This will send a chill down your spine...

[Richard Cranium]

On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 18:46:41 -0700, UltimatePatriot
<UltimatePatriot@thebestcountry.org> wrote:

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 10:02:13 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

America's Ministry of Propaganda Exposed


Are you Rosie O'donnell's puppy dog?

Let me guess... you don't think a plane hit the Pentagon, and you do
not believe that we sent men to the Moon 7 times, and you think that WTC
6 was a demo.

Grow up, you little pussified bitch.

I need help. I'm agreeing with Archie. That's gotta be a sure sign
of some form of mental illness. Perhaps an enema would help. All of
the conspiracy fuckwits can then suck the enema solution from my ass
instead of drinking the kool aid they're being served by the
pork-faced morons who promulgate this crap.

It's hard to accept that anyone who subscribes to the stupid
conspiracy stories can read and breathe regularly enough to stay
alive.

 

[Ouroboros Rex]

flipper wrote:

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:59:19 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009 09:31:56 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:43:27 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex"
its@casual.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
This will send a chill down your spine...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

Big brother is watching... big time :-(

Bullshit.

"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform
out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of
life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via
chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can't
keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking
for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web
about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to
flag@whitehouse.gov."

You are such a good little mind numbed robot.

When, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the Bush Administration
asked the public to keep an eye out for potentially life
threatening, illegal, terrorist activity and report same to the
appropriate authorities the left went into an apoplectic fit
screaming fascist, fascist, but you think it's perfectly fine for
people to collect and send private communications to the White
House for nothing more threatening than expressing a political
opinion Obama doesn't like.

Let's see, the left says reporting life threatening illegal
activities bad.

Bullshit.

and the left is full of it.


Hate to burst your fascist bubble but the First Amendment doesn't
say only speech Obama likes, or only speech you like, or only
speech Obama deems politically appropriate or only speech Obama,
in his great wisdom. deems the one and only 'truth'. It protects
SPEECH.

Only a complete idiot would think this is for anything but
rebuttal. lol

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a flying fig *what* your twisted
little swastika imagines the 'purpose' to be. It's a violation of
both free speech and privacy rights,

Pathetic lie.

Spoken like a good loyal fascist.

What you mean is, you can't find proof one for your lie above. lol

regardless, and the Constitution makes no
exceptions for "unless the Obama administration finds infringing on
these rights convenient for stomping on it's political opposition"
nor is there one for 'convenient rebuttal'.

But, since liberals don't give a dam what the Constitution says, I
feel compelled to point out it's also illegal by statute passed by a
Democrat Congress.

Pathetic lie.

ditto

What you mean is, you can't find proof one for your lie above. lol

And, as I already mentioned in the parts you dishonestly snipped,
all of it is readily available on the Internet ranging from
'mainstream' new sources, to editorials, to blogs, to youtube and
the only schmucks apparently not only deaf dumb and blind to the
deluge of concern but unable to google and click on a link to
inform themselves are Mr. Teachable Moment and his 'communications
director'.

Pathetic lie.

ditto

What you mean is, you can't find proof one for your lie above. lol

 

[Ouroboros Rex]

flipper wrote:

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 10:02:13 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

Robert Baer wrote:
flipper wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 08:55:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

This will send a chill down your spine...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

Big brother is watching... big time :-(

Might I suggest an E-mail flood ?

...Jim Thompson

Even scarier is the Administration apparently thinks that hurling
accusations and simply repeating the same thing over and over,
while ignoring the arguments presented, is a 'rebuttal'.
Isn't Hitler who said that if a lie is told often enough that it
becomes believed / the truth?

Sounds likely. =)

Congratulations. You just did a near perfect imitation of Hitler and
Goebbles.

translation: drooool

"The link between terrorism, Iraq and 9/11

Iraqi agents meeting with 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta

Iraq's possession of chemical and biological weapons.

Iraq's purchase of nuclear materials from Niger.

Saddam Hussein's development of nuclear weapons.

Aluminum tubes for nuclear weapons

The existence of Iraqi drones, WMD cluster bombs and Scud missiles.

Iraq's threat to target the US with cyber warfare attacks.

The rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch.

The surrender of a 5,000-man Iraqi brigade.

Iraq executing Coalition POWs.

Iraqi soldiers dressing in US and UK uniforms to commit atrocities.

The exact location of WMD facilities

WMDs moved to Syria.

Every one of these stories received extensive publicity and helped
form indelible public impressions of the "enemy" and the progress of
the invasion.

Every one of these stories was false."


http://www.earthisland.org/project/newsPage2.cfm?newsID=491&pageID=177&subSiteID=4

America's Ministry of Propaganda Exposed

By Gar Smith / The-Edge

November 7, 2003

A Strategy of Lies: How the White House Fed the Public a Steady Diet
of Falsehoods

Colonel Sam Gardiner (USAF, Ret.) has identified 50 false news
stories created and leaked by a secretive White House propaganda
apparatus.

Bush administration officials are probably having second thoughts
about their decision to play hardball with former US Ambassador
Joseph Wilson. Joe Wilson is a contender.

When you play hardball with Joe, you better be prepared to deal with
some serious rebound.

After Wilson wrote a critically timed New York Times essay exposing
as false George W. Bush's claim that Iraq had purchased uranium from
Niger, high officials in the White House contacted several Washington
reporters and leaked the news that Wilson's wife was a CIA agent.

Wilson isn't waiting for George W. Bush to hand over the perp.

In mid-October, the former ambassador began passing copies of an
embarrassing internal report to reporters across the US.

The-Edge has received copies of this document.

The 56-page investigation was assembled by USAF Colonel (Ret.) Sam
Gardiner.

"Truth from These Podia: Summary of a Study of Strategic Influence,
Perception Management, Strategic Information Warfare and Strategic
Psychological Operations in Gulf II" identifies more than 50 stories
about the Iraq war that were faked by government propaganda artists
in a covert campaign to "market" the military invasion of Iraq.

Gardiner has credentials.

He has taught at the National War College, the Air War College and
the Naval Warfare College and was a visiting scholar at the Swedish
Defense College.

According to Gardiner, "It was not bad intelligence" that lead to the
quagmire in Iraq, "It was an orchestrated effort [that] began before
the war" that was designed to mislead the public and the world.

Gardiner's research lead him to conclude that the US and Britain had
conspired at the highest levels to plant "stories of strategic
influence" that were known to be false.

The Times of London described the $200-million-plus US operation as a
"meticulously planned strategy to persuade the public, the Congress,
and the allies of the need to confront the threat from Saddam
Hussein."

The multimillion-dollar propaganda campaign run out of the White
House and Defense Department was, in Gardiner's final assessment
"irresponsible in parts" and "might have been illegal."

"Washington and London did not trust the peoples of their democracies
to come to the right decisions," Gardiner explains.

Consequently, "Truth became a casualty. When truth is a casualty,
democracy receives collateral damage."

For the first time in US history, "we allowed strategic psychological
operations to become part of public affairs... [W]hat has happened is
that information warfare, strategic influence, [and] strategic
psychological operations pushed their way into the important process
of informing the peoples of our two democracies."

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced plans to create an Office
of Strategic Influence early in 2002.

At the same time British Prime Minister Tony Blair's Strategy
Director Alastair Campbell was setting up an identical operation in
London.

As soon as Pvt. Jessica Lynch was airlifted from her hospital bed,
the first call from her "rescue team" went, not to military
officials but to Jim Wilkinson, the White House's top propaganda
official stationed in Iraq.

White House critics were quick to recognize that "strategic
influence" was a euphemism for disinformation.

Rumsfeld had proposed establishing the country's first Ministry of
Propaganda.

The criticism was so severe that the White House backed away from the
plan.

But on November 18, several months after the furor had died down,
Rumsfeld arrogantly announced that he had not been deterred.

"If you want to savage this thing, fine: I'll give you the corpse.
There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm gonna keep doing
every single thing that needs to be done -- and I have."

Gardiner's dogged research identified a long list of stories that
passed through Rumsfeld's propaganda mill.

According to Gardiner, "there were over 50 stories manufactured or at
least engineered that distorted the picture of Gulf II for the
American and British people."

Those stories include:



The link between terrorism, Iraq and 9/11

Iraqi agents meeting with 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta

Iraq's possession of chemical and biological weapons.

Iraq's purchase of nuclear materials from Niger.

Saddam Hussein's development of nuclear weapons.

Aluminum tubes for nuclear weapons

The existence of Iraqi drones, WMD cluster bombs and Scud missiles.

Iraq's threat to target the US with cyber warfare attacks.

The rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch.

The surrender of a 5,000-man Iraqi brigade.

Iraq executing Coalition POWs.

Iraqi soldiers dressing in US and UK uniforms to commit atrocities.

The exact location of WMD facilities

WMDs moved to Syria.

Every one of these stories received extensive publicity and helped
form indelible public impressions of the "enemy" and the progress of
the invasion.

Every one of these stories was false.

"I know what I am suggesting is serious. I did not come to these
conclusions lightly," Gardiner admits.

"I'm not going to address why they did it. That's something I don't
understand even after all the research."

But the fact remained that "very bright and even well-intentioned
officials found how to control the process of governance in ways
never before possible."

A Battle between Good and Evil

Gardiner notes that cocked-up stories about Saddam's WMDs "was only a
very small part of the strategic influence, information operations
and marketing campaign conducted on both sides of the Atlantic."

The "major thrust" of the campaign, Gardiner explains, was "to make a
conflict with Iraq seem part of a struggle between good and evil.
Terrorism is evil... we are the good guys.

"The second thrust is what propaganda theorists would call the 'big
lie.' The plan was to connect Iraq with the 9/11 attacks. Make the
American people believe that Saddam Hussein was behind those
attacks."

The means for pushing the message involved: saturating the media with
stories, 24/7; staying on message; staying ahead of the news cycle;
managing expectations; and finally, being prepared to "use
information to attack and punish critics."

Audition in Afghanistan

The techniques that proved so successful in Operation Iraqi Freedom
were first tried out during the campaign to build public support for
the US attack on Afghanistan.

Rumsfeld hired Rendon Associates, a private PR firm that had been
deeply involved in the first Gulf War.

Founder John Rendon (who calls himself an "information warrior")
proudly boasts that he was the one responsible for providing
thousands of US flags for the Kuwaiti people to wave at TV cameras
after their "liberation" from Iraqi troops in 1991.

The White House Coalition Information Center was set up by Karen
Hughes in November 2001.

(In January 2003, the CIC was renamed the Office for Global
Communications.)

The CIC hit on a cynical plan to curry favor for its attack on
Afghanistan by highlighting "the plight of women in Afghanistan."
CIC's Jim Wilkinson later called the Afghan women campaign "the best
thing we've done."

Gardiner is quick with a correction.

The campaign "was not about something they did. It was about a story
they created... It was not a program with specific steps or funding
to improve the conditions of women."

The coordination between the propaganda engines of Washington and
London even involved the respective First Wives.

On November 17, 2001, Laura Bush issued a shocking statement:

"Only the terrorists and the Taliban threaten to pull out women's
fingernails for wearing nail polish."

Three days later, a horrified Cherie Blaire told the London media,
"In Afghanistan, if you wear nail polish, you could have your nails
torn out."

Misleading via Innuendo

Time and again, US reporters accepted the CIC news leaks without
question.

Among the many examples that Gardiner documented was the use of the
"anthrax scare" to promote the administration's pre-existing plan to
attack Iraq.

In both the US and the UK, "intelligence sources" provided a steady
diet of unsourced allegations to the media to suggest that Iraq and
Al Qaeda terrorists were behind the deadly mailing of anthrax-laden
letters.

It wasn't until December 18, that the White House confessed that it
was "increasingly looking like" the anthrax came from a US military
installation.

The news was released as a White House "paper" instead of as a more
prominent White House "announcement."

As a result, the idea that Iraq or Al Qaeda were behind the anthrax
plot continued to persist.

Gardiner believes this was an intentional part of the propaganda
campaign.

"If a story supports policy, even if incorrect, let it stay around."

In a successful propaganda campaign, Gardiner wrote, "We would have
expected to see the creation [of] stories to sell the policy; we
would have expected to see the same stories used on both sides of the
Atlantic. We saw both. The number of engineered or false stories from
US and UK stories is long."

The US and Britain: The Axis of Disinformation

Before the coalition invasion began on March 20, 2003, Washington and
London agreed to call their illegal pre-emptive military aggression
an "armed conflict" and to always reference the Iraqi government as
the "regime."

Strategic communications managers in both capitols issued lists of
"guidance" terms to be used in all official statements.

London's 15 Psychological Operations Group paralleled Washington's
Office of Global Communications.

In a departure from long military tradition, the perception managers
even took over the naming of the war.

Military code names were originally chosen for reasons of security.

