Preserving The Lie

[Jeffrey of Troy]

If Bush is impeached for "the domestic spying scandal"

(" President Bush’s authorization of a secret domestic spying program – and his fierce defense of his action – is leading to talk of possible impeachment. ")
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/1723431.php

or even for "misleading the nation" about the justification for invading Iraq, as Conyers is doing

(" Democrats are eyeing several parliamentary maneuvers to prod Congress into investigating the so-called Downing Street memo and other recently disclosed documents that they contend shows that the Bush administration manipulated prewar intelligence to build support for the war in Iraq.

Although any Democratic move will almost certainly fail in the face of vigorous Republican opposition, such maneuvers would constitute the first steps toward filing articles of impeachment... ")
http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/062805/dems.html

instead of for treason for 9/11, then The Lie will be preserved.

 

[anart]

True, the Lie would be preserved if that were to occur. Considering the control he has over both houses and the judiciary, I would be shocked if lil' georgie were impeached. They are probably rolling along with their next natural disaster or terrorist hit to distract us and avoid the issue all together - unless georgie's usefulness is at an end, in which case, an impeachment would be a nice cover for what's really coming down the pike. At this point, it seems to be anyone's guess, and nothing would shock me.

 

[Lucy]

Hi anart,

I'd say "our cynicism is in synch" on this one.

Whatever happens, it will undoubtedly involve distraction(s) to keep the 'masses' directed towards a lie ... and the possibilities are so numerous and convoluted in nature as to be hard to figure out, or 'see', even as they occur, much less beforehand.

I just keep thinking of the phrase, "People who pay strict attention to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the 'Future.' ( Cassiopaeans, 09-28-02) Certainly not an easy task under the circumstances, even for those who are actively working at it!

And, as you say, "nothing would shock me," at this point, although some of the possibilities are more dismaying to me than others.

Lucy

 

[autumn]

Considering the control he has over both houses and the judiciary, I would be shocked if lil' georgie were impeached. They are probably rolling along with their next natural disaster or terrorist hit to distract us and avoid the issue all together - unless georgie's usefulness is at an end, in which case, an impeachment would be a nice cover for what's really coming down the pike. At this point, it seems to be anyone's guess, and nothing would shock me.

Please forgive me, whilst I do not understand all that is going on within US politics, I do watch people. GW has no control over anything - you have only to watch him with the sound down

On the other hand Princess Tony is a manipulative control freak who is all upset that he wasn't hailed as the saviour of Iraq and is now egging your bloke on the start over in Iran. I see that GW has been told to say that he will not deal with Hamas until it renounces its call to destroy Israel. So, is anyone taking bets on how long it is until the entire eastern Med is just a smoking hole in the ground? - oops have to be careful the Thought Police are on the prowl again ;-O

in light

autumn

 

[anart]

"Please forgive me, whilst I do not understand all that is going on within US politics, I do watch people. GW has no control over anything - you have only to watch him with the sound down "

That certainly seems to be the case on a personal level. What I should have written, to be more precise, is that Bush's puppeteers are in complete control and, as long as he serves their purposes, he is untouchable. Such a sick theatre production it all is.

 

[Marie]

First of all, congratulations on your site – your work is admirable. Lately I have found on it one more piece of a puzzle I have been trying to put together for years.

The basic question goes like this: why does it seem necessary for the powers of the week to put down women to such an extend? An urgent sub question is: why is George W. Bush so hellbent on taking away not only women's rights generally, especially reproductive rights?

Now, we already know some of the rather self-evident answers: a state oriented towards war and domination NEEDS babies, most of all babies born from poor and uneducated families, in order to have a) people willing to enlist in the army and b) cheap wage workers – it will be very important to have a lot of them when comes the time to remove unions and worker's rights. And you cannot get a high birth rate in a society where women are free to choose not to have babies. But then, that explanation is not enough.

Why? Because Bush could have easily forced thousand of underprivileged women and girls in unwanted motherhood with only a fraction of the anti-women laws he enacted (over 300 and climbing fast). Indeed, the plan seems to include if not all women, at least a specific category – those who cannot find the father of their children. Bush's last attacks were all about “spousal notification”. What this means is that a woman's uterus is now the property of her husband/boyfriend and he gets to choose how the rest of her life is going to be.

Now, let's think. Who gets an advantage from this? Rapists in human form, of course, who get to spread around their DNA, and... who else really, really wants to spread their DNA? Who else wants women to have their babies regardless of the consequences? Did anybody say “human-alien hybrid program?”.

Seriously, let's imagine a scenario. Let's say that Jane Doe becomes “mysteriously” pregnant, without any sexual contact – or else she “remembers” an alien abduction, either on her own or with hypnotherapy. If she is informed, she might very well want to opt out. But then she had to not only find the father, but make him sign a permission to get an abortion! There is a bunch of grays & reptoids somewhere laughing their asses off.

