Tuesday, November 13, 2007

24 hours after the day that will be known to history

Loose Change Final Cut was just released. No doubt millions will be watching it (for free I might add) over the coming weeks. The video is far more damning than I had originally anticipated. I am impressed to say the least. Yet you wouldnt know there was any significance to this event if you were only tuned into the mainstream media. big surprise eh?

Check out this screen capture of google news taken 24 hours after loose change final cut was unleashed

Note the video was released at midnight on Nov 12. Not one news story about it!

The question will be asked... why did it take so long for 9/11 truth to finally make a powerful case? Screenshots like this provide the answer.

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Why the Ron Paul Campaign is Dangerous

This is a response to Why the Ron Paul Campaign is Dangerous
By JB Williams (11/11/07)

I am fast becoming the most unpopular man in America, among Ron Paul supporters that is. Truth is seldom popular among those at odds with that truth.

Truth? ha, well let's see what your version of the "truth" is?

Paul supporters have worked diligently to convince voters that their candidate is the “real deal” constitutionalist conservative in the ’08 presidential race and that he has a real chance of winning. But the facts simply don’t support either of these claims and pointing this reality out seems to drive Paul supporters into a fit of unbridled rage.

Your selection of the facts might not support those claims. In order to know who is right, and who is full of it, all depends on how many logical fallacies are rooted within your interpretation of the facts. I can already see one glaring logical fallacy, and that is this: You cant lump all of Ron Paul's supporters into a group and say they all are angry and having "fits of unbridled rage." That's fallacy #1.

Besides, why would anyone want to waste their hate on you personally? Most Ron Paul supporters are focusing their anger on the forces at work destroying the value of the dollar. Or the forces at work constantly lying us into war after war after war while sweeping the hundreds of thousands of deaths under the rug. You have to be narcissistic to think that anyone would really be angry over a peon like you. But no doubt you are a part of those forces, so that is the reason you get lots of angry emails. Not because you're anything special.

The fact is, though Ron Paul himself is no threat to anyone or anything, his campaign is on a track that is very dangerous for America and the conservative movement in particular.

You mean the neo-conservative establishment. That's fallacy #2. Bush and Giuliani and most of the others you support are not conservatives. And THAT is a fact. Just because somebody calls themself a conservative does not make it so. Their actions are what determine that.

Although he is highly unlikely to win anything, his campaign is increasingly likely to cause real trouble for the legitimate Republican nomination process.

Because he is growing the party? Hey if it weren't for Ron Paul, the party would be shrinking even more this year. And THAT is a fact. But you dont care about that, because obviously, A: you want Hillary to win, and B: because you have no respect for the democratic process. The Republican party is open to almost anyone who wishes to register. Yet you're against that? Fallacy #3. And it's a big one!

Recent headlines have been focused on the record fund raising day in the Paul campaign. It was a very effective campaign stunt.

Fallacy #4. It's not a campaign stunt. It was a grassroots effort that sprung up independently of the campaign. Like RonPaul2008 would have chosen Guy Fawkes day to have a huge fundraiser? Come on.... I'm surprised you didnt mention Guy Fawkes actually. That's always good for a lowbrow cheapshot, which should be right up your alley.

Although he still trails most other candidates in overall fund raising by a pretty wide margin,

This is not just fallacy #5, but it is also a blatant lie. Fact is, most other candidates trail him. Why dont you try subtracting all the money that Romney has personally contributed to his own campaign? Then you'll see that Romney hasnt raised all that much.

his campaign grabbed headlines by setting up an internet campaign stunt designed to raise as much as possible in a single day.

Again, this is a blatant lie. The campaign did NOT organize that "stunt". And I would call this fallacy #6 since I know damn well you wouldnt be calling it a stunt if Fred or Rudy had pulled this off. And you know it too.

It worked - they got the desired headlines - but what does it really mean?

It means Ron Paul's campaign got money and headlines, that's all it means. How can you feign ignorance about this? lol

In the end, it won’t change the outcome of the election process.

