Does this video mean the Georgians politicians are testing out the new anti-protest methods for use by American politicians in our own Armed Madhouse? I’m asking because I got the strangest feeling that I was watching a video from Nov. 5, 2008.
Scott,IMHO this kind of a video makes me wish you could focus on the common ground you already have with Alex Jones regarding the police state, and bury the hatchet, and have an interview with him.
jones would try to control the show & dilute it. theyre not the same approach to demonstrating the dangers of government. cant wait for the big usa crackdown. people of dominant mindsets want so badly to enforce narrow perspectives that the fierce segregation of ‘us & them’ consumes them. kinda like the borg, we must be assimilated.
I don’t know much about Mr. Jones, but I do hear the 911 kooks at the meetup mention him so there ya go. I did, however, check out his website (which is all about him) and saw that he was the crazy dude in the car in that Richard Linklater film, Scanner something something. I recall thinking that bit of the film was pretty amusing and thought how fun it would be to have some guy like that in my neighborhood driving around spouting out poetic truths from speakers mounted on the roof of his car. If there wasn’t so much baggage associatied with a personality like that, you might even learn something, but then that would just be a dream, wouldn’t it?
…That’s right, Evil Empire bigger than shit Brethren…Listen to the thoughtless arrogance of this fucking fool…High as Lennie Bruce on power, he’s right outta Orwell…Check it out, he says: “…We’re an Empire now, and when we act? We create our own Reality. And while you are studying that Reality—Judiciously as you will—We’ll act again, creating other Realities, which you can study too. And that’s how things will sort out. We’re History’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to study just what we do.”
—Attributed to a Bush Administration Official in a conversation with Reporter Ron Suskind.
…You think he ain’t nuts?…Jesus Christ!…Anyway, whether he would like it or not, I can tell you that it is my considered opinion that this fucker is not only insane to talk Psychotic shit like this to a Journalist—But in the legal sense of the term as well. As it would remain evident to any rationale observer, that he obviously doesn’t know right, from wrong. Like I say he’s easily deranged as Orwell’s character O’Brien in 1984…He and the Party can create Reality. I think this is the best example of The State’s true intentions that I’ve read in 40 years…Worse than that? I think I know who it is.
Alex Jones is an outstandingly talented person and a gifted communicator.
He is also combative, picks fights, argues on the basis of emotions rather than reason, and paints his numerous enemies as cartoonish villains.
He is also wrong about 30% of the time, as in completely full of shit, enough to be deeply repellent to my sensibilities, enough to cause harm to gullible people (i.e., some of his contentions that HIV started in a US military lab, or that all vaccines are bad, or that all genetic engineering is bad, etc), enough to cause otherwise bright and motvated folk to squander their limited energy on stuff that is absolutely useless (i.e., explosives in the two towers).
The other 70% of the time he’s right. Not only right, but enough to make one say, YEAH!! you tell em.
I think that being covered up to your thighs in BS is better than up to your eyeballs in it, like the Freeper crowd or the John Hagee-ites. If that meets your standard of excellence in journalism, fine.
But there are people who are better than 70% right out there who probably deserve our attention, no?
I once thought AJ’d be great on Scott’s show. But on second though, Alex would use that opportunity to browbeat and holler, and would interrupt and monopolize the microphone.
Hmmm, how much patience would Scott have for that?
enough to cause otherwise bright and motvated folk to squander their limited energy on stuff that is absolutely useless
That’s the part about it that’s so heart breaking. I’ve even lost good friends because I could no longer relate to their penchant for unfalsifiable conspiracy stories.
Alex can be a clown, but he does a lot more good than harm in my opinion. He says some stupid things, he get somethings wrong and can act like an ass, but he has often been more right than many other people in the libertarian movement. He was right about the NA union and the reason why they are leaving the borders wide open and who was funding it. He said Bush sending the troops down to the border is farce, right again. He said Iraq was a big farce, that it was not bungled, it was planned not only to seperate Iraq along sectarian lines but also to bankrupt the middle class of the US. I agree again. And he thinks it goes a lot higher than some neoconservatives. I don’t know, but can I say he’s an idiot for saying this, no way. He pointed out that Chalabi was at the Bilderberg conference in Canada after Iraq. As far as I know, he was. I think he has been great at getting so many young people involved and interested in politics. As for 911, I wouldn’t always call them kooks, some are, but anyone who believes the whole story of what happened as the government said should be called a kook. Seriously, why would anyone believe it, you’d have to have to be an idiot.