But there has to be more to it. For example, why did Bush need to so increase women's economic dependency on their partners? Between cutting off or restricting welfare to single mothers and putting them under high pressure to get married, taking away resources to eliminate discrimination and violence against women, squeezing battered women's shelters even tighter, and a hundred other vicious attacks, there seems to be another reason than babies to persecute women here. There are still a few puzzle pieces to find – anybody seen them?

 

[Mike]

I know this seems obvious, but in case you didn't see it - Laura wrote about your post at:

http://laura-knight-jadczyk.blogspot.com/2006/02/abortion-psychopaths-and-mother-love.html

 

[Ca.]

The caustic effect of the lie.

Sputnik
US Air Force General Faints During Press Briefing
(updated 06:41 11.02.2016)
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/us/20160211/1034553919/air-force-general-faints-budget-briefing.html#ixzz3zqRgDGkP

An Air Force major general has been taken to the hospital after he fainted at the podium during a Pentagon budget briefing, on Tuesday.

It is unknown what lead to Major General James Martin Jr. collapsing, but he was carried from the podium and taken to another room before being brought to the hospital as a precaution.

1Bln
The news conference was to discuss the Air Force’s fiscal 2017 budget, Martin is the deputy assistant secretary for budget under the Air Force’s Financial Management and Comptroller office. Martin was in the middle of discussing the funding for their F-35 fighter jet program.

Carolyn Gleason, the Air Force Deputy for Budget, took over where Martin left off and finished the briefing


“That’s what the F-35 will do to you,” Ms. Gleason nervously joked.

Martin was back to work on Wednesday “supporting Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James and Chief of Staff General Mark Welsh at the Senate Appropriations hearing,” Air Force spokeswoman Maj. Melissa Milner told the Air Force Times.

https://youtu.be/8Irv0hET_-o

The Surprisingly Large Cost of Telling Small Lies
By Rebekah Campbell March 11, 2014 7:00 am
http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/11/the-surprisingly-large-cost-of-telling-small-lies/?_r=0

As our conversation drifted from an update of my company to a deep discussion about life itself, I asked him what he thought was the secret to success. I expected the standard “never give up” or some other T-shirt slogan, but what he said took me by surprise. “The secret to success in business and in life is to never, ever, ever tell a lie,” he said.

Can Telling Lies Harm Your Body?
http://www.care2.com/greenliving/can-telling-lies-harm-your-body.html
August 11, 2014

We all fabricate the truth or stretch facts. Okay, so most of us lie. A lot.
What happens when we tell lies? Other than its predictable effects on the health of relationships, lying can also harm your body. And this has been substantiated by a study conducted at the University of Notre Dame

.

THE DECAY OF LYING
BY OSCAR WILDE A DIALOGUE
PDF http://virgil.org/dswo/courses/novel/wilde-lying.pdf
Persons: Cyril and Vivian.
Scene: the library of a country house in Nottinghamshire

 

[Ca.]

Like the comments from the peanut gallery. More truth in their views then than this "SECRET" propaganda production.

There setting the stage to the puppet audience for more of the same rhetoric Fear campaign. What a crock.

Guess there going to light something up some where. So the GP need a little fear pron conditioning.

¡Ay, caramba, aquí vamos de nuevo.

Report: Secrets Of The IS Files Obtained By Sky News
Published on May 3, 2016
An exclusive investigation by Sky News uncovers the true nature of the terrorist threat posed by Islamic State to Europe. Earlier this year Sky obtained files from an IS defector that showed which country recruits came from, who [glow=red,2,300]recruited[/glow] them and whether they wanted to fight on the front line - or die as a suicide bomber.

https://youtu.be/gJis0sCXplo

Solmanov Igor1 day ago
Sky news, if your bl.jurnalists "found secret files" why CIA cannot determinate who pay money to ISIS and how they make a money transactons?
Result - this is f. propaganda and american bs.

Orange Agent1 day ago
Well, tks to Putin we now know ISIS was making tons of money selling oil to Turkey...that just happens to be US ally and a NATO member. ;p

ushadrons1 day ago
Turkey has been helping Daesh (ISIS) from day one.
Research Paper: ISIS-Turkey Links

Derek Keogh1 day ago
I wonder how much of this is actually allowed to happen?
Reply
Orange Agent1 day ago (edited)
Not only allowed, but supported by the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel (and many other NATO members).

Derek Keogh1 day ago
all of us supping out of the same bowl wearing the same uniforms? the tunnels from wallmart involved?

Conor McGregor's Pool Noodle1 day ago
Zionist propaganda trying to to smear Islam! Let's take our country back! Vote for Labour!

Stacy Skywatch22 hours ago
The CIA created this data base,,,

Orange Agent1 day ago
This video screams propaganda, to the point where they go out of their way trying to convince us that these illiterate ignorant radicals have the know-how to carry out more complex attacks that are yet to come (a nuclear attack maybe). Now we know the Saudis were responsable for 9/11 and not Al Qaeda, what kinda of BS they gonna try next and blame these IS idiots?