Is it really? They both make you look ridiculous.

Jonus

__________________
First rule: Do not use semicolons. They are transvestite hermaphrodites representing absolutely nothing. All they do is show you've been to college.

And I realise some of you may be having trouble deciding whether I am kidding or not. So from now on I will tell you when I'm kidding...

We are about to be attacked by al-Qaida. Wave flags if you have them. That always seems to scare them away. I'm kidding.
-Kurt Vonnegut

Manipulate poll

Howard Dean is a vivid sample of how insider group to use media and intelligence to manipulate an election.

1. In last October, when Dean became a threat to Bush, they at first threw out Wesley Clark to block him. Media said that Clark was the only one in Democratic Party which could beat Bush. ( try to divert the support of Dean to Clark) CNN-USA Today Gallop poll said Clark lead over Bush at the rate of 49% to 46%. How could they get such a result when not much people knew who Clark was?

Even media beat the drum to blow up Clark, the general has never led in any of Demo's primary. Where is the base of that 49% vs Bush's 46%?

2. When they failed to block Dean by Clark, inside group threw out Kerry. Kerry won the first Demo Primary in January. The tactic was the same. Now they said Kerry is the one who can beat Bush. The problem is how could Dean, as a leading candidate in Iowa, suddenly dropped into a result of 18% vs Kerry's 38%? Media use a word "Iowa surprise" to explain this drama. It's not convincible. Consider Demo candidates have similar stands on important issues, that 75% Iowa voters are anti-war, that Kerry has voted for Iraq war authorization Bill.

3. Same show had acted in recall of California. Before the recall, poll said Arnold had 26% vs Bustmonte's(Demo)28%. Another Rep's candidate, Mclintok, had a steady 14%. Mclintok wouldn't pull out the campaign after persuation. Then CNN poll suddenly boosted Arnold a 40% vs Bustmonte's 28%. (with Mclintok's 14% unchanged)
Obviosly, inside group once thought Mclintok would pull out, but he didn't. Of course that wouldn't trouble them, because they control election office thus they control the result. (just like in Florida election) All they had to do was immediately threw out a poll to justify Arnold's victory.

This is how insider group manipulate American election. They steal it by intelligent covert job. (Those who controlled intelligence, they controlled election office) And make people believe the result is reasonable by fake poll.

Media censorship

The tactic inside group used to pull down Howard Dean.

1. A negative propaganda against Dean before Primary. Dean got more criticism than any other Democratical candidates did.

2. Control Primary election. Justify the result by fake poll. (see message "Manipulate poll")

3. Media censorship. They decided to terminate Dean's campaign right from the begining of Primary by created an "Iowa surprise". After a short period of "hopeless" comment about Dean, Media censored the news of Dean and put the focus on Kerry. There is no reason for Kerry's sudden leap up. It's only the result of manipulation of media - the decision of inside group. When Dean announced his pull out, he was still the second leading candidate of Demo.

Quote, "Study: Network news criticizes Dean most
- - - - - - - - - - - -
ASSOCIATED PRESS

Jan. 16, 2004 | LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Howard Dean received significantly more criticism on network newscasts than the other Democratical contenders, who were the subjects of more favorable coverage, according to a study released Thursday.

More than three-quarters of the coverage of Dean's foes by the nightly news programs was favorable, while a majority of attention to Dean was negative, the Center for Media and Public Affairs found.

The study found that 49 percent of the coverage of former Vermont Gov. Dean was positive, compared to 78 percent of the rest of the Democratic field, collectively.

http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/01/16/dean_media/

Why the Corporate Media Wiped Out Howard Dean
News/Comment; Posted on: 2004-02-17 13:22:42 [ Printer friendly ]

On December 1, 2003, Howard Dean was ahead by twenty points in the polls when he appeared on Hardball with Chris Matthews and said, "We're going to break up the giant media enterprises." This pronouncement went far beyond the governor's previous public musings about possibly re-regulating the communications industry, and amounted to a declaration of war on the corporations that administer the flow of information in the United States.

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=2096

ross perot did quite well in the media when he courted a white house thread... but he wasn't a threat to the media. i guess this says something about the information we are fed....