In modern US warfare, however, military code names have become "part
of the marketing."

There was Operation Nobel Eagle, Operation Valiant Strike, Operation
Provide Comfort, Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Uphold
Democracy and, finally, Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The "Rescue" of Jessica Lynch

The Pentagon's control over the news surrounding the capture and
rescue of Pfc. Jessica Lynch receives a good deal of attention in
Gardiner's report.

"From the very beginning it was called an 'ambush'," Gardiner noted.

But, he pointed out, "If you drive a convoy into enemy lines, turn
around and drive back, it's not an ambush. Military officers who are
very careful about how they talk about operations would normally not
be sloppy about describing this kind of event," Gardiner complained.

"This un-military kind of talk is one of the reasons I began doing
this research."

One of the things that struck Gardiner as revealing was the fact
that, as Newsweek reported:

"as soon as Lynch was in the air, [the Joint Operations Center]
phoned Jim Wilkinson, the top civilian communications aide to
CENTCOM Gen. Tommy Franks."

It struck Gardiner as inexplicable that the first call after Lynch's
rescue would go to the Director of Strategic Communications, the
White House's top representative on the ground.

On the morning of April 3, the Pentagon began leaking information on
Lynch's rescue that sought to establish Lynch as "America's new
Rambo."

The Washington Post repeated the story it received from the Pentagon:
that Lynch "sustained multiple gunshot wounds" and fought fiercely
and shot several enemy soldier... firing her weapon until she ran
out of ammunition."

Lynch's family confused the issue by telling the press that their
daughter had not sustained any bullet wounds.

Lynch's parents subsequently refused to talk to the press, explaining
that they had been "told not to talk about it."

(Weeks later, the truth emerged. Lynch was neither stabbed nor shot.
She was apparently injured while falling from her vehicle.)

Rumsfeld and Gen. Myers let the story stand during an April 3 press
conference although both had been fully briefed on Lynch's true
condition.

"Again, we see the pattern," Gardiner observed.

"When the story on the street supports the message, it will be left
there by a non-answer. The message is more important than the truth.
Even Central Command kept the story alive by not giving out details."

Gardiner saw another break with procedure.

The information on the rescue that was released to the Post "would
have been very highly classified" and should have been closely
guarded. Instead, it was used as a tool to market the war.

"This was a major pattern from the beginning of the marketing
campaign throughout the war," Gardiner wrote.

"It was okay to release classified information if it supported the
message."

 

[Ouroboros Rex]

UltimatePatriot wrote:

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 10:02:13 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

Every one of these stories was false."


You are full of shit.

Your statement is false. My statement is abso-fucking-lutely true.

translation: droool

 

[Ouroboros Rex]

UltimatePatriot wrote:

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 10:02:13 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

America's Ministry of Propaganda Exposed


Are you Rosie O'donnell's puppy dog?

Let me guess... you don't think a plane hit the Pentagon, and you do
not believe that we sent men to the Moon 7 times, and you think that
WTC 6 was a demo.

Grow up, you little pussified bitch.

translation: drooool

 

[Ouroboros Rex]

UltimatePatriot wrote:

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 10:02:13 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

How the White House Fed the Public a Steady Diet
of Falsehoods


Like the one where Obama said there would be no more pork out of one
side of his mouth to the American people, while the other side
muttered to his buddies "Right after we get this last one in, and
(pointing to the republicans) you guys can join in too!"

You have forgotten the stimulus bill predated Obama's inauguration. lol

Yes. He is feeding us a steady diet of lies and stupid moves. It's
an abomination. It is obvious he knows nothing about a free market
economy, and it is obvious that when ours recovers, he'll be
attempting to take credit for it. As will his party. It really is
sad what the politicians in this country have turned into, and what
that is doing to certain American mind sets.

You are all stained with ill informed, ill focused mind sets.

I call for redress! It is time to discontinue the abuse of the
American coffers under the guise of crisis management.

Obama is a liar. Most likely the worst president that ever wormed his
way into office.

No, Bush's habit of lying to us all on every single issue thumps that
easily.

Thanks a lot, ACORN, you fraudulent bastards.

Sorry, no actual vote fraud from ACORN. Registration fraud, which ACORN
caught and tagged as fraudulent, cannot skew an election until the
individuals fraudulently registered vote.

Of course, I don't expect actual knowledge of the issues from someone with
your posting record.

