Posted October 6, 2012 | comments 103 Comments

Letter to the Editor: What's in place to prevent another Auschwitz?


A few years ago, I toured the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C., as a guest of one of its staff.

The story of how enslavement starts as a small political prejudice instilled in a people is clear. The slow erosion of their rights, the expanding of prejudice to other groups, to a full-blown hysteria of "anyone not like us" is thoughtfully laid out as you walk through the remains of history ... literally: one room is nothing but the shoes of Holocaust victims. You smell the ancient leather as you walk across a simple bridge, nothing but shoes underneath. This is just the shoes room, and it only represents a fraction of the "killing industry" Nazi Germany conducted.

In another room, bales of human hair testify to the salvaging of human remains. People were reduced to nothing but a commodity: their bodies were parted out like factory-farmed chickens, in much the same manner, with similar machinery. Who operated the machinery? Average citizens, who subscribed to the propaganda, not questioning their government, its motives, or unreasonable laws. It all unfolded so subtly that it was not taken as unusual. But like disease, it progressed to the horror the world finally had to admit.

I'm sure the building of death camps brought jobs to communities. I'm sure personal intentions were good among the civilian population. But it was pre-meditated to build those facilities: there were blueprints and surveys, all with the intention for one thing: mass elimination of any dissent.

Is our government not doing the same thing with propaganda against Muslims? Have we not followed the accusing fingers' direction toward a created scenario which is reinforced with fear and panic? The United States, it can be stated with certainty, has built "secret prisons," and continues to build facilities for sinister purposes. Such a progression shows clearly an agenda, pre-meditated and agreed upon by a controlling faction. Given the acceptable face of "creating jobs," what checks and balances are in place to assure Auschwitz doesn't rise again?

What checks and balances have been removed to assure it does?

Roy A. Stokes, Maurertown

103 Comments | Leave a comment

    The Patriot Act comes to mind:
    "Q: On what evidence can Ashcroft designate someone as a terrorist?
    A: Mere suspicion and hearsay.
    Q: What legal rights and Constitutional protections does someone detained on the grounds of being a suspected terrorist have?
    A: Next to none.

    It may be difficult for some hard-core, patriotic Americans to believe the veracity of the preceding question and answer series, but the answers to the questions are based upon the implications and dangerous ramifications of the USA PATRIOT Act (USAPA) that was passed last October [2001] by so-called congressional representatives who never bothered to read or debate it.

    It slipped through at the midnight hour under the cover of darkness, voted on by men and women engulfed in a terrifying atmosphere of shock, fear, mass media hysteria, and suspiciously targeted anthrax mailings.

    U.S. government officials would have us believe that this 342-page, complexly nuanced document was allegedly crafted after September 11 in the time span of a little over a month. To accomplish this feat would have required the in-depth study of fifteen other lengthy acts and statutes which it modifies and amends.

    The act's extremely clever yet highly misleading acronym USA PATRIOT, which stands for "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism," is an obvious attempt to intimidate and brand as "unpatriotic" and treasonous anyone who might dare to question its alarmingly overreaching provisions.


    You overstate things, Jack. By doing so, you diminish the true horror of the Holocaust.

    We already have a president going out of his way to instill "small political prejudice" against those 'who cling to their guns and religion' -- among so many others who deign to disagree with His Nibs. -- But is it fair (or sane?) to raise him to the level of a Hitler, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot?

    I did get a kick from Obama's deliberately soft mention of his grandmother during the debate -- the "typical white person" he had dismissed during the '08 campaign. But that is a far cry from the deception necessary to transform the US into a police state.

    As to "(in) the United States, it can be stated with certainty, has built "secret prisons," and continues to build facilities for sinister purposes":

    Name just one, Jack. "Certainly," you can do that.

      Fathers, I don't remember Romney mentioning anything about the couple that reared him during the first debate. But I didn't really expect to because, of course, we remember at the RNC as he is presenting his credentials for becoming the Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces he didn't even mention the military...not once. WOW!

      9:06 am...I think perhaps you should lay off the bottle so early in the morning. Its really rather comical that right-wing whackjobs keep trying to compare such a despicable time in the history of the world to score political points. Let's be as clear as I can make it. (from my own POV of course)

      The problem isn't those "who cling to their guns and religion". Cling away my friend. The problem is when you try to force it upon others, or try to take the freedom away from others. Last I checked, it wasn't the left trying to institute the "Christian God" into anyone else's life. The left doesn't try to make laws deciding for others who we can love, what we can do with our own bodies. The left isn't fighting to keep America uneducated and docile. The left isn't advocating violence and civil war if the election doesn't go their way. The left doesn't need to make up lies regarding your candidates religion to scare people. Granted both sides lie and pander, but it isn't folks on the left who take it one step further and create lies of their own to cover their candidates lies while using the deaths of others. (side note, if you are both single you should ask the other letter writer out to lunch, its a hate fueled match made in heaven)

      The left doesn't need to post all over FB about our guns, or tell others we'll leave a light on at our house, but we don't recommend knocking. The left just lets you remain in the ignorance that everyone else is pacifist until the need arises. We don't need NRA to lie to us and tell us President Obama is trying to take away our rights, we are smart enough to see he expanded them.

      Boy, its an all day topic, but you want fear and hate mongering, attempts to control and subdue, you are looking at the right. All the left wants you to do is stop being afraid. Open your eyes and see the world. Take the time to learn about what you don't know or understand. "Boogie-men" only scare those who don't have the knowledge to logically reason why they wont jump out from under your bed.

    First of all, my name is "Roy". If you cannot address me with respect, it is a reflection your disrespect, not mine. Such disrespect is precisely the first erosion in a sequence which leads to diminishing people and peoples to levels of abuse, by abusers. Such erosive techniques employ diminuations such as "Japs", "Nigs", "Fags" etc.. Calling me "Stokes" is unacceptable, unless you're my high-school gym teacher, which you are not. I'm 55 years old, and have done nothing to warrant disrespect.

    To answer your legitimate question, Guantanimo was one such secret prison, before it became necessary to reveal its presence.

    "You overstate things, Jack. By doing so, you diminish the true horror of the Holocaust."

    A perfect example of double-think, Mr. Flathers. How does "overstating" "diminish", other than by exageration? I use no exageration in my letter.

    The crux of my letter is not "a giant leap into a police state": it is pointing out how a police state starts out with subtle moves, with endorsements from civic leaders who in turn influence public opinion. By creating a "norm" and defining it by inclusion/exclusion, larger changes are accepted by the masses. Perhaps, in your studies of the horrors of the Holocaust, you read a bit about Goebbels and his ilk. Perhaps you stumbled upon the fact that Prescott Bush financed the rise of the Nazi party, and actually had to be ordered by Congress to stop doing so. His son, George H.W. Bush, went on to become director of the CIA: the branch of government
    which now possesses all Nazi research and records. In a "historical" quirk of fate, HIS son became President of the United States, and it was under his watch the Patriot Act was begun. It is founded upon the biggest "conspiracy theory" ever presented: 19 cave-dwelling Neanderthals with fiftty-cent box cutter thwarted a $10-trillion defense system.

    We are IN a police state. Denying it doesn't help the situation. Pooling information and exposing the perpetrators is a step in resolving an event that historically keeps repeating itself, due TO the lack of sharing information.

    And sharing information in a civil manner.

    The goal of the far right wing of politics is to have everybody, and especially the far left wing, angry at them. The angrier, the better. Makes Jack happy and contented in the center of attention pretending to be a somebody with guru tendencies.

    Now comes Stokes, ginning up sympathy for his imagined innate sensitivity to the ideas and feelings of others, (who could possibly disagree with the horror of Auschwitz?) then DEMANDING Flathers respect him for creating yet another wild, convoluted, preposterous conspiracy theory;
    · Prescott Bush linked to
    · the Nazi Party linked to
    · George H.W. Bush linked to
    · the CIA linked to
    · the Patriot Act linked to
    · box-cutter wielding Neanderthals
    · leading to the conclusion:

    There is one positive outcome to this insanity.... it is a mildly entertaining break from the usual Stokes theory flying saucers full of little green men are out to enslave the world, one warm smelly probe at a time.

    For the first time in his life, Flathers is in an argument he can win. Go get 'um, tiger.

    living rent free between stokes ears

    Fathers: "I did get a kick from Obama's deliberately soft mention of his grandmother during the debate -- the "typical white person" he had dismissed during the '08 campaign.

    You really are a piece of work Flathers!

    Madelyn Dunham, who raised Obama since he was ten years old. died two days before her grandson was elected President. In her mid-eightlies and in severe pain, it was SHE who didn't want the spot light. She did, however, appear in one of his campaign ads.


    He made statements about her on talk shows while campaigning, describing her as "she has been the rock of our family and she is sharp as a tack" and, guess you don't remember, that he suspended his 2008 campaign to spend time with her at her home prior to her death.

    "She has really been the rock of the family, the foundation of the family. Whatever strength, discipline – that – that I have – it comes from her." ~ Barak Obama (October 23, 2008)

    On November 2, 2008 (November 3, 2008 in the continental United States), the Obama campaign announced that Madelyn Dunham had "died peacefully after a battle with cancer" in Hawaii. At a rally in Charlotte, North Carolina on November 3, Obama said, "She was one of those quiet heroes that we have all across America. They’re not famous. Their names are not in the newspapers, but each and every day they work hard. They aren’t seeking the limelight. All they try to do is just do the right thing." (wiki)

    You REALLY are a piece of work Flathers!

    Roy: I do apologize for misnaming you Jack. I was thinking of someone else. The error is mine. No offense meant.

    Still, you do overstate a nexus with what is going on here to Nazi Germany which I take as a diminishment of the horrors of the Holocaust.

    Your replies since your letter have done nothing to clarify the matter.

    Gitmo is by no means "secret."

    The likelihood of totalitarianism in this country will only come from a leader who the population adores, the press won't challenge and who will dictate policy without regard to standing law or a legistaltive body.

    The closest we have currently occupies the WH but we have more than enough in the country who won't buy what he's selling.

    Those advocating a strong centralized government should beware its implications.

