PDA

View Full Version : Has this Forum been Completely De-Fanged?




acptulsa
01-04-2016, 02:50 PM
The enemy of my enemy is my friend. And the friend of my enemy is my enemy.

I am tired of playing defense. The powers that be drive wedges, and we attempt to rush in and heal the rift. We can't do it fast enough. The nation is divided and we are conquered. Now, it's a month to Iowa and where are we, for all our twelve years of attempting to bridge the gaps they have created? Have we figured out yet that the best defense is a good offense?

They are masters. They know what buttons to push. But that isn't why they're masters. They're masters because they know what buttons not to push. We have attempted before to unify the American people by driving a wedge between them and the Head Psychotics in Charge. But most people have quite the herd mentality. And the last thing the herd wants to hear is that the top dog doesn't give a shit about any other member of the pack. Especially when the Top Dog is so good at making most every member of the pack feel oh so special and oh so appreciated.

But they also like to bite off more than they can chew. Being greedy, miserly bastards, the powers that be like to do many things with one investment. Take ISIS, for example.

Ask one of us, and you will hear that ISIS was created to give us a boogeyman to keep us too scared to question authority, or to allow a defense authorization to go unapproved. And so it was. But if you ask Syria, ISIS was created to depose Assad because we were too sick of war to stand idly by while the president send the Army and Marine Corps in to do it. And if you ask Iran, ISIS was created to do Saudi Arabia's dirty work. These things, too, are true. ISIS was the one stone created to kill three birds.

ISIS is our enemy. Try to convince someone otherwise. I dare you. I'd say it's like pulling teeth to convince a typical American that ISIS is something besides an enemy to every civilized human on the planet. But people pay dentists big bucks to pull their teeth. No one wants to hear anything good about ISIS at all.

ISIS is also Iran's enemy. Which makes it Saudi Arabia's friend. And Saudi Arabia is a friend to ISIS. I'm willing to bet proof of their collusion can be found, too. Which makes Saudi Arabia an enemy of the United States of America, and everyone in it.

And that makes every politician who ever kissed the Saudi ring an enemy to the United States of America, and everyone in it.

There are certain advantages to pushing this line. There are things that make it easy to put this over--far, far easier than some of the things we've tried before. There are things that we will accomplish if we put this thing over.

One of the things that makes this relatively easy to do is the fact that Saudi Arabia has one nasty government. They persecute, cane, and even behead Christians, for example. Can anyone say evangelicals? Another is that Saudi Arabia was the major force behind OPEC, and everyone old enough to remember the shock of first seeing gasoline being sold for the ridiculously high price of 50.9 cents a gallon has never trusted that government. Can anyone say The Senior Vote?

One of the things we would accomplish by demonizing them is that we would give the right wing and the left wing something in common. Oh, each may be convinced that the other hates Saudi Arabia for all the wrong reasons--that their persecution of Christians does not compare with their persecution of women, for example. But as long as they have a common enemy, it's all good. We could suddenly get conservatives watching the Michael Moore flick Fahrenheit 9/11. Not so long ago, that could never have happened, but Jeb has done us the favor of making the Bush family more or less irrelevant to Republican Team Players. I remember that Republicans would continue to defend Nixon right through the seventies, but by the Reagan Era, they were actually happy to throw the old bastard to the wolves. I say the time has come when Republicans will no longer stir themselves to defend the illiterate dunce. Obama has kissed the Saudi Royal Ring since then.

That means the time is right.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. By the same token, the friend of my enemy is my enemy. And Saudi Arabia is a friend to ISIS. Which makes any politician who kisses the Saudi Royal Ring my enemy.

This is a simple concept. If we were to meme it with the same sort of vengeance with which we put things over eight years ago, we could insert this into the national conversation. We don't want to put it out there specifically as a selling point for Rand Paul. Quite the opposite. It wouldn't be good salesmanship. Good salesmanship is putting the whole jigsaw puzzle together except for the last one or two pieces, then telling the person who came along and idly put those last pieces in what a genius they are for completing that whole puzzle. All we need to do is drive a wedge. If Saudi Arabia is suddenly and incontrovertibly the enemy of the United States of America, then every politician who ever kissed the Saudi Royal Ring (whether literally or just figuratively, by saying things in support of that nation) is our enemy. And that's most of them.

Think about it. At first glance, this might seem a silly-assed game. But talking about Ron Paul's eyebrows or Rand Paul's curly hair are silly-assed games, too. Yet with an uninformed, distracted, silly-assed electorate, shit like this works. This won't raise the defenses of Americans, because Americans have no vested interest in Saudi Arabia at all. This won't have Americans defensively thinking, 'Oh, this conspiracy couldn't have been going on because I could never have overlooked all the clues,' because it's a collusion that was presumably happening halfway around the world. It taps into the growing dissatisfaction with the situation we are in, and gives people a litmus test they can trust. It might raise horror over expensive gas, but with gas at a buck and a half a gallon I don't think that's such a raw nerve right now. People might even decide that's a risk worth taking for the sake of their nation and their future.

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that the only thing that could keep this from driving a wedge between the American people and most of their politicians is our inability--or unwillingness--to jump in with both feet and put it over. You might say it's too remote a thing to have a major impact. I say that's the beauty of it--every time we make a direct, full frontal assault on the herd's love for those who slaughter them like sheep, we trigger their defenses. This isn't saying that there's something horribly wrong with the land that we love, this is saying there's something horribly wrong with Saudi Arabia, and we had better find out who among us loves Saudi Arabia too much and keep them out of power. Defenses avoided. I also say that it's a month to Iowa, and we have nothing to lose.

We can do this. Or, at least, there was a time this forum could do this. Are we de-fanged? Or are we red-blooded, freedom-loving American human beings with fight enough left in our guts to spare?

Rad
01-04-2016, 03:05 PM
I agree! It is getting late in the election cycle. People are about to vote.

Rand should've read the 28 pages in Congress: "Rand Paul urged President Obama to declassify 28 additional pages of the 9/11 commission’s report on Tuesday, but made clear that he does not intend to exercise his constitutional prerogative as a senator and read the pages on the floor of Congress – yet."
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/02/rand-paul-urges-obama-to-declassify-28-pages-of-the-911-report

This is the only way I could think that would turn the tables on his detractors. I don't understand why he didn't take it and run with it. What stopped him?

LibertyEagle
01-04-2016, 03:08 PM
I agree! It is getting late in the election cycle. People are about to vote.

Rand should've read the 28 pages in Congress: "Rand Paul urged President Obama to declassify 28 additional pages of the 9/11 commission’s report on Tuesday, but made clear that he does not intend to exercise his constitutional prerogative as a senator and read the pages on the floor of Congress – yet."
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/02/rand-paul-urges-obama-to-declassify-28-pages-of-the-911-report

This is the only way I could think that would turn the tables on his detractors. I don't understand why he didn't take it and run with it. What stopped him?

If they are classified, does he have the prerogative to release them to the public?

tsai3904
01-04-2016, 03:15 PM
I agree! It is getting late in the election cycle. People are about to vote.

Rand should've read the 28 pages in Congress: "Rand Paul urged President Obama to declassify 28 additional pages of the 9/11 commission’s report on Tuesday, but made clear that he does not intend to exercise his constitutional prerogative as a senator and read the pages on the floor of Congress – yet."
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/02/rand-paul-urges-obama-to-declassify-28-pages-of-the-911-report

This is the only way I could think that would turn the tables on his detractors. I don't understand why he didn't take it and run with it. What stopped him?

He only has access to the documents in a secured room. He's not allowed to bring in any staff members or electronic devices, let alone leave the room with the documents.

specsaregood
01-04-2016, 03:18 PM
I agree! It is getting late in the election cycle. People are about to vote.

Rand should've read the 28 pages in Congress: "Rand Paul urged President Obama to declassify 28 additional pages of the 9/11 commission’s report on Tuesday, but made clear that he does not intend to exercise his constitutional prerogative as a senator and read the pages on the floor of Congress – yet."
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/02/rand-paul-urges-obama-to-declassify-28-pages-of-the-911-report

This is the only way I could think that would turn the tables on his detractors. I don't understand why he didn't take it and run with it. What stopped him?

Seeing as when they read the papers in the vault, they are not allowed any aids, electronics or pen and paper, how do you propose he reads those 28pages in congress? Are you assuming he has a photographic memory? Or are you simply proposing that he paraphrase the contents, release classified materials, have no hardcopy of which to back up his statements and deal with the fallout and repercussions?

Rad
01-04-2016, 03:29 PM
Those are valid points. He does have the prerogative according to the article like Mike Gravel did with the Pentagon Papers. He would need some brave angel to get a copy of it.

