| *bang bang* fuck i'm dead! |
[20 Feb 2003|11:10am] |
Big chicken little was shot yesterday by a six lone gunmen believed to be ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.2) amp23, Lee Harvey Oswald's Nazi Zombie Clone, and four men who were picked up by the police and let go on unrelated charges.
It's not like anyone's gonna investigate or anything.
his last words were "quiet loners with families and kids need love too"
word on the street is amp23 either ate the shepherd's pineal gland and hypothalmus, or he locked the brain away in a jar of mountain dew for future implantation in another body.
the following bookmarks were found on the shepherd's laptop:
http://www.disinfo.com/
http://www.thememoryhole.org/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/
http://www.guerrillanews.com/
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/
http://www.prisonplanet.com/
http://www.gregpalast.com/
http://www.adbusters.org/
http://www.indymedia.org/
http://www.sacredcow.com/
it appears 90% of the links he posted came from one or more of those sites, or through the newswires concentrated at yahoo.com
other good sources of articles include:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/sos_usa
http://www.livejournal.com/users/infojunkies
medical technology is improving every day, maybe at some point doctors can figure out how to cure 30 gunshot wounds and he'll be back to his old self. folks are encouraged to explore the links above, maybe watch amp23's journal for signs of life, and always question anything anyone is telling them.
RIP
(this journal isn't being deleted, just idled because it was taking too much time, maybe it'll be back in zine form in time for the next rise and fall of zines, maybe it's time people read less and acted more)
|
|
| get your war ON! MUTHAFUCKA! |
[14 Feb 2003|01:08pm] |
Clear Channel is ready for war
So is our ILLEGAL WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
(listen to Rumseld talk about the inconveniences of international treaties when planning to use illegal weapons, developed illegally, in an illegal war, like a woman complaining about her hair)
All you folks calling for support of this war based on Saddam illegally gassing people have quite the conundrum to rectify here...how are we going to gas civillians and expect that to send the world the message that gassing civilians won't be tolerated??
The only message we're sending is that the guys leading the war are hypocrites and criminals.
Report THAT, Clear Channel! if you can tame your hardons long enough to report real news.
|
|
| Bush's tax plan in plain english... |
[26 Jan 2003|08:31pm] |
since it's the bottom line that matters, find your income level below and feel the love George Bush has for your contribution to The Economy. Be ready to lick your wounds:
If you make $16,000 or less your total savings is (Little Drum Roll)
$6 dollars. (i'm getting a Happy Meal with my refund!!!!! WOOP!)
If you make between $16,000 to $29,000 your total savings is (Little Bigger drum Roll)
$99 dollars.
If you make between $29,000 to $46,000 your total savings is (Slightly-Big Drum Roll)
$289 dollars.
If you make between $46,000 to $77,000 your total savings is (Sorta-Big Drum Roll)
$657 dollars.
If you make between $77,000 to $154,000 your total savings is (Pretty-Big Drum Roll)
$1,841 dollars.
If you make between $154,000 to $374,000 your total savings is (Very-Big Drum Roll)
$3,524 dollars.
If you make more than $374,000 a year your total savings is (Really-Big Drum Roll)
$30,127 dollars.
Get the full story here.
If you don't trust fucking liberals using free websites to slander the President,
HERE'S AN ARTICLE FROM BUSINESSWEEK SAYING THE EXACT SAME THING.
are you still convinced Bush has anyone's interest in mind other than his own, and the interest of his "one-percenter" friends? If you do it's only because you want to believe it and you're ignoring vital info.
Stop lying to yourself.
|
|
| if we can really "own" land... |
[26 Jan 2003|03:50pm] |
then i want the 10,000 acres the Mexican Government siezed from my great-great-grandfather returned to my family. My ancestor gave up his noble title in Spain to go to Mexico and become a merchant, he worked decades to amass the holdings he had, from Tampico to San Antonio. My birthright was stolen by a revolution that created one of the more corrupt governments in a zoo full of corrupt governments.
more people have a similar claim than not, all such claims would become null and void should land ownership be abolished and people be allowed to settle anywhere where land isn't currently being put to productive use by someone else. since there would still need to be a way of settling disputes, there could be a body that oversees land custodianships. one that would tax landholders who do not either put the land they watch to use or protect the land as wild/greenspace such as a park or animal habitat.