I guess that would make the Republicans the party of big business, corporate corruption and greed, of an oligarchy that puts pollution and environmental disregard ahead of the well-being of our future generations, of selfish elitism, of privileged materialists, of multi-nationalists, of religious imperialism, of restriction of our personal rights, of racism amongst many other things …

(And frankly, I think Thomas Jefferson would prefer his Republicans to be the anti-federalists seeing where he championed states rights over a strong central government …but hey when you’re rambling, you’re rambling …)

I think both parties are guilty of allowing money and special interests to corrupt …but that’s for another thread …

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Though either Bush or Clinton are politicians cultivated by inside group, they more or less belong to a party and sometimes must stand for Party's interest. So the best way is to have a candidate of their own. We can see now how intelligence have their own people to join the campaign. Such like Clark. (Clark was pro GOP before, and was said not even registered as Demo the night before he became a president candidate of Demo Party), and Arnold Schwarzenneger.

Though he rides the boat of GOP, Schwarzenegger is propaganded more as a man of both parties. The tactic inside group used is:

1. Make Schwarzenegger keeping a distance from Bush because Bush is becoming notorious.

2. Emphasize his personal relationship with Demo. That his wife Maria is a niece of former President Kennedy. Reporting he was received warmly by Senator Edward Kennedy in DC.

3. To create a figure of a successful politician, inside group activated their resource in Demo to support Schwarzenegger. When Arnold became the governor, he turned over two bills, "Drive license for illegal immigrant" bill, "Automobile license fee" bill. These important bills signed by former Demo Governor Davis and supported by Democratic Party, now are abolished without trouble in a governmet dominated by Demo. Those Demos, once have voted yes on these bills, now vote no.

Another big event is the "Bond bill". The way Schwarzenneger suggested to solve California finance problem is borrowing money. Which was once opposed by Demo. Later it was passed without trouble too. Here we can see there is no opposing Party. Any opinion could be easily changed to master's will. When there is a demand from inside group, the opposing party became tame sheep.

4. Media blow up Schwarzenneger with big effort. In newspaper, (San Jose Mercury News which I read) almost everyday there is big article, often with picture about Schwarzenneger to boost his fame.

After they stole California, they are preparing to take over the US with their own candidate. You probably will see in near future they change the constitution the rule that only native born American can be US president. To pave the way particularly for their own candidate, Arnold Schwarzenneger.

How Bush Sr lost his presidency.

There were two war on Iraq. One started by GW. Bush. The other one was started by his father Bush Sr.

Bush Sr. won the Persian Gulf war beautifully. Compare with his son, Bush Sr. got the support from most countries of the world. US soldiers suffered much less casulties compare with GWB's. And US paid a little amount of war fee. Most spending were shared by other countries.

GW. Bush misled US into an unjust war. He lost the support from UN. He lost traditional allies. He made US paid an huge war fee, and let US army dropped in an Vietnam like war of daily casulty. We don't know when can we leave that quagmire.

One thing strange happened. Bush Sr., though had a glorious victory, and got an approvement rate of 90% then, lost the President campaign to Clinton. While GW. Bush had so bad a war, he is still awarded a rate of nearly 60% and is predicted to win the president campaign in a landslide victory in election 2004.

Why? The answer is pretty simple. America is controlled by inside group. Their interest is for the security of Israel. Their target is occupying Iraq to oppress the hostility of Islamic hostility against Israel. So when Bush Sr. stopped to invade Iraq to save US soldiers' lives, it was against the inside group's will. He was punished for failure in president election.

GW Bush is much obedient. Despite it was hurting the interest of US, he started a war to favour the inside group. He will be awarded 2nd term of president. The inside group creates a situation for his succeeding. Maintain his approve rate by rigged poll around 50%. Incapacitate his rival Demo Party. And try to boost the economy in 2004.

About Clark

Clark is a tool used by inside group to block Dean. Dean's anti-war opinion gathered support from the people and becomes a threat to Bush. So in September they throw out Clark to replace him.

Why when Clark announced to be 10th Demo candidate he could be suddenly jumped over others and was said the one could defeat Bush while a lot people asked in internet, "Who is Clark?"?
If people support Clark because of his anti-war opinion, then Dean has that opinion much longer then Clark. Why Dean can't defeat Bush but Clark can?