There are the wikileaks cables.
"More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaida, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups," says a secret December 2009 paper signed by the US secretary of state. Her memo urged US diplomats to redouble their efforts to stop Gulf money reaching extremists in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

"Donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide," she said.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/05/wikileaks-cables-saudi-terrorist-funding

GunnyFreedom
01-04-2016, 03:33 PM
Saudi Arabia is more of an enemy than Iran IMHO. That's not to say Iran isn't bad, but it is to say that Saudi Arabia is really bad. Five will get you 20 the Saudi Royal Family had more to do with 9/11 than all of the people in Iran combined.

acptulsa
01-04-2016, 03:34 PM
He couldn't release that stuff. And I'm not entirely sure he should.

9/11 is a can of worms. It's a two-edged sword which is as likely to cut he who wields it as whom it is aimed at.

I'm glad you brought it up, though, Rad. Because that's part of the beauty of this. What I am suggesting is not trying to reopen tht can of worms. But that can of worms is yet another thing, like female mutiltion, like OPEC, that gives it weight.

Those nineteen hijackers were Saudis. They were. And most people remember that, in the back of their minds. Which means 9/11 will give this strategy weight. And we don't even have to reopen that can of worms to make that can of worms work for us on this, because we don't have to remind people of those nineteen Saudis. Many people remember them.

The synergy of this thing is striking. Even if we only do it to prove we can still stir the pot, the fact is that there are layers in this thing. It could surprise us. It could develop a weight and momentum of its own.

What good does it do us to kiss the Saudi ring? It gives us access to air bases we can use to attack ISIS? Who's stupid enough to attack ISIS from a nation which supports it? Where's the advantage if they're calling ISIS as soon as we take off, and telling them how many planes took off and which direction they went?

And why should we be happy the Saudis are selling us oil if they're enabling ISIS to cut us off from all the other oil in the whole of the Middle East?

I see a lot of potential and no downsides. This is a way to tar and feather the neocons without triggering the cognitive dissonance which has foiled us all these past twelve years.

If we over-think it, we blow it. This is just this simple: 'I don't support Carson because he supports Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Arabia supports ISIS.

We can't play a proper game of chess against the neocons if we can't even see that Saudi Arabia is their Queen.

specsaregood
01-04-2016, 03:36 PM
Those are valid points. He does have the prerogative according to the article like Mike Gravel did with the Pentagon Papers. He would need some brave angel to get a copy of it.

There are the wikileaks cables.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/05/wikileaks-cables-saudi-terrorist-funding

Yes, there are the wikileak cables, which the public and media has had access to for years now... And the public doesn't give a shit and it made not one difference. So why should he go out on a limb and release classified material if the public has already decided they don't care? Just trying to see why he should take such a risk. It was a different era when Gravel read the pentagon papers, I'm not so sure things would have gone the same for him nowadays.

Speaking of which, the Supreme Court said Gravel would not have been protected:


That clause provides that "for any Speech or Debate in either House, [a Senator or Representative] shall not be questioned in any other Place", meaning that Gravel could not be prosecuted for anything said on the Senate floor, and, by extension, for anything entered to the Congressional Record, allowing the papers to be publicly read without threat of a treason trial and conviction. When Gravel's request was reviewed by the Supreme Court, the Court denied to extend this protection to Gravel or his legislative aide, Leonard Rodberg, because the grand jury subpoena served on them related to a third party rather than any act they themselves committed for the preparation of materials later entered into the Congressional Record. Nevertheless, the grand jury investigation was halted, and the publication of the papers was never prosecuted
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers#Leak

Ronin Truth
01-04-2016, 03:47 PM
I've slept since then. When was it again, that it was fanged?

DFF
01-04-2016, 05:01 PM
Acptulsa, everything you say at this forum is bullshit.

You should've been flushed down the toilet years ago along with a group of other like-minded losers.

acptulsa
01-04-2016, 05:07 PM
I've slept since then. When was it again, that it was fanged?

It flew a blimp. It got the He Who Must Not Be Named phenomenon parodied on Comedy Central.

Unfortunately, some of the things we could have done in those days didn't happen, because people could not see the value of it. For example, if we had gotten Huckabee enough votes in 2008 to deny McCain the nomination and force a brokered convention, who knows what would have happened? It would have made history.

