke through riot police lines in Hong Kong today.
Side note: For about the same cost as a life vest, these guys could have much stronger armor using SCA standards. Also could have learned stick and shield/ group melee tactics there. Just a thought. South Korean farmers might want to look into it before engaging in activism this year.
Posted by Reverend X at 5:35 AM
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
A question of priorities. In the last century which activities caused more harm to the American Citizenry: Islamic Terrorism or the Epidemic of Child Molestation? As far as effecting a percentage of Americans. Pedophilia personally harmed millions of Americans while Islamic Terorrism only effected thousands. 89.9% of child molestation was inflicted by white males between the ages of 30 and 60.
A Modest Proposal: Remove the prostate of all white males at the age of 30. This simple and non lethal preemption would not only eliminate 90% of child molestation in this country. It would also nearly eliminate prostate cancer. Billions would be saved in Medicare alone. The cultural problems attributed to the rampant expansion of the porn industry would also disappear. In one fell swoop or scoop in a literal sense, we would be preventing crime, curing disease and saving the soul of our nation. How could any good American not want to immediately enact such a beneficial policy? Any opponents to this policy would have to come from the pro cancer/ pro child raping/ satanic fringe of society!!
Does anyone else see the inherent evil of generalization and racial profiling here? Neo con absolutist arguments against Islam do not even carry the validity of concrete evidence which I was able to draw upon to justify the forced castration of an entire race. No one could ever indict the 19 alleged hijackers of 9-11 in a court of law. See for yourself! Nonetheless the Right wing war pigs have pushed this agenda of hate on us over and over again. Fine, you wanna base this country on policies of fear and possibility? Let's f**kin do it already. You can kill your boogey men all you want, but first we get to pancake theory your dicks. Fair is fair motherfuck... err... well, cant you call you that anymore since you'll be unable, "Danger"! OK then... Fair is fair ,limpies. As you said, "we must destroy it before it destroys us!" New slogan, "Kill their erections in the next elections!"
It sells itself, doesn't it">
Posted by Reverend X at 5:39 AM
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
I wrote this in a reply on a forum a few minutes ago. I am pasting it here because I think it might be worthwhile to think about. Tonight I watched as one more seemingly unrelated nightmare played out across the advertising forum we call "the News". I watched as our criminal rehabilitation system was effectively remarketed and sold to all of us as a punitive retribution program. Living proof that a person can change and be redeemed was rendered a trophy for vengeance. Narrow the arguments and ideologies to the core choices made today. What benefit to our society was achieved by taking the life of a man today? was it significantly more valuable than what we could have gained from keeping him in prison for the natural remainder of his life? What effects can we expect from this event. good or bad? How did we as a society benefit from this? How has this event damaged us? I may be missing something here, but I don't see positive return here. This event is a microcosm of the cultural rot we are experiencing. To quote an interviewee on national primetrime television, "I hope they execute him because Jesus said thou shalt not kill." WTF? Do you see the insanity that is not only accepted, but promoted with this blurb? let me attempt to paraphrase... here is that statement in reality- we should kill, because someone told us our God is against killing. This crap was immediately followed up with "expert" validation. A man, purported to know hebrew law, referenced the bible, a non hebrew text, to show why this was a proper sentiment. Analogy: a professor of French impressionism teaching quantum physics with a car manual. Yet no one questioned his lesson. Sorry if I seem to be rambling, but there is a point in here somewhere. Everything is not relative. (i.e. damaging a defenseless person for the purpose of extracting information is torture. That is precisely what the word means.) Obfuscation is only a perversion of truth. To spin with language is lying. We have all forgotten this somehow. We all know right from wrong. What we do with that information is important. Ask yourself right now are you promoting the greater good or supporting the lesser evil. It really is that simple. We just forgot that. I forgot that. Now I have to remember to do that, all the time.
Posted by Reverend X at 5:28 AM
Saturday, December 10, 2005
OK, I had hoped to avoid this subject. Really I had. But since it seems to be snowballing, "Clerks" definition, I guess I have to give my opinion.
1) Christians, if you think that the phrase Happy Holidays is persecuting you somehow, please click here. There you go. That is what persecution of Christians looked like.
2) Everybody else, suck it up! This holiday season benefits Malls and Suicide Hotlines. That is it end of story.
If for some reason you still feel that you were called to fight the War on Christmas, click here.
There really is a War going on. It will be going this X-mas and probably will still be going on next year. People are dying. Do something about it and shut the fuck up about your feelings being hurt or offended. OK?
Oh yeah, almost forgot... Dear Media, Quit making stuff up to draw attention away from important events that you are refusing to cover! You bastards!
Posted by Reverend X at 2:33 AM
Friday, December 02, 2005
Dear Bill O'rriely really rail-e whatever,
Dear Sir, yeah that sounds better,
I am writing this letter in the hopes of perhaps softening your heart in this christmas-e season. You see, sir, lately you have been seriously damaging my business and my livelihood. Did I mention that I have kids? Well, the problem is that lately you have been giving free advertising on your tv and radio shows to "far-far left wing schmeer"(sic) websites. I, being the owner and operator of far, far left schmear site, had hoped to cash in on your crusade, but unfortunately, you seem to be promoting sites that have nothing at all to do with schmearing from way out here in la la land. I have worked very hard for quite some time to build up my customer base. Now you are taking my hard earned customers and basically giving them away as christmas-e wrapped gifts to websites that have never once earned the distinction to be called schmear-e. You of all people should know how difficult it is to continually create divisive and shock-jock oriented content for the drooling chromosome deficient loud mouthed sheep to ingest and repeat sans thought, ad nauseum. You at least have an entire network of writers and pundits to spin your cotton candy. I have only myself and a few local drunks I watch C-SPAN with once a week. So far I have done pretty well for myself, but now with you classifying such organizations as Media Matters, Common Dreams, FAIR, Op-Ed News, Truth-Out, and the like as schmear sites, I can not stay the course and hope to stay financially solvent. And if, God Forbid, those sites were to realize the lucrative market you are pushing on them, I would surely be lost. I can't compete with Journalists. Sorry if I used a word you didn't know. It's kinda antiquated. You see, "Journalists" were writers and reporters who felt some strange compulsion to report on what was going on in the world. Much unlike what reporters do today, these "Journalists" wrote about and reported on all kinds of happenings and events regardless of the corporate bottom line. Fortunately for Mega Corp, "Journalists" were driven to the brink of extinction by tabloid, gossip and celebrity newscasters such as you and I. BTW, huge fan of Inside Edition. You so totally should have been John Tesh's Boss not his B****. Oh well... Where was I? oh yeah. If you could please stop promoting those fair, balanced, and independent news agencies as schmear sites, which is what we do, it would be greatly appreciated by my wife, my twin sons and me. And if you happen to be in the giving mood this Christmas-e-ve, could you find it in your heart to take some shots at my site? You have the Midas tongue. You could push the way-out-whacko-fringe back where they belong. Hell, you could probably make a whole bunch of new radicals if you wanted to. I'll even set myself up for your lines.. mmm let's see...