The answer is obvious. Dean's anti-war opinion is honest. It is against the will of inside group. So they must stop him. Clark is a patsy of that group. He had been an admirer of Bush cabinet. Now he stole Dean's opinion in order to block the way of Dean to become the president candidate of Democratic Party. A patsy always change his mind to favour his master.

Media is in stronghold of inside group. So Clark has been titled "he is the only one who can beat Bush." "another name of Clinton", "another Esenhower".... That's how inside group to manipulate election by propaganda. And the way to pick up the candidate of their own.

Ashcroft attacks

Ashcroft accused Jamie Gorelick erected the "wall" between the FBI and the CIA that kept them from sharing intelligence and possibly from doing more to prevent the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. That because FBI feared to touch that wall, they hadn't applied a permission to search suspect Zacarias Moussaoui's computer, so they lost chance to stop 911 attack in advance.

This is a blackmail.

There are two ways for FBI to apply a search warranty from Judge. One is by FISA court.(Foreign Intelligence Spy Act) In which a warranty is in a very low standard and is easy to get. The other way is by criminal law court which is in high standard because Americans are protected by 4th amendment from unreasonable search and arrest.

When Ashcroft said there is a wall to block sharing information between foreign information and criminal investigation, he is demanding a big police power expanding which makes 4th amendment mean nothing. He then can search and arrest American citizen at his will, only out of suspicion(FISA standard is low) while we should be protected by criminal law from being unreasonable search and arrest. (must based on evidence)

Ashcroft use Moussaoui's case as a foundation, said because FBI feared to touch the wall of criminal law so they didn't investigate Moussaoui's computer. It's hypocrite and is a misleading. We don't have to be a professional like A.G. or FBI to know that Moussaoui is a foreigner and fits for FISA. Why FBI hadn't apply FISA(obviously an easy one) but considered domestic criminal law? And why they even didn't apply? It is incompetence, a mistake, or a deliberate negligence? Many informations revealed that government knew 911 attack in advance, it was allowed to happen. Because they are benefit from it.

What Ashcroft wants is to give FBI more police power to search and arrest people. He wants to low the standard of criminal law. That's a blackmail in the name of "war on terrorism".

BTW, there is a deep meaning of "erect the wall of sharing information" . In fact, intelligence share the information already. The real meaning is they can't use that information to apply a search warrent. The wall prevent they use FISA standard on domestic criminal case.

Theoretically, FBI can't spy a citizen unless they have evidence the man has committed crime. When this "sharing information wall" is broken, now they can search a citizen covertly only on suspicion. Because FISA standard is low.

This is the real purpose of Ashcroft. And he claimed "Patriot Act" gave him such priviledge.
The fact is, under "Patriot Act", Bush and Ashcroft expand their fascist police power. American people are losing the protect from "unreasonable search and arrest" of 4th amendment.

Government and media never tell people about this. You are losing your constitutional right.

Quote, "9/11 panelist denies accusation on CIA-FBI 'wall'
Ashcroft had faulted official's 1995 memo

Washington Post
Monday, April 19, 2004
©2004 San Francisco Chronicle

Washington -- Jamie Gorelick, the embattled Sept. 11 commission member who served as a deputy attorney general during the Clinton administration, fired back at critics who said she erected the "wall" between the FBI and the CIA that kept them from sharing intelligence and possibly from doing more to prevent the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Information was available that was not passed on. In a 1995 memo concerning Ramzi Youssef and other terrorists from the first bombing of the WTC, Jamie Gorelick had this to report, to comfort everyone about the incredible, insurmountable "WALL" she empoyed to make sure that no information could be leaked to help ongoing investigations between the CIA and FBI.

Gorelick wrote:
[b]"This AUSA will also serve to ensure, in conjunction with the FBI and OIPR that information which reasonably indicates that a significant federal crime has beent in been, is being, or may be committed Is appropriately disseminated to criminal investigative personnel, the USAO and the Criminal Division pursuant to the procedures set forth above. That AUSA will Continue to be "walled off" from participation in the on-going criminal investigations and cases and will continue to abide by all FISA dissemination provisions and guidelines."