Redrum,
When I call someone a “kook” it puts them in a special category of disbeliever. I define a kook as someone who pretends that logic and the rules of evidence can be used to test ideas (hypotheses) that are inherently unfalsifiable (i.e., cannot be shown to be false). For example, it is kooky to believe that evidence can be assembled to demonstrate that life on earth was created by an omnipotent entity. The reasons is because if the entity is indeed all powerful, then it is certainly capable of obscuring evidence of its own existence. Thus, failure to assemble evidence of creation is not evidence against a creator; that is, the creator hypothesis is unfalsifiable. And yet, there are many, many people who insist that a scientific case can be built to support the creation hypothesis. But it just ain’t so because one can always invent a reason for why the creator might have decided to cover its tracks, leaving researchers literally clueless regarding its existence.
One who believes that 911 was an inside job orchestrated by an omnipotent cabal of militarists, CIA agents, or whomever, may be engaging in the same flawed reasoning. It just depends on the assumptions one makes. However, my sense is that many 911 “truthers” tend to assume that the cabal has such incredible powers of control that failure to find evidence is simply interpreted as evidence of the cabal’s extraordinary ability to cover it’s own tracks. My estranged friend used to say, “They [the CIA or whoever] are very good at what they do. . . .” The implication was of course that they’re so good at what they do that you’d never know they even existed. Why, they might even go so far as to kill themselves in order avoid detection! That’s how good they are. No evidence of explosive detonation of Building 7? Oh, that’s just because the cabal knew how to plant the explosives so as to eliminate all forensic evidence! The absurdities know no limits with such reasoning. That is, by my definition, kooky.
MikeL, you are taking the exteme of the argument and judging upon this. I never said I agree with them.
Reynolds can be used as a strawman. Like I said Alex isn’t always right, but he does more good than bad in my opinion. I go to Alex’s site to keep up with a lot of domestic news inside the US, he covers it better than probably anyone. I was only kind of standing up for him because he’s like the Ayn Rand of political info. By this I mean, a lot of people report what he said later, and never talk about him, or refer to him. I bet a lot of people visit his site and look at his news too. Just like Ayn Rand, you saw many people influenced by her ideas and not refer to her.
I think a plane hit the pentagon, but why doesn’t the government release a better video? They have many. Is the conspiracy playing into their agenda? Does it help them? No matter what you think, there is so much weird behavior and questions about 911. Also, what’s up with people like Karen Kwiatkowski saying she couldn’t see any plane stuff when she came out of the pentagon? Is she a “Kook”? Is she lying? Is she near sighted? Why doesn’t anyone ask her about this?
I don’t know what is up with the towers. I do know they didn’t need to blow them up to have a war. Simple planes hitting the buildings would have done the job. But I still think it’s suspicious. It’s interesting how quickly Bin Laden was picked as the enemy that day. And that those Israeli’s had bomb residue in the van, and box cutters…. this is a little bizarre. I’m not saying they did anything beside dance around and film or take pictures (whatever they were doing) , but what’s up with that? These are legitimate questions that should make anyone question all this shit. Why no media coverage on this?
Anyone who continues to talk about Iraq as if it’s blunders is a moron, ignorant or a liar in my opinion. Paul Bremer didn’t blunder and neither did all the people who planned this. When Kissinger is involved, this does a lot to make me question the whole “realists” vs. “neo-conservatives” theory. Oh, but wait, we have perpetual liars (sorry so called realists) saying they just don’t agree. The question is, not whether I’m right, it is, why should I believe them? They are lying sacks of shit. Is it so implausable to believe that the CFR and the Bilderbergs at the absolute least didn’t have a little something to do with this?
…I don’t necessarily go in for said intricate conspiracies lurking behind every event that qualifies as Historic…Conversely, FDR is reputed to have said: “If happened around here? Well then it’s certainly not by accident. Nothing at the top happens by chance.” Bottom line, I saw video of two aircraft go into The World Trade Center…I saw video of no aircraft strike the side of The Pentagon, only the signature of an explosion involving a petroleum derived fuel, and or substance…But the question remains; is seeing always believing? Given the bi-lateral capabilities of these murderous sonsofbitches presently locked in an irreconcilable conflict at our expense?…Who can say?
redrum,
To repeat: In my opinion, a kook is a special category of disbeliever. Not all, or even most, disbelievers are kooks. You are not a kook.