"The War in Iraq was sold to Congress and the American Public on a pack of lies... Lies which even continue today. Congress was not given the same intelligence about Saddam and WMD's that the White House had." Umm, one more... ok. "9-11? Bush didn't do it! There's no way Cheney would let him have that kinda responsibility!"
Thanx for giving us the strength to carry on,
PS- How much a month does Ann Coulter pay for her Corporate membership at Jenny Crank? She looks great! And she gets so much done!!
One more thing. I saw your "X-mas in the x-hairs" bit. That Minister's last words "Jesus makes people wanna spend." Where do you find these people? You gotta give me your casting agent's number!! Jesus spends!! roflmao. Good thing no one ever told him, "Jesus Saves!!" wink
Posted by Reverend X at 4:16 AM
Thursday, December 01, 2005
Ok, so about 5 or 6 weeks ago I put out a little Jesus flash vid called the Cross. It seems to be a hit. I keep getting it sent to me by friends. "Have you seen this sh*t?" Why yes, I have, but thanks for sending it. Most of my friends also bounce my emails cause they have yet to realize that I have a political website. Well, here's the point. I have gotten a few emails from people who like the vid. Quite a few who claim to wanna kick my ass for Jesus. They missed point of the vid apparently. Oh, and I have received a boat load of email basically asking me to use COC's "Clean My Wounds" or bitching that I did not use that song in the first place. So here it is... drumroll. The Clean My Wounds FLash everyone has been requesting. I call it "Time" . That's the quickload version, the other one is available on my homepage. I was going to use this theme with Whitney Houston Screaming "I believe the Children are the Future..." But this is much better. lol
Posted by Reverend X at 11:08 PM
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
"He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation."
History is cyclical. At least in regards to the worst events and ideas. Over and over again humanity has succumbed to the inevitable entropy of it's own nobility. Our's is nothing new and certainly not special in it's own right. But we do have an original phenomenon on our hands. It would seem that our ever increasing thirst for instant gratification has brought with it an unexpected side effect. Not only are we reexperienceing the Tyranny of an earlier George from America's Revolutionary birth, but we are also getting to see the blind faith and ignorance of the Dark Ages and all that down home brotherly rage and bloodthisty hatred of the Civil War.
Posted by Reverend X at 11:42 PM
Sunday, November 20, 2005
On July 3rd, 2005 I posted this paragraph on an IMC Repost
"The New New Pearl Harbor
author: Poll Takers e-mail: email@example.com
The last time Bush had these bad of numbers was right before 9/11. Basic sequel rules for action flics,you need at least 2-3 times the explosions for a hit. This is the mentallity of the actual terrorists so everyone might want to start thinking of things to look out for. Start a list. "
Well, I have been credited, cursed with predicting them. I followed a simple enough equation. What they did to get powere (z), times the reprecussions of losing that power (y), times the accelerated level of positional entropy (w) equals what they will do to retain said power (x). So I figured... (zy)w=x and I took a guess cause I still suck at word problems.
As it turns out, I was within 4 days of the London Bombings. Of course, they had the explosions, but the Brits never were very interested in over the top American Cinema. Multiple booms, but more of a "Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels" low budget/ bang for your buck... er punch for your pound I guess. Personally, I tend to side with the "Boon Dock Saints" genre flic also, then again, my tastes are unimportant cause I am JAFO on the playing field today. Lemme just get to the point...
I worked the equation again.
Factored in the obvious:
1. 34% approval is closer to sugar gum pushing dentist numbers than Democratic Mandate.
2. Cats outta the bag on Iraq Intel, Plamegate, Katrina, deficit and so on.
3. Frist is fisted and Delay is played... out. Abromoff is going to ruin the GOP Elite.
4. Scientists are beginning to discuss 911, and that bodes ill for it's Intelligent Designers, even the moronic ones.
5. There is a strong possibility that Bushco will be swingin in the wind with Saddam n Slobodan if he ever drops the Commander-in-Name-Chiefly gig.
Well, I did the math... whilse reading this GOP Memo http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20051112/cm_huffpost/010528
and all of a sudden I feel like I might live a bit too close to San Francisco. Yeah, I am suggesting, that it is concievable, that if my world view is correct, that the powers that be might nuke San Francisco. I thought of other possible targets, but nowhere else even came close. In one bright flash, the Neo-cons could rid themselves of a progressive stronghold, an anti-war mecca, Arnold's Bane, a huge percentage of this country's intelligencia (Non Ivy League too!), and more than enough feminists, homosexuals, and assorted alt lifestylers to unquestionably declare the whole tragedy to be the will of their Jesus/God/Almighty Right Whitey construct, cause everybody knows IT Hates an honest sex life. I'm probably wrong, but I thought it a good idea to get this out there, you know, on the public record. If you are in the Bay Area, look out for anything that isn't stoned, happy, rational or tye dyed. A false flag op should stick out their like... well... like a covert op in San Francisco.
Posted by Reverend X at 7:01 PM
Wow, I am way behind on the news. Check this out.. Tucker Carlson spoke with Professor Jones of BYU on the 16th. Do you remember when Jon Stewart went on Crossfire and tore Ol' Tuck a new one? Well, seems Tuck lost his job but not his habits. You can tell immediately that Prof. Jones is not going to be able to show anything scientific, experiment or other, with Carlson asking him inane and pointless questions. Tuck, if someone corrects you for using a word improperly, quit using it. If you cannot define "Theory" see this. OK I linked my own article there, but It fits. Basically the Show was poorly done, until you read the blog. Just the line about no one really believing the government to be responsible, because we have not left the country...? Someone please get this message to him, somehow "Douchebag, it's our country. We are not going anywhere! You, on the other hand, might be. Along with the people you are working for." Watch the videos.
