Posted on 09/23/2004 10:05:25 AM PDT by GIJoel
"(1)Thats just the issue.. "Make "them" CHANGE???".. Forcing "them" to change is what you do to the OTHER PARTY not your own party.."
First, I tend to disagree with the statement. You are more likely to effect change among members of your own party. There, you have common ground---but you see some issues differently. There, argument can cause one person to see that they were wrong and admit it. I've done it and seen others do it.
In terms of Republican leadership, they are political realists who balance out the pressures they face. That is how they got where they are. That is how politics works. Even if you from your own party or caucus that fits your own definition of things, as soon as you start meeting, be it face to face or online, you will find yourself compromising---or you will quickly lose your connection to the group.
Republican leaders today face many Left pressures, including the media, the government bureaucracy, and, realistically, some possible pressure from the Hard Left that might include blackmail. I am proposing that we add an extra Right pressure.
Second, I am not only proposing to convince people to change. I also want to exchange some of the people. Both are possible.
I'm down with dat..
I know.. 900+ raw FBI files stolen shows that, with abandon and in your face, dareing reprisals.. Thats only what, by the way, we know of.. Little doubt in my mind thats (some of whats) goin on.. Couple that with government and private funding of other professional left wing snoops.. maybe even foreign.. and the picture looks pretty bleak.. Thats not includeing "offers that cannot be refused".. i.e. threats against ones person, family and loved ones.. then ones reputation even, pales in value... Vinny Foster was a message sent.. and evidently received.. If the Asst Attorney General of The U.S. is NOT safe.. Who in the hell do you think YOU ARE.?...
The Clintons were quite an education.. to me.. Even IF ones heart was/is in the right place(elected reps.) a malaise of direction would be the result.. a.k.a. Sprecte, McLaim, Snowe, Chaffee, even Kennedy, Kerry, and Conyers, Hatch, Frist, and others.. maybe ALL OF THEM, or most all of them..
Ruby Ridge and Waco might be the tip of the iceberg.. since the treatment of those "officials in charge" were not sequestered and reviewed but PROMOTED.. The Sandy Burgular affair was telling.. not that it COULD happen but that it DID happen.. with such arrogant disreguard for the knowing of it.. Its like, What are THEY going to DO about it anyway.?... NEXT..
Count Von Bushula NOT immediately firing ALL Clinton appointees.. speaks of complicit "Unite'ing and NOT Divide'ing anyway"... The "Spectre" of the FBI, BATF, CIA, and NSA as the real enemies looms possible.. Not all of them of course but the ones with any power.. Gov't bureaus all attract automatons anyway.. that will do whatever they are told.. I'm not talking about "tin foil" but about Tin PLATE.. much thicker.. LoL..
Blackmail would then be minor "pressure".. much more serious pressure could be, and probably IS used.. Then after a newbie arriving in Washington D.C, fresh ... a "visit" or "dinner" with the proper "Neigborhood Watch" Rep.. could make everything very clear to the newbie.. You know, they MUST pay protection, or some very bad things might happen.. Pay up at the proper time and the machine gets "oiled".. DON'T and the "squeeking" could kill you.. or someone.. Followed after a {pause} by YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.?.
If so this cabal would do anything for this scam to remain hidden.. so the faux competion between republicans and democrats could continue.. Actually if any of those agencys are penetrated even close to that degree its possible.. let alone ALL OF THEM.. Thats part of why I feel my "solution"(as I've stated) is the ONLY solution not merely "A" solution.. One bad apple hireing(promoteing) other bad apples which in turn hire(promote) other bad apples.. is NETWORKING in reverse..(THEY know who the bad apples are FOR SURE, their not just guessing) And could explain our present situation.. partially or in total..
Alamo-girls legacy site don't say all this but the evidence implies it.. to me.. And thats the stuff we know of, for sure.. connected to the Clintons.. They are not the only malefactors in Washington D.C. either by a long shot... Elections could very well be illusion for the autistic..
"You know, they MUST pay protection, or some very bad things might happen.. Pay up at the proper time and the machine gets "oiled".. DON'T and the "squeeking" could kill you.. or someone.. Followed after a {pause} by YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.?."
I don't think things are quite on that level at this time. For example, when Golitsyn and Angleton ran their "checks" on the CIA (in the 1960s), by seeding pieces of "marked" information through the CIA, they found the Soviet Section of the CIA had been penetrated---and by a number of agents.
This is bad, don't get me wrong, but they did not find the whole CIA had been penetrated. Angleton and Golitsyn were defeated by a combination of Soviet agents throughout Western Intelligence and agents of influence (journalists, etc.) The whole French CIA (something like SDCE, can't remember) was completely penetrated, but there may have been only 5 high ranking penetrations in Britain, etc.
Remember the great invasion of Afghanistan? A CIA plan, obviously not penetrated.
I think most FBI agents are straight, but some are bent, no doubt.
Yes, Hillary is doing some damage with her 293 boxes of files. That is different from sending people around to everyone with death threats.