    As to Jane08: Reread what I wrote for context -- which is Obama's penchant for changing himself to the crowd -- I'm sure he loves his grandmother's memory -- and that I didn't need your silly lecture to understand it. (Unless, by my being "a piece of work," you mean that comprehension is work for you.)

    ROFLMAO: Unserious as usual. Nobody can accuse you of false advertising with your nom de plume.

      Fathers: "I'm sure he loves his grandmother's memory "(Unless, by my being "a piece of work," you mean that comprehension is work for you.)

      Most of your comments are pathetically inept...from your comments about Obama sleeping while Amb Stevens was running for his life to Obama's references of his grandmother during his 2008 campaign. When someone actually proves you WRONG, you claim they didn't comprehend your statements. That's rich!

      I comment on your posts because I have a very low tolerance to asininity.

    Many thanks for the well-received apology, Mr. Flathers.

    I agree in your dialogue in that we can offer different points of view in civil tones, and in doing so, glean insights on all sides of the spectrum. This is how problems are resolved.

    I have long heard the denials about "it can't happen here". One valid point I offer is: what are we doing to insure it doesn't? There are many indicators pointing to the fact that it has already happened. Dismissing it, in fact, ALLOWS it to happen.

    ROFLMAO is best described here:

    Please also allow me to state that I do not hold Clinton or Obama in any different light: to get to that point in government, there's no question about where your lips have been. Clinton chums with H.W. Bush when it benefits the oligarchy. And as can be clearly seen by this very forum, we have no real way of holding these office-holders to account. For the most part, we're given propaganda to parrot back, and pacified with an occasional "vote" that is supposed to change things.

    As Nazi Germany rose, countless people endured ridicule and even death to tell the world what was really going on. The world didn't want to hear it, because it disrupted everyone's comfort. On 9/11, G.W. Bush instructed us to "go to Disneyland". This doesn't sound like sage advice after the worst attack in the nation's history. How does giving even more money to a multi-billion dollar corporation defeat "terrorists"? But that's what happened after 9/11: multi-billion dollar corporations were given more money for manufacturing weaponry, rights were taken away, and each election politicians vow to give more money to defense industry corporations. All the while, the Constitution erodes to just a piece of paper.

    It's a legitimate concern.

    Mr. Stokes, all you or I or anyone else can do is vote and try to get people to consider other ideas, thoughts, and so forth.

    There are are a number of reasons GITMO remains open, specifically a GOP promise/House vote not to allow the detainees to be brought within the states our tried in any stateside courts. (googleable of course) That said, my father spent some time there(the naval base) during his tour and at least in the 70's, there was no secret prison or anything of the sort.

    You pose a question with no short answer, but the shortest I can come up with is vote. Vote for an America that that offers equality for all its citizens regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Vote for an America that understands there is a good and an evil within us all, but doesn't judge the good by the evil. Vote to keep us educated and learning so that we have understanding. That is how we wont repeat the mistakes of the past.

    Mr.Stokes a FB add directed me to this story, considering your letter, I thought you may be interested.


    These are the people we should be keeping from public office at all costs.

    I agree. The United States has been on a path to a Fascist/Marxist state for decades. Both the Democrats and Republicans have had a hand in it.

    There was bipartisan support for the healthcare insurance individual mandate, legal indefinite "detention" of American citizens by US armed forces, the PATRIOT act and its removal of the protections afforded us by most of the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, government bailouts of corporations, purchasing securities that no fiscally responsible business or person would hold so we have that risk carried by our monetary system instead, for government control of the internet through CISPA and PIPA, the expansion of medicare through part "D", NAFTA, GATT, gun control, Guantanamo where we can torture people who haven't even been convicted of anything, the 'noble' cause of the US killing civilians in other countries by unmanned drone strikes, our own government assassinating American citizens on those same countries with the same drones and for digging a fiscally suicidal hole with massive debt spending.

    The two major parties offer no change in the direction of this country. They're the ones who have led us where we are. If you care about civil or economic liberty, Republicans or Democrats are not the answer.

    Stokes & Flathers:

    1) Can you explain why Benny Hill music plays in the mind of every person who reads your posts?

    2) Obama got Bin Laden, will Romney will get Big Bird?

    still living rent free between stokes ears

    "Eventually, EO 9066 cleared the way for the relocation of Japanese Americans to internment camps."

    This is brought up, not to argue the pros or cons of Japanese internment, but the INTENTION of the whole process to imprison these people, and that secret camps were built prior to what the story the public was given. Most are reluctant to investigate history and admit to the deeper influences: it's comfortable to salute a flag and live the illusion that "we're the good guys". Yet every month, the U.S. is admitting to atrocities committed 50 years ago, ranging from experiments on citizens to military foibles. Even this is not new: history books don't talk about the mass murders of American~Indians by way of covert operations...such as issuing blankets with smallpox germs to tribes. "Reservations" seem to fit the category of prisons. "The Trail Of Tears" speaks still to the hearts of those whose own leaders sold them out for a few pennies...only to be executed themselves, once the "mission was accomplished".

    In all of these events, the public voiced objection, yet the government did as it wanted. We see this occurring locally with the Regional Jail episode.

    Japanese-American internment was the relocation and internment by the United States government in 1942 of about 110,000 Japanese Americans and Japanese who lived along the Pacific coast of the United States to camps called "War Relocation Camps," in the wake of Imperial Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor.[2][3] The internment of Japanese Americans was applied unequally throughout the United States. All who lived on the West Coast of the United States were interned, while in Hawaii, where the 150,000-plus Japanese Americans composed over one-third of the population, an estimated 1,200[4] to 1,800 were interned.[5] Of those interned, 62% were American citizens.[6][7]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custodial_Detention_Index :
    The FBI Indexes were a series of personnel databases used by the FBI before the adoption by the Bureau of computerized databases. They were based on paper index cards. They were used to track US citizens and others believed by the Bureau to be dangerous to national security. The indexes generally had different 'classes' of danger the 'subject' was thought to represent.

    The actual assignment of the categories was, however, based on the perceived individual commitment to the person's native country, rather than the actual potential to cause harm; leaders of cultural organizations could be classified as "A", members of non-Nazi and pro-Fascist organizations.

    "Eventually, EO 9066 cleared the way for the relocation of Japanese Americans to internment camps."

    This is brought up, not to argue the pros or cons of Japanese internment, but the INTENTION of the whole process to imprison these people, and that secret camps were built prior to what the story the public was given. Most are reluctant to investigate history and admit to the deeper influences: it's comfortable to salute a flag and live the illusion that "we're the good guys". Yet every month, the U.S. is admitting to atrocities committed 50 years ago, ranging from experiments on citizens to military foibles. Even this is not new: history books don't talk about the mass murders of American~Indians by way of covert operations...such as issuing blankets with smallpox germs to tribes. "Reservations" seem to fit the category of prisons. "The Trail Of Tears" speaks still to the hearts of those whose own leaders sold them out for a few pennies...only to be executed themselves, once the "mission was accomplished".

    In all of these events, the public voiced objection, yet the government did as it wanted. We see this occurring locally with the Regional Jail episode.

    "Eventually, EO 9066 cleared the way for the relocation of Japanese Americans to internment camps."

    This is brought up, not to argue the pros or cons of Japanese internment, but the INTENTION of the whole process to imprison these people, and that secret camps were built prior to what the story the public was given. Most are reluctant to investigate history and admit to the deeper influences: it's comfortable to salute a flag and live the illusion that "we're the good guys". Yet every month, the U.S. is admitting to atrocities committed 50 years ago, ranging from experiments on citizens to military foibles. Even this is not new: history books don't talk about the mass murders of American~Indians by way of covert operations...such as issuing blankets with smallpox germs to tribes. "Reservations" seem to fit the category of prisons. "The Trail Of Tears" speaks still to the hearts of those whose own leaders sold them out for a few pennies...only to be executed themselves, once the "mission was accomplished".

    In all of these events, the public voiced objection, yet the government did as it wanted. We see this occurring locally with the Regional Jail episode.

      From wikipedia:
      "The FBI Indexes were a series of personnel databases used by the FBI before the adoption by the Bureau of computerized databases. They were based on paper index cards. They were used to track US citizens and others believed by the Bureau to be dangerous to national security. The indexes generally had different 'classes' of danger the 'subject' was thought to represent.

      The actual assignment of the categories was, however, based on the perceived individual commitment to the person's native country, rather than the actual potential to cause harm; leaders of cultural organizations could be classified as "A", members of non-Nazi and pro-Fascist organizations."

      We see, even still today, a "perceived threat" is enough to ruin a person's life. The premice of "pre-emptive war", introduced by the G.W.Bush administration, is symptomatic of a corruption that shows no intention of stopping or even going into remission.

      The war sabers being rattled against Iran are no different than propaganda of years gone by. The voices here, on this forum, are up against a multi-billion dollar media machine with unlimited financing. Our best hope is to provide information and hope there are enough brain cells left among the population to at least awaken.

      It is disappointing there are so many who will sell out their fellow human beings for two dirty dollars, while a sincere minority try to instill the need to think about a better future for all. That future WILL come: what will your standing BE, in that community?

    Jane08: Your intolerance is not limited to what you see as "asininity." (At some point, do you think you might belly-up to the point of an issue and address it?)

    Katybug: "...I think perhaps you should lay off the bottle so early in the morning."

    Glad to see that you're keeping it classy.

    As to your claim that the Left isn't a source for potential civil violence...Obama's pal Bill Ayers is a good place to start as a case in point for rebuttal.

    Really, Miss. Read a book.

    Now that y'all have had a chance to vent your collective spleens, let me enlighten everyone: no matter who is president, the result will be the same in that the USA is BROKE. We Americans will NOT pay our debts, thus we will live in la-la land as long as the Federal Reserve prints money. They are subsidizing the $16 Trillion right now. When they decide to let their foot off the gas, look out. I forecast they never will, so what's to worry about?
    As to whether we will become a welfare state, we already are. Like it or not, we have almost half the population on welfare of one kind or another. My advise to all: sit back & enjoy it. Vote Obama & if you are not a current Federal employee or a wage-earning Federal contractor, you'll never have to worry. The Gov't safety nets will always hold you up. You just have to learn how to tap the spigot.

    I was saddened when the NVD dropped "Our Daily Bread" by Rev. Bailey: his simple insights to scripture were often profound FOR their simplicity.

    Here's one from several years ago: in very simple terms, it expresses how Americans slowly allowed their rights...and voices...to be diminished.
    Take unto you the whole armor of God, that you may withstand in the evil day. - Ephesians 6:13

    Remember how the fox outwitted the skylark? The bird was fond of worms but found them hard to get. One day he met with a fox who had the bright idea of exchanging worms for feathers.

    The skylark said:" I have plenty of feathers, so i can make this exchange profitably." Later that day, after his good meal, he found he could not fly so high, but he attributed this to his imagination.

    The old fox continued to exchange a few worms for a few feathers and eventually the bird had stripped himself for his appetite so that he could no longer fly. Then the fox declared, "Your appetite has brought you to the place that my appetite can be fed."

    Only a feather - a trivial thing but enough of them took away the power of flight and escape from the enemy.

    In one year, (President Obama) provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world … into solar and wind, to Solyndra and Fisker and Tesla and Ener1. ~ Mitt Romney on Wednesday, October 3rd, 2012 in the first presidential debate in Denver

    "Romney used the number "$90 billion" five times in the first presidential debate, claiming, "In one year, (Obama) provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world … into solar and wind, to Solyndra and Fisker and Tesla and Ener1."

    That is incorrect in several ways. That $90 billion, as described in a report provided by the Romney campaign, wasn’t provided in one year, wasn’t distributed primarily via tax breaks, wasn’t primarily provided directly to companies, wasn’t primarily spent on solar and wind, and wasn’t spent at all on Fisker or Tesla.

    In reality, more than 60 percent of it was directed to state and local governments and utility companies for energy efficiency, transportation and electrical infrastructure .

    We rate his claim False. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/05/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obama-provided-90-billion/

    Says President Obama has "doubled" the deficit. ~Mitt Romney on Friday, October 5th, 2012 in the first presidential debate in Denver

    Romney said that Obama has "doubled" the deficit. In reality, using the most appropriate comparison, he and Congress have actually decreased the deficit slightly. We rate Romney’s statement False. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/05/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obama-has-doubled-deficit/

    Right now, the (Congressional Budget Office) says up to 20 million people will lose their insurance as Obamacare goes into effect next year. ~Mitt Romney on Wednesday, October 3rd, 2012 in the first presidential debate in Denver

    That number is cherry-picked, and many of those 20 million will be leaving employer coverage voluntarily for better options. Romney also ignores that under the status quo, many more people today "lose" coverage than even the highest, cherry-picked CBO estimate. We rate his statement False. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/04/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-20-million-will-lose-health-insur/

    Pre-existing conditions are covered under my (health care) plan. ~ Mitt Romney on Wednesday, October 3rd, 2012 in a presidential debate in Denver

    Romney did not mention the qualifier that people have to stay insured to get the protection. That’s a significant omission. We rate his statement Mostly False. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/05/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-his-health-care-plan-covers-pre-e/

    Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it. ~ Adolf Hitler

    ...and that ethos has been working quite nicely for the current administration (Lybia and the supposed economic 'recovery' being the latest examples.)

      Classy? I ignored the warning signs and stepped into the cage knowing you were already busy flinging poo, there's only so classy one can be in the given situation.

      Ayers? That is your "don't look here, look at this instead" example to distract from the GOP currently advocating violence should they happen to lose an election by the people?

      That not enough? Perhaps the GOP bills last year in South Dakota and Nebraska to make it legal to murder abortion providers? Yes, lets just kill those who don't follow our ideology...

      Ayers? lets look at more recent examples like Wade Michael Page the Sikh temple shooter or Kevin Harpham currently sentenced for the bomb he planted along the MLK jr. memorial march. Keep looking for single distraction events?

    I got this all figured out....

    According to the Teabilly logic, if I take advantage of a tax break and I am a corporation, I'm a smart Republican businessman, but if I take advantage of something I need to not be hungry, I'm a moocher?

    How insane is it that we pay for Viagra and other male erectile dysfunction drugs, which help cause pregnancy, but refuse to pay for the drugs that may prevent a pregnancy?

    Good news - bad news. The good news is massive voter fraud has been discovered. The bad news is it is the Republicans who were caught committing the fraud.

    The price at the pump keeps going up and up. Could this be caused by the oil companies now EXPORTING gasoline from America or was it Mitt Romney opening another off-shore bank account?

    President Obama has failed to keep campaign promises, mainly those promises made for him by his Republican opponents:
    · President Obama did not create ObamaCare death squads to kill your grandma
    · President Obama failed to take away your guns
    · President Obama's election did not cause terrorists to dance in the streets - they are dodging hellfire missiles fired from drones
    · Bin Laden did not attack America again. He is hiding in Davy Jone's locker planning his next move.
    · Obama failed to prolong the Iraq war.
    · Obama failed to convert the U.S. to socialism
    · Obama killed Bin Laden - Romney will kill Big Bird

    Now, the biggest obstacle to tax reform is a group named Americans For Tax Reform, led by, you guessed it, Grover Norquist. One of our political parties is insane and we all know which one it is.

    Since we really don't know when life begins, I'm not sure if Flathers and Stokes are really here.

    Danny Boy and Royster;
    Now, I want you to remember to breathe after I tell you this:
    Now is a good time for you guys to bring that Kazoo out.

    But always remember this.... Play guitar and harmonica at the same time and folks think you have some talent. But, just as soon as you strap a pair of cymbals to the inside of your knees, those same folks will cross the street to avoid you.

    Twenty-some years ago, the dawn of the Internet Age gave us Godwin's Law:

    "If an online argument goes on long enough, somebody will eventually invoke Hitler or quote scripture from a religious text. When that happens, it's basically the end of the conversation, because all rational discussion ceases when one side calls the other Nazis or godless."

    Wikipedia quotes Godwin differently:

    "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."




    “I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don’t have a tax cut of a scale that you’re talking about.” A Tax Policy Center analysis of Romney’s proposal for a 20 percent across-the-board tax cut in all federal income tax rates, eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax, eliminating the estate tax and other tax reductions, would reduce federal revenue $480 billion in 2015. This amounts to $5 trillion over the decade.

    “My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. But I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people.” If Romney hopes to provide tax relief to the middle class, then his $5 trillion tax cut would add to the deficit. There are not enough deductions in the tax code that primarily benefit rich people to make his math work.

    “My — my number-one principal is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that: no tax cut that adds to the deficit.” As the Tax Policy Center concluded, Romney’s plan can’t both exempt middle class families from tax cuts and remain revenue neutral. “He’s promised all these things and he can’t do them all. In order for him to cover the cost of his tax cut without adding to the deficit, he’d have to find a way to raise taxes on middle income people or people making less than $200,000 a year,” the Center found.

    “The president’s put it in place as much public debt — almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined.” This is not even close to being true. When Obama took office, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Now the national debt is over $16 trillion. That $5.374 trillion increase is nowhere near as much debt as all the other presidents combined.

    “I want to take that $716 billion you’ve cut and put it back into Medicare…. But the idea of cutting $716 billion from Medicare to be able to balance the additional cost of Obamacare is, in my opinion, a mistake." There’s that number again. Romney is claiming that Obamacare siphons off $716 billion from Medicare, to the detriment of beneficiaries. In actuality, that money is saved primarily through reducing over-payments to insurance companies under Medicare Advantage, not payments to beneficiaries. Paul Ryan’s budget plan keeps those same cuts, but directs them toward tax cuts for the rich and deficit reduction.

    Read 'em all--AND SPREAD THE WORD about this slick-talking sociopath Willard.

    Oh--and make sure you're registered to vote.

    ROFLMAO & Big Bird - You guys ROCK!

    The Background: Romney has proposed reducing income tax rates by 20 percent and eliminating the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax. He says his plan would boost growth, while avoiding an expansion of the federal budget deficit because he also would curtail deductions, exemptions and credits. He says there are enough tax breaks for top earners that he would eliminate to avoid shifting the burden to the middle class.

    The Facts: Romney’s tax plan can’t add up under congressional budget-scoring rules that don’t let him assume that economic growth will generate higher tax revenue.

    The Facts: Romney’s tax plan can’t add up under congressional budget-scoring rules that don’t let him assume that economic growth will generate higher tax revenue.

    Obama’s argument rests on an August analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington. That group sought to see if it was simultaneously possible to meet all of Romney’s principles: Cut tax rates, avoid shifting the tax burden to the middle class, don’t increase the budget deficit, and keep tax benefits for savings and investment.

    The study found that, in 2015, $86 billion of the tax burden would be shifted to the middle class to keep the plan from increasing the deficit.

    Romney’s advisers contested that analysis. They maintain they would consider some changes that the Tax Policy Center kept off the table, such as the tax exemption for municipal bonds. Those changes make the plan more arithmetically possible, though still politically difficult. Romney’s campaign hasn’t provided enough detail about what he’s proposing for deductions and exemptions to be able to analyze it completely.

    Romney said in the debate that his plan wouldn’t cut enough tax breaks to offset all of his tax cuts. Economic growth, he said, would be generated by his tax plan and make up the difference. He hasn’t specified how much.

    Congressional budget-scoring rules are conservative about anticipated growth from tax cuts because economists disagree over how much they spur the economy. If Romney’s plan goes to Congress, where those rules apply, it wouldn’t add up.


    Romney's Medicare Plan:

    "Seniors and disabled people on Medicare could wind up paying more out of pocket if the plans’ premiums grow faster than the government’s subsidy, and traditional Medicare might not remain an affordable option if it attracts older, less healthy beneficiaries than the private plans, driving up costs." (businessweek.com article)

    10 Most Shameless Romney Debate Lies -- Debunked

    Your conservative relatives should see this.

    Shameless Lie #1. An ‘Unelected Board’ Controlling Your Health Care

    Despite President Obama trying to push back on this lie, Romney made this claim a few times last night. Obamacare, according to Romney, “puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have.” In reality, as the Associated Press points out, the board that is tasked with bringing down Medicare costs is prohibited from “rationing care, shifting costs to retirees, restricting benefits or raising the Medicare eligibility age. So the board doesn't have the power to dictate to doctors what treatments they can prescribe.” This Romney claim also hearkened back to Sarah Palin’s lie that Obamacare created “death panels,” which was a straight up lie.

    Shameless Lie #2. A Bipartisan Record

    Romney referred to his alleged “bipartisan” record in Massachusetts as governor during the debate. But what’s the real story on this? ABC News calls the claim “not quite factual.” Indeed: Romney’s health care plan was enacted with the help of a Democratic legislature. But in general, the body was “frustrated” with Romney “because he wanted to govern like a ‘CEO’ and ‘didn’t pay heed to the legislature and they resented that,’” according to the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation’s Michael Widmer.

    Shameless Lie #3. Dodd-Frank Labels Banks as ‘Too Big to Fail’

    One contrast between the candidates that emerged during the debate was over Dodd-Frank, the weak Wall Street reforms and regulations passed after the 2008 financial collapse. Romney wants to repeal Dodd-Frank, and part of the reason why is his claim that the bill designates banks as “too big to fail” and therefore gives them “a blank check.” But as ThinkProgress notes, this is far from the truth: “the law merely says that the biggest, systemically risky banks need to abide by more stringent regulations. If those banks fail, they will be unwound by a new process in the Dodd-Frank law that protects taxpayers from having to pony up for a bailout.”

    Shameless Lie #4. Obamacare Leads to Loss of Healthcare

    Governor Romney claimed that the passage of the Affordable Care Act will lead to 20 million people losing health insurance. He based this claim on a Congressional Budget Office report. But according to PolitiFact, Romney “cherry picked” the CBO report and mislead viewers on why people would “lose” coverage.

    PolitiFact’s final verdict on the claim is: “That number is cherry-picked, and he’s wrong to describe it as only including people who ‘like’ their coverage, since many of those 20 million will be leaving employer coverage voluntarily for better options. Romney also ignores that under the status quo, many more people today ‘lose’ coverage than even the highest, cherry-picked CBO estimate. We rate his statement False.”

    Shameless Lie #5. The Failure of the Obama Economy

    Romney hammered Obama on the economy’s performance over the past four years. One claim Romney made was this: “[We have] 23 million people out of work...The proof of that is that 50 percent of college graduates this year can't find work.”

    But here’s the AP breakdown of the facts on this claim: “The number of unemployed is 12.5 million, not 23 million. Romney was also counting 8 million people who are working part time but would like a full-time job and 2.6 million who have stopped looking for work, either because they are discouraged or because they are going back to school or for other reasons.”

    And on the college graduate claim, Romney was also wrong. Back to the AP: “A Northeastern University analysis for The Associated Press found that a quarter of graduates were probably unemployed and another quarter were underemployed, which means working in jobs that didn't make full use of their skills or experience.”

    Shameless Lie #6. Obamacare Cuts Billions From Medicare

    This was one of Romney’s favorite attack lines last night: the notion that the Affordable Care Act is siphoning off funds from Medicare. The specific claim is that $716 billion was cut from Medicare because of the Affordable Care Act. In reality, this claim is highly misleading. What the number refers to is money that is saved “primarily through reducing over-payments to insurance companies under Medicare Advantage, not payments to beneficiaries. Paul Ryan’s budget plan keeps those same cuts, but directs them toward tax cuts for the rich and deficit reduction,” ThinkProgress notes.

    Shameless Lie #7. Gas Prices Increase

    Romney said that “gasoline prices have doubled under the president. Electric rates are up.” This is true--but to blame it on the president is highly misleading. Gasoline prices have little to do with individual policies carried out by a president. Instead, as the Associated Press states, “Gasoline prices are set on financial exchanges around the world and are based on a host of factors, most importantly the price of crude oil used to make gasoline, the amount of finished gasoline ready to be shipped and the capacity of refiners to make enough to meet market demand.”

    The AP also skewers Romney’s claim on electric rates going up: “Retail electricity prices have risen since Obama took office — barely. They've grown by an average of less than 1 percent per year, less than the rate of inflation and slower than the historical growth in electricity prices. The unexpectedly modest rise in electricity prices is because of the plummeting cost of natural gas, which is used to generate electricity.”

    Shameless Lie #8. Health Care Costs Rising Under Obama

    Romney’s made this statement on the campaign trail--and if it was wrong then, it’s wrong now. Last night, Romney claimed that “health care costs have gone up by $2500 a family.”

    But FactCheck.org was on this false claim back when Romney used it on the campaign trail in September. Their take: “Romney says health insurance premiums have gone up $2,500 under Obama. The actual increase has been $1,700, most of which was absorbed by employers and only a small part of which is attributable to the health care law.”

    Shameless Lie #9. Oil and Gas Production Increases Only on Private Land

    The former Massachusetts governor said last night that “all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private land...Your Administration has cut the numbers of permit and licenses in half.”

    But ABC News says Romney is playing loose with the facts. Data from the Bureau of Land Management shows that “the number of drilling permits on federal lands approved during the fiscal years President Obama has been in office has decreased somewhere between 20 and 37 percent compared to the years before he became president - not the 50 percent Romney claimed.”

    Shameless Lie #10. No Tax Cuts for the Rich

    To fend off the perception that he’s only concerned about the wealthy, Romney made sure to emphasize that his economic plan would not lower tax rates on rich people.

    Think Progress has the details on that claim: “If Romney were to actually implement his plan to reduce tax rates by 20 percent while eliminating tax deductions in order to pay for it, taxpayers with more than $200,000 would certainly see a tax cut. But everyone else — 95 percent of Americans —will see their taxes increase.”


    Mitt Romney's Big Promises - and Bigger Lies

      Big Bird, From http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/mitt-romneys-big-promises-and-bigger-lies

      Love this one: "This isn't just a casual line. In eight sentences, Romney asserts over and over again that Obama wants to create "equal outcomes" and give everybody the "same rewards." This is nuts, Glenn Beck-level insane. Restoring Clinton-era taxes is not a plan to equalize outcomes, or even close. It's not even a plan to stop rising inequality. Obama's America will continue to be the most unequal society in the advanced world -- only slightly less so. The alternative proposals accelerate inequality even further."

      Romney will eventually have to adapt Beck's quote:

      ''...'if you take what I say as gospel, you're an idiot.''
      —Glenn Beck, New York Times, March 29, 2009

    Health-Care Costs

    The Claim: Romney said, “Health-care costs have gone up by $2,500 a family” under Obama.

    The Background: During the legislative debate over the president’s health-care overhaul law, critics charged the measure wouldn’t do enough to control medical costs. Insurance industry spokesmen and others have warned that the law will drive up premiums because of such requirements as coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions.

    The Facts: The number Romney cited is in the ballpark. It’s close to the figure in a recent Kaiser Family Foundation survey that shows average premiums for a four-person family rose $2,370 between 2009 and 2012. The fact he didn’t mention is that the rate of increase has slowed under Obama. Kaiser calculated insurance rates over the past 10 years. They rose at an average annual rate of eight percent from 2002 through 2008, the year Obama was elected. Since he came to office, Kaiser said, the average annual rate has been 4.3 percent.

    (Source: businessweek.com)

    Mitt Romney tells 533 lies in 30 weeks, Steve Benen documents them


    Mitt Romney tells 533 lies in 30 weeks, Steve Benen documents them

    August 29, 2012 By Fred Clark

    I’ve written about or linked to a great deal here “chronicling Mitt’s mendacity” — to borrow Steven Benen’s phrase.

    Mitt Romney says many, many things that are not true. He says this despite being in possession of the correct facts of the matter.
    Which is to say that Mitt Romney lies. A lot. He lies more than any other national candidate for office in my lifetime. And I was born before the Nixon administration.

    This is documented. Proven. Validated, verified, demonstrated, catalogued and quantified. Mitt Romney lies.

    Here are 30 — 30! — of Benen’s weekly “chronicling” posts. These are all backed up and sourced. These are not assertions, interpretations or allegations. These are facts, actual instances.

    Over the past 30 weeks, Mitt Romney has told lie after lie after lie:

    [Here the article lists 30 page links - go to this link to view all 30 links.]

    [ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/08/29/mitt-romney-tells-533-lies-in-30-weeks-steve-benen-documents-them/ ]


    Click those links. Read the lists. List after list of lie after lie. Hundreds of them — 533, to be exact, although Benen does not make any claim to providing a comprehensive chronicle.

    This is unprecedented. “We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers,” Romney’s pollster, Neil Newhouse, said.

    This has produced what James Fallows calls the “post-truth” age — a relentlessly dishonest onslaught of brazen falsehoods with which the media and the political system are struggling to cope. What do you do when every article, every “fact-check,” every arbiter denounces a lie and corrects it, but then a politician just keeps repeating it?

    It’s remarkable to behold.

    One of the weirder aspects of this for me is watching this unfold in the politically conservative culture of my evangelical world. The most partisan evangelical conservatives are also those most likely to rant against “relativism” and to trumpet their status as defenders of “absolute truth.” Those same folks will dismiss this post — and all 30 of Benen’s posts above — as mere partisan attacks without ever bothering to examine the 533 factual instances of Mitt’s mendacity, chronicled.

    That’s the only cognitive defense they have, I guess. Jam fingers in ears and shout la-la-la-you’re-being-partisan!

    Because, you see, the fact that Mitt Romney said something he knew to be false is a partisan fact. And the fact that he has done this at least 533 times in the past 30 weeks is also partisan.

    I suppose the other approach for Romney defenders who cannot bear to face the fact of those 533 facts will be to angrily pore over all of Benen’s lists, reading each one with a lawyerly eye.

    Have at it. Please. Cherry-pick. Spin. Split hairs. Hand-wave away whichever lies you wish as mere misdemeanors and not full-fledged felonies against honesty.