Posted by Reverend X at 2:41 AM
Saturday, November 19, 2005
At the beginning of 2002, I had an idea for a cheaper way to take out Saddam. People were throwing around ideas like assassination, bribery and what not. My suggestion was to buy $1 billion of crack or tweak and drop it on Baghdad. Of course that would be $1 billion actual street value, not reported street value. There is about a 10,000% difference in case anyone was wondering. Drop that and a Wal-mart. Looking back, I think it would have had the same general effect. Total chaos, roving gangs shooting everyone else, things exploding everywhere, unemployment around 60%, no one trusting anyone, most of the structures in ruins. Yep, same effect and 299 billion dollars less in expenses. Sure, it could be construed as usage of chemical weapons, but since we are doing that already... Just something to think about as we build up our forces on the Syrian border.
Posted by Reverend X at 7:06 AM
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Seriously, this is not politics, religion, or lifestyle. This is what every parent in America needs to know. If you blog, copy and repost. Websites, same thing. This info needs to be common knowledge. Should have been 20 years ago. Email it. Print it. Walk down the road and hand it to strangers.
Deadly Immunity By Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Salon.com
Thursday 16 June 2005
A Salon/Rolling Stone joint investigation. When a study revealed that mercury in childhood vaccines may have caused autism in thousands of kids, the government rushed to conceal the data - and to prevent parents from suing drug companies for their role in the epidemic.
(Image: Salon.com) In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session - only private invitations to 52 attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva, and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.
The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines - thimerosal - appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants - in one case, within hours of birth - the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children.
Even for scientists and doctors accustomed to confronting issues of life and death, the findings were frightening. "You can play with this all you want," Dr. Bill Weil, a consultant for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told the group. The results "are statistically significant." Dr. Richard Johnston, an immunologist and pediatrician from the University of Colorado whose grandson had been born early on the morning of the meeting's first day, was even more alarmed. "My gut feeling?" he said. "Forgive this personal comment - I do not want my grandson to get a thimerosal-containing vaccine until we know better what is going on."
But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry's bottom line.
"We are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits," said Dr. Robert Brent, a pediatrician at the Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children in Delaware. "This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country." Dr. Bob Chen, head of vaccine safety for the CDC, expressed relief that "given the sensitivity of the information, we have been able to keep it out of the hands of, let's say, less responsible hands." Dr. John Clements, vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization, declared flatly that the study "should not have been done at all" and warned that the results "will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond the control of this group. The research results have to be handled."
In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism.
Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants - but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year. The CDC and FDA gave them a hand, buying up the tainted vaccines for export to developing countries and allowing drug companies to continue using the preservative in some American vaccines - including several pediatric flu shots as well as tetanus boosters routinely given to 11-year-olds.
The drug companies are also getting help from powerful lawmakers in Washington. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has received $873,000 in contributions from the pharmaceutical industry, has been working to immunize vaccine makers from liability in 4,200 lawsuits that have been filed by the parents of injured children. On five separate occasions, Frist has tried to seal all of the government's vaccine-related documents - including the Simpsonwood transcripts - and shield Eli Lilly, the developer of thimerosal, from subpoenas. In 2002, the day after Frist quietly slipped a rider known as the "Eli Lilly Protection Act" into a homeland security bill, the company contributed $10,000 to his campaign and bought 5,000 copies of his book on bioterrorism. Congress repealed the measure in 2003 - but earlier this year, Frist slipped another provision into an anti-terrorism bill that would deny compensation to children suffering from vaccine-related brain disorders. "The lawsuits are of such magnitude that they could put vaccine producers out of business and limit our capacity to deal with a biological attack by terrorists," says Andy Olsen, a legislative assistant to Frist.
Even many conservatives are shocked by the government's effort to cover up the dangers of thimerosal. Rep. Dan Burton, a Republican from Indiana, oversaw a three-year investigation of thimerosal after his grandson was diagnosed with autism. "Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic," his House Government Reform Committee concluded in its final report. "This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal, a known neurotoxin." The FDA and other public-health agencies failed to act, the committee added, out of "institutional malfeasance for self protection" and "misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry."
The story of how government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks of thimerosal from the public is a chilling case study of institutional arrogance, power and greed. I was drawn into the controversy only reluctantly. As an attorney and environmentalist who has spent years working on issues of mercury toxicity, I frequently met mothers of autistic children who were absolutely convinced that their kids had been injured by vaccines. Privately, I was skeptical. I doubted that autism could be blamed on a single source, and I certainly understood the government's need to reassure parents that vaccinations are safe; the eradication of deadly childhood diseases depends on it. I tended to agree with skeptics like Rep. Henry Waxman, a Democrat from California, who criticized his colleagues on the House Government Reform Committee for leaping to conclusions about autism and vaccinations. "Why should we scare people about immunization," Waxman pointed out at one hearing, "until we know the facts?"
It was only after reading the Simpsonwood transcripts, studying the leading scientific research and talking with many of the nation's preeminent authorities on mercury that I became convinced that the link between thimerosal and the epidemic of childhood neurological disorders is real. Five of my own children are members of the Thimerosal Generation - those born between 1989 and 2003 - who received heavy doses of mercury from vaccines. "The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage," Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. "Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in 25 years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children." More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed among 11 children born in the months after thimerosal was first added to baby vaccines in 1931.
Some skeptics dispute that the rise in autism is caused by thimerosal-tainted vaccinations. They argue that the increase is a result of better diagnosis - a theory that seems questionable at best, given that most of the new cases of autism are clustered within a single generation of children. "If the epidemic is truly an artifact of poor diagnosis," scoffs Dr. Boyd Haley, one of the world's authorities on mercury toxicity, "then where are all the 20-year-old autistics?" Other researchers point out that Americans are exposed to a greater cumulative "load" of mercury than ever before, from contaminated fish to dental fillings, and suggest that thimerosal in vaccines may be only part of a much larger problem. It's a concern that certainly deserves far more attention than it has received - but it overlooks the fact that the mercury concentrations in vaccines dwarf other sources of exposure to our children.