I fear this is one of those things. Maybe not. Maybe Republican primary voters wouldn't rule out candidates because they kiss the Saudi ring. But I think it could well happen, if we make a good run at it. And that would put a real hurt on a number of chumps.

Only one way to find out, people.


Acptulsa, everything you say at this forum is bullshit.

You should've been flushed down the toilet years ago along with a group of other like-minded losers.

Thank you for endorsing Saudi Arabia. I have seldom received higher praise. I could not possibly consider condemnation from the devil himself to be a more glowing endorsement. Have your neg rep back and have a nice day.

LibertyEagle
01-04-2016, 05:16 PM
I've slept since then. When was it again, that it was fanged?

It was in between you trying to convince everyone not to vote, TruthWarrior.

Ronin Truth
01-04-2016, 05:22 PM
It was in between you trying to convince everyone not to vote, TruthWarrior.

Did it work?

Ronin Truth
01-04-2016, 05:24 PM
It flew a blimp. It got the He Who Must Not Be Named phenomenon parodied on Comedy Central.

Unfortunately, some of the things we could have done in those days didn't happen, because people could not see the value of it. For example, if we had gotten Huckabee enough votes in 2008 to deny McCain the nomination and force a brokered convention, who knows what would have happened? It would have made history.

I fear this is one of those things. Maybe not. Maybe Republican primary voters wouldn't rule out candidates because they kiss the Saudi ring. But I think it could well happen, if we make a good run at it. And that would put a real hurt on a number of chumps.

Only one way to find out, people.



Thank you for endorsing Saudi Arabia. I have seldom received higher praise. I could not possibly consider condemnation from the devil himself to be a more glowing endorsement. Have your neg rep back and have a nice day.

Did it work?

juleswin
01-04-2016, 05:31 PM
On August 15, 1971, President Richard M. Nixon shocked the global economy when he officially ended the international convertibility from U.S. dollars into gold, thereby bringing an official end to the Bretton Woods arrangement.

Two years later, in an effort to maintain global demand for U.S. dollars, another system was created called the petrodollar system. In 1973, a deal was struck between Saudi Arabia and the United States in which every barrel of oil purchased from the Saudis would be denominated in U.S. dollars. Under this new arrangement, any country that sought to purchase oil from Saudi Arabia would be required to first exchange their own national currency for U.S. dollars. In exchange for Saudi Arabia's willingness to denominate their oil sales exclusively in U.S. dollars, the United States offered weapons and protection of their oil fields from neighboring nations, including Israel.

By 1975, all of the OPEC nations had agreed to price their own oil supplies exclusively in U.S. dollars in exchange for weapons and military protection.

This petrodollar system, or more simply known as an "oil for dollars" system, created an immediate artificial demand for U.S. dollars around the globe. And of course, as global oil demand increased, so did the demand for U.S. dollars.

I think its fair to say that they have made up for the fuel crisis of the 1970s. Also they buy a lot of US made military equipment and do a lot of investing in the US economy. Kick them out and you kick all those goodies away. I think a better plan would be an invasion and we would need a ruthless man like Trump for the job.

specsaregood
01-04-2016, 05:43 PM
Personally, I think that if the classified pages only detailed Saudi involvement that it would not be earth shattering info and would have already been declassified long ago. I suspect there is more to it.

euphemia
01-04-2016, 09:00 PM
Libertarians need to decide on the bottom line issues they want to fix and unite around those, or we are sunk. Dems will unite on anything. We unite on nothing.

DFF
01-04-2016, 09:30 PM
Has this forum been completely cucked?

I like this thread title better. :D

acptulsa
01-05-2016, 08:58 AM
Now Trump is making controversial statements about ISIS to get attention and make the other candidates look like they're keeping secrets from us.

Too bad we don't have enough sense to do the same thing. We could get Rand Paul the same sort of advantage Trump's giving himself without Rand ever having to stoop to gossip, if we stepped up and gave this thing a tumble.

Give libertarians a candidate willing to do what it takes to win, and what happens? They lay down on him. Takes all the fun out of it, I guess...

Ronin Truth
01-05-2016, 10:45 AM
Libertarians need to decide on the bottom line issues they want to fix and unite around those, or we are sunk. Dems will unite on anything. We unite on nothing.

"If one takes care of the means, the end will take care of itself."

LibertyEagle
01-05-2016, 11:27 AM
Did it work?

You probably convinced a few I would imagine.