 

[Ouroboros Rex]

flipper wrote:

On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 01:40:18 -0700, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 08:55:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

This will send a chill down your spine...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

Big brother is watching... big time :-(

Might I suggest an E-mail flood ?

...Jim Thompson

Even scarier is the Administration apparently thinks that hurling
accusations and simply repeating the same thing over and over, while
ignoring the arguments presented, is a 'rebuttal'.

Isn't Hitler who said that if a lie is told often enough that it
becomes believed / the truth?

That's commonly thought but Hitler's oft quoted commentary on the
subject, expressed in Mein Kampf, was the "Big Lie" theory.

"All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true in
itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of
credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more
easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than
consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of
their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the
small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little
matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It
would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and
they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort
the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be
so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and
waver and will continue to think that there may be some other
explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind
it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all
expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art
of lying."

-Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

Interestingly enough, that quote is often taken out of context
because, it one looks at the preceding paragraph, he is actually
accusing 'the Jews and Marxists' of doing that.

"But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for
falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute
responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had
shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the
catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that
hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for
the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took
away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous
enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the
Fatherland to Justice."

That doesn't mean Hitler wasn't a liar, only that you can't 'prove' it
by using a quote where he's accusing the Jews and Marxists of being
liars.

Goebbels included both 'repetition' and 'big lie' in his theory but
there's no doubt of his intent.

""If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent,
for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension,
the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

In this day where there is much discussion about 'the role of
government' it is interesting to note that Goebbles theory prizes
vitality of the State and he apparently concludes the State must, of
necessity, lie and, so, it is (or else it would not be) "vitally
important' for the State to repress truth and dissent.

A Constitutional democracy is diametrically opposite. It prizes the
vitality of the people and the 'State' comes and goes at their will.

Goebbels, again, on repetition

""The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success
unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must
confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over"

The modern left adds their own twist to the technique: regardless of
what they say accuse all dissenters of lying and, as Sen Hillary
Clinton demonstrated with Gen Petreus, do so before they even speak.

I often wax long and hard about logic and fallacies

Not as long as you do when using them. =)

flipper wrote:

Obama's oft repeated claim is you will be able to keep your current
plan, if you like, or chose the government plan.

Now, as I said from the get go, his words are 'technically correct'
but what he intentionally leads one to believe is you will have the
choice of any plan you 'like'

 

[flipper]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:33:25 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com>
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:59:19 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009 09:31:56 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:43:27 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex"
its@casual.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
This will send a chill down your spine...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

Big brother is watching... big time :-(

Bullshit.

"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform
out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of
life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via
chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can't
keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking
for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web
about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to
flag@whitehouse.gov."

You are such a good little mind numbed robot.

When, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the Bush Administration
asked the public to keep an eye out for potentially life
threatening, illegal, terrorist activity and report same to the
appropriate authorities the left went into an apoplectic fit
screaming fascist, fascist, but you think it's perfectly fine for
people to collect and send private communications to the White
House for nothing more threatening than expressing a political
opinion Obama doesn't like.

Let's see, the left says reporting life threatening illegal
activities bad.

Bullshit.

and the left is full of it.


Hate to burst your fascist bubble but the First Amendment doesn't
say only speech Obama likes, or only speech you like, or only
speech Obama deems politically appropriate or only speech Obama,
in his great wisdom. deems the one and only 'truth'. It protects
SPEECH.

Only a complete idiot would think this is for anything but
rebuttal. lol

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a flying fig *what* your twisted
little swastika imagines the 'purpose' to be. It's a violation of
both free speech and privacy rights,

Pathetic lie.

Spoken like a good loyal fascist.

What you mean is, you can't find proof one for your lie above. lol


regardless, and the Constitution makes no
exceptions for "unless the Obama administration finds infringing on
these rights convenient for stomping on it's political opposition"
nor is there one for 'convenient rebuttal'.

But, since liberals don't give a dam what the Constitution says, I
feel compelled to point out it's also illegal by statute passed by a
Democrat Congress.

Pathetic lie.

ditto

What you mean is, you can't find proof one for your lie above. lol


And, as I already mentioned in the parts you dishonestly snipped,
all of it is readily available on the Internet ranging from
'mainstream' new sources, to editorials, to blogs, to youtube and
the only schmucks apparently not only deaf dumb and blind to the
deluge of concern but unable to google and click on a link to
inform themselves are Mr. Teachable Moment and his 'communications
director'.