What is most striking is the lengths to which many of the leading detectives have gone to ignore - and cover up - the evidence against thimerosal. From the very beginning, the scientific case against the mercury additive has been overwhelming. The preservative, which is used to stem fungi and bacterial growth in vaccines, contains ethylmercury, a potent neurotoxin. Truckloads of studies have shown that mercury tends to accumulate in the brains of primates and other animals after they are injected with vaccines - and that the developing brains of infants are particularly susceptible. In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to much lower concentrations of ethylmercury than those given to American children still suffered brain damage years later. Russia banned thimerosal from children's vaccines 20 years ago, and Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have since followed suit.
"You couldn't even construct a study that shows thimerosal is safe," says Haley, who heads the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky. "It's just too darn toxic. If you inject thimerosal into an animal, its brain will sicken. If you apply it to living tissue, the cells die. If you put it in a petri dish, the culture dies. Knowing these things, it would be shocking if one could inject it into an infant without causing damage."
Internal documents reveal that Eli Lilly, which first developed thimerosal, knew from the start that its product could cause damage - and even death - in both animals and humans. In 1930, the company tested thimerosal by administering it to 22 patients with terminal meningitis, all of whom died within weeks of being injected - a fact Lilly didn't bother to report in its study declaring thimerosal safe. In 1935, researchers at another vaccine manufacturer, Pittman-Moore, warned Lilly that its claims about thimerosal's safety "did not check with ours." Half the dogs Pittman injected with thimerosal-based vaccines became sick, leading researchers there to declare the preservative "unsatisfactory as a serum intended for use on dogs."
In the decades that followed, the evidence against thimerosal continued to mount. During the Second World War, when the Department of Defense used the preservative in vaccines on soldiers, it required Lilly to label it "poison." In 1967, a study in Applied Microbiology found that thimerosal killed mice when added to injected vaccines. Four years later, Lilly's own studies discerned that thimerosal was "toxic to tissue cells" in concentrations as low as one part per million - 100 times weaker than the concentration in a typical vaccine. Even so, the company continued to promote thimerosal as "nontoxic" and also incorporated it into topical disinfectants. In 1977, 10 babies at a Toronto hospital died when an antiseptic preserved with thimerosal was dabbed onto their umbilical cords.
In 1982, the FDA proposed a ban on over-the-counter products that contained thimerosal, and in 1991 the agency considered banning it from animal vaccines. But tragically, that same year, the CDC recommended that infants be injected with a series of mercury-laced vaccines. Newborns would be vaccinated for hepatitis B within 24 hours of birth, and 2-month-old infants would be immunized for haemophilus influenzae B and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.
The drug industry knew the additional vaccines posed a danger. The same year that the CDC approved the new vaccines, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, one of the fathers of Merck's vaccine programs, warned the company that 6-month-olds who were administered the shots would suffer dangerous exposure to mercury. He recommended that thimerosal be discontinued, "especially when used on infants and children," noting that the industry knew of nontoxic alternatives. "The best way to go," he added, "is to switch to dispensing the actual vaccines without adding preservatives."
For Merck and other drug companies, however, the obstacle was money. Thimerosal enables the pharmaceutical industry to package vaccines in vials that contain multiple doses, which require additional protection because they are more easily contaminated by multiple needle entries. The larger vials cost half as much to produce as smaller, single-dose vials, making it cheaper for international agencies to distribute them to impoverished regions at risk of epidemics. Faced with this "cost consideration," Merck ignored Hilleman's warnings, and government officials continued to push more and more thimerosal-based vaccines for children. Before 1989, American preschoolers received only three vaccinations - for polio, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis and measles-mumps-rubella. A decade later, thanks to federal recommendations, children were receiving a total of 22 immunizations by the time they reached first grade.
As the number of vaccines increased, the rate of autism among children exploded. During the 1990s, 40 million children were injected with thimerosal-based vaccines, receiving unprecedented levels of mercury during a period critical for brain development. Despite the well-documented dangers of thimerosal, it appears that no one bothered to add up the cumulative dose of mercury that children would receive from the mandated vaccines. "What took the FDA so long to do the calculations?" Peter Patriarca, director of viral products for the agency, asked in an e-mail to the CDC in 1999. "Why didn't CDC and the advisory bodies do these calculations when they rapidly expanded the childhood immunization schedule?"
But by that time, the damage was done. Infants who received all their vaccines, plus boosters, by the age of 6 months were being injected with levels of ethylmercury 187 times greater than the EPA's limit for daily exposure to methylmercury, a related neurotoxin. Although the vaccine industry insists that ethylmercury poses little danger because it breaks down rapidly and is removed by the body, several studies - including one published in April by the National Institutes of Health - suggest that ethylmercury is actually more toxic to developing brains and stays in the brain longer than methylmercury.
Officials responsible for childhood immunizations insist that the additional vaccines were necessary to protect infants from disease and that thimerosal is still essential in developing nations, which, they often claim, cannot afford the single-dose vials that don't require a preservative. Dr. Paul Offit, one of CDC's top vaccine advisors, told me, "I think if we really have an influenza pandemic - and certainly we will in the next 20 years, because we always do - there's no way on God's earth that we immunize 280 million people with single-dose vials. There has to be multidose vials."
But while public-health officials may have been well-intentioned, many of those on the CDC advisory committee who backed the additional vaccines had close ties to the industry. Dr. Sam Katz, the committee's chair, was a paid consultant for most of the major vaccine makers and shares a patent on a measles vaccine with Merck, which also manufactures the hepatitis B vaccine. Dr. Neal Halsey, another committee member, worked as a researcher for the vaccine companies and received honoraria from Abbott Labs for his research on the hepatitis B vaccine.
Indeed, in the tight circle of scientists who work on vaccines, such conflicts of interest are common. Rep. Burton says that the CDC "routinely allows scientists with blatant conflicts of interest to serve on intellectual advisory committees that make recommendations on new vaccines," even though they have "interests in the products and companies for which they are supposed to be providing unbiased oversight." The House Government Reform Committee discovered that four of the eight CDC advisors who approved guidelines for a rotavirus vaccine laced with thimerosal "had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine."