And yeah, I agree, there’s all kinds of bizarre shit associated with 911. But considering the nature of the attack and the clear and present incompetence of our government, what other way could it be?
My whole thing is I’ve become very suspicious that it is always just incompetence. This is a constant excuse. In fact, I get kind of sick hearing this. It’s kind of like Bernanke, Greenspan and the FED. Many people say they just don’t “get it”, it’s all incompetence. That’s what many say, they just don’t know what they are doing.
Lol, funny. If guys as smart as these two, and both of them are very smart, with as much economic education as they have “just don”t get it”, then why even bother with economics or social science, why not just relegate economics to alchemy? We should just have the flat earth society come back in science also. Did you guys see that video with Ron Paul and Bernanke last week on CNBC? Amazing, Bernanke pretty much just said he’s embracing the Weimar model (obviously for it’s amazing success), and as long as Americans stay in the U.S, it’s ok if their dollar goes down and the purchasing power is debased. I guess, he just doesn’t “get it”, he slept through pre-Nazi German history. I wouldn’t bet on it.
Truth be told, I can’t stand listening to Alex Jones’ show, how anyone can listen to him for 3 hours a day is beyond me. But I like some of the info on his site.
As for another subject, it really is too bad that some so-called libertarian sites are not or don’t seem to be libertarian. CATO comes to mind. Honestly, I haven’t visited the CATO site in a while, so I don’t know how it still is, but I still see many of their guys come on the business channels shilling for the corporations and the blessings of our “free” market system.
Oscar, yes I totally agree. It would go a long way. Honestly though, it would be even better to actually get Ron Paul in, even if he did half of what he said he’d do…. the US may have a chance. I care more about this then Sibel’s story, even though I want to hear that. But it still won’t do much to change what is happening to the country and the world, financially. We’ll see.
…The Gentlemen at CATO like Money, Prestige, their Careers and all those Elegant, Beautiful, Intelligent Courtesans much better than they do raising hell—Thus every man has his price—That is unless he is as stubborn, eccentric and angry at the abuses of authority as most of us continue…As for Sibell Edwards? They, “The Powers that be” will slap a figurative sock in her mouth…or maybe even a real one if she goes to far…One last thing, how many here think that they are by challenging the “Empire” [their word Dudes not mine] in effect “pissing in the wind?”
Scott your doing some good shit… you still have some of the best interviews anywhere. Anti-war radio and Flashpoints.net are ones I try to listen to as often as I can. I don’t have time to read all those headlines at Anti-War, so your show is great. I bet the radio show has added a lot to Anti-War.com. I love Charles Goyette too. I always try and listen to the archives of al the interviews.
I was talking with a friend the other day, and he brought something up to me which was interesting. He said that he thinks the US is already at the point were something must be considered being done by the people, because you don’t want to get to a stage of fighting a government that has such a high level of technological ability to controling crowds and protesters. (We can see from this video) If Ron Paul does not get in, he thinks revolution may be the only way. You know, its creepy, but he may be right. It’s creepy because, you are stuck between a rock in a hard place. Stay as you are, become a slave. Risk revolution, possible death, god knows what, and also,,, what kind of government comes out of the end of it, that is the creepy part.
If it came down to it, the people would win. Think government = slow, dumb, and brittle. People = fast, flexible, and adaptive.
I don’t think they’d bring it to such a point. Instead what would happen would be a slow collapse and disintegration ala the Soviet Union
On the other hand, shit looks awfully suspicious, like some people are up to something. You can almost hear them
whistling to themselves, tiptoeing, tweaking their wee mustaches, snickering quietly.
Tags: 
Does this video mean the Georgians politicians are testing out the new anti-protest methods for use by American politicians in our own Armed Madhouse? I’m asking because I got the strangest feeling that I was watching a video from Nov. 5, 2008.
[...] You can read the rest of this blog post by going to the original source, here [...]
The battle against the State is global.
Scott,IMHO this kind of a video makes me wish you could focus on the common ground you already have with Alex Jones regarding the police state, and bury the hatchet, and have an interview with him.
Curt, I’m afraid not.
Here is the video of the Georgian tv station getting shut down.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=90a_1194540764
jones would try to control the show & dilute it. theyre not the same approach to demonstrating the dangers of government. cant wait for the big usa crackdown. people of dominant mindsets want so badly to enforce narrow perspectives that the fierce segregation of ‘us & them’ consumes them. kinda like the borg, we must be assimilated.
