If I may comment.
"Sean" has declared the death knell of the cia-drugs email list for
years, always declaring that I have killed it by being paranoid, drug-
addled, uneducated, an Israeli/Neocon op, etc. and then he also plays
all these games with the people that do post. Did ya ever notice how
"Sean" singles people out, putting their names into the subject? One
reason is to discourage "lurkers" to post, who wants the grief? One
reason is to dominate the conversations and shout down all other
viewpoints. And to waste endless hours in "debate."
And I find "sean" always pushing a dialectic of us and them, two
sides; and that we at cia-drugs are all together.
What's with that? I mean were are just an email group, mostly just
informational exchange with some discussion and expression of opinions.
Bob and I aren't loyal to each other. We have never met. I respect
Bob. I enjoy Bob's prose. Bob is his own man. We haven't signed any
pact. We are both just loyal to the same thing. The truth of the matter.
"Sean," you claim I am paranoid, yet you have posted that you use a
false name on the Internet because you were afraid of the Mossad and
"crazy people."
"Sean" says, "Yahoo knows for certain that I am not Berlet, as do
more than a dozen members of my Yahoo group"
How does Yahoo know who you are? There is no ID check in getting a
yahoo account. Anyone, most anywhere can create a yahoo account,
without any shred of evidence of who they are. "Sean" claims over a
dozen people know he isn't Berlet. Hmm, I've never heard from one. Do
you have meetings? Is there a secret handshake? Wow, this is the
biggest number "Sean" has ever claimed, know that he isn't Berlet.
Have you been out in bars lately recruiting? Bonding? How sweet?
Oh, and "Sean"/John you never answer my questions, but I will try one
more time, you seem to be such a reasonable guy and have so much time
on your hands. And a person of such knowledge and eruditeness should
be able to whip it off the top of their head.
Please show me where the Founding Fathers signed the Declaration of
Independence, pledging their honor and fortune with false names and
please show me a Shakespeare play about internecine warfare between
father and son. You have had several weeks to answer those two
questions, will you ever?
Peace,
Kris Millegan
www.trineday.com
On Oct 2, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Vigilius Haufniensis wrote:
uh, no. are you looking for an excuse to censor my posts?
i understand that you dont want to use your real name online.
heck, i dont use my real name either. there has been times where
hopsicker has written me offlist demanding to know who i am. heh.
if youre going to be anonymous, you have to expect that.
what i am saying is that i do other stuff fulltime. this does not
include obsessing over israel.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sean McBride
To: Vigilius Haufniensis
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 8:30 AM
Subject: More Lies?
Are you accusing me of receiving a $100,000 grant from the Ford
Foundation? If you are, you are mindlessly repeating lies that are
originating from Kris Millegan and Bob Dodds. I have received
money from no one to pursue my own research -- I am completely
independent. And it is insulting in the extreme for you to suggest
otherwise.
Why should I engage in a discussion on my own list with someone who
is circulating malicious lies about me?
Perhaps you haven't noticed: you are the only remaining member from
the former cia-drugs community who is still loyal to Millegan and
Dodds, and who hasn't deserted their group. What broke cia-drugs
was Millegan's paranoid and false accusations against at least five
members of the list. You are one of the few people on the list who
hasn't been able to figure out what's going on.
If you want me to post this, rewrite it with the malicious personal
attack removed, and I will answer your points about the Rothschilds.
Yahoo! Groups Notification <political-research-accept-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
A message has been sent to the political-research group from
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The message summary:
--------------------
FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DATE: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 01:19:44 -0500
SUBJECT: Re: [political-research] An Unanswered Question to
Vigilius Haufniensis
Do you realize that there is a major lack of specificity and
facts in your statements on this subject? I suggest you
research and master these areas first before trying to
comment on them in any kind of authoritative way.
VMANN: soon as i get a $100,000.00 grant from the ford
foundation, ill get right on that. in the meantime, i think
you've been arguing my case very well.
I once posted an article pointing to a Rothschild connection
--------------------
A complete copy of this message has been attached for your
convenience.
This message requires your approval for one of the following reasons:
* Your group is set to moderate all messages from this user, OR
* Your group is set to moderate messages from all users
To approve or reject this message using the web, please visit:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/pending?
view=1&msg=19870
To approve this message using email, reply to this message. You do not
need to attach the original message, just reply and send.
To reject this message using email, forward this message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
NOTE: The pending message will expire after 14 days. If you do not
take action within that time, the pending message will be
automatically
rejected. Yahoo! Groups does this to maintain a high quality of
service for our users.
Thank you for choosing Yahoo! Groups.
Regards,
Yahoo! Groups Customer Care
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/
terms/
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 01:19:44 -0500
From: "Vigilius Haufniensis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [political-research] An Unanswered Question to
Vigilius Haufniensis
Do you realize that there is a major lack of specificity and facts
in your statements on this subject? I suggest you research and
master these areas first before trying to comment on them in any
kind of authoritative way.
VMANN: soon as i get a $100,000.00 grant from the ford foundation,
ill get right on that. in the meantime, i think you've been
arguing my case very well.
I once posted an article pointing to a Rothschild connection to
Mikhail Khodorkovsky -- but MK is only one billionaire out of
hundreds on the planet.
In addition to the Simon Schama book I just mentioned, you should
also read Niall Ferguson's two fairly recent major volumes on the
Rothschilds:
Niall Ferguson; 1999; The House of Rothschild: Volume 1:
Money's Prophets: 1798-1848; Penguin
Niall Ferguson; 2000; The House of Rothschild: