"The price of appeasing the Taliban" by Stephen F. Lynch | February 17, 2010
Yeah, start right off with the charged language and lie.
US Representative Stephen F. Lynch is a member of the House Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Relations.
AS THE war in Afghanistan becomes more costly and less popular among the US and European coalition, everyone is looking for the opportunity to declare victory and move on.
Yup, and we get MORE of it from our "democratic" leaders.
However, a hasty scramble for the exits may bring lasting damage to Afghan society....
Yeah, but LITTERING the PLACE with Depleted Uranium and other WMD while flattening the mountains and villages is really doing 'em good, Congressman.
What a detestable PoS -- and it gets worse.
The United States should resist any tactic that would restore the Taliban to a position of legitimacy and power in Afghanistan simply as a concession to facilitate our departure.
I don't see how we stop it now outside of slaughtering them all.
And those peace talks mean nothing so why bother linking them.
Even as we desire to remove ourselves from Afghanistan, which is the correct strategy, restoring legitimacy to the Taliban would be a malicious and barbaric betrayal of democracy and America’s highest ideals.
Oh, like TORTURE? Like the MASS MURDER of MILLIONS and WAR CRIMES?
Those "values," you PoS prick?
But it would especially betray Afghan women....
Yeah, and MURDERING THEM and their CHILDREN in MISSILE ATTACKS is REALLY GOING TO HELP, Steve!!!
The Taliban is a violent and oppressive regime that has given support to Al Qaeda and employed brutality against the general population, especially against women....
And which Al-CIA-Duh would that be, huh, puke?
This one??
Or that one??
Prop 101: Al-CIA-Duh and the OSI
Prop 101: Al-CIA-Duh's Greatest Hits
Prop 101: The "Terrorism" Business
"Al-CIA-Duh" School in Somalia
New York Times Admits War on Terror is U.S. Creation
"Al-CIA-Duh," right.These women said that they respect the United States, not merely for its economic success or its military power, but for “upholding individual rights for all of its citizens.’’ This, they said, “is the intoxicating idea of America.’’
Yeah, there is SOMETHING INTOXICATING, all right!
Guy is SHOVELING LIKE MAD, ain't he?
Enough to make you unconscious.
And WHO are these women? He NEVER SAYS!
So while the president’s timetable for withdrawal proceeds, we must be mindful of the conditions we leave behind.
Unlike the last time when we used "Al-CIA-Duh" against the Soviets, right?
Too bad YOU DIDN'T LEARN a GOD-DAMNED THING, Steve.
And this guy is supposed to be a dove, can you believe it?
We must not endorse a plan that delivers the mothers and daughters of Afghanistan to the brutality of the Taliban....
Oh, LIKE BEFORE?
"The U.S. government was well aware of the Taliban's reactionary program, yet it chose to back their rise to power in the mid-1990s. The creation of the Taliban was "actively encouraged by the ISI and the CIA," according to Selig Harrison, an expert on U.S. relations with Asia. "The United States encouraged Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to support the Taliban, certainly right up to their advance on Kabul," adds respected journalist Ahmed Rashid. When the Taliban took power, State Department spokesperson Glyn Davies said that he saw "nothing objectionable" in the Taliban's plans to impose strict Islamic law, and Senator Hank Brown, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Near East and South Asia, welcomed the new regime: "The good part of what has happened is that one of the factions at last seems capable of developing a new government in Afghanistan." "The Taliban will probably develop like the Saudis. There will be Aramco [the consortium of oil companies that controlled Saudi oil], pipelines, an emir, no parliament and lots of Sharia law. We can live with that," said another U.S. diplomat in 1997."
Oh, that's a real kick to the lower groans, isn't it, ladies?
The TALIBAN was established under U.S. AUSPICES?
We can "LIVE WITH THAT?"
Well, I SURE CAN as long as the KILLING STOPS -- especially since (sorry) I NO LONGER BELIEVE the LIES PROMOTED by my WAR-MONGERING, MUSLIM-HATING, AGENDA-PUSHING AmeriKan PRESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Of course, it's a GOOD THING American missiles have "liberated you" from your ickey-pooh men and children!!
And there goes the old man again! Just not in the mood this morning I guess.
What a BUTT HOLE, huh, readers?
Yup, the OPINION PAGE of the Boston Glob!
By doing so we will reaffirm to the world our commitment to the fundamental freedoms that have illuminated our history and for which our courageous troops are fighting to preserve.
As THIS GOVERNMENT TAKES THEM ALL AWAY from us!!!!!
EVER GET TIRED of s*** coming out your mouth, Congressman?
Yes, the SELF-ADULATING ARROGANCE and FALSITIES bother me greatly.
Related: Lynch's Looting
Oh, what a scum!!
Has he stopped cheating on his wife yet?
Related: The Boston Globe's Invisible Ink: Karzai's Kin
U.S. Talking to Itself in Talks With Taliban
Hanh?
More:
"Something of a catchall term for loosely affiliated insurgents without a singular command structure. Often, the Afghan government favors the phrase 'enemies of the state' (New York Times July 24, 2007)."
"The Taliban is growing and creating new alliances not because its sectarian religious practices have become popular, but because it is the only available umbrella for national liberation," says Pakistani historian and political commentator Tariq Ali. "As the British and the Soviets discovered to their cost in the preceding two centuries, Afghans never like being occupied."
Also see: Afghanistan's Other Government
And today, readers?
"More and more, people here look back to the era of harsh Taliban rule from 1996 to 2001, describing it as a time of security and peace."
Oh, oh, oh!!!! I'm so offended by the AmeriKan MSM and its bullshit!
And consider this:
"They sat in one girl’s home telling their story, their faces uncovered only because no man was present. But when Mohammed Matloob, the father of one of the girls, walked into the room, the other three quickly pulled their head scarves over their faces. His daughter, Nagina, 16, ordered him to leave the room, which he did, with a surprised shrug."
Aren't the children beautiful?
Tomas Munita for The New York Times Hameeda Sarfraz, in the dark burqa, teaches Islamic religious lessons to children in her village, about 50 miles north of Islamabad, Pakistan.
And one more thing.
This should be required reading for all Americans:
"How I Came to Love the Veil" by Yvonne Ridley/Washington Post October 22, 2006
Yvonne Ridley is political editor of Islam Channel TV in London and coauthor of "In the Hands of the Taliban: Her Extraordinary Story" (Robson Books).
LONDON
I used to look at veiled women as quiet, oppressed creatures -- until I was captured by the Taliban.
In September 2001, just 15 days after the terrorist attacks on the United States, I snuck into Afghanistan, clad in a head-to-toe blue burqa, intending to write a newspaper account of life under the repressive regime. Instead, I was discovered, arrested and detained for 10 days. I spat and swore at my captors; they called me a "bad" woman but let me go after I promised to read the Koran and study Islam. (Frankly, I'm not sure who was happier when I was freed -- they or I.)
Back home in London, I kept my word about studying Islam -- and was amazed by what I discovered. I'd been expecting Koran chapters on how to beat your wife and oppress your daughters; instead, I found passages promoting the liberation of women. Two-and-a-half years after my capture, I converted to Islam, provoking a mixture of astonishment, disappointment and encouragement among friends and relatives.
Now, it is with disgust and dismay that I watch here in Britain as former foreign secretary Jack Straw describes the Muslim nikab -- a face veil that reveals only the eyes -- as an unwelcome barrier to integration, with Prime Minister Tony Blair, writer Salman Rushdie and even Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi leaping to his defense.
Having been on both sides of the veil, I can tell you that most Western male politicians and journalists who lament the oppression of women in the Islamic world have no idea what they are talking about. They go on about veils, child brides, female circumcision, honor killings and forced marriages, and they wrongly blame Islam for all this -- their arrogance surpassed only by their ignorance.