And if he raises 12 million on Dec 16th, you'd probably say the same thing. If he raised 200 million, you'd surely be saying the same thing, no? Who are you to say what will or will not change the outcome of the election process? The only way you can know the outcome is if you think the system is controlled. That's fallacy #7. And it's an insulting one at that. There may be some establishment controls, namely such as yourself, but they are weak and fleeting.

But the recent surge in campaign contributions did raise a more important question.

Where’s all that money coming from?

From people who are sick of being lied to? That's just a guess. From people who are sick of watching their dollar be devalued by massive amounts, and then seeing that the other candidates wont even address the issue.

At first, I assumed, and had even written, that Ron Paul’s financial support was coming from the Libertarian wing of the Republican Party. Then I was corrected by former Ron Paul aide and founder of the Libertarian Republican Caucus, Eric Dondero, who also founded MainstreamLibertarian.com and hosts blogtalk radio show Libertarian Politics Live.

Oh, Dondero eh? Many RP supporters have known for a long time that Dondero has some sort of personal vendetta against Ron Paul. Fact is, Ron Paul's views are more inline with Dondero's than those of Hillary. By attacking Ron Paul, he is in fact shilling for Hillary, who will most likely win in the absence of a true conservative opponent. Do some research on Dondero, and you will see this clearly. There has to be something personal motivating him. I have a pretty good idea what that is, but I dont care to discuss such trivialities.

In an interview with Dondero, he emphatically complained; “Please refrain in the future from using the label "Libertarian Republican" in describing Ron Paul. Call him what he is: Some sort of populist leftwinger.”

Dondero continued, “Since 9/11 Paul has become a complete nutcase conspiratorialist quasi-Anti-Semitic leftwing American-hating nutball.”

Nutcase and nutball in the same sentence, eh? Quasi-anti-semitic? What in blazes does that mean? lol. Why not add ufo nut and holocaust denier to the list just to round it out? Fallacy #8, you are using quotes of someone's ad hominem attacks to build your case or make your point.

These were strong words from a former aide to Mr. Paul (from 1997 – 2003) and words worthy of investigation in my mind. So I decided to investigate, which in politics always means, follow the money

Where is all that money coming from?.

Fallacy #9. You said you did some investigating, but then you immediately switched to following the money on the campaign trail. Why dont you follow the money with regard to this personal vendetta Dondero has with Ron Paul? Ron Paul isnt a sellout, and IF Dondero is (like most of em are) then that surely could have something to do with his hate of Ron Paul. Again, did you even investigate this angle at all?

Upon investigation, it appears that Mr. Dondero is exactly right. Much of Ron Paul’s money is not coming from mainstream Libertarians or Republicans.

Although he is running as a Republican, he actually has very little support from rank and file Republicans, as every national Republican poll confirms. But it turns out that he has very little support from mainstream Libertarians either. As Dondero pointed out, “Ron Paul is only attracting support from the leftwing side of the libertarian spectrum, virtually none of whom are Republicans.”

There are two fallacies here. Fallacy #10, just because Dondero hates Ron Paul does not indicate that Ron Paul does not have strong support from libertarians. You have to provide more evidence than that. Show me a candidate that has received more donations from Libertarians at this point in the cycle?

Fallacy #11. Your vaunted "national Republican polls" are deeply flawed and rooted in so many fallacies I will not even get into it here. If you were sincere in your journalistic pursuits, you would have at least acknowledged the fact that Ron Paul isnt going to poll well amongst people who voted for Bush in the last primary. Duh. What exactly is a poll like that supposed to tell us? Absolutely NOTHING. I really couldnt care less what that very small group of people thinks. They've had 7 years to show us all that they dont know much about what really goes on in the world of politics. You can pretend that very small group of republicans speaks for the entire party. But they DO NOT. And I got some news for you. After this primary, that small group of mindnumbed morons is going to be balanced by all the new recruits to the republican party. And future polls of republican primary voters are going to reflect the growing support for true conservatism.

What we have here is a candidate trying to win the Republican nomination by raising money from liberals across the political aisle.