Offit, who shares a patent on the vaccine, acknowledged to me that he "would make money" if his vote to approve it eventually leads to a marketable product. But he dismissed my suggestion that a scientist's direct financial stake in CDC approval might bias his judgment. "It provides no conflict for me," he insists. "I have simply been informed by the process, not corrupted by it. When I sat around that table, my sole intent was trying to make recommendations that best benefited the children in this country. It's offensive to say that physicians and public-health people are in the pocket of industry and thus are making decisions that they know are unsafe for children. It's just not the way it works."
Other vaccine scientists and regulators gave me similar assurances. Like Offit, they view themselves as enlightened guardians of children's health, proud of their "partnerships" with pharmaceutical companies, immune to the seductions of personal profit, besieged by irrational activists whose anti-vaccine campaigns are endangering children's health. They are often resentful of questioning. "Science," says Offit, "is best left to scientists."
Still, some government officials were alarmed by the apparent conflicts of interest. In his e-mail to CDC administrators in 1999, Paul Patriarca of the FDA blasted federal regulators for failing to adequately scrutinize the danger posed by the added baby vaccines. "I'm not sure there will be an easy way out of the potential perception that the FDA, CDC and immunization-policy bodies may have been asleep at the switch re: thimerosal until now," Patriarca wrote. The close ties between regulatory officials and the pharmaceutical industry, he added, "will also raise questions about various advisory bodies regarding aggressive recommendations for use" of thimerosal in child vaccines.
If federal regulators and government scientists failed to grasp the potential risks of thimerosal over the years, no one could claim ignorance after the secret meeting at Simpsonwood. But rather than conduct more studies to test the link to autism and other forms of brain damage, the CDC placed politics over science. The agency turned its database on childhood vaccines - which had been developed largely at taxpayer expense - over to a private agency, America's Health Insurance Plans, ensuring that it could not be used for additional research. It also instructed the Institute of Medicine, an advisory organization that is part of the National Academy of Sciences, to produce a study debunking the link between thimerosal and brain disorders. The CDC "wants us to declare, well, that these things are pretty safe," Dr. Marie McCormick, who chaired the IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee, told her fellow researchers when they first met in January 2001. "We are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect" of thimerosal exposure. According to transcripts of the meeting, the committee's chief staffer, Kathleen Stratton, predicted that the IOM would conclude that the evidence was "inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation" between thimerosal and autism. That, she added, was the result "Walt wants" - a reference to Dr. Walter Orenstein, director of the National Immunization Program for the CDC.
For those who had devoted their lives to promoting vaccination, the revelations about thimerosal threatened to undermine everything they had worked for. "We've got a dragon by the tail here," said Dr. Michael Kaback, another committee member. "The more negative that [our] presentation is, the less likely people are to use vaccination, immunization - and we know what the results of that will be. We are kind of caught in a trap. How we work our way out of the trap, I think is the charge."
Even in public, federal officials made it clear that their primary goal in studying thimerosal was to dispel doubts about vaccines. "Four current studies are taking place to rule out the proposed link between autism and thimerosal," Dr. Gordon Douglas, then-director of strategic planning for vaccine research at the National Institutes of Health, assured a Princeton University gathering in May 2001. "In order to undo the harmful effects of research claiming to link the [measles] vaccine to an elevated risk of autism, we need to conduct and publicize additional studies to assure parents of safety." Douglas formerly served as president of vaccinations for Merck, where he ignored warnings about thimerosal's risks.
In May of last year, the Institute of Medicine issued its final report. Its conclusion: There is no proven link between autism and thimerosal in vaccines. Rather than reviewing the large body of literature describing the toxicity of thimerosal, the report relied on four disastrously flawed epidemiological studies examining European countries, where children received much smaller doses of thimerosal than American kids. It also cited a new version of the Verstraeten study, published in the journal Pediatrics, that had been reworked to reduce the link between thimerosal and autism. The new study included children too young to have been diagnosed with autism and overlooked others who showed signs of the disease. The IOM declared the case closed and - in a startling position for a scientific body - recommended that no further research be conducted.
The report may have satisfied the CDC, but it convinced no one. Rep. David Weldon, a Republican physician from Florida who serves on the House Government Reform Committee, attacked the Institute of Medicine, saying it relied on a handful of studies that were "fatally flawed" by "poor design" and failed to represent "all the available scientific and medical research." CDC officials are not interested in an honest search for the truth, Weldon told me, because "an association between vaccines and autism would force them to admit that their policies irreparably damaged thousands of children. Who would want to make that conclusion about themselves?"
Under pressure from Congress, parents and a few of its own panel members, the Institute of Medicine reluctantly convened a second panel to review the findings of the first. In February, the new panel, composed of different scientists, criticized the earlier panel for its lack of transparency and urged the CDC to make its vaccine database available to the public.
So far, though, only two scientists have managed to gain access. Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetics Center of America, and his son, David, spent a year battling to obtain the medical records from the CDC. Since August 2002, when members of Congress pressured the agency to turn over the data, the Geiers have completed six studies that demonstrate a powerful correlation between thimerosal and neurological damage in children. One study, which compares the cumulative dose of mercury received by children born between 1981 and 1985 with those born between 1990 and 1996, found a "very significant relationship" between autism and vaccines. Another study of educational performance found that kids who received higher doses of thimerosal in vaccines were nearly three times as likely to be diagnosed with autism and more than three times as likely to suffer from speech disorders and mental retardation. Another soon-to-be-published study shows that autism rates are in decline following the recent elimination of thimerosal from most vaccines.
As the federal government worked to prevent scientists from studying vaccines, others have stepped in to study the link to autism. In April, reporter Dan Olmsted of UPI undertook one of the more interesting studies himself. Searching for children who had not been exposed to mercury in vaccines - the kind of population that scientists typically use as a "control" in experiments - Olmsted scoured the Amish of Lancaster County, Penn., who refuse to immunize their infants. Given the national rate of autism, Olmsted calculated that there should be 130 autistics among the Amish. He found only four. One had been exposed to high levels of mercury from a power plant. The other three - including one child adopted from outside the Amish community - had received their vaccines.