These cultural issues and customs have nothing to do with Islam. A careful reading of the Koran shows that just about everything that Western feminists fought for in the 1970s was available to Muslim women 1,400 years ago. Women in Islam are considered equal to men in spirituality, education and worth, and a woman's gift for childbirth and child-rearing is regarded as a positive attribute.
When Islam offers women so much, why are Western men so obsessed with Muslim women's attire? Even British government ministers Gordon Brown and John Reid have made disparaging remarks about the nikab -- and they hail from across the Scottish border, where men wear skirts.
When I converted to Islam and began wearing a headscarf, the repercussions were enormous. All I did was cover my head and hair -- but I instantly became a second-class citizen. I knew I'd hear from the odd Islamophobe, but I didn't expect so much open hostility from strangers. Cabs passed me by at night, their "for hire" lights glowing. One cabbie, after dropping off a white passenger right in front of me, glared at me when I rapped on his window, then drove off. Another said, "Don't leave a bomb in the back seat" and asked, "Where's bin Laden hiding?"
Yes, it is a religious obligation for Muslim women to dress modestly, but the majority of Muslim women I know like wearing the hijab, which leaves the face uncovered, though a few prefer the nikab. It is a personal statement: My dress tells you that I am a Muslim and that I expect to be treated respectfully, much as a Wall Street banker would say that a business suit defines him as an executive to be taken seriously. And, especially among converts to the faith like me, the attention of men who confront women with inappropriate, leering behavior is not tolerable.
I was a Western feminist for many years, but I've discovered that Muslim feminists are more radical than their secular counterparts. We hate those ghastly beauty pageants, and tried to stop laughing in 2003 when judges of the Miss Earth competition hailed the emergence of a bikini-clad Miss Afghanistan, Vida Samadzai, as a giant leap for women's liberation. They even gave Samadzai a special award for "representing the victory of women's rights."
Some young Muslim feminists consider the hijab and the nikab political symbols, too, a way of rejecting Western excesses such as binge drinking, casual sex and drug use. What is more liberating: being judged on the length of your skirt and the size of your surgically enhanced breasts, or being judged on your character and intelligence? In Islam, superiority is achieved through piety -- not beauty, wealth, power, position or sex.
I didn't know whether to scream or laugh when Italy's Prodi joined the debate last week by declaring that it is "common sense" not to wear the nikab because it makes social relations "more difficult." Nonsense. If this is the case, then why are cellphones, landlines, e-mail, text messaging and fax machines in daily use? And no one switches off the radio because they can't see the presenter's face.
Under Islam, I am respected. It tells me that I have a right to an education and that it is my duty to seek out knowledge, regardless of whether I am single or married. Nowhere in the framework of Islam are we told that women must wash, clean or cook for men. As for how Muslim men are allowed to beat their wives -- it's simply not true. Critics of Islam will quote random Koranic verses or hadith, but usually out of context. If a man does raise a finger against his wife, he is not allowed to leave a mark on her body, which is the Koran's way of saying, "Don't beat your wife, stupid."
It is not just Muslim men who must reevaluate the place and treatment of women. According to a recent National Domestic Violence Hotline survey, 4 million American women experience a serious assault by a partner during an average 12-month period. More than three women are killed by their husbands and boyfriends every day -- that is nearly 5,500 since 9/11.
Violent men don't come from any particular religious or cultural category; one in three women around the world has been beaten, coerced into sex or otherwise abused in her lifetime, according to the hotline survey. This is a global problem that transcends religion, wealth, class, race and culture.
But it is also true that in the West, men still believe that they are superior to women, despite protests to the contrary. They still receive better pay for equal work -- whether in the mailroom or the boardroom -- and women are still treated as sexualized commodities whose power and influence flow directly from their appearance.
And for those who are still trying to claim that Islam oppresses women, recall this 1992 statement from the Rev. Pat Robertson, offering his views on empowered women: Feminism is a "socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."
Now you tell me who is civilized and who is not.
--MORE--"
Yeah, about you "liberated" ladies of the West!
"Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize Society
March 18, 2002
by Henry Makow Ph.D.
"In the 1960's, the elite media invented second-wave feminism as part of the elite agenda to dismantle civilization and create a New World Order."
Since writing these words last week, I have discovered that before she became a feminist leader, Gloria Steinem worked for the CIA spying on Marxist students in Europe and disrupting their meetings. She became a media darling due to her CIA connections. MS Magazine, which she edited for many years was indirectly funded by the CIA.
Steinem has tried to suppress this information, unearthed in the 1970's by a radical feminist group called "Red Stockings." In 1979, Steinem and her powerful CIA-connected friends, Katharine Graham of the Washington Post and Ford Foundation President Franklin Thomas prevented Random House from publishing it in "Feminist Revolution." Nevertheless the story appeared in the "Village Voice" on May 21, 1979.
Steinem has always pretended that she had been a student radical. "When I was in college, it was the McCarthy era," she told Susan Mitchell in 1997, "and that made me a Marxist." (Icons, Saints and Divas: Intimate Conversations with Women who Changed the World 1997. p 130) Her bio-blurb in June 1973 MS. Magazine states: "Gloria Steinem has been a freelance writer all her professional life. Ms magazine is her first full-time salaried job."
Not true. Raised in an impoverished, dysfunctional family in Toledo Ohio, Steinem somehow managed to attend elite Smith College, Betty Friedan's alma mater. After graduating in 1955, Steinem received a "Chester Bowles Student Fellowship" to study in India. Curiously, an Internet search reveals that this fellowship has no existence apart from Gloria Steinem. No one else has received it.
In 1958, Steinem was recruited by CIA's Cord Meyers to direct an "informal group of activists" called the "Independent Research Service." This was part of Meyer's "Congress for Cultural Freedom," which created magazines like "Encounter" and "Partisan Review" to promote a left-liberal chic to oppose Marxism. Steinem, attended Communist-sponsored youth festivals in Europe, published a newspaper, reported on other participants, and helped to provoke riots.
One of Steinem's CIA colleagues was Clay Felker. In the early 1960's, he became an editor at Esquire and published articles by Steinem which established her as a leading voice for women's lib. In 1968, as publisher of New York Magazine, he hired her as a contributing editor, and then editor of Ms. Magazine in 1971. Warner Communications put up almost all the money although it only took 25% of the stock. Ms. Magazine's first publisher was Elizabeth Forsling Harris, a CIA-connected PR executive who planned John Kennedy's Dallas motorcade route. Despite its anti establishment image, MS magazine attracted advertising from the cream of corporate America. It published ads for ITT at the same time as women political prisoners in Chile were being tortured by Pinochet, after a coup inspired by the US conglomerate and the CIA.
Steinem's personal relationships also belie her anti establishment pretensions. She had a nine-year relationship with Stanley Pottinger, a Nixon-Ford assistant attorney general, credited with stalling FBI investigations into the assassinations of Martin Luther King, and the ex-Chilean Foreign Minister Orlando Latelier. In the 1980's, she dated Henry Kissinger. For more details, see San Francisco researcher Dave Emory.
Our main misconception about the CIA is that it serves US interests. In fact, it has always been the instrument of a dynastic international banking and oil elite (Rothschild, Rockefeller, Morgan) coordinated by the Royal Institute for Internal Affairs in London and their US branch, the Council for Foreign Relations. It was established and peopled by blue bloods from the New York banking establishment and graduates of Yale University's secret pagan "Skull and Bones" society. Our current President, his father and grandfather fit this profile.