I don’t know much about Mr. Jones, but I do hear the 911 kooks at the meetup mention him so there ya go. I did, however, check out his website (which is all about him) and saw that he was the crazy dude in the car in that Richard Linklater film, Scanner something something. I recall thinking that bit of the film was pretty amusing and thought how fun it would be to have some guy like that in my neighborhood driving around spouting out poetic truths from speakers mounted on the roof of his car. If there wasn’t so much baggage associatied with a personality like that, you might even learn something, but then that would just be a dream, wouldn’t it?
…That’s right, Evil Empire bigger than shit Brethren…Listen to the thoughtless arrogance of this fucking fool…High as Lennie Bruce on power, he’s right outta Orwell…Check it out, he says: “…We’re an Empire now, and when we act? We create our own Reality. And while you are studying that Reality—Judiciously as you will—We’ll act again, creating other Realities, which you can study too. And that’s how things will sort out. We’re History’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to study just what we do.”
—Attributed to a Bush Administration Official in a conversation with Reporter Ron Suskind.
…You think he ain’t nuts?…Jesus Christ!…Anyway, whether he would like it or not, I can tell you that it is my considered opinion that this fucker is not only insane to talk Psychotic shit like this to a Journalist—But in the legal sense of the term as well. As it would remain evident to any rationale observer, that he obviously doesn’t know right, from wrong. Like I say he’s easily deranged as Orwell’s character O’Brien in 1984…He and the Party can create Reality. I think this is the best example of The State’s true intentions that I’ve read in 40 years…Worse than that? I think I know who it is.
…Say what ya want man, but Alex Jones isn’t 1/10th as crazy as this Bastard is!
mace, I meant “crazy” in the endearing sense, not in the clinical sense.
Alex Jones is an outstandingly talented person and a gifted communicator.
He is also combative, picks fights, argues on the basis of emotions rather than reason, and paints his numerous enemies as cartoonish villains.
He is also wrong about 30% of the time, as in completely full of shit, enough to be deeply repellent to my sensibilities, enough to cause harm to gullible people (i.e., some of his contentions that HIV started in a US military lab, or that all vaccines are bad, or that all genetic engineering is bad, etc), enough to cause otherwise bright and motvated folk to squander their limited energy on stuff that is absolutely useless (i.e., explosives in the two towers).
The other 70% of the time he’s right. Not only right, but enough to make one say, YEAH!! you tell em.
I think that being covered up to your thighs in BS is better than up to your eyeballs in it, like the Freeper crowd or the John Hagee-ites. If that meets your standard of excellence in journalism, fine.
But there are people who are better than 70% right out there who probably deserve our attention, no?
I once thought AJ’d be great on Scott’s show. But on second though, Alex would use that opportunity to browbeat and holler, and would interrupt and monopolize the microphone.
Hmmm, how much patience would Scott have for that?
enough to cause otherwise bright and motvated folk to squander their limited energy on stuff that is absolutely useless
That’s the part about it that’s so heart breaking. I’ve even lost good friends because I could no longer relate to their penchant for unfalsifiable conspiracy stories.
Hmmm, how much patience would Scott have for that?
Yeah man….just ask Eric Dondero!
Alex can be a clown, but he does a lot more good than harm in my opinion. He says some stupid things, he get somethings wrong and can act like an ass, but he has often been more right than many other people in the libertarian movement. He was right about the NA union and the reason why they are leaving the borders wide open and who was funding it. He said Bush sending the troops down to the border is farce, right again. He said Iraq was a big farce, that it was not bungled, it was planned not only to seperate Iraq along sectarian lines but also to bankrupt the middle class of the US. I agree again. And he thinks it goes a lot higher than some neoconservatives. I don’t know, but can I say he’s an idiot for saying this, no way. He pointed out that Chalabi was at the Bilderberg conference in Canada after Iraq. As far as I know, he was. I think he has been great at getting so many young people involved and interested in politics. As for 911, I wouldn’t always call them kooks, some are, but anyone who believes the whole story of what happened as the government said should be called a kook. Seriously, why would anyone believe it, you’d have to have to be an idiot.