Pathetic lie.

ditto

What you mean is, you can't find proof one for your lie above. lol

What I mean is exactly what I said. You speak like a good loyal
fascist.

 

[flipper]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:41:48 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com>
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 01:40:18 -0700, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 08:55:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

This will send a chill down your spine...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

Big brother is watching... big time :-(

Might I suggest an E-mail flood ?

...Jim Thompson

Even scarier is the Administration apparently thinks that hurling
accusations and simply repeating the same thing over and over, while
ignoring the arguments presented, is a 'rebuttal'.

Isn't Hitler who said that if a lie is told often enough that it
becomes believed / the truth?

That's commonly thought but Hitler's oft quoted commentary on the
subject, expressed in Mein Kampf, was the "Big Lie" theory.

"All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true in
itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of
credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more
easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than
consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of
their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the
small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little
matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It
would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and
they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort
the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be
so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and
waver and will continue to think that there may be some other
explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind
it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all
expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art
of lying."

-Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

Interestingly enough, that quote is often taken out of context
because, it one looks at the preceding paragraph, he is actually
accusing 'the Jews and Marxists' of doing that.

"But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for
falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute
responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had
shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the
catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that
hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for
the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took
away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous
enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the
Fatherland to Justice."

That doesn't mean Hitler wasn't a liar, only that you can't 'prove' it
by using a quote where he's accusing the Jews and Marxists of being
liars.

Goebbels included both 'repetition' and 'big lie' in his theory but
there's no doubt of his intent.

""If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent,
for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension,
the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

In this day where there is much discussion about 'the role of
government' it is interesting to note that Goebbles theory prizes
vitality of the State and he apparently concludes the State must, of
necessity, lie and, so, it is (or else it would not be) "vitally
important' for the State to repress truth and dissent.

A Constitutional democracy is diametrically opposite. It prizes the
vitality of the people and the 'State' comes and goes at their will.

Goebbels, again, on repetition

""The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success
unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must
confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over"

The modern left adds their own twist to the technique: regardless of
what they say accuse all dissenters of lying and, as Sen Hillary
Clinton demonstrated with Gen Petreus, do so before they even speak.

I often wax long and hard about logic and fallacies

Not as long as you do when using them. =)

You just demonstrated two of your, and the left's, favorites: hurling
an accusation with no evidence whatsoever and the dishonest tactic of
partial quote.

Made even more irrational because you didn't even have anything of
substance to dispute. Just 'hurling' for the sake of 'hurling'.

flipper wrote:

Obama's oft repeated claim is you will be able to keep your current
plan, if you like, or chose the government plan.

Now, as I said from the get go, his words are 'technically correct'
but what he intentionally leads one to believe is you will have the
choice of any plan you 'like'

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 19:47:22 -0500, flipper <flipper@fish.net> wrote:

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:41:48 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

flipper wrote:
[snip]

The modern left adds their own twist to the technique: regardless of
what they say accuse all dissenters of lying and, as Sen Hillary
Clinton demonstrated with Gen Petreus, do so before they even speak.

I often wax long and hard about logic and fallacies

Not as long as you do when using them. =)

You just demonstrated two of your, and the left's, favorites: hurling
an accusation with no evidence whatsoever and the dishonest tactic of
partial quote.

Made even more irrational because you didn't even have anything of
substance to dispute. Just 'hurling' for the sake of 'hurling'.

[snip]

"Hurling", politically correctness for "upchucking" ?

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Obama was elected by a clear vote of the people.

So do we conclude he's doing what the people wanted him to to do?

Likewise Hitler was elected by a clear vote of the people.

See the similarities?

 

[Ouroboros Rex]

flipper wrote:

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:33:25 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:59:19 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009 09:31:56 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex"
its@casual.com> wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:43:27 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex"
its@casual.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
This will send a chill down your spine...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

Big brother is watching... big time :-(

Bullshit.

"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform
out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of
life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface
via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we
can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're
asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on
the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send
it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

You are such a good little mind numbed robot.

When, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the Bush
Administration asked the public to keep an eye out for
potentially life threatening, illegal, terrorist activity and
report same to the appropriate authorities the left went into
an apoplectic fit screaming fascist, fascist, but you think
it's perfectly fine for people to collect and send private
communications to the White House for nothing more threatening
than expressing a political opinion Obama doesn't like.