The agenda of this international cabal is to degrade the institutions and values of the United States in order to integrate it into a global state that it will direct through the United Nations. In its 1947 Founding Charter, the CIA is prohibited from engaging in domestic activities. However this has never stopped it from waging a psychological war on the American people. The domestic counterpart of the "Congress for Cultural Freedom" was the "American Committee for Cultural Freedom." Using foundations as conduits, the CIA controlled intellectual discourse in the 1950's and 1960's, and I believe continues to do so today. In "The Cultural Cold War," Francis Stonor Saunders estimates that a thousand books were produced under the imprint of a variety of commercial and university presses, with covert subsidies.
The CIA's "Project Mockingbird" involved the direct infiltration of the corporate media, a process that often included direct takeover of major news outlets. "By the early 1950's," writes Deborah Davis, in her book "Katherine the Great," the CIA owned respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communication vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all." In 1982 the CIA admitted that reporters on the CIA payroll have acted as case officers to agents in the field. Philip Graham, publisher of the Washington Post, who ran the operation until his "suicide" in 1963, boasted that "you could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple of hundred dollars a month."
I was born in 1949. Idealists in my parent's generation were disillusioned when the Communist dream of universal brotherhood turned out to be a shill for a brutal despotism. My own generation may discover that our best instincts have also been manipulated and exploited. There is evidence that the 60's drug counter culture, the civil rights movement, and anti-war movement, like feminism, were CIA directed. For example, the CIA has admitted setting up the (National Student Association as a front in 1947 http://www.cia-on-campus.org/nsa/nsa2.html). In the early 1950's the NSA opposed the attempts of the House Un American Activities Committee to root out Communist spies. According to Phil Agee Jr., NSA officers participated in the activities of SNCC, the militant civil rights group, and Students for a Democratic Society, a radical peace group.
According to Mark Riebling, the CIA also may have used Timothy Leary. Certainly the agency distributed LSD to Leary and other opinion makers in the 1960s. Leary made a generation of Americans turn away from active participation in society and seek fulfillment "within." In another example of the CIA's use of drugs to interfere in domestic politics, Gary Webb describes how in the 1980's, the CIA flooded Black ghettos with cocaine.
I won't attempt to analyze the CIA's motivation except to suggest what they have in common: They demoralized, alienated and divided Americans. The elite operates by fostering division and conflict in the world. Thus, we don't realize who the real enemy is. For the same reason, the CIA and elite foundations also fund the diversity and multicultural movements.
Feminism has done the most damage. There is no more fundamental yet delicate relationship in society than male and female. On it depends the family, the red blood cell of society. Nobody with the interests of society at heart would try to divide men and women. Yet the lie that men have exploited women has become the official orthodoxy.
Man loves woman. His first instinct is to nurture ("husband") and see her thrive. When a woman is happy, she is beautiful. Sure, some men are abusive. But the vast majority have supported and guided their families for millennium.
Feminists relentlessly advance the idea that our inherent male and female characteristics, crucial to our development as human beings, are mere "stereotypes." This is a vicious calumny on all heterosexuals, 95% of the population. Talk about hate! Yet it is taught to children in elementary schools! It is echoed in the media. Lesbians like Rosie O'Donnell are advanced as role models.
All of this is calculated to create personal confusion and sow chaos among heterosexuals. As a result, millions of American males are emasculated and divorced from their relationship to family (the world and the future.) The American woman has been hoodwinked into investing herself in a mundane career instead of the timeless love of her husband and children. Many women have become temperamentally unfit to be wives and mothers. People, who are isolated and alone, stunted and love-starved, are easy to fool and manipulate. Without the healthy influence of two loving parents, so are their children.
Feminism is a grotesque fraud perpetrated on society by its governing elite. It is designed to weaken the American social and cultural fabric in order to introduce a friendly fascist New World Order. Its advocates are sanctimonious charlatans who have grown rich and powerful from it. They include a whole class of liars and moral cripples who work for the elite in various capacities: government, education and the media. These imposters ought to be exposed and ridiculed.