Is this illegal? No. So why dont you focus on things which ARE illegal? Like the iraq war? That's fallacy #12. And here's a thought... have you ever considered that all these democrats and liberals are supporting Ron Paul because they realize Hillary is a fake? Just like Bush, with his "humble foreign policy, no nation building" rhetoric was also a fake?

This is why his fund-raising is not translating to improved poll positions

No, that is fallacy #13. His poll positions ARE improving. Sorry but that is just a FACT. Not only is he rising in the polls, he is rising faster than any other candidate. You see, going from 1% to 2% is a 100% increase. lol. Hey it's a sad fact but its still a fact. And going from 2% to 4% is also a 100% increase. And he'll get to 8 soon enough. Much sooner than you think. But you also have to accept the fact that if that narrow sect of people being polled were actually openminded, then this country wouldnt be in the shape it is in. Most of them think the economy is going great, even though most of them are also losing massive amounts of their own personal savings through currency devaluation. Even though most of them are upper middle class or upper class. It dont matter, they're still losing massive amounts of money. They dont even admit either. But sooner or later, they will have to. And when they do they just might become some of Ron Paul's biggest supporters.

Yet his supporters still claim he is much more popular than the national polls indicate and that he will be the come from behind shocker at the Republican convention. How?

By growing the party. By registering more republican voters. By offsetting those who voted for Bush in the 2004 primaries. THAT is how it works. THAT is how change happens within a party. NOT by people sticking their heads in the sand.

Here’s where the Ron Paul campaign becomes dangerous

Because Paul supporters know that support coming from non-Republicans is not reflected in the Republican polls, they have started a campaign to promote party-jumping so that their anti-war supporter’s from the left can vote in the Republican primary.

Twenty four states have “open” primaries, which means, one need not be Republican to vote in those Republican primaries. Ron Paul supporters are promoting both strategies – one in which Democrats, Independents, and members of other third parties can vote for him in “open” primaries where possible, and switch parties to vote for him where the primaries are “closed.”

The mere notion that a Republican presidential candidate should be nominated by this strategy is insane and very dangerous to the entire election process. At a minimum, it is a demonstration of just what kind of people are behind the Ron Paul campaign, obviously, not constitutionally conscious people. I do not know if the Paul campaign itself is behind this effort. But I am sure that the campaign is aware of this effort, as well as the fact that much of their funding is coming from people other than Republicans.

Fallacy #14. The republican party HAS lost its way. It HAS adopted the liberal ideology. Big spending, sacrificing of civil liberties, nation building, etc. What is happening in response to that IS HEALTHY for democracy. I cant stand two party rule, but right now it's even worse because we're really in a one party system right now. We have to choose between big government and unjust war, or .... big government and unjust war. That is a FACT. That is the choice we have, without Ron Paul in the race. How can you not see that? I will not sit idly by and watch as the current political establisment tries to select candidates that are totally gung-ho when the majority of the public is against the war.

The only Republicans we find in his campaign are those myopic small government conservatives angry with Bush for his Democrat-like spending habits.

Myopic? How dare you. Fallacy #15. I am not myopic. You have no business even claiming that I'm myopic. I look at the millions of wrecked and ruined Iraqis and I see that some of them, not many, but some, will turn to Al Qaeda-esque groups for answers. This is how terrorism is born. And we're breeding it enmass over there, and its spreading into Lebanon, Pakistan, Syria, Egypt... and this is a FACT, and you are myopic for ignoring it. You dont fight terrorism by exacerbating the conditions conducive to terrorism.

Those so angry with Bush, that they are willing to overlook all of this just to vote for a candidate who promises less spending.

Fallacy #16. How can you seriously believe there is anyone who is angry at Bush only because he is s big spender? He's also more anti-2nd amendment than Clinton. That's a fact, and I challenge you to challenge me on that fact. He sat back and let Enron rape the living daylights out of california. (Even Ron Paul with his limited govt stance could have done more to help california. That's pretty sad actually.) Bush sat there in a classroom on 9/11 and disgraced this entire nation with his cowardliness and insecurity. And then later he postured and pretended at photo-op after photo-op trying to make himself out to be anything but the coward that he is. That's not someone I could ever vote for. How dare you sit there and claim that I or anyone else would only have a problem with his spending habits.