    But how many of those charges do you think you can get dismissed? 10 percent? 20 percent? Maybe, if you’re that sort of person and you work really hard at it — if you’re willing to get even more pedantic and semantic and technical than even you are usually comfortable with — maybe you could half convince yourself that 50 percent of those lies somehow shouldn’t really count against Romney
    That still leaves more than 260 lies. That still leaves Mitt Romney as a convicted liar, 260 times over. And at that point you’ll have to join your friends with their fingers in their ears.

    But you’ll still know.

    Because everyone knows. Mitt Romney lies. A lot. That is what he does. That is who he is. And friend or foe, he does not care if you know it.

    Unelected Health Board

    The Claim: Romney said the Affordable Care Act “puts in place an unelected board that’s going to tell people, ultimately, what kind of treatments they can have.”

    The Background: The health law creates a new appointed board, the Independent Payment Advisory Board, to help control the growth of Medicare’s costs. If the growth exceeds targets based on inflation and gross domestic product, the IPAB would recommend ways to cut Medicare spending starting in 2015.

    The Facts: Romney’s characterization of the board is false. The law forbids the IPAB from making any recommendation “to ration health care,” increase Medicare beneficiaries’ premiums or copayments, or “otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility.” Further, the board’s recommendations aren’t automatically effective. Congress must review them, and can pass alternative changes to Medicare that reduce costs by the same amount. If Congress doesn’t act, the government is required to implement the board’s recommendations.

    17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
    23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

    Big Bird and Jane, you have effectively shut down what could have been an interesting conversation. RickC2012 “The two major parties offer no change in the direction of this country. They're the ones who have led us where we are. If you care about civil or economic liberty, Republicans or Democrats are not the answer.” And Steve “let me enlighten everyone: no matter who is president, the result will be the same in that the USA is BROKE. We Americans will NOT pay our debts, thus we will live in la-la land as long as the Federal Reserve prints money” had interesting comments that I would like to see discussed along with Roy’s original topic of discussion.
    But no, we have to get Big Bird’s cut and paste over and over and over again along with Jane. Hey Big Bird, if I wanted to real this left wing propaganda I can easily find it.
    Oh and by the way ROFLMAO – what do you think the title of this letter to the editor is?

      Curiously, what prevents you from responding to those you found most interesting and ignoring what you don't? Persistence Debt ;)

      I think there are many Americans that are unhappy with the R vs D scenario. The problem is there just aren't enough unhappy voters to throw behind a singular separate option successfully at this time. "I" think that's going to be a difficult reach to achieve because of our differences. Using myself as an example (as to hopefully not offend someone this time at least) I feel like the left is too weak on illegal immigration and not very far behind the right in willingness to go to war, but I wasn't throwing in behind Ron Paul either because I realize it would place us in more danger to just suddenly stop being the global police, and "my" own research led me to see that while our government doesn't do the greatest job managing our money, the US not only never truly followed a gold standard, it was also never successful anywhere else.

      I'm not using those examples as an opening into debate as to whether or not RP's ideology is feasible or not, because really it just doesn't matter as he didn't garner enough following to be on the ticket. That is my point, finding a candidate outside the primary two party spectrum that can manage to gather enough votes from both sides to truly make a dent. Someone that can offer a way of doing things that is different yet appeals to the masses at large.

      I did answer the title question, even though I wasn't in your comment about going off on other tangents. VOTE. For Mr. Stokes question we vote for a society that doesn't allow us to even consider such a scenario. For that we need equality. As long as we lack tolerance of each other and are trying to use the law to force others to conform to our beliefs or take the rights of those whom we disagree with, we are only a heartbeat away from repeating the past. It is in seeing others as "less than" that we would learn to allow such atrocities.

      For Steve and Rick etc...the answer is still VOTE. Whether we like our choices or not the choices still are what they are. Even if we truly 100% believe neither one of the choices has the right answers, the outcome (at this time in history) is still going to be one of those two choices. America will still move in one of those two directions. One of the two inevitably will have something you believe is right more than the other has wrong. You can either sit home and pout about not getting your ideal choice or vote to keep moving in a direction at least in some way towards what you believe is in America's best interest until there is a more personally viable choice. With or without a handful of votes (on the large scale) our options at this time are to keep President Obama or elect Willard Romney.

      My own opinion. (even if too long for other tastes)

      I'mdebtfree states: "Big Bird and Jane, you have effectively shut down what could have been an interesting conversation."

      I'mdebtfree, I don't know exactly what you are getting at by that statement and how anyone, no matter how many posts they have written, can "shut down" a conversation. If you or others wanted to engage these other people posting, like RickC2012 and whoever else you were talking about, then please do so no matter how many posts others have written. There is absolutely nothing to stop you. I am honestly not trying to be sarcastic, but I just can't see what the problem is. Maybe you want NV Daily to closely monitor how long someone's post is or how many times they are allowed to post but as far as I can tell, NV Daily does not do that and I am glad they don't.

      We all use the word "freedom", but sometimes we don't stop to think that it also includes someone else's "freedom" whether we agree with what they do or not. We all have the freedom to come on these comment sections on NV Daily and if we don't like certain things about it, we have the freedom to not come on here. It really is just that simple.

    ruh roh.

    Big Bird went postal? Let's blame the Cookie Monster. Or maybe it was 'debt'? Or Flathers? Yeah, that's the ticket to ride. It's all their fault and everybody knows it. As for me? I'm sleeping with a light on for the rest of my life.

    The preceding message was brought to you by the letters "P" and "U".

    The following message is brought to you by the letters "L" and "I" and "A" and "R":

    Why just the other day the Evangelical Fundamentalists in my neighborhood had banded together in concerned awe and wonderment about why Obama had not loaded them into boxcars already. I calmed their fears explaining they failed because they did not hate Obama enough for their prayers to be answered, plus, Romney has already promised to take away their Social Security and Medicare so they would not live long enough to see the boxcars. Problem solved! Everybody was relieved and happy, especially me and I expressed my happiness by...



    The real criminals at Auschwitz were the ones who ordered the prisons built. These same criminals dictated who would go into those prisons. Their crimes were abetted by a system they had manipulated, whose corruption had advanced to such a degree that mass murder approached a global scale. Their techniques don’t differ from the system currently in place: patriotic rhetoric, “if you‘re not with us, you‘re one of them“, and nothing has changed at all since the days of Solomon‘s famous words. “There is nothing new under the sun.“

    It is now legal for the U.S. government to murder its own citizens. Did your “vote” change that? Did your vote…or even your voice…change the 2000 elections? Did Obama bring change? Not really. Our society still depends on a petro-chemical economy. Corporations still stand unaccountable for environmental disasters, in particular the defense industry, the largest polluter in the world. No investigations are held to expose any degree of truth, except to imprison those who get in the way of corporate greed. A whole industry of caging people. Industry to build the cages. A legal system that assures a prison population. A population that accepts this, without question, ever-believing that some iconic politician will change things. By their very nature, politicians are there to insure that things stay the same. By believing a “vote” will change anything, you essentially allow this all to continue.

    There are no easy answers to this huge problem, I agree. Most people are unwilling to endure the discomfort of being unpopular with their views in order to facilitate change. Most are unwilling to dedicate themselves to what’s really required to address this problem, and who could blame them: the System is set up to make you appear as an outcast if you disagree even slightly with the mainstream. This peer-pressure shrinks the comfort of “normal” every day.

    As for myself, I will continue look within myself every day, and work with my own dysfunctions. I will courageously address them. I will accept when I’m wrong, and promptly admit it. I will continue to walk with the creed “Harm No One”, but I see very clearly the Emperor has no clothes, and I am not required to remain silent about it. Even after my voice is silenced, truth will continue to emerge, regardless of the most clever disinformation machinery.

    “To Thine Own Self Be True”. That is the foundation from which a healthy mind might grow. Answers instinctively come to a healthy mind: a mind which does not accept excuses, does not look for easy fixes, and is willing to share its learning freely.

    And is not afraid to speak the truth.

    It is clear this website doesn't facilitate 'change', but rather allows spamming of any real problem with comfortable scape-goat thinking.

    No society in history met its demise without adequate warning, if only from its own citizens. We are well past the warning phase. If you insist on turning your head and pretending that you just don't see, Wal-Mart has a good selection of Shock Faces to choose from.

    Hey there, stokie-boy, I have a question for you....

    You say the world is coming to an end this coming December ('cause the Mayan calendar said so, right?) and you say America is preparing Auschwitz style death camps.....

    My question is;
    What's gonna kill us first?

    Your answer here:_________________________ .

    My answer here:
    If the world is coming to an end in December, let the party begin. Let's invite everybody, including the alcoholics.
    If I have a boxcar ride in my future after December, I'm buying lots of guns and ammo. They'll never take me alive. I'll seek sanctuary wherever a front porch light is burning.

    still living rent free between your ears, royster

    764 itemized 'Romney Lies' by Big Bird.

    I suppose there's an expectation that we should accept it all without investing a month of our lives to fact-check.

    O/C disorder on display.

    “The supreme tragedy is still not seen that in Germany it was largely people of good will who, by their socialist policies, prepared the way for the forces which stand for everything they detest.” Friedrich A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom

      The right wouldn't know "socialism" if it jumped up and smacked you across the face. In America it is a term used to bring about hate and fear. EXACTLY the ideology that ushers in the situation Mr. Stokes asks about.

      What would you have Debt? Should we be forcing the poor to line up once a month for their food rations so that they may be ostracized publicly for their situation? Should we just have everyone poor, sick, or elderly living in the streets? Or toss them in jail for their crime of "laziness"? Let's stop educating those financially unable to buy their education and/or degrees, because surely that will benefit our economy. Gawd, the epitome of teabilly.

      Here's a quote for you: As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have a duty to be fighter for truth and justice. Google that up.

      Food for thought as well, Do you really want to hear Jesus say: For I was jobless and you told me to 'get a job'; I was homeless and you called me a dirty hippie, I was destitute and you said unto me 'Helping you would only encourage a big government nanny state. Be patient for surely my riches will trickle down to you'?

      Lastly, just to show you aren't just fear/hate mongering, prove it, show us a country that has universal healthcare(there's many) and assistance for its needy (plenty to pick from) that is actually a country practicing "socialism" in the true sense of the word.