Getting the facts out there is not blackmail. You are factually incorrect.Then why did the Patriot Act pass with overwhelming support? To undo Gorelicks "WALL".I support ongoing efforts to round up terrorists. The Partiot Act protects citizens. Your Ashcroft attacks are unfounded.No one has benefitted from the terror freak show in the air. Your point is moot and has no merit. The FBI and CIA did not cooridinate data so Moussaui slipped through as did his supplier of the Airliner Flight Simulator software who was one of the pilots in error on Wellstone's flight. There is a lot better job the FBI and CIA could have done against Islammist terror freaknoids.[quote=kathaksung]What Ashcroft wants is to give FBI more police power to search and arrest people. He wants to low the standard of criminal law. That's a blackmail in the name of "war on terrorism". [quote=kathaksung]Naw. That's not blackmail, it's national security in the War on Terror freaks. I don't think that name calling our police as fascists supports the War on Terror. Perhaps you may which to alter your language of our officers who put themselves at great risk against the suicidal terror freaks.We have lost nothing. We gained our independence from the fascist, sick terror freaks who attack everyone on the planet. The Patriot Act is a good thing. I disagree with your inaccurate assessment.Not only did Jamie Gorelick (very Clintonesque name) construct a wall that could not be penetrated, she also implimented a non proactive effort to combat terror which the current administration has had to over come.

Gorelick wrote:
"No "pro-active" investigative efforts or technical coverages are presently contemplated in any of the ongoing criminal investigations, which primarily focus on past criminal conduct, with the exception of the obstuction investigation. If in the future, the criminal investigations develop information requiring "pro-active" efforts or technical coverages, the United States Attorneys Office USAO and the criminal agents will consult with the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review (0IPR), and the FCI agents before undertaking such efforts, absent exigent circumstances, in order to determine the impact, if any, on the FCI investigation.

I personally support the Patriot Act to make it easier to round up Osama and Saddams band of merry terror freaks. I am also in opposition to Jamie Gorelick's "WALL" and "INACTIVE" approach to terror suspect pursuit.

__________________
United We Stand.

Patriot Act was pushed through in a hurry. Ashcroft took the advantage of 911 attack that while law makers still in shock and panick. Many council members had little time to go over the Act.

We lost nothing? We lost big. We lose the protect of 4th amendment. To be searched and arrested without evidence is something taking place in totalitarian country, so I say it's fascist.

Patriot Act is opposed by more and more people in US when people realize how it damaged civil liberty. A lot of cities, even states, have passed resolution to condemn it. Ashcroft exploited Americans' fear of terrorism for his police power expanding.

---------------

Media deception (5/3)

How media issued polls to manipulate the sentiment of American people?

To block Howard Dean to become a real rival to Bush, inside group has thrown out Wesley Clark and John Kerry one after another. To help these puppets to win over Dean in Democrate's primary, CNN-USA Today Gallop in early October, 2003, had a poll (49% vs 46%) said Clark was the only one who could beat Bush. Then in January, it gave a similar poll said Kerry was the only one who could beat Bush.

And it's interesting to reveiew other media's poll at that time when they tried to justify Kerry's victory over Dean.

Re: "Kerry's standing has strengthened not only against his Democratic rivals but also against Bush. For the first time, he clearly defeats the president in a head-to-head matchup, 53% to 46%. By 63% to 24%, those surveyed say Kerry would be a good president.(USA TODAY, 2/2/2004)

Re: 52 Percent of Voters Don't Want to See Bush Re-Elected (44% Do), 37 Percent Strongly Want to See Him Re-Elected, 47 Percent Strongly Do Not. (Newsweek Poll , Saturday January 24,)

Now watch the dramatic change of the poll. They were done after Howard Dean was pulled down from Demo's primary.

Fox's Last-night poll says: "45% Bush to 45% Kerry" (2/21)

Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll shows George W. Bush attracting 47% of the nation's likely voters while John F. Kerry is the choice for 45%. (2/21)

Same USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll said in April that "The survey, taken Friday through Sunday, shows Bush ahead 50% to 44% among likely voters......The president's job-approval rating was steady at 52%."

What happened from February to April which boost Bush's approve rate?