Of course, we can’t entirely overlook the handful of moderate Republicans who oppose the war in Iraq either, few as they are.

Fallacy #17. They are not so few as you might think. And even if they were, each one of them is worth a whole gaggle of pro-quagmire zealots.

Why is the Ron Paul campaign dangerous?

Despite his very real popularity across the political aisle, he is not likely to get enough people to switch parties in order to win the RNC nomination.

Fallacy #18. He doesnt rely on just people switching parties. He is also relying on the apathetic MAJORITY of american citizens who dont participate because there is no candidate who speaks for them. And he is also relying on the fact that Bush's foreign policy is in no one's best interest, even rank and file republican primary voters. They are beginning to see just how big an issue is currency devaluation. People like Rush Limbaugh may be able to hide most simple truths from republicans, but he cant hide currency devaluation. He can spin it, but that's at least a step up from hiding it.

But he is doing a great job of validating the perspective of all the negative propaganda uttered by leftists against Bush, Republicans, the War on Terror and national security. That’s not good.

Fallacy #19. It is merely your opinion that "negative propaganda" against Bush is really truly negative. According to my math, two negatives cancel each other out! Also, facts are not propaganda. It is a fact that Bush foreign policy is wrecking this country. This is reflected in the value of the dollar. That is a huge threat to national security. When currencies collapse, it becomes the ultimate threat to national security.

He is also doing a great job of helping the left undermine the war on terror and that’s why he’s so popular among anti-war leftists, including in the press. This is bad.

Undermine the war on terror? What gives with you? Why do you guys always paint yourself into a corner on this issue? How does speaking out against policies that lead to 5 million displaced Iraqi refugees undermine the war on terror? It doesnt. Fallacy #20. Same goes with speaking out against Blackwater. It is no surprise to me that the violence in Iraq has diminished after the scolding that Blackwater took. How is it undermining the war on terror to speak out against policies that lead to hundreds of thousands of US weapons in the hands of insurgents? This is mainstream news, you will not hide from it! And how the hell do you conduct a war against a tactic anyway? War on drugs, war on terror, how many of these stupid wars will it take before you realize that its all a bunch of nonsense?

But even worse, he threatens the integrity of the Republican nomination process itself by relying upon non-Republicans to win the Republican nomination.

Fallacy #21. You have no credibility to tell me or anyone else what a true republican is. Go down the list of what republicans stand for, historically speaking. That's not Bush, and it's not Giuliani.

Last, at a time in American history when the Republican Party must be more united and engaged than ever before, when every available conservative vote is needed in next years general election, Paul and his supporters are busy carving up the party for their own anti-Republican agenda.

Again, more of your "anti-republican" garbage. You dont know what you're talking about. And no, now is not the time for republicans to be united. Fallacy #22. Now is the time for republicans to be asking some serious questions. Now is the time for hardcore debate. Now is the time to realign the party to its roots. Now is the time for republicans to challenge themselves and exercise their critical thinking skills.

I hate wasting this much press time on Ron Paul. But the Paul campaign is becoming a real threat to the Republican primary process and if allowed to continue, he will take votes away from the most conservative Republican candidates in the party, not the most liberal.

If "allowed" to continue? What exactly are you saying? You authoritarians are really despicable when you show your true colors. And no, Ron Paul is not going to "take away" conservative votes. If a liberal decides to vote for Ron Paul, he is in FACT taking votes away FROM a liberal. Fallacy #23. You are completely 180 degrees off in your logic.

This is bad for the party and the country.

No, it is good for both the party and the country. Incongruent logic is what is bad for the party and the country. Your positions are simply indefensible. You require a colosally huge media wing and an echo chamber in order to make your views sound defensible. But even all that is humbled by a humble 72 year old man whom none of you can properly debate.