    Dear Flathers,
    Hope this message finds you well.
    What is wrong with you? Can't you get anything right? I do not have QCD as you suggest. I have CDO. It's exactly like OCD except it is in alphabetical order like it should be.

    Dear Debt,
    Hope this message finds you well.
    What insight, enlightenment, secrets, or personal wisdom concerning horrific tragedy can you bring to the table that has not already been revealed by the Nuremberg Trials? Is it your goal to extrapolate that info to somehow describe the current administration as guilty by inference? So many lies, and so little time to say them all....

    Dear Stokes,
    Hope this message finds you well.
    Play guitar and harmonica at the same time and folks will admire your talent. But just as soon as you strap a pair of cymbals to the inside of your knees people will cross the street to avoid you.
    My, what lovely cymbals you have there, Stokes. Please play us a love song dedicated to the little green men in the flying saucers.

    like fish in a barrel

    Bwwaaahhhh hahahahahahaha

    Well Katybug you missed the point. When government is given so much power then they have the power to misdirect it.
    Here is another quote from Hayek that I found is so true “Who can seriously doubt that the power which a millionaire, who may be my employer, has over me is very much less than that which the smallest bureaucrat possesses who wields the coercive power of the state and on whose discretion it depends how I am allowed to live and work?”
    Again, for someone who continues to complain that Christianity doesn’t belong in government it’s amazing that you invoke the name of Jesus to support government help. So should the government have Christian principals only when it suits you? I also find it interesting that you call it “fear/hate mongering” to have a distrust in big government.

      Your concern is a government so big that it dictates how you are allowed to live and work? Like telling you who you can marry? Or enforcing the tenants of one particular faith upon you? Or dictating to you which options you have towards having children or not? Because then you would be absolutely correct in the "big government" dictating how we live argument.

      On the other hand if you are perfectly okay with those measures but take issue with the government stepping in to care for the basic needs of those unable to do so themselves rather than just let them die, you a have a very dark black soul.

      I don't invoke the name of Jesus to advocate the relationship between Christianity and the government at all. But considering your previous twisting of my words that isn't surprising. The "invocation" is a stark reminder to the many that hide their selfishness, greed, and hate behind a cross that the man who died there in a most unselfish way would admonish such behavior. Taking care of those in need isn't only a christian principle, its a moral principle recognized with or without religion of any type. Its a human principle much like a toddler will help soothe a playmate that has hurt themselves. That small child has not learned its what you are "supposed" to do, its just naturally the right thing to do.

      It would be a beautiful world if people helped each other simply because its the human thing to do. But people don't and won't. I believe I said to you before that even with the government stepping in to provide the necessities for some, charities that provide the same care are consistently forced to turn those in need away. Why? If we don't need the government to care for the neediest of us, then Why are the charities that operate simply upon the goodness of others sense of charity not overflowing with ability to help?

        Katybug, You are one very wise women. If the humans of the world thought as you do, it would be a wonderful world.

        "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

      *almost forgot, the fear mongering in your quote... stands on its own. The constant complete misuse of "socialism".

      Did you look up who said my quote? Evil can hide behind any source.

    Katybug, I didn’t misuse the term “socialism”, I merely provided a quote relevant to the topic being discussed.
    Since you are bringing up social issues and the role of government you should take a look at Obamacare that states “secretary shall” over 1,000 times. You may think that is fine that you trust Kathleen Sebelius to make the right decisions but how will you feel about “secretary shall” if Rick Santorum is appointed Secretary of HHS and is now making your healthcare decisions?
    But general welfare issues are only one part of government overstepping their bounds. It goes on and on with bailouts, corporate welfare, indefinite detention, trying to gain control of the internet, the Federal Reserve, education, etc.
    “We shall never prevent the abuse of power if we are not prepared to limit power in a way which occasionally may prevent its use for desirable purposes.” Hayek

      DEBT, As Obamacare contains 2,163,744 words, referring to the Department head's duties a 1000 times seems really trivial. In others words, much too do about nothing.

      bailouts, corporate welfare, indefinite detention, trying to gain control of the internet, the Federal Reserve, education

      That's a whole separate ball game from helping citizens in need, or even promoting the general welfare as Jane pointed out. Although devils advocate could say that all of those things go towards promoting the general welfare of the public.

      Education for instance, while anyone can see the system is a mess, needs federal guidelines and standards, or else you would have whole states choosing to ignore science and skip parts of history. Which does nothing towards innovation. In order to have the most competitive workforce you need the smartest, brightest America possible. Wasn't it just Texas trying to do away with critical thinking skills?

      Bailouts especially corporate & financial industries could even be construed towards safegaurding the general welfare. Detroit a good example. Where would those people be had we not? Not just the immediate workers but other areas those jobs effect such as suppliers? Not to mention a USA damn near wholly dependent upon foreign autos.

      Note that I'm only providing the flip side of the coin to a couple of those. I still maintain that the first answer to Mr. Stokes question is equality. Recognizing that all citizens deserve the same rights and living it, not just saying it. Using myself as example, I may feel that some fondly referred to as Teabilles may need some enlightenment on reality, but I would never advocate hauling them off and killing them. *unless of course they followed through with the threat of civil war if the election doesn't go their way. That's a whole other scenario.

    Auschwitz was a large factor in organizing the Geneva Convention, and the international laws agreed upon there. The U.S. breached those agreements heavily in the wake of 9/11, under the watch of George W. Bush. As well, the U.S. refuses to become a member of the International Criminal Court. What mechanisms are in place for the average citizen to present these wrongs, and take steps to correct them?

    The answer would be to change the laws, which an average citizen has no means of doing. Representatives have no interest in reasonable laws, but instead are dedicated to the conducting of business for international corporations...the ones the laws are designed to benefit, and the laws are constructed in a web designed to thwart any meaningful citizen action.

    Without a significant or transparent investigation...in fact, with enormous resistance from the Bush administration...9/11 was permitted to be the premise of several laws that override the Constitution, the Geneva Convention, and plain ol' human common sense. Protests against government are met with police in riot gear, armed with pepper spray, all the while essentially protecting corporate entities. Citizens do not have riot police or pepper spray to defend against corporate criminals. In fact, citizens have been stripped of all power. Further, citizens have been divided, cubiclized and medicated by every means from fluoride in the water to aluminum/barium from chemtrails. A compliant corporate media keeps this information from the public, while employing agents of disinformation that we might "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain".

    It is not my intention to foster feelings of hopelessness. It is my hope to generate some real thinking, rather than merely placing a band-aid on cancer, which only allows the cancer more darkness in which to fester. In all of the postings here, few had the courage to step beyond the comfortable. Regardless of this letter's outcome, it is clear that common human bonds have been broken, seriously diminishing a grass-roots solution...which is often simply sharing meaningful ideas in a civil manner. As it is, anyone reading this thread can clearly see that the threat to America is not some "terrorist out there": it is being dissolved from the inside out.

    What intelligent actions being taken to address the problem...the title of the thread...are conspicuously missing from most participant's comments. It does not bode well for any of us.

    "One act of courage invariably exposes several inactions of cowardice."


    Oh, Mr. Stokes, you are right on.That the American citizens could not charge Bush/Cheney with war crimes boggles the mind of many human beings!

    In 2011 during his Canadian visit Amnesty International was calling on the federal government to detain and investigate George W. Bush for war crimes.

    Former President George W. Bush was forced to cancel a planned trip to Switzerland over concerns of protests linked to the Bush adminstration's treatment of detainees.


    Aren't we PROUD!


    The Iraq war “has destabilized and polarized the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history,” wrote Tutu, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1984.


    DEBT: "if Rick Santorum is appointed Secretary of HHS and is now making your healthcare decisions?"

    You know, DEBT, I took a look at just a few of these "the Secretary shall" entries...and, personally, I concluded that if someone like Santorum (God forbid) were in charge of HHE, I would be happy--even grateful--that the Secretary's duties are so precisely defined.

    --the Secretary shall consult with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (referred to in this section as the ‘NAIC’), a working group composed of representatives of health insurance-related consumer advocacy organizations, health insurance issuers, health care professionals, patient advocates including those representing individuals with limited English proficiency, and other qualified individuals.

    -- ‘‘(c) PERIODIC REVIEW AND UPDATING.—The Secretary shall periodically review and update, as appropriate, the standards developed under this section.

    --‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall, by regulation, provide for the development of standards for the definitions of terms used in health insurance coverage, including the insurance-related terms described in paragraph (2) and the medical terms described in paragraph (3).

    --‘‘(C) AVAILABILITY OF REPORTS.—The Secretary shall make reports submitted under subparagraph (A) available to the public through an Internet website.

    --‘(c) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Secretary shall promulgate regulations that provide criteria for determining whether a reimbursement structure is described in subsection (a).

    --The Secretary shall make reports received under this section available to the public on the Internet website of the Department of Health and Human Services.

    --The Secretary shall award grants to States to enable such States (or the Exchanges operating in such States) to establish, expand, or provide support for—
    ‘‘(1) offices of health insurance consumer assistance; or
    ‘‘(2) health insurance ombudsman programs.

    --The Secretary shall utilize such data to identify areas where more enforcement action is necessary and shall share such information with State insurance regulators, the Secretary
    of Labor, and the Secretary of the Treasury for use in the enforcement activities of such agencies.

    --. The Secretary shall ensure the public disclosure of information on such increases and justifications for all health insurance issuers.

    -- The Secretary shall establish— (1) an appeals process to enable individuals to appeal a determination under this section; and (2) procedures to protect against waste, fraud, and abuse.

    --the Secretary shall seek to reduce the number and complexity of forms (including paper and electronic forms) and data entry required by patients and

    (Source: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act)

      Jane, there is a whole lot of right-wing websites that throw a boogie-man out there when you google up "Obamacare+Secretary shall 1000 times". Thank-you for providing more information.