Paul O'Neill, Richard A. Clarke, revealed Bush from the beginning decided to invade Iraq. WMD, "democracy" is only an excuse.

The insurgence of Fallujah, and insurgence of Shiite revealed Bush's "war on Iraq" is becoming a quagmire for US.

All these proved Bush is a dishonest man, an incompetent president. Yet all these nagative things boost his rate. Please tell me I may missed something Bush did good in this period. Otherwise review what media said and polled and to see how inside group control the mind of American people.

They control US by media and intelligence. They justify rigged election (through intelligence) by fake poll (media). They even turn negative things into positive. To maintain the approve rate of a patsy president always around 50%. Despite how notorious he is. All to make sure they will have him a second term.

No blackmail would be them threatening to give compromising pictures of you and a some random girl to your wife if you didn't pay them 10,000.

Government deception (5/13)

Bush said what happened in Abu Ghurayb prison was done only by a few people and high ranking military officials denied they knew anything about it. It was a lie. They knew it clearly there were vast abuse in the jail.

Quote, "Red Cross report details abuse, mistaken detentions in Iraq.
By Bob Drogin
Los Angeles Times.

Washington - Coalition military intelligence officials estimated that 70 to 90 percent of prisoners detained in Iraq since the war began last year "had been arrested by mistake," according to a confidential Red Cross report given to the Bush administration earlier this year.

The report described a wide range of prisoner mistreatment - including many new details of abusive techniques - that it said US officials had failed to halt, despite repeated complaints from the International Committee of the Red Cross. "(S.J.M.N. 5/11/04)

As a matter of fact, torture is a method intelligence used to squeeze information from detainees. US government covered it up with fake news, disinformation and lies. The death of Saddam Hussain's sons was a typical example.

News reported Saddam's sons Uday and Qusay, along with other two people, were all died in a six hours' long battle against 200 US soldiers. But forensic analysis revealed that Uday and Qusay were tortured before their death. There is an article with pictures and details on it.

Quote, "America's Uday and Qusay Conjuring Trick
Latest White House lies reveal larger hidden untruths

Unfortunately the forgery team completely forgot to use any putty around the ankles..... If you look at the color picture of the two cadavers lying side by side, the one on the right has unique brown marks on both ankles. These marks have been identified by experts as pressure sores, caused by iron clamps used to hold the ankles while this poor man was suspended upside down for torture in the "Adnan Chalabi Hilton". As I wrote earlier, death must have finally come as merciful relief for these two......."

http://www.joevialls.co.uk/transpositions/hussein.html

As I told before, media is controlled by inside group. It serves for the war policy of this group. Why this time it suddenly threw out a scandal which hurt the fame of Bush's administration? None of such kind of event happens by coincidence. They always have a purpose. (to be continued)

As opposed to the dictates of Cowboy George Jr deciding what is in the best interest of the world?

Other than the fact that he makes his decisions based on getting re-elected and panders to the neoconservative (read neo fascist) leanings of slightly less than one half of the pitiful number of people in the US who actually vote, why should anyone else have any say in how the world should run?

International Law is actually a number of treaties signed between consenting nations. The US voluntarily signed these treaties and is now ignoring them.

Is that the sort of a nation you want to be? One that cannot be trusted to honour your own freely entered international obligations?

What is wrong with abortion on demand? It may offend your religious leanings but it is the protected by the Constitution that you defended above.

Is supporting and defending the constitution an absolute for you or simply a matter of picking and choosing what you like as in a smorgasbord?


I would agree on restrictions on abortions if you agreed to, at random, accept and adopt any child and all children born to mothers that did not want to raise them. This would include providing acceptable prenatal care to the expectant mother. This would of course be without consideration for race and health issues of the mother or child.

You stated, Tom Dashel & Al Gore advised not to run, because they would defeat Bush. Ha.ha.ha. You sure don't know much about our politics do you. You just mentioned the most liberal of the liberal, against a conservative. The majority of this nation is moderate & tends to lean towards conservative. Tom Dashel & Al Gore, would love one single person in the U.S. to go up to them & say run against Bush. The problem is, they haven't got a shot, & they know it. That's why they're not running. ha.ha.ha.