The Qur'an states it explicitly: there is more than enough land for all of us (and you will be asked why you did not move somewhere else if you found your homeland to be occupied by people who do not follow The Path.)
if this is truth, there is no reason for most of the people on this planet to be locked out of providing for themselves on an appropriate parcel of land. if they are following the libertairan principle of ZAP, and not interfering with someone else providing for themselves. there should be no reason to conscript anyone into any "system" against their will.
|
|
| can you say 'mixed signals'? |
[26 Jan 2003|04:42am] |
| [ |
mood |
| |
permediaplexed |
] |
if everyone in the US has been pumped full of pages and pages of "intelligence" about Iraq and how 'Saddam is a MADMAN' and he 'needs to be stopped by force', even going so far as to have the spokesman for the White House suggest the Iraqi people could solve their problems with "one bullet"...
Then WHY is the Times of India writing that the CIA has suggested to Iraq that we would let Saddam run away to India with no hard feelings?
Could it be that it's not about Saddam, as long as we get to control the second largest oil supply in the world? OF COURSE NOT you fool! Quit thinking those perverted commie thoughts before you're sent to be tortured with the poor farmers held in Camp X-Ray!!
er, i mean, of course the US has the best interests of the world in mind. What's good for Bush/Cheney is good for all 6 billion of us (minus those thousands being killed by US weapons for not agreeing we're #1)
HAPPINESS,
WE'RE ALL IN IT TOGETHER!
(smile, or else)
|
|
| here's why the iraq invasion will cost so much... |
[25 Jan 2003|07:13pm] |
US to use 800 cruise missiles in first 48 hours of invasion.
These are the same cruise missiles we've used for 20 years which cost us $1.3 million dollars a pop (the ones Bill Clinton used 13 of in retaliation for the Bush assassination attempt a decade ago, the ones that managed to land in AFGHANISTAN after we shot them at BAGHDAD). So in the first two days of the illegal invasion to steal oil from the people of Iraq, we will dump over a billion dollars worth of explosives on their civillian asses.
Or in the words of the men in charge of lying and murdering for profit:
"There will not be a safe place in Baghdad," a Pentagon official told America's CBS News after a briefing on the plan. "The sheer size of this has never been seen before, never been contemplated before."
Do you still think this is about weapons or Hussein?
Are you still lying to yourself that the Pentagon will try to minimize civillian casualties??
There are 5,000,000 civillians in Baghdad right now,
and our own military states none of them will be safe.
|
|
| no more flags and coffins for our boys... |
[25 Jan 2003|02:19pm] |
Remember when the military almost had us believing they
'never leave a man behind'?
Well you can forget about all that. US Soldiers who make the mistake of getting themselves killed over in Iraq can look forward to being bulldozed into a mass grave. A fate similar to that of the people we're used to burying in such a way over the last decades. iraqis, palestinians, yugoslavians, somalis, afghanis, south americans, vietnamese (13jul00), cypriots, east timorese, congolese, indians, many people know friends who were interred by bulldozer.
So all those people speculating about how many body bags will satisfy the US Gov don't really want the answer. The real question is how many mass graves.
This also means you can probably look forward to never seeing your dead friends on a wall in washington. Hard to list names when the bodies are buried hundreds per hill, in pieces. Also hard for widowed Americans to pester Uncle Sam about petty shit like death benefits with no bodies.
Does this mean there will be no official US casualties in Iraq?
I mean if we already ignore everyone else who gets the bulldozer...
Of course, treating our dead soldiers like insignificant collateral damage would only be for our troops' own protection, and you'd be a fool and a communist to suggest otherwise (like that it's a cost-cutting measure)
I can just see 'Get Your War On' now...
"I helped liberate Iraq's Oil and all I got was bulldozered into a mass grave"
|
|
| game theory... |
[25 Jan 2003|04:07am] |
if life is a game, then the stock market is the government's casino. propped up by the SEC and several other organizations that pump billions into it, and more importantly, urge the public to pump billions into it, but in the end it operates the same as a gambling house.