        Katybug, Unfortunately, many Americans have lost the ability to think and/or reason for themselves. Any thinking person should realize that when a policy or contract is written, there will be specific guidelines for the head/leader/CEO of that created entity--without exception. For example, suppose The Elders of Calvary Baptist Church hire a new pastor; they would have him sign a contract such as this one http://www.lawmart.com/forms/agm-em14.htm. (Admittedly a poor example in my opinion.) If you open the document, hit 'crt f', type in 'pastor', you can see the word 'pastor' highlighted about 90 times in that short contract.

        So the right wing establishes many websites emphasizing a catch word or phrase; i.e., how many times the words 'the secretary ...'. The pied piper starts playing and the populace lines up and follows. Personally, it should frighten all of us that there are individuals among us so gullible as to NOT recognize this for what it is--a very subtle form of mind control.

        Thought you might enjoy this: GOPAC memo: "The comic strip Doonesbury mentions the memo in a strip, calling it the "Magna Carta of attack politics'" (wiki)

        As I mentioned in past postings, I used to vote the Republican ticket; GWB reformed me. The more the Republican Party invokes religion into the party, the less they actually practice it or set examples. McConnell, Minority Leader of the Senate, said it all! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-A09a_gHJc How can any progress be made to help the US pull itself up with The President facing a brick wall?

        Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer: "The Iraqi government is a huge disappointment. Republicans overwhelmingly feel disappointed about the Iraqi government. ~ Mitch McConnell

        Oh, really, Mitch? The US invaded a sovereign country, destroyed its infrastructure, caused its professionals (physicians, educators, etc.) to flee their homeland, and is responsible for about 100,000 or more Iraqi deaths AND McConnell is 'disappointed' in the government of Iraq? WOW!

        Katybug, I did a search on "Obamacare+Secretary shall". etc. How can a country of supposedly literate people be so taken in and made to focus on an issue which has absolutely no importance?

    Well Katy and Jane you really did outline our differences. You are comfortable with government making decisions for you and having more and more control (this is why they call it the nanny state).
    I used the words “general welfare” to see what you might take that to mean and from your responses I see it means the government handing out money to those that they think need it. I don’t think this was the intended meaning but was more for the general protection of our individual rights.
    Katybug says “Education for instance, while anyone can see the system is a mess, needs federal guidelines and standards, or else you would have whole states choosing to ignore science and skip parts of history.” Again here we have a clear difference of our opinions. I completely disagree and feel we could do much better without the Department of Education. Just think of the money that could actually go to pay teachers instead of some bureaucrat in Washington.
    So I guess we’re at the end of this conversation. You continue to advocate for bigger government and more government control and I would like to see less. I say part of the answer to Stokes question is to try to reduce the power of government. How do we do that? I have no idea when we have a certain number of people wanting to give the government more power.
    “Government never furthered any enterprise but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way” Henry David Thoreau

      More education helped people all over the world stay employed during the recession, according to the OECD. Between 2008 and 2010, unemployment rates among developed nations jumped from 8.8% to 12.5% for people with less than a high-school education and from 4.9% to 7.6% for people with only a high-school education. For those with the equivalent of a college degree or more, the jobless rate rose from 3.3% to just 4.7%. (marketwatch.com)


      Okay, I'll bite, DEBT. Give me one GOOD example of how deregulation of anything has had a long-term positive benefit.

      No help now people. I have all confidence that DEBT can give me some great examples.

      Do you have faith that Mississippi can regulate its own schools? Do you think they would reimpose segregation? If so, do you believe other southern states would follow suit? Do you advocate that yourself?

      The Top 3 Educational Systems In The World
      May 31 2012| Filed Under » Economy, Post-Secondary Education, Professional Education
      When countries across the globe entered into a period of economic recovery during 2010, it became increasingly clear that emerging nations were bouncing back far quicker than their more established Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) counterparts. For example, while the global recession of 2008 and 2009 left more than 15 million American citizens unemployed and home-owners nationwide facing the burden of negative equity, nations such as China, Korea and India found that they were experiencing rapid growth as their respective gross domestic products (GDP) soared.

      It was generally accepted that this was because these developing nations were less damaged by the original financial crisis, as they were not encumbered with significant debt before the events of 2008. Not only this, but countries such as China and India did not officially enter a period of recession, and instead suffered solely from diminished economic growth. However, nations that experienced a quicker than expected economic recovery also performed outstandingly well in the World Education Rankings released in 2010, which suggests a correlation between prospering economies and financial sectors with strong teaching systems. http://www.investopedia.com/articles/professionaleducation/12/top-educational-systems.asp#ixzz28ovawdxU

      No, DEBT, I am NOT comfortable with anyone making my decisions or having control of my life. I do have sense enough to realize in a country with a population of 311,591,917 (2011), there needs to be rules and regulations. Do I like all of them? NO. For example, I hate completing tax forms and having to submit them before 15 April but I do understand the need. I don't like paying car insurance, but I do understand the need. When I was a Kaiser member, I had to show my ID card AND a picture ID; I didn't like fishing my driving license out every time, but I understand why they request it. Most educated people do understand that in order for society to survive, laws and procedures need to be in place--even with rules in place, look at the number of people who attempt to abuse, circumvent, or outright defy them. You are most welcome to interrupt that as my accepting a 'nanny state' if you so choose. I know better.

      Your acceptance of some source or sources telling you that the number of times that "the Secretary shall" appears in the ACA document is somehow wrong, evil or dictatorial and your criticism of the figure (1000) only proves one thing--you accept being controlled, and these very same sources are working overtime to convenience you that is your government--not them--who is attempting to control you.

    My sincere thanks to katybugs, Jane8, IDF (Imdebtfree) and the others who exhibited a civil tone, and contributed to the actual topic...of which, we see, many branches stem from. Often our differences outline an unconsidered aspect: being able to agree on that aspect is really good progress.

    When I saw IDF mention Socialism, I, too, stopped in my tracks, but quickly realised he (he?) was using that as only an example. However, the incident points out how 'emotional prompt words' work to immediately and subliminally sway opinion. Smart people don't fall for that.

    I submit that the real crux of our social problems right now are the dysfunctions of a money system. By its very design, a money system cannot work without provisions for those who refuse to bend to it, those who do not understand it, and those who manage to live without it. I'm sure many will agree that the money system primarily controls the population, and to retain that control, the welfare state is necessary.

    Ours is a system of haves and have-nots. It's a wide spectrum: Hopi Traditionalists still don't care for the trappings of technology, and we can see the Amish refuse much of modern lifestyles. I remember reading in letters, some time ago, that "liberals were going to take our air conditioners away from us!" What a life-priority.

    It's a very thick problem we face today, which requires some real courage, give-and-take, and ultimately unity to overcome. Agree to disagree, good. Simply float along and hope it will be alright: bad.

    Each of us has a part of the answer. It takes many colors to make a complete rainbow.

    I again thank those of you who care enough to conduct an intelligent exchange. If minds are thinking independently, yet with a common goal, there's hope. When minds slam shut, there's a mental lock-down. When that happens, only guards have the keys.

    And it's all about prisons: how to prevent them from infecting and controlling all life. This includes how we think and live. When we accept what is truly unacceptable, by proxy we acquiesce another "feather".

    What you accept, you teach.

    The Patriot Act created a federal crime of "domestic" terrorism, and the definition is broad enough to worry many activist organizations: "…acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of criminal laws" if they "appear to be intended to influence the policy of a government…" Could mass protests fit this definition? Acts of civil disobedience? Strikes? In addition, the Justice Department admitted recently that many of the provisions of the Patriot Act which allow greater opportunities for surveillance, search, and seizure are now being used on domestic cases with no connection to terrorism.

    Congress has, in other words, handed the government broad powers, free of the usual checks and balances, which it is permitted to exercise in almost total secrecy. Why does the government want this? Clearly, it has a chilling effect on dissent…which allows the government to wage wars, defend corporate profits, and attack entitlements at will. The government seeks further expansion of its powers in the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, also known as Patriot Act II. Attorney General Ashcroft says extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. The administration says the war on terrorism may last for years.



    THIS is the kind of courage needed to accomplish huge change. It still exists within us all.

    "The strength of the Final Solution was its secrecy," Vrba told the Ottawa Citizen last year. "I escaped to break that belief that it was not possible. And to stop more killings."


    "They call themselves the Cabal**, self-mockingly, In the past year, according to former and present Bush Administration officials, their operation, which was conceived by Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, has brought about a crucial change of direction in the American intelligence community. These advisers and analysts, who began their work in the days after September 11, 2001, have produced a skein of intelligence reviews that have helped to shape public opinion and American policy toward Iraq. They relied on data gathered by other intelligence agencies and also on information provided by the Iraqi National Congress, or I.N.C., the exile group headed by Ahmad Chalabi. By last fall, the operation rivalled both the C.I.A. and the Pentagon’s own Defense Intelligence Agency, the D.I.A., as President Bush’s main source of intelligence regarding Iraq’s possible possession of weapons of mass destruction and connection with Al Qaeda. As of last week, no such weapons had been found. And although many people, within the Administration and outside it, profess confidence that something will turn up, the integrity of much of that intelligence is now in question.

    "W. Patrick Lang, the former chief of Middle East intelligence at the D.I.A., said, “The Pentagon has banded together to dominate the government’s foreign policy, and they’ve pulled it off. They’re running Chalabi. The D.I.A. has been intimidated and beaten to a pulp. And there’s no guts at all in the C.I.A.

    "There was a close personal bond, too, between Chalabi and Wolfowitz and Perle, dating back many years. Their relationship deepened after the Bush Administration took office, and Chalabi’s ties extended to others in the Administration, including Rumsfeld; Douglas Feith, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy; and I. Lewis Libby, Vice-President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff. For years, Chalabi has had the support of prominent members of the American Enterprise Institute and other conservatives. Chalabi had some Democratic supporters, too, including James Woolsey, the former head of the C.I.A.

    "There was another level to Chalabi’s relationship with the United States: in the mid-nineteen-nineties, the C.I.A. was secretly funnelling millions of dollars annually to the I.N.C. Those payments ended around 1996, a former C.I.A. Middle East station chief told me, essentially because the agency had doubts about Chalabi’s integrity. (In 1992, Chalabi was convicted in absentia of bank fraud in Jordan. He has always denied any wrongdoing.) “You had to treat them with suspicion,” another former Middle East station chief said of Chalabi’s people. “The I.N.C. has a track record of manipulating information because it has an agenda. It’s a political unit—not an intelligence agency.