Let's see, the left says reporting life threatening illegal
activities bad.

Bullshit.

and the left is full of it.


Hate to burst your fascist bubble but the First Amendment
doesn't say only speech Obama likes, or only speech you like,
or only speech Obama deems politically appropriate or only
speech Obama, in his great wisdom. deems the one and only
'truth'. It protects SPEECH.

Only a complete idiot would think this is for anything but
rebuttal. lol

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a flying fig *what* your twisted
little swastika imagines the 'purpose' to be. It's a violation of
both free speech and privacy rights,

Pathetic lie.

Spoken like a good loyal fascist.

What you mean is, you can't find proof one for your lie above. lol


regardless, and the Constitution makes no
exceptions for "unless the Obama administration finds infringing
on these rights convenient for stomping on it's political
opposition" nor is there one for 'convenient rebuttal'.

But, since liberals don't give a dam what the Constitution says, I
feel compelled to point out it's also illegal by statute passed
by a Democrat Congress.

Pathetic lie.

ditto

What you mean is, you can't find proof one for your lie above. lol


And, as I already mentioned in the parts you dishonestly snipped,
all of it is readily available on the Internet ranging from
'mainstream' new sources, to editorials, to blogs, to youtube and
the only schmucks apparently not only deaf dumb and blind to the
deluge of concern but unable to google and click on a link to
inform themselves are Mr. Teachable Moment and his 'communications
director'.

Pathetic lie.

ditto

What you mean is, you can't find proof one for your lie above. lol



What I mean is exactly what I said. You speak like a good loyal
fascist.

More nothing from the nothng.

 

[Ouroboros Rex]

flipper wrote:

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:41:48 -0500, "Ouroboros Rex" <its@casual.com
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 01:40:18 -0700, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 08:55:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

This will send a chill down your spine...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

Big brother is watching... big time :-(

Might I suggest an E-mail flood ?

...Jim Thompson

Even scarier is the Administration apparently thinks that hurling
accusations and simply repeating the same thing over and over,
while ignoring the arguments presented, is a 'rebuttal'.

Isn't Hitler who said that if a lie is told often enough that it
becomes believed / the truth?

That's commonly thought but Hitler's oft quoted commentary on the
subject, expressed in Mein Kampf, was the "Big Lie" theory.

"All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true in
itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of
credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more
easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than
consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of
their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the
small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little
matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It
would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths,
and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to
distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove
this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will
still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be
some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves
traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which
is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire
together in the art of lying."

-Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

Interestingly enough, that quote is often taken out of context
because, it one looks at the preceding paragraph, he is actually
accusing 'the Jews and Marxists' of doing that.

"But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for
falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute
responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had
shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the
catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that
hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for
the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took
away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous
enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the
Fatherland to Justice."

That doesn't mean Hitler wasn't a liar, only that you can't 'prove'
it by using a quote where he's accusing the Jews and Marxists of
being liars.

Goebbels included both 'repetition' and 'big lie' in his theory but
there's no doubt of his intent.

""If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for
such time as the State can shield the people from the political,
economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes
vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress
dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by
extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

In this day where there is much discussion about 'the role of
government' it is interesting to note that Goebbles theory prizes
vitality of the State and he apparently concludes the State must, of
necessity, lie and, so, it is (or else it would not be) "vitally
important' for the State to repress truth and dissent.

A Constitutional democracy is diametrically opposite. It prizes the
vitality of the people and the 'State' comes and goes at their will.

Goebbels, again, on repetition

""The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success
unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it
must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over"

The modern left adds their own twist to the technique: regardless of
what they say accuse all dissenters of lying and, as Sen Hillary
Clinton demonstrated with Gen Petreus, do so before they even speak.

I often wax long and hard about logic and fallacies

Not as long as you do when using them. =)

You just demonstrated two of your, and the left's, favorites: hurling
an accusation with no evidence whatsoever

Made-up crazyassed crap.

flipper wrote:

Obama's oft repeated claim is you will be able to keep your current
plan, if you like, or chose the government plan.

Now, as I said from the get go, his words are 'technically correct'
but what he intentionally leads one to believe is you will have the
choice of any plan you 'like'

and the dishonest tactic of

partial quote.

Sorry, straw man arguments have beginnings and ends. lol

Continue squealing.