Hey Admin

[rsquirell]

This one's for admin...who loves statistics. I found an article about a computer model which predicts a bush win...for what it's worth. (One of my applicants was a PhD math-type who did a lot of modeling for political parties...and he said," Statistics are my business...and statistics lie. You can get statistics to support nearly any position you wish to support depending on how you "massage" the data.") After last night's defeat of the Yankees by the RedSox (coming back after being 3 down to win the pennant) a lot of bookies have lost faith in statistics. So hozabout it....can we post our vids? Elections are, indeed, exciting.

[rsquirell]

Hmmmm....I typed in "John Zogby muslim" into google...and found the first two posts...one referring to James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute critcizing his fellow muslims....and the next, talking about James Zogby's brother, John, conducting a survey in palestine. I also typed in "Ralph Nader muslim" and ran into nothing but articles about the ADL labeling him as anti-semetic...and him being the darling of the American Muslim community...getting 26% of their vote (56% are going with Kerry). Perhaps I appologized too soon, but, as I said... their religion really doesn't make any difference. On the lighter side...go to www.jibjab.com for some really funny stuff.

[ormonde]

The "Jibjab" stuff is pretty hilarious. I remember when the "This Land is Your Land" first came out. The funniest part is when Hillary catches Bill with Monica and slaps him...

[megamachine]

I hate to push this, but your sources are either dead wrong or confused. Zogby and Nader have both often proudly identified themselves as Lebanese Christians and the sons of immigrants. They were part of the early wave of Arab immigrants to the US, most of which were Syrian and Lebanese Christians fleeing the Ottoman (Muslim) Empire. You'd be surprised at who else came out of that Diaspora (Jamie Farr, Klinger of MASH fame, or Casey Kasem, the American top 40 host, plus a few congressmen). If you watch Zogby's TV show, he mentions his heritage frequently, and Nader's website gives his bio background. While they both might support, perhaps ironically, some Muslim causes today, and they both are pro-Palestine (along with Farr and Kasem), that doesn't make them Muslims. In fact, it's in some ways an Arab Christian thing to do for them, if religion and ethnicity enter into it all (they needn't), because what many Americans don't know is that there are several large Christian communities in Palestine today (who do you think lives in Bethlehem and Nazarath, not to mention parts of Jerusalem), which is often obscured behind recent headlines screaming about Islamic terrorism and Muslim fanatics. But I do agree, religion need not enter into this at all.

[megamachine]

BTW, jibjab is great fun, LOL.

[megamachine]

Back to Libya for a moment, during the 1970s Qaddafi supported the American Indian Movement and the Black Panthers in the US, and the Palestine Liberation Organization in the Mideast, all of which were secular nationalist outfits. Qaddafi's an opportunist, and knows a good opportunity when he sees it, as you pointed out. He is no doubt being rewarded handsomely for his recent ascenion to the "axis of good." His religion has nothing to do with any of this. And by the way, regarding Bin Laden, you are right, Palestine was low on his list of grievances, precisely because, in his eyes, it was not an Islamic cause since, a) many Palestinians are Christians, and b) the PLO was pushing secular nationalism. So, in Bin Laden's case, religion is a factor, but being Arab, to him, matters much less. It's not that these factors don't matter - they do - but the problem is they are quite often conflated or confused.

[ormonde]

"So, in Bin Laden's case, religion is a factor, but being Arab, to him, matters much less."

Just so it is clear on who has supported these guys. Al Qaeda is an outgrowth of a phenomenon that was originally called "Al Afghani" also known as "The Muslim Brotherhood" founded again by Al Afghani. This organization became a toy (an asset) of the British Imperial Intelligence Service whose goal it was to control them. Then, in the 1980's George H.W. Bush cut a deal with these guys for the sake of the religious defense of Islam against the communists of Russia to defend Afghanistan (a Muslim nation). They were able to convince all of the local religious figures (the Mullahs) to sign on to this venture. After the Gulf War against Iraq, the U.S. and Britain decided to dump these killers - to turn them loose but not to take responsibility for them. So now it is coming back to haunt us unfortunately.