    The Pentagon, first time in its history, created its own 'intelligence apparatus' and the U.S. and Iraq were at its mercy.

    **A cabal is a group of people united in some close design together, usually to promote their private views or interests in a church, state, or other community, often by intrigue. Cabals are sometimes secret societies composed of a few designing persons.

    Mr. Stokes, Were you aware of this network operating from within the walls of our Pentagon? Few people were. I remember telling my son when I heard GWB was running,,,"not good",: And when I heard his selection of Cheney and Rumsfeld...I told my son...mark my words, they WILL destroy us. Our respect in the world community is gone.

    "This time the implications are far more damaging for the White House, which stands accused of politicising and contaminating its own source of intelligence.

    "According to former Bush officials, all defence and intelligence sources, senior administration figures created a shadow agency of Pentagon analysts staffed mainly by ideological amateurs to compete with the CIA and its military counterpart, the Defence Intelligence Agency.

    "The agency, called the Office of Special Plans (OSP), was set up by the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to second-guess CIA information and operated under the patronage of hardline conservatives in the top rungs of the administration, the Pentagon and at the White House, including Vice-President Dick Cheney.

    "The ideologically driven network functioned like a shadow government, much of it off the official payroll and beyond congressional oversight. But it proved powerful enough to prevail in a struggle with the State Department and the CIA by establishing a justification for war.

    "Mr Tenet has officially taken responsibility for the president's unsubstantiated claim in January that Saddam Hussein's regime had been trying to buy uranium in Africa, but he also said his agency was under pressure to justify a war that the administration had already decided on." http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jul/17/iraq.usa

    I admire Colin Powell. I am in awe of him and believe with all my being that he would have made a great president; he is an honest/quality human but, sadly, he salutes.

    I meet George Tenet only one time in my life, and I cannot help to wonder what the Bush/Cheney administration had on this man to get him to kow tow to their demands because he doesn't appear to be a man one could easily coerce.

    The Nation magazine was way ahead of the mainstream back in the Chalibi days, revealing his history and what the government would try to do. After 9/11, for many years I wrote...and had published...a letter every month in the NVD, trying to present facts, to motivate people to ask questions. While my reseach and views were dismissed as 'conspiracy theory", it all comes up now as true, and a matter of public record. George H.W. Bush personally put Saddam Hussein in power. A Bush family member can be tired directly to oil, war, and the deaths of over one million Iraqis since the first invasion there. No one cared. Not enough to speak out.

    I still have newspaper clippings from 2001 up to 2006: the story is out there fully, right in public view, but fragmented. One sequence over a period of weeks shows the same men dressed as "liberated Iraqis", who then are among the 300 selected for the Hussein statue-toppling photo-op, and then later as Iraqi soldiers. Doing any real research takes away from Facebook and football, so America is ignoring itself to death. If it makes them feel uncomfortable, they dismiss it.

    This letter was my final attempt to prompt some thinking through the NVD. I have submitted one more regarding a light-hearted matter, and then I'm done trying to help, in this manner. I do appreciate those who went to bat and got bases loaded :)

    The Muslim world does not "hate our freedom". It hates that we invaded and poisoned their world. It hates that we allow...and arm...Israel to commit genocide in Gaza, but hold a microscope to Iran...coincidentally the next largest world oil reserve...rattling the same, tired "WMD" banner.

    I have dealt with the intelligence community for several years, ironically some are clients of mine. The incidents of alcoholism among them is very high, because once you get into that racket, there's no getting out. So it's their only form of escape. The system is eroding itself from the inside out. It's just a matter of time before we see the results of this "Great Experiment". And when that day comes, we will each see how we treated each other.

    I remind readers my website is available by clicking on my avatar. I will not be participating on the NVD website much longer. My thanks to those who showed kindness and intelligence.

      "I" don't believe you should give up participating. I might even believe a certain few I've seen here need a long walk off a short pier, but after they swim back to shore, come on back...simply for the silent readers that through the bickering back and forth may find a gleam of information they didn't see before. Maybe a view they hadn't considered. (sometimes even myself).

      Maybe I'm not old enough yet to believe all hope for us is lost, or maybe I'm just crazy LOL! But you still shouldn't stop participating.

        It seems you can spam and troll without any restraint on this forum, but posting replies with some serious oomph yeilds a notice stating: "awaiting approval from the blog owner". Selective editing leads me to understand the true nature of this forum.

        I accept that the Daily is a business, and as such some of its stories, presented as news, are actually promotions for businesses. Glowing testimonials are permitted, hard facts to the contrary await "editing by the blog owner".

        The trolls here assure that a cesspool environment is maintained to their comfort. They wallow on the floor because they cannot rise above their own filth.

        I'm grateful the Daily still prints Letters.

        Ultimately, these letters and replies find their way down The Memory Hole, and to retrive them costs a few dollars. Again, I respect that the Daily is a business.

        I don't see this as a viable media for conducting human affairs of long-term meaningfulness: it is more a slow-motion Facebook site that allows temporary feel-good abuse. I have been honored to exchange ideas with some very intelligent folks here. It is a shame that this environment harbors and condones psychopathic behavior.

        You get what you pay for.


    Years ago I posted the above-mentioned Iraqi men on a website. It is available here:

    (I took over this website last year. Feel free to take advantage of the Public Access forum).

    What can I say about someone whose life is a Pied Piper excursion now totally out of control, appearing to be a series of one-act plays featuring conspiracies of every flavor and unsolved mysteries dominated by thought control aliens hovering above us in their flying saucers.

    And now you're promoting 9/11 conspiracies? You gotta be kidding. Both sides of your mouth must be exhausted.

    3.) Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.

    5.) Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

    18.) Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'


    In just under four years, the 9/11 “truth movement” championed by Royster Stokes has ground to a halt. Apart from the fundamental incoherence of their theories, the downfall of the 9/11 denier juggernaut was good old-fashioned skepticism at its finest, the kind that conjures visions of James Randi challenging psychics and faith healers on their home turfs and winning. Skeptics are better at their jobs than they think, and its important to give credit where credit is due.

    Staking their fortunes almost solely on Internet-based content may have been the 9/11 deniers’ (and Stokes) biggest mistake. What seems like a perfect place for pseudoscience — the Internet is un-edited, without fact-checkers or minimum publishing standards of any kind — also became a perfect place for a rapid-response system of blogs and forums to fight back. Drawing on the freely available technical information from the NIST, FEMA, and academic journals which most colleges let their students access for free, skeptical sites like




    are able to defuse 9/11 denier claims as they arise.

    Living rent free between Stokes ears.

    My bad. These cut and paste links should work:



    Up Next; Little Green Men In UFO's

    Siege of ‘Little Green Men’: The 1955 Kelly, Kentucky, Incident


    ...complete with gunshots, aliens in trees, aliens on the roof, police investigations, white lghtning, eleven witnesses (counting those hiding under their beds)


    The International Military Tribunal for Germany
    Contents of The Nuremberg Trials Collection


    Here ya go Stokes. Now don't come back bothering everybody with specious arguments about America becoming a Nazi State until you have read every document, especially the four volumes concerning Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression (The Red Set).

    "First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for the communist and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionists.

    Then they came for me -

    and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Pastor Niemoeler (victim of the Nazis)

      RAS: Comment October 11, 2012 11:46 PM

      Pastor Stokes, You must know that most people have 'to walk in the shoes' before they can relate to the pain. For example, the man who wrote the poem you cited was a national conservative and initially a supporter of Adolf Hitler.

    Dear Goofus "I Get No Respect For My Conspiracy Theory" Doofus,

    ·- it must take a great deal of effort to sustain the illusion that you are something eternally separate from the rest of the universe.

    ·- will you be opening my mind to some kind of third eye?

    ·- will you be telling me from which Native American tribe I am reincarnated?

    ·- will I reach that blissful Zen state promised by those other charlatans from your cult?

    ·- will I achieve real world joy and existential clarity when I can understand your baffelgab?

    ·- will I master Zazen while my wet fingers touch wall outlets?

    ·- will the Lotus position overcome skeptical minds that deny flying saucer existence?
    ·- will a dreamy fantasy state distract us from your inane connect-the-dots proofs?

    Worst of all, your demeaning usage of the wisdom gleaned by other truly wise men who actually experienced the Holocaust as support for your lunatic conspiracy theories. Have you no shame?

    The only real enlightenment is to realize you are a complete rat-herding Pied Piper phony.

    Unless we, as a people, are willing to review history, and expose the tamperings of society, there is no point hashing about the political landscape today. Today’s politics are founded on a long line of population mind and behavior control, and the control will continue so long as people’s personal comforts are more important than facing the hard truths. The falsehoods revealed already…Pearl Harbor, Gulf Of Tonkin, eugenics, government experiments on citizens, 9/11... should be enough for a society to take notice, but instead, excuses are manufactured, science neatly explains it all away, and “familiar” comfort appears to be retained. Nothing changes.

    As long as people refuse to accept…by ignoring or denial…that psychopathic individuals are running the asylum, then expecting any change from the very politician spokespersons FOR the psychopaths is just as insane as the crimes we speak against. Even when groups are courageous enough to face the truths, they are often unwilling to accept the remedies and work necessary to correct centuries of an abused humanity. “We GAVE peace a chance!” an impatient, war-mongering public was heard to cry. So war continued, stimulating a war-based economy. How many years do we expect to prosper by enabling a killing industry? How sustainable is denial? How much poison can we put into the atmosphere and expect no consequences?

    How can continuing the same old path possibly bring about any change?


    The Mendacity of Mitt Romney Lying To The Teabillies

    As of Friday 10-12-2012, the number of Mitt Romney lies has reached 804, listed here chronologically, Including reference source web links.


Copyright © The Northern Virginia Daily | nvdaily.com | 152 N. Holliday St., Strasburg, Va. 22657 | (800) 296-5137