Women's oppression is a lie. Sex roles were never as rigid as feminists would have us believe. My mother had a successful business in the 1950's importing watchstraps from Switzerland. When my father's income increased, she was content to quit and concentrate on the children. Women were free to pursue careers if they wanted to. The difference was that their role as wife and mother was understood, and socially validated, as it should be.
Until Gloria Steinem and the CIA came along.
--savethemales.ca - Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to ...--""The Feminist Movement was a CIA project of social programming; The CIA and the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations funded Ms. Magazine and Gloria Steinem and elements of the feminist movement
No, I’m not some sexist that believes women should be bare foot and pregnant, slaving away take care of the home. I believe that all people regardless of sex, ethnicity and whatever qualifier you come up with should have equal rights, equal pay and respect and dignity given as a human being.
And the feminist movement was social programming by the CIA, the Ford Foundation and other globalist organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations. The CFR is a creation of John D. Rockefeller and is run by his grandson, David Rockefeller. This is all well documented. Ms. Steinem herself has admitted this, although she didn’t want the information to get out in the 1970’s. Under “Operation Mockingbird” the CIA infiltrated the US media organizations and recruited writers and broadcasters to control what we refer to as the “main stream media.” The CIA has been practicing spying on dissidents since the 1950’s in what they call COINTELPRO operations, or “Counter Intelligence Programs.” Cord Meyers of the CIA recruited Steinem into the CIA in 1958. Her job was to direct “activists” in a group called the “Independent Research Service.”
The following some snips from an article published in The Village Voice on May 21, 1979.
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listse rv.aol.com/msg02217.html
“Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem”
by Nancy Borman
The near-total blackout on the Steinem/Random House censorship story is reminiscent of the level of enthusiasm Redstockings encountered when they first tried to get coverage for the story of Steinem and the CIA.
Their 16-page tabloid "press release" charging that Steinem had covered up a 10-year association with the CIA and that Ms. magazine, which she had founded, was endangering the women's liberation movement struck the 1975 MORE conference like a new war coming over the wire. The hotel was abuzz and people snatched up the releases, but when it came to actually writing the story, nearly everyone bowed out. One reporter criticized the women for not obtaining Steinem's side of the story before publishing the release. Others skimmed the material and dismissed it as old news, which was partially true. Still others thought it was McCarthyistic both in tone and casual conclusions.
In 1967 both the New York Times and the Washington Post carried interviews with Steinem in the wake of Ramparts' expose of CIA funding of the National Student Association and other organizations. Steinem was the founder and director of one of those groups, Independent Research Service, for which she had solicited and obtained CIA money to carry out covert operations at Communist youth festivals in Vienna and Helsinki in 1959 and 1952. Unlike most of the other principals in the scandal, who had repudiated their past work with the agency and turned over information to the press, Steinem defended her secret deal with the CIA, calling the undermining of the youth festivals "the CIA's finest hour."
There’s a lot more background in the article, but I’ll let you go to the link above and read it yourself. Basically, Gloria Steinem was part of the CIA's "Operation Mockingbird."
“Operation Mockingbird”
This CIA operation was the infiltration of corporate media in an effort to take over major news outlets. Deborah Davis’ book, “Katharine the Great : Katharine Graham and Her Washington Post Empire,” shows that the CIA “owned” journalists of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other media outlets. A quote from Ms. Davis’ book.
“By the early 1950´s, the CIA owned respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communication vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all according to a former CIA analyst."
The CIA admitted in 1982 that reporters on the CIA payroll had acted as case officers for field agents. Philip Graham, who published the Washington Post, ran the operation until his suicide in 1963. Graham has been quoted as saying, “you could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple of hundred dollars a month.” Allen Dulles of the CIA oversaw the operation.