Reagan and Bush set the current rules by turning the previous rules in favor of their corporate buddies, and giving huge comps to the high rollers while tossing out the lower classes, the equally corporate-beholden House and Senate in full control by the Republicrats rubber stamped these changes because it meant bigger percs tossed their way.
Then the Republicrats either underestimated the charisma of a redneck coke-fiend, or they knew he'd be just the guy to run the house fast and loose for a few years to get the middle classes psyched at a chance to grab the brass ring. Even going so far as getting people to wager their entire retirement prospects on the govs tables. But remember who always wins in a casino racket.
So 8 years of Clinton made the houses numbers look better than they ever had, to the point where even people who don't know anything about gambling were going in and racking up impressive stacks of chips. But the man was a sex fiend and a servant-level interface with the more illicit extra-profitable gaming rooms in back who the common man identified with and that didn't sit well with the richer and more powerful Republicrats. it didn't help that most of those stacks of chips were in paper ledgers rather than actual transactions.
After Clinton was hounded and framed and slandered out of office, the house was given back to the next generation of the men who built it. This new generation immediately cashed out the high rollers and started tossing the commoners again, leaving the house's books a shambles but apparently still able to survive the burden of the cashouts on the shoulders of the small-time players. The main problem though, is that there is no outside source of wealth to back the house's operations. the house has as much money as it needs printed for its gamers at a fraction of face value which it then charges back to its gamers at full value plus interest.
A casino operating like that can only go so long before checks start bouncing and the house of cards collapses.
|
|
| You tell em, Helen! |
[24 Jan 2003|05:40am] |
Helen Thomas, the only female reporter to go to China with Nixon and white house press correspondent to EIGHT presidents calls George W Bush the worst president in history, says we've lost our way as a nation, and echos Dan Rather's sentiments about the press eating up spun bullshit like it was filet mignon because they're scared and soft.
We need more Helen Thomases. Put her on Rather's show if he won't be a fucking man.
|
|
| one last bubble to pop... |
[24 Jan 2003|03:12am] |
and quit telling me about the fucking price of gasoline!
it has gone up ten cents in the last week in my area, before the war machine has even been set loose. That's how certain this war is. Those with memories longer than the last commercial break may remember that before Gulf War I the price of gas was in the 80-90 cent range.
Gulf War I doubled that price overnight, and it has never come back to pre-war levels. It is still double the price it was in 1990 despite preparing to go to war a second time in the name of "stabilizing the price of oil" and the "efficiency brought by industry globalization"
just how stable is an exponential ramp? how high will they let prices climb this time? Do the Saudi's and Hussein's REALLY need another garage-full of Rolls-Royces? Do you think the gas prices after Gulf War II are more likely to fall to 80cents a gallon, or rise to $3.60 in accordance with the last war we fought?
Oil Wars do not make gasoline more affordable.
stop even thinking it.
Oil Wars only make gasoline more profitable.
|
|
| related to last rant... |
[24 Jan 2003|03:01am] |
if questioning Bush is equal to supporting Hussein and Bin Laden,
then what the fuck do you call putting millions directly into the man's pocket and selling him the weapons he's supposedly going to hit us with?
which of the above supports the man more? calling him a menace while funding and arming him, or telling our leaders to stop paying the motherfucker with one hand and arming him with the other??
i say NOT questioning the Bush Cabal is supporting terrorism millions of times over. If you're buying gas from Exxon you may as well be giving the man a wink and a nod while you denounce him, cause that behavior will only make him stronger and more dangerous as he takes advantage of his protected position.
winners of rigged games get stupid. this is both blessing and curse.
stop rigging the game in favor of these people.
|
|
| fuck that goldstein motherfucker, god i fucking hate him, fucking alpha-male monkey-ass motherfucker |
[24 Jan 2003|02:54am] |
If Saddam Hussein is really The Enemy, and Bush is truly operating as if we are in a State of War as it has been suggested by his aids, then WHY are oil companies still being allowed to put millions into the man's pocket a day right now by buying oil from Iraq? Currently, only Citgo, Sunoco, and Conoco are making gasoline without "supporting Terrorism" according to the Bush Cabal's own definitions of the words.
Why aren't consumers pushing for oil that doesn't come from The Enemy? Why isn't 7-11's gas revenue soaring, while Exxon/Chevron and the others watch their revenues fall off?