[rsquirell]

Don't forget Danny Thomas and Marlo Thomas...in the 1950's Beirut was a seaside resort known as " the Paris of the Eastern Med"...but then a spark ignited between the Christians and the Muslims...and that place has looked like a hellhole ever since. Funny, I never thought of the Christians in the region as "Arab"...but if they self-identify so be it. Given the hatred between the 2 groups, I wonder what James Zogby was trying to accomplish when he chastized the American Muslims for not condeming 911 ( they're not going to listen to him)...or whether he was talking over their heads to the American People to say "we are not those guys". Like the Mooamar, Sadam used terrorist groups for surrogates, as well. The kidnapping of the OPEC Oil Ministers in Geneva ( operation contracted by Sadam to jack oil prices up) was carried out by the PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine)...but Carlos, the Jackel, double crossed Sadam when he didn't kill the Saudi Prince as ordered, but accepted a bribe to release him in Algeria instead. The "terrorist states" all used surrogates ( which really turned my radar on when it was disclosed the head of Iraqi Intelligence had met with Atar in Prague prior to 911)...but the USSR was also using the terrorist states as surrogates (look at all the AK-47s and RPGs in the region) in their cold war effort against the west. But. then again, Bill Clinton's mentor at Georgetown, Carroll Quigley, in his book "Tragedy and Hope" points out that Wall Street Bankers had funded world communism, and were using the USSR as a surrogate...and those Wall Street Bankers were, themselves, surrogates to a myriad of "shadow groups" he identified as the Trilateral Commission, Council of Foriegn Relations (CFR), Bildebergers, and a host of others...all of whom were conforming to the anglophile New World Order Cecil Rhodes had espoused ( and Quigley supported). But people often get "hoisted by their own pitard"...just ask Russia after Beslam and the Moscow Theater tragedies. Noone expected a bunch of radical Islamists who are still hung up on the Crusades to throw a monkey wrench into their grand scheme. Since they've taken over states, those states have to be neutralized...and then, after there are no more "safe harbors" for them to operate in, they have to be rooted out, one by one, of society as a whole. Until the terror sponsoring states have been converted the effort has to be a military one. Afterwards it becomes an intelligence/police matter. You can't put the cart before the horse. But let's not sidetrack this thread with the intricacies of MiddleEastern politics. Speaking of Clinton...guess who's in the news...

[rsquirell]

Now I don't want to use "scare tactics" ...but this election boils down to two simple choices. 1) Vote for Bush, and keep your constitution with its Bill of Rights (read Free Speech) or (2) Vote for Kerry who will suppress opposing thought, subjugate your constitution to the whims of the UN making the US but one of many member states....and controlled by, guess who, Bill Clinton...who gets elected Secretary General by the Socialist Totalitarian dictatorships who comprise the vast majority of UN members. Bill Clinton....King of the World.

[ormonde]

"and controlled by, guess who, Bill Clinton...who gets elected Secretary"

According to a recent interview that I heard (yesterday) form Richard Holbrook, that possibility is not likely to happen...

[rsquirell]

Yeah, sure....but that's precisely the scenario Cecil Rhodes and Carroll Quigley envisioned for establishing the anglophile New World Order. I take it that with admins silence on the matter, and the fact he hasn't shut this thread down, he's given his tacit approval for us to post our vids....he can't openly say so because he doesn't want the site to appear to endorse anyone or anything...but I believe he's curious what people are thinking (and what we got)...and if everyone remembers that the posts only reflect the poster's opinions...and are not endorsed as the site's opinion, that it's OK.

[rsquirell]

Still no comment...soooo...http://s3.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=40...3412A8F13E6AEB This is what happened the last time we elected an Anti-American Anti-War Activist/Traitor President of the United States. Like Ormonde's comments about Sinclaire's airing of "Stolen Honor", Questions about Clinton's past were called "Republican Dirty Tricks" by both the Washington Post and Time magazine. But a candidates past is an indication of his future...it's his core which shapes his character. Although I didn't do any research of the content...this documentary is well documented...mostly from the Congressional Record...so if anyone has questions as to the content, just ask. All I did was connect the dots.

[ormonde]

rsquirell

Another reason I believe that Clinton would not fill the "Secretary General's" position at the UN is because it would create an enormous conflict of interest if (Kerry is not elected this year) but Hillary decides to take a stab at the White House in 2008 (I know she would most likely not get elected). However, there might be a good possibility that she would be the Democratic front-runner and be nominated by the party. I don't think that would set too well if her husband was heading up the UN.

[rsquirell]

Imagine the scenario...Bill gets elected Secretary General in '06...and Hillary takes the White House in '08. Bill says,"give me my country back"...Hill says,"No...it's mine"...give it to me...no it's mine, give it to me. You dems have a humerous view of the world.

[ormonde]

"You dems have a humerous view of the world."

Don't count me in the "Dems" camp completely - as I'm always tittering on the edge of political persuasion...