There’s really no need to write another word about Ron Paul. If you can know all of these facts,

What facts? Google giving him money? Oh my god a quarter-trillion dollar company gives a candidate some money. You've just shattered my political paradigm! Are you claiming that he's gotten more money than Hillary from big corporations? How about more than Giuliani? How dumb do you think we are?

Real Republicans need to be aware and unite to block this effort to hijack the party nomination.

Real republicans? Ha. Real Republicans do not need to be told what to do by the likes of you. They can make up their own minds. The lack of respect you show to even those you consider Real Republicans is astounding!

National elections are decided by a couple points one way or another today. Republicans can’t afford to let any candidate play games with their nomination process.

Games? Did someone say games? I got a game for you. It's really fun. You'll love it. Just imagine if the country held the presidential election right now. The republicrat frontrunner Giuliani, vs Hillary. It would be a landslide. lol. What fun! You really think that dynamic is going to change over the next year? Are you predicting a major terrorist attack or something? Because that is about the only thing that is going to stampede the masses into voting for someone like Giuliani. You know, I bet you guys do sit around hoping for planes to fly into buildings. It wont matter how many PDB's are sitting on Bush's desk while he's out on vacation. You'll still rally behind your fearless leader as he sits in another classroom reading "my pet goat".

Thursday, November 08, 2007

Ron Paul Stock Soars! Dailykos sinks

I may not be rich. I may not be a savvy investor. I thought of buying PetroChina stock when it was sitting at $140 a couple months ago. (It's at $250 right now heh.) But I try not to buy Chinese stocks.

But if Ron Paul was a stock, I'd be a millionaire! Because I "bought" into his stock a year ago, when it was at bargain basement prices.

Oh just imagine if that was a real stock chart! Well, as far as I'm concerned, it is!

When I first started this blog, I had just left DailyKos because I disagreed with their silly shortsighted censorship of 9/11 debate, among other reasons which I have explained in detail. That happened around May of 2006. Check out this chart:

Apparently a lot of other people left as well. I told you so, Moulitsas, you tool. Aside from a few blips (death throes heh), they've been trending downwards ever since.

Hey Markos, you think you know what it is that makes Ron Paul's grassroot support grow, while your fake wannabe "netroots" wallow in the mud? It's because he stands for simple truths. You stand for an establishment that sucks off the marrow of american society. It might sell you a few books, but people see through it in the long run. You can try to comprehend or replicate Ron Paul's success all you want, but you never will. People like Ron Paul, as well as myself, do not sell themselves out just to make a cushy living and hopefully become part of the corrupt establishment. Yeah i could be sitting pretty on my 1000% annualized PTR profits, but I'm not a sellout. I wouldn't expect you to understand. (Even though you've written a book on the subject! lol what a joke.) So please, go on making wild guesses as to what drives Ron Paul's nutty supporters. Good luck trying to replicate it!

Thursday, November 01, 2007

Is There a Problem With Overpopulation?

I've heard many arguments stating how the earth is overpopulated. It seems to be a popular view among many who consider themselves "educated", "realistic", etc.

I'm going to answer as many of those arguments as I can.

There are not "far too many people on this planet, ecologically speaking." The earth is not Easter Island, and we have more than trees to use as fuel.

Nature is irrelevant. We crossed the boundary of living in harmony with nature a long long time ago. There are 60 billion farm animals. What we have is utterly unsustainable without continuous technological advance. The only way to get back in "harmony with nature" is to kill off at least 6 billion people. If that is what you believe then you should be the first to volunteer. If you're not prepared to do that then you must admit you're faced with a serious ideological conundrum! That is your issue to deal with, but it is not mine.

No I do not think there will be a "magical" technological solution.

I dont think electricity is magical.
I dont think magnetism is magical.
I dont think gravitational forces are magical.
I dont think tidal forces are magical.
I dont think solar radiation is magical.
I dont think fission is magical.
I dont think fusion is magical.
I dont think (the concept of) antigravity is magical.
I DO think the spirit of ingenuity that makes a lowly lifeform able to understand and use all of those things is magical.