Redrum,
When I call someone a “kook” it puts them in a special category of disbeliever. I define a kook as someone who pretends that logic and the rules of evidence can be used to test ideas (hypotheses) that are inherently unfalsifiable (i.e., cannot be shown to be false). For example, it is kooky to believe that evidence can be assembled to demonstrate that life on earth was created by an omnipotent entity. The reasons is because if the entity is indeed all powerful, then it is certainly capable of obscuring evidence of its own existence. Thus, failure to assemble evidence of creation is not evidence against a creator; that is, the creator hypothesis is unfalsifiable. And yet, there are many, many people who insist that a scientific case can be built to support the creation hypothesis. But it just ain’t so because one can always invent a reason for why the creator might have decided to cover its tracks, leaving researchers literally clueless regarding its existence.
One who believes that 911 was an inside job orchestrated by an omnipotent cabal of militarists, CIA agents, or whomever, may be engaging in the same flawed reasoning. It just depends on the assumptions one makes. However, my sense is that many 911 “truthers” tend to assume that the cabal has such incredible powers of control that failure to find evidence is simply interpreted as evidence of the cabal’s extraordinary ability to cover it’s own tracks. My estranged friend used to say, “They [the CIA or whoever] are very good at what they do. . . .” The implication was of course that they’re so good at what they do that you’d never know they even existed. Why, they might even go so far as to kill themselves in order avoid detection! That’s how good they are. No evidence of explosive detonation of Building 7? Oh, that’s just because the cabal knew how to plant the explosives so as to eliminate all forensic evidence! The absurdities know no limits with such reasoning. That is, by my definition, kooky.
With human beings you take the good with the bad.
Unless you can’t,
or can only tolerate limited doses.
The choice is
up to you.
MikeL, you are taking the exteme of the argument and judging upon this. I never said I agree with them.
Reynolds can be used as a strawman. Like I said Alex isn’t always right, but he does more good than bad in my opinion. I go to Alex’s site to keep up with a lot of domestic news inside the US, he covers it better than probably anyone. I was only kind of standing up for him because he’s like the Ayn Rand of political info. By this I mean, a lot of people report what he said later, and never talk about him, or refer to him. I bet a lot of people visit his site and look at his news too. Just like Ayn Rand, you saw many people influenced by her ideas and not refer to her.
I think a plane hit the pentagon, but why doesn’t the government release a better video? They have many. Is the conspiracy playing into their agenda? Does it help them? No matter what you think, there is so much weird behavior and questions about 911. Also, what’s up with people like Karen Kwiatkowski saying she couldn’t see any plane stuff when she came out of the pentagon? Is she a “Kook”? Is she lying? Is she near sighted? Why doesn’t anyone ask her about this?
I don’t know what is up with the towers. I do know they didn’t need to blow them up to have a war. Simple planes hitting the buildings would have done the job. But I still think it’s suspicious. It’s interesting how quickly Bin Laden was picked as the enemy that day. And that those Israeli’s had bomb residue in the van, and box cutters…. this is a little bizarre. I’m not saying they did anything beside dance around and film or take pictures (whatever they were doing) , but what’s up with that? These are legitimate questions that should make anyone question all this shit. Why no media coverage on this?
Anyone who continues to talk about Iraq as if it’s blunders is a moron, ignorant or a liar in my opinion. Paul Bremer didn’t blunder and neither did all the people who planned this. When Kissinger is involved, this does a lot to make me question the whole “realists” vs. “neo-conservatives” theory. Oh, but wait, we have perpetual liars (sorry so called realists) saying they just don’t agree. The question is, not whether I’m right, it is, why should I believe them? They are lying sacks of shit. Is it so implausable to believe that the CFR and the Bilderbergs at the absolute least didn’t have a little something to do with this?
…I don’t necessarily go in for said intricate conspiracies lurking behind every event that qualifies as Historic…Conversely, FDR is reputed to have said: “If happened around here? Well then it’s certainly not by accident. Nothing at the top happens by chance.” Bottom line, I saw video of two aircraft go into The World Trade Center…I saw video of no aircraft strike the side of The Pentagon, only the signature of an explosion involving a petroleum derived fuel, and or substance…But the question remains; is seeing always believing? Given the bi-lateral capabilities of these murderous sonsofbitches presently locked in an irreconcilable conflict at our expense?…Who can say?
redrum,
To repeat: In my opinion, a kook is a special category of disbeliever. Not all, or even most, disbelievers are kooks. You are not a kook.