Here’s a link to an article by writer, Alex Constantine on Operation Mockingbird that gives a good overview of the project. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCH O/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html
Tales from the Crypt: The Depraved Spies and Moguls of the CIA's Operation MOCKINGBIRD
Here’s a link to an article about Operation Mockingbird.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JF Kmockingbird.htm
There are numerous links in the about article on a lot of the prominent players in this project.
There is ample documentation on the internet and in books making the CIA-Steinem connection and Operation Mockingbird. Do the research if you’re still skeptical about this issue.
The next big question is “why.” Why would the CIA want to infiltrate the mainstream media? If you read enough about Operation Mockingbird, the original impetus was to counteract communist groups and provide propaganda that would produce loyalty to the American government. It sounds innocent enough, but it got twisted into a total control of what is supposed to be a “free press.” It hasn’t been “free” for decades. Another interesting topic to research is the CIA’s “family jewels” information released on June 26, 2007 under a Freedom of Information request. It documents the CIA’s meddling in US media and the illegal wiretapping of journalists and dissidents. Here’s a link to a site that has all the details.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSA EBB222/index.htm
Another big “why” question, is why did the CIA want to infiltrate and guide the women’s liberation movement? Nicholas Rockefeller, of the powerful Rockefeller family, had befriended filmmaker Aaron Russo, during the 1990’s. According to Russo, Rockefeller had told him that the Rockefeller Foundation had helped to fund the feminist movement. There were several reasons for this. One, it got women into the work force. This provided more income for taxation. If you haven’t read it, you might want to check out the article I wrote on the income tax system, “There Is No Law Requiring Most People to File and Pay Income Tax in the US.”
http://www.thisisby.us/index.php/conten t/there_is_no_law_requiring_most_people _to_file_and_pay_income_tax_in_the_us
Second, it got kids in government funded schools at an earlier age for indoctrination. The intent was to break up the traditional family and the acceptance of the government as the primary family. Here’s an article on Russo and his memories of his relationship with Nick Rockefeller.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/ja nuary2007/290107rockefellergoal.htm
Russo reveals a lot more than just the manipulation of the women’s liberation movement in this article. There are also a few videos of Aaron Russo being interviewed about his relationship with Nick Rockefeller. Here’s a link to a 15-minute clip from the interview.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid =1263677258215075609&q=aaron+russo&total= 414&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex= 2
Rockefeller Admitted Elite Goal Of Microchipped Population
Here’s the expanded version of the interview, 1 hour and 9 minutes long. Fascinating stuff to say the least.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid =5420753830426590918&q=aaron+russo&total= 414&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex= 9
Historic Interview with Aaron Russo, Fighting Cancer and the New World Order
I know all this sounds like “conspiracy nutjob central” stuff. It’s hard to accept. But Aaron Russo was no fool. He was an accomplished filmmaker and entertainment big shot. He was a true patriot. And the chip is coming. Do some research on the Real ID Act, which will require “chipped” identification cards for anyone who wants to enter federal buildings, use public transportation (flights, trains, busses, ships), have a bank account at a federally chartered bank, have an investment account with a registered investment firm, receive federal benefits (Social Security, Medicare, etc.). This is supposed to be in effect by May 2008. Several states have voted not to participate in the program. US passports are now being chipped. Several companies are requiring RFID chips for employees for “security” reasons. RFID chips are being touted on networks like CNBC as the wave of the future. There is a movement in the medical community to have people chipped so that medical records could be accessed in emergency situations. The movement is to have the chips implanted in people eventually. You can take one if you want to, but I’m not getting chipped like an animal.
So believe what you will about what’s really going on behind all this. The information is out there if you’re willing to look.
--MORE--"
I know what I believe, and it will never be what the MSM newspapers of Amerika say.
I BELIEVE that the "Taliban" -- and other Muslims -- LOVE THEIR WOMEN and CHILDREN as much as the rest of us (if not more)!!
THAT is why they are FIGHTING US, duuuuh!!!!