You say let's get with reality, but do you realize that just a few miles below your feet the ground there is hot enough to boil water? Is that reality enough for you? All the energy we need is right there, and we would be up to 100 billion before we had to worry about sucking so much heat energy from the earth that it becomes a problem. By then we'll be generating energy in other ways. ALL ecological problems can be solved with enough energy. Food for 100 billion people can easily be grown without any impact on the environment, given the proper amounts of energy. This energy would not even scratch the surface of how much energy is stored just in the crust of the earth. Without even going into the mantle...

No, agent smith, humanity is not a virus or a cancer on the planet. The planet is not a mammal or a fish. So you really have no idea what a cancer of the planet could possibly be, and definately have no idea what this planet was meant to do in its lifetime. Perhaps all the earth's creatures, including humans, were meant to serve a specific evolutionary purpose. And perhaps all of those species, including us, will be extinct before all is said and done. Perhaps we were meant to give birth to AI and usher in a totally new paradigm not just on this planet but in this entire galaxy. The point is, we dont know. So you cant pretend like you know what's best for mother earth, and then use that as a justification for any type of genocide. And make no mistake genocide is exactly what you're talking about. You should feel comfortable with that term if you're going to support it.

The problem isnt overpopulation, it is simply one of stupidity. We already have most of the technology we need to "save the planet". We just don't use it. Just like we have these great communication tools, cell phones, the internet, etc yet we barely use them to even 1% of their potential. What has always kept this species alive is that 1% who does make the full use of what was given to them. And as the earth's population grows, so too does that critical 1%. The only question is... do you want to be a part of that one percent? If people spent even half the time thinking of real solutions as they do thinking of "final solutions", there would never be a problem.

If you really want to understand why overpopulation is not the problem, then go to google and type in "iarga". Read one man's story. Dont focus on whether it's true or not. Dont focus on the whole ufo veneer. Just look at the ideas presented within. Explore the limitless possibilities. And don't waste your time criticising it unless you actually read it.

Let Your Hypocritical Stars Shine

I don't understand why political parties have to be divided on this issue at all. It's deeply ironic. Because the congress has no business being involved in the abortion debate at all. And the supreme court has no business either, except in deciding the issue of a mother's personal privacy. But that's a conservative point! Conservatives should be for a woman's personal privacy! Liberals should be the ones placing a higher value on the unborn baby! Why is it reversed? Same goes with terri schiavo. The parties were reversed on that too. Liberals should be pro-life (or anti-choice if you prefer). Because it really is the "liberal" position.

There are some legitimate reasons for having an abortion. For that reason Roe V Wade shouldnt be overturned, at least until those specific instances are addressed.

But it is just a plain and simple fact that most abortions are more the fault of britney spears than of some rapist or incestuous family member. If you dont agree with that then sorry you're deluding yourself.

And when I say britney spears you ought to know what I mean. Look back to when she was 17. That's when things really started accelerating down this spiral. The girls noticed how much the guys talked about britney, and so they emulated her. It's not just her either. All the tv shows started oversexualizing adolescents. Much more than they used to. I'm sure part of it was preparation for the Iraq war... how nice it must be that all these defense contractors have their own huge media and entertainment wings. Hell just look at Disney. Goebbels would be jealous....

Yes abstinance from intercourse really is the one true key to reaching common ground on the abortion issue. Not only is it the most logical solution, but it's also the most realistic. Notice I did not say abstinance from sex, merely from intercourse. I think that's where conservatives really mess up their message. The whole "sex can wait" campaign was just a colossal waste of energy. Sex cannot wait. People need to come to grips with the fact that humans are animals and that we dont "become" a human (or an animal) when we turn 18. Sorry it dont work like that.

When a teen sees one of those ads on tv saying "sex can wait", what they're really seeing is "We're just a bunch of fakes and liars, tune us out. Listen to Britney, she knows what it's all about." It is like a big lie. Almost as if done intentionally...

Our culture needs to obliterate the taboo around sex and strengthen the taboo around intercourse. Because intercourse is complicated, serious, and actually quite dangerous on many levels. A hand job and a pearl necklace never killed anyone, born or unborn.