Remember too, it was worse when Bill was the actual head of all US law enforcement---and will be worse if Hillary is. That is not the case now. For a realistic look at what Hillary was like in power, the murders, etc. read the excellent book:
Hillary’s Secret War, The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists, by Richard Poe, WND Books, 2004
Bad things are happening, but most people are still good and still free. Part of the Hard Left's strategy is to focus on the very powerful, which they can do effectively, in part utilizing FSB (KGB) tactics. The Hard Left is best when they can focus on a small number of targets, That is why they do better in the Senate than the House (in my opinion). That is why they do so well with the super-rich (in my opinion.)
If you want to learn more about these kinds of tactics, I suggest Inside the GRU by Anton Suvorov, former Spetnaz, former GRU, defector to Great Britain.
When thinking about these things, it is important to realize that the Hard Left in the US is not tightly organized at all. Most of what goes on in the Hard Left is "legit", that is to say, they are doing what they say they are. If there was some kind of tight Command & Control, the US gov't would pick it up. Especially since 911, this would be disasterous for them. Mostly, they act independently.
Another thing to realize is that all Russian-based operations are very low-tech by nature. That is because we always beat them at high tech. One thing you can notice is, certain of these people traveling a great deal.
This is a "safer" way to manage communications, assuming there are "good reasons" for the travel, which there always are (work, family ties in another country, etc.) Again, Inside the GRU provides a good guide foe understanding. The same author's book, Inside Spetsnaz, provides a good insight into modern terrorism. On p. 93, he explains the Soviet attitude toward terrorists (this was back in 1987).
By the way, in Inside the GRU, he says there was only one term in the GRU for the Western leftists, who willingly helped the GRU without being paid or blackmailed. "Shit eaters."
LoL.. Thats funny.. True believers of any kind despise traitors and dupes.. even though they use them like rented mules.. Remember a book by Tex Marrs, "The 4th Reich of the Rich".. or something like that.. Was pretty good.. Was kinda like the David Ichys stuff.. Moonbat'ish.. But opened me up to considering America was not immune from world class malfeance..
Today I think there is a very real possibility that America is run (more or less) by a shadow gov't.. Just the presence of "the State Department" with all its power no matter who is President smacks of it.. How much?.. If at all...I dunno.. But John Kerry of all people running against Bush(2004) strikes me as just a little too convenient.. With all his negatives against a war time President.. Its like the demos took a dive.. And if so, directed by whom?..
Makes me think maybe the Pubbies will take a dive next time.. for Hillary.. If they select a RINO they could very well take a dive.. And they will you know, come on admit it, you know they will.. The denyablity is pregnant too.. If there is a shadow gov't it would be smart too.. Satisfy both sides of a polarized populace.. in iterations.. The illusion of vacillating power.. when it isn't vacillating at all..
Too cynical, say you.?. I don't think I'm cynical enough.. Political machines are not new.. here or anywhere.. Made into a "science", and updated, poltical machinery would be hard to stop, sans a revolution.. Even with a revolution, whos to say the machine didn't cause the revolution as a last ditch effort to retain power.. with a remnant.. and organized cadre for the "future"..
"Today I think there is a very real possibility that America is run (more or less) by a shadow gov't.. John Kerry of all people running against Bush(2004) strikes me as just a little too convenient..
Makes me think maybe the Pubbies will take a dive next time.. for Hillary."
Well, I don't agree with this view, except partially in terms of the Kerry analysis. I do feel that Hillary has had tremendous power in the Democratic Party, at least since being elected Senator. There is no doubt, Kerry's election would have hurt her personal bid for power. She would have been unable to run until 2012, at which time she would be getting fairly old.
I think she could have sabotauged the Democratic attempt to control the Media on Kerry, specifically by allowing Fox to run Swift Boat stuff. I know Fox is fairly conservative, but Hillary has succeeded in canceling the Fox interview with the author of the new Hillary book. I am undecided on this part of the analysis.
I agree the State Department is communist (or, more exactly, controlled by the Hard Left, since most of them do not probably literally subscribe to Marxism/Leninism, now even denounced by Putin.) However, it is annaccurate to conclude from that that there is a single Shadow Government.
Clearly though, as demostrated in Operation Iraqi Freedom and it's aftermath in Iraq, the State Department makes it difficult for the US to follow policies that conflict with the hard left agenda. For example, Turkey denied our troops permission to attack, apparently, because we did not have UN approval. Of course, Bush never counted on UN approval, and we should never have had 1/4 of out troops dependent, in effect, on UN approval to be free for action. This is the kind of detail tradtionally handled by the State Department. Or in this case, purposefully mishandled.
In addition, the Hard Left has probably gotten to some of the Seven Dwarfs via blackmail, etc., thus blurring the distinction between the parties. We have to fight to resharpen that distinction, hopefully via a conservative national campaign to defeat one of the Seven Dwarfs (fillibuster sell outs) in the primary in 2006. It would be modeled on the Toomey vs. Specter campaign, which came very close to working.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.