At the state level, many officials have also conducted in-depth reviews of thimerosal. While the Institute of Medicine was busy whitewashing the risks, the Iowa Legislature was carefully combing through all of the available scientific and biological data. "After three years of review, I became convinced there was sufficient credible research to show a link between mercury and the increased incidences in autism," says state Sen. Ken Veenstra, a Republican who oversaw the investigation. "The fact that Iowa's 700 percent increase in autism began in the 1990s, right after more and more vaccines were added to the children's vaccine schedules, is solid evidence alone." Last year, Iowa became the first state to ban mercury in vaccines, followed by California. Similar bans are now under consideration in 32 other states.
But instead of following suit, the FDA continues to allow manufacturers to include thimerosal in scores of over-the-counter medications as well as steroids and injected collagen. Even more alarming, the government continues to ship vaccines preserved with thimerosal to developing countries - some of which are now experiencing a sudden explosion in autism rates. In China, where the disease was virtually unknown prior to the introduction of thimerosal by U.S. drug manufacturers in 1999, news reports indicate that there are now more than 1.8 million autistics. Although reliable numbers are hard to come by, autistic disorders also appear to be soaring in India, Argentina, Nicaragua and other developing countries that are now using thimerosal-laced vaccines. The World Health Organization continues to insist thimerosal is safe, but it promises to keep the possibility that it is linked to neurological disorders "under review."
I devoted time to study this issue because I believe that this is a moral crisis that must be addressed. If, as the evidence suggests, our public-health authorities knowingly allowed the pharmaceutical industry to poison an entire generation of American children, their actions arguably constitute one of the biggest scandals in the annals of American medicine. "The CDC is guilty of incompetence and gross negligence," says Mark Blaxill, vice president of Safe Minds, a nonprofit organization concerned about the role of mercury in medicines. "The damage caused by vaccine exposure is massive. It's bigger than asbestos, bigger than tobacco, bigger than anything you've ever seen." It's hard to calculate the damage to our country - and to the international efforts to eradicate epidemic diseases - if Third World nations come to believe that America's most heralded foreign-aid initiative is poisoning their children. It's not difficult to predict how this scenario will be interpreted by America's enemies abroad. The scientists and researchers - many of them sincere, even idealistic - who are participating in efforts to hide the science on thimerosal claim that they are trying to advance the lofty goal of protecting children in developing nations from disease pandemics. They are badly misguided. Their failure to come clean on thimerosal will come back horribly to haunt our country and the world's poorest populations.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, chief prosecuting attorney for Riverkeeper and president of Waterkeeper Alliance. He is the co-author of The Riverkeepers. -------
Posted by Reverend X at 12:19 PM
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
"The Government of Orissa has a law against aiding and abetting witchcraft.In 1999, the Government also passed an act against witchcraft, ÂWitch Prohibition Act-1999Â, according to which six months imprisonment and a fine of 2,000 rupees can be imposed on a person found guilty of torturing innocent women.
Surprisingly, in most cases the practitioners of witchcraft as well as their victims are women.While cases of women practicing the occult is known, in most cases it is innocent women who are branded as witches and subjected to torture and even death."
I don't know if its the subject of this report, the illogical and fallacious wording of it- "in most cases it is innocent women"... What, on occasion they catch one of those broom ridin' hags mid-hex?, or the disturbing realization that this doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Witch trials in India, waterboarding in US Gulags, Intelligent Design debates that don't involve Fung Shia and drapes... We are on a one way horse and buggy ride into the Neo Dark age. I mean, have you seen some of these arguments in favor of ID? They are ridiculous.
"Well the Theory of Evolution is only a theory."
Jackass, the fact your ignorant ass doesn't know the definition of the word 'theory' does not entitle you to pull a story out of your ignorant ass and have it taught to children. For educational purposes I will learn ya what theory means.
The reason you have 9 kids in a double wide trailer with a wife who hates you is not because your theory that sex with her on top would prevent conception. You see, that's not a theory, that's just you fucking up repeatedly. Understand?
If you are offended by me calling your ass ignorant, it's because you are also mistaken (means wrong, not "married hottie") about ignorance. Ignorance is your failure to attain a sufficient body of knowledge and education to have worth while thoughts on things and stuff. That is your fault so you can't take offense. It doesn't mean that you are stupid. The fact that you are rereading this diatribe for the fifth time because you still don't get it, means your stupid! That's your parent's fault. Go bitch to them about it.
Now as for ID versus Evolution... They are not mutually exclusive. And God said, "Let there be light!" The Big Bang Banged. Then came dark, bright flashes will do that to you. Work the remaining days out for yourselves.
Posted by Reverend X at 11:45 AM
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
"How the United States should react if Iraq acquired WMD. The first line of defense...should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence--if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration."
- Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor January/February 2000 issue of Foreign Affairs 2/1/2000
"We are greatly concerned about any possible linkup between terrorists and regimes that have or seek weapons of mass destruction...In the case of Saddam Hussein, we've got a dictator who is clearly pursuing and already possesses some of these weapons. A regime that hates America and everything we stand for must never be permitted to threaten America with weapons of mass destruction."
- Dick Cheney, Vice President Detroit, Fund-Raiser 6/20/2002
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."
- Dick Cheney, Vice President Speech to VFW National Convention 8/26/2002
"There is already a mountain of evidence that Saddam Hussein is gathering weapons for the purpose of using them. And adding additional information is like adding a foot to Mount Everest."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Response to Question From Press 9/6/2002
"We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."
- Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor CNN Late Edition 9/8/2002
"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."
- George W. Bush, President Speech to UN General Assembly 9/12/2002
"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons. We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."
- George W. Bush, President Radio Address 10/5/2002
"The Iraqi regime...possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."
- George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002
"And surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it had used to produce chemical and biological weapons."
- George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002
"After eleven years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon."
- George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002
"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas."
- George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002
"Iraq, despite UN sanctions, maintains an aggressive program to rebuild the infrastructure for its nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile programs. In each instance, Iraq's procurement agents are actively working to obtain both weapons-specific and dual-use materials and technologies critical to their rebuilding and expansion efforts, using front companies and whatever illicit means are at hand."