Bush Jr is in a unique position with regard to the consequences of trading with enemies we're at war with. His grandfather (Prescott, supposed thief of Geronimo's skull for his deathshead cronies) had companies siezed under the Trading With The Enemy Act for running almost all of Hitler's stateside business (which was promptly shifted to overseas divisions to hide the continuing support in cases like IBM).
Even the Bin Ladens, last year's Goldsteins, were close business partners of both Jr and Sr Bush up until Jr allowed 3000 people to be killed through criminal negligence as the commander in chief of our Air Force (why weren't fighters scrambled from the airbases the hijacked planes passed within MILES of instead of from ANOTHER STATE ENTIRELY, in defiance of 30 years of FAA and military regulation?). Jr even allowed all of Bin Laden's relatives to be flown out of the country while we were mourning without a single question or finger being raised, even though every other plane in the country was grounded (this is after explicitly spiking FBI investigations into their connections to Al-Qaeda).
Not just Bush is in on this either. Our national security advisor has a fucking SUPERTANKER named after her. It's being operated by one of the companies buying oil from Iraq right now. Cheney is similarly tainted, on top of swallowing up lucrative military support contracts for Halliburton's Brown & Root from the federal government.
Why were these people allowed to sell their stock options and simply walk away from committing treason, if Saddam Hussein is really The Enemy? Why are some of them still getting away with it today?
They can't have it both ways, either Saddam is the Enemy and is treated accordingly (provided an actual war declaration is issued) or he's an acceptable business partner and thus not the threat he's claimed to be. If he is a real threat he should not be getting american dollars from elected american leaders (and the rest of us) to enrich his tyrannical regime.
it's really that simple.
I think the Bush Administration's business actions are speaking louder than its warmongering words, and it's not the first time they've taken an self-evidently hypocritical stance with regard to interpreting our War Laws. they're still getting away with a double standard for "enemy combatants" who suffer all the torture and punishment of a POW without any of the human rights guaranteed by both domestic and international law (even in times of war).
|
|
| strong words, with strong evidence behind them... |
[23 Jan 2003|07:20pm] |
The System Can't Be Fixed
the amount of evidence backing this man's claims makes it hard to see the light at the end of the tunnel except to remind myself that people have survived equivalent times in the past. i don't agree with this man that it's hopeless, but it's going to get much darker before the dawn. the current "double dip recession" is just the gathering of the storm.
what are YOUR plans when the house of cards comes crashing down? the lies propping the system are only going to last so long before the reality of the situation sets in.
if you're in a "service job", find a way to become productive. now. you'll be thankful later.
|
|
| Why Viacom Must Die... |
[21 Jan 2003|02:20pm] |
Viacom wants insurers to pay them hundreds of millions of dollars for choosing not to run advertisements after the WTC and Pentagon attacks. That's right. They chose on their own, as a business decision, without government prompting, to stop running ads in the aftermath of the attacks.
And now they want to be rewarded for their decision by a court, forcing their insurance company to compensate them.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/1/16/192954.shtml
as for who Viacom is, if you watch cable television, you're watching Viacom
(all the channels not owned by AOL/TW)
|
|
| still think our military PROTECTS americans? |
[21 Jan 2003|01:37pm] |
say it with me: COINTELPRO,
remember this word, it's about to become just as relevant as it was.
New book reveals that, in the 60s, the US Army had a sniper squad that was given photos of high profile targets. All were dissidents who had a chance of making a difference in stopping the War Effort.
Think this is too far fetched?
MLK was one of the targets army snipers were given.
(they want you to believe he was coincidentally killed by a lone gunman before the snipers fired, of course, but will admit the snipers were there on a nearby roof in case the lone nut wasn't as good a shot as he shoulda been)
The Pentagon protects only one thing: the Pentagon's budget
(now up to a billion dollars a day and still rising)
those of you signing up for your tours, pray you don't get hurt, because injured soldiers are a financial drain the Pentagon doesn't appreciate (or even acknowledge after dropping your gimped and chemically exposed ass)
MEDICAL CARE AFTER DUTY IS A LIE, ASK A VETERAN
|
|
| navigation |
| [ |
viewing |
| |
most recent entries |
] |
| [ |
go |
| |
earlier |
] |
|
|
|
|