And yeah, I agree, there’s all kinds of bizarre shit associated with 911. But considering the nature of the attack and the clear and present incompetence of our government, what other way could it be?
My whole thing is I’ve become very suspicious that it is always just incompetence. This is a constant excuse. In fact, I get kind of sick hearing this. It’s kind of like Bernanke, Greenspan and the FED. Many people say they just don’t “get it”, it’s all incompetence. That’s what many say, they just don’t know what they are doing.
Lol, funny. If guys as smart as these two, and both of them are very smart, with as much economic education as they have “just don”t get it”, then why even bother with economics or social science, why not just relegate economics to alchemy? We should just have the flat earth society come back in science also. Did you guys see that video with Ron Paul and Bernanke last week on CNBC? Amazing, Bernanke pretty much just said he’s embracing the Weimar model (obviously for it’s amazing success), and as long as Americans stay in the U.S, it’s ok if their dollar goes down and the purchasing power is debased. I guess, he just doesn’t “get it”, he slept through pre-Nazi German history. I wouldn’t bet on it.
Truth be told, I can’t stand listening to Alex Jones’ show, how anyone can listen to him for 3 hours a day is beyond me. But I like some of the info on his site.
As for another subject, it really is too bad that some so-called libertarian sites are not or don’t seem to be libertarian. CATO comes to mind. Honestly, I haven’t visited the CATO site in a while, so I don’t know how it still is, but I still see many of their guys come on the business channels shilling for the corporations and the blessings of our “free” market system.
Sibel Edmonds will help unravel everything. She is the key.
Oscar, yes I totally agree. It would go a long way. Honestly though, it would be even better to actually get Ron Paul in, even if he did half of what he said he’d do…. the US may have a chance. I care more about this then Sibel’s story, even though I want to hear that. But it still won’t do much to change what is happening to the country and the world, financially. We’ll see.
Red: Re: Cato: I absolutely agree. Those guys - with a few quite noble exceptions - suck ass.
…The Gentlemen at CATO like Money, Prestige, their Careers and all those Elegant, Beautiful, Intelligent Courtesans much better than they do raising hell—Thus every man has his price—That is unless he is as stubborn, eccentric and angry at the abuses of authority as most of us continue…As for Sibell Edwards? They, “The Powers that be” will slap a figurative sock in her mouth…or maybe even a real one if she goes to far…One last thing, how many here think that they are by challenging the “Empire” [their word Dudes not mine] in effect “pissing in the wind?”
Mace, I got nothing else better to do, man.
I ain’t changing history, but a mind here and there is good enough.
Scott your doing some good shit… you still have some of the best interviews anywhere. Anti-war radio and Flashpoints.net are ones I try to listen to as often as I can. I don’t have time to read all those headlines at Anti-War, so your show is great. I bet the radio show has added a lot to Anti-War.com. I love Charles Goyette too. I always try and listen to the archives of al the interviews.
I was talking with a friend the other day, and he brought something up to me which was interesting. He said that he thinks the US is already at the point were something must be considered being done by the people, because you don’t want to get to a stage of fighting a government that has such a high level of technological ability to controling crowds and protesters. (We can see from this video) If Ron Paul does not get in, he thinks revolution may be the only way. You know, its creepy, but he may be right. It’s creepy because, you are stuck between a rock in a hard place. Stay as you are, become a slave. Risk revolution, possible death, god knows what, and also,,, what kind of government comes out of the end of it, that is the creepy part.
Redrum.
If it came down to it, the people would win. Think government = slow, dumb, and brittle. People = fast, flexible, and adaptive.
I don’t think they’d bring it to such a point. Instead what would happen would be a slow collapse and disintegration ala the Soviet Unionion.
Redrum.
If it came down to it, the people would win. Think government = slow, dumb, and brittle. People = fast, flexible, and adaptive.
I don’t think they’d bring it to such a point. Instead what would happen would be a slow collapse and disintegration ala the Soviet Union
On the other hand, shit looks awfully suspicious, like some people are up to something. You can almost hear them
whistling to themselves, tiptoeing, tweaking their wee mustaches, snickering quietly.
Red, that’s the dilemma alright. I guess we just keep going like this best we can…
And thanks for the kind words man.
Oscar: Tweaking mustaches and such. I can see em now.
Did everyone see Gary North’s piece on why the establishment is running scared? It’s a good read. Check it out:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north584.html