- John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control Speech to the Hudson Institute 11/1/2002
"We estimate that once Iraq acquires fissile material -- whether from a foreign source or by securing the materials to build an indigenous fissile material capability -- it could fabricate a nuclear weapon within one year. It has rebuilt its civilian chemical infrastructure and renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, and VX. It actively maintains all key aspects of its offensive BW program."
- John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control Speech to the Hudson Institute 11/1/2002
"Iraq could decide on any given day to provide biological or chemical weapons to a terrorist group or to individual terrorists...The war on terror will not be won until Iraq is completely and verifiably deprived of weapons of mass destruction."
- Dick Cheney, Vice President Denver, Address To Air National Guard 12/1/2002
"If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 12/2/2002
"The president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not true, and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Response to Question From Press 12/4/2002
"We know for a fact that there are weapons there."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 1/9/2003
"I am absolutely convinced, based on the information that's been given to me, that the weapon of mass destruction which can kill more people than an atomic bomb -- that is, biological weapons -- is in the hands of the leadership of Iraq."
- Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader MSNBC Interview 1/10/2003
"What is unique about Iraq compared to, I would argue, any other country in the world, in this juncture, is the exhaustion of diplomacy thus far, and, No. 2, this intersection of weapons of mass destruction."
- Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader NewsHour Interview 1/22/2003
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
- George W. Bush, President State of the Union Address 1/28/2003
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
- George W. Bush, President State of the Union Address 1/28/2003
"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State Remarks to UN Security Council 2/5/2003
"There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more. And he has the ability to dispense these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction. If biological weapons seem too terrible to contemplate, chemical weapons are equally chilling."
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State Addresses the U.N. Security Council 2/5/2003
"In Iraq, a dictator is building and hiding weapons that could enable him to dominate the Middle East and intimidate the civilized world -- and we will not allow it."
- George W. Bush, President Speech to the American Enterprise Institute 2/26/2003
"If Iraq had disarmed itself, gotten rid of its weapons of mass destruction over the past 12 years, or over the last several months since (UN Resolution) 1441 was enacted, we would not be facing the crisis that we now have before us...But the suggestion that we are doing this because we want to go to every country in the Middle East and rearrange all of its pieces is not correct."
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State Interview with Radio France International 2/28/2003
"I am not eager to send young Americans into harm's way in Iraq, or to see innocent people killed or hurt in military operations. Given all of the facts and circumstances known to us, however, I am convinced that if we wait, a threat will continue to materialize in Iraq that could cause incalculable damage to world peace in general, and to the United States in particular."
- Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Letter to Future of Freedom Foundation 3/1/2003
"Iraq is a grave threat to this nation. It desires to acquire and use weapons of mass terror and is run by a despot with a proven record of willingness to use them. Iraq has had 12 years to comply with UN requirements for disarmament and has failed to do so. The president is right to say it's time has run out."
- Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Senate Speech 3/7/2003
"So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? I think our judgment has to be clearly not."
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State Remarks to UN Security Council 3/7/2003
"Getting rid of Saddam Hussein's regime is our best inoculation. Destroying once and for all his weapons of disease and death is a vaccination for the world."
- Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Washington Post op-ed 3/16/2003
"Let's talk about the nuclear proposition for a minute. We know that based on intelligence, that has been very, very good at hiding these kinds of efforts. He's had years to get good at it and we know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."
- Dick Cheney, Vice President Meet The Press 3/16/2003
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
- George W. Bush, President Address to the Nation 3/17/2003
"The United States...is now at war so we will not ever see what terrorists could do if supplied with weapons of mass destruction by Saddam Hussein."
- Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Senate Debate 3/20/2003
"Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 3/21/2003
"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And...as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them."
- General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief Central Command Press Conference 3/22/2003
"One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites."
- Victoria Clark, Pentagon Spokeswoman Press Briefing 3/22/2003
"I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction."
- Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board member Washington Post, p. A27 3/23/2003
"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense ABC Interview 3/30/2003
"We simply cannot live in fear of a ruthless dictator, aggressor and terrorist such as Saddam Hussein, who possesses the world's most deadly weapons."
- Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Speech to American Israel Political Action Committee 3/31/2003
"We still need to find and secure Iraq's weapons of mass destruction facilities and secure Iraq's borders so we can prevent the flow of weapons of mass destruction materials and senior regime officials out of the country."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Conference 4/9/2003
"You bet we're concerned about it. And one of the reasons it's important is because the nexus between terrorist states with weapons of mass destruction...and terrorist groups -- networks -- is a critical link. And the thought that...some of those materials could leave the country and in the hands of terrorist networks would be a very unhappy prospect. So it is important to us to see that that doesn't happen."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Conference 4/9/2003
"Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty."
- Robert Kagan, Neocon scholar Washington Post op-ed 4/9/2003
"I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 4/10/2003
"But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 4/10/2003
"Were not going to find anything until we find people who tell us where the things are. And we have that very high on our priority list, to find the people who know. And when we do, then well learn precisely where things were and what was done."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Meet the Press 4/13/2003
"I have absolute confidence that there are weapons of mass destruction inside this country. Whether we will turn out, at the end of the day, to find them in one of the 2,000 or 3,000 sites we already know about or whether contact with one of these officials who we may come in contact with will tell us, 'Oh, well, there's actually another site,' and we'll find it there, I'm not sure."
- General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief Central Command Fox News 4/13/2003
"We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them."
- George W. Bush, President NBC Interview 4/24/2003
"There are people who in large measure have information that we need...so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Briefing 4/25/2003
"We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so."
- George W. Bush, President Remarks to Reporters 5/3/2003
"I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now."
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State Remarks to Reporters 5/4/2003
"We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Fox News Interview 5/4/2003
"I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program."
- George W. Bush, President Remarks to Reporters 5/6/2003
"U.S. officials never expected that 'we were going to open garages and find' weapons of mass destruction."
- Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor Reuters Interview 5/12/2003
"I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean, there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago -- whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're still hidden."
- Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne Press Briefing 5/13/2003
"We said all along that we will never get to the bottom of the Iraqi WMD program simply by going and searching specific sites, that you'd have to be able to get people who know about the programs to talk to you."
- Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense Interview with Australian Broadcasting 5/13/2003
"Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found."
- Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps Interview with Reporters 5/21/2003
"It's going to take time to find them, but we know he had them. And whether he destroyed them, moved them or hid them, we're going to find out the truth. One thing is for certain: Saddam Hussein no longer threatens America with weapons of mass destruction."
- George W. Bush, President Speech at a weapons factory in Ohio 5/25/2003
"Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction."
- Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff NBC Today Show interview 5/26/2003
"They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations 5/27/2003
"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on."
- Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense Vanity Fair interview 5/28/2003
"The President is indeed satisfied with the intelligence that he received. And I think that's borne out by the fact that, just as Secretary Powell described at the United Nations, we have found the bio trucks that can be used only for the purpose of producing biological weapons. That's proof-perfect that the intelligence in that regard was right on target."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 5/29/2003
"We have teams of people that are out looking. They've investigated a number of sites. And within the last week or two, they have in fact captured and have in custody two of the mobile trailers that Secretary Powell talked about at the United Nations as being biological weapons laboratories."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Infinity Radio Interview 5/30/2003
"But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them."
- George W. Bush, President Interview with TVP Poland 5/30/2003
"You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons...They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two...And we'll find more weapons as time goes on."
- George W. Bush, President Press Briefing 5/30/2003
"It was a surprise to me then -- it remains a surprise to me now -- that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there."
- Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force Press Interview 5/30/2003
"Do I think we're going to find something? Yeah, I kind of do, because I think there's a lot of information out there."
- Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton, Defense Intelligence Agency Press Conference 5/30/2003
"This wasn't material I was making up, it came from the intelligence community."
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State Press Briefing 6/2/2003
"We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents. This is the man who spent decades hiding tools of mass murder. He knew the inspectors were looking for them. You know better than me he's got a big country in which to hide them. We're on the look. We'll reveal the truth."
- George W. Bush, President Camp Sayliya, Qatar 6/5/2003
"I would put before you Exhibit A, the mobile biological labs that we have found. People are saying, 'Well, are they truly mobile biological labs?' Yes, they are. And the DCI, George Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence, stands behind that assessment."
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State Fox News Interview 6/8/2003
"No one ever said that we knew precisely where all of these agents were, where they were stored."
- Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor Meet the Press 6/8/2003
"What the president has said is because it's been the long-standing view of numerous people, not only in this country, not only in this administration, but around the world, including at the United Nations, who came to those conclusions...And the president is not going to engage in the rewriting of history that others may be trying to engage in."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Response to Question From Press 6/9/2003
"Iraq had a weapons program...Intelligence throughout the decade showed they had a weapons program. I am absolutely convinced with time we'll find out they did have a weapons program."
- George W. Bush, President Comment to Reporters 6/9/2003
"The biological weapons labs that we believe strongly are biological weapons labs, we didn't find any biological weapons with those labs. But should that give us any comfort? Not at all. Those were labs that could produce biological weapons whenever Saddam Hussein might have wanted to have a biological weapons inventory."
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State Associated Press Interview 6/12/2003
"Those documents were only one piece of evidence in a larger body of evidence suggesting that Iraq attempted to purchase uranium from Africa...The issue of Iraq's pursuit of uranium in Africa is supported by multiple sources of intelligence. The other sources of evidence did and do support the president's statement."
- Sean McCormack, National Security Council Spokesman Statement to press 6/13/2003
"My personal view is that their intelligence has been, I'm sure, imperfect, but good. In other words, I think the intelligence was correct in general, and that you always will find out precisely what it was once you get on the ground and have a chance to talk to people and explore it, and I think that will happen."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Briefing 6/18/2003
"I have reason, every reason, to believe that the intelligence that we were operating off was correct and that we will, in fact, find weapons or evidence of weapons, programs, that are conclusive. But that's just a matter of time...It's now less than eight weeks since the end of major combat in Iraq and I believe that patience will prove to be a virtue."
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Pentagon media briefing 6/24/2003
MS. BLOCK: There were no toxins found in those trailers.
SECRETARY POWELL: Which could mean one of several things: one, they hadn't been used yet to develop toxins; or, secondly, they had been sterilized so thoroughly that there is no residual left. It may well be that they hadn't been used yet.
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State All Things Considered, Interview 6/27/2003
"That was the concern we had with Saddam Hussein. Not only did he have weapons -- and we'll uncover not only his weapons but all of his weapons programs -- he never lost the intent to have these kinds of weapons."
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State All Things Considered, Interview 6/27/2003
"I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of mass destruction to tell the world where they are."
- Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 7/9/2003
Posted by Reverend X at 2:55 AM
Saturday, November 12, 2005
As more and more information surfaces in regards to the US Gulag system, it is becoming clear that from the top down, these guys are Rons. I mean, we had a lot of Rons, but with the addition of the PNAC Alumni, whoa! It would seem the old equation still holds. If you have 10 Rons and 5 other Rons join you, what do have? More Rons!
Sorry, I apologize for that intro. Now where was I? Oh yeah... For the last six months or so I have been trying to get the message across that 911 was impossible. Laws of Science cannot be broken, even by the Law Breakers in this Administration. Well, Check it. Drop the Science with Defiance. On a Mission to Prove Demolition So I would like to say, as humbly as possible, "Suck it, Bitches! In your Face!" Of course I can't find a humble way to say that so I'll just say, "Hopefully the GOP Controlled Congress doesn't vote in a law to stop this guy from investigating 911."
Vote not to investigate? Why on Earth would our Representatives vote to NOT investigate allegations of Criminal Activity. Hell if I know, ask them yourself. Keyword search "GOP votes" "House conservatives" etc and you should find quite a number of them. I believe all together there have been 23 flagrant partisan votes against different investigations coming out of committee, the floor, and so on. I have not fully researched this, so you will have to do your own work. And 23 is approximate. http://backbonecampaign.org/page.cfm?id=64 is just the most recent example. One more
My question today is: Why, with the GOP holding all the moral people and religious virtues of the world so close to it's heart, would they not wish to show by example their righteousness and christ-like goodness? Why, instead, would they repeatedly unilaterally deny the American people the blessing of seeing the work of God these Holy men are carrying out in our Name? Ask your Representatives and Senators that question. I dare you.
Posted by Reverend X at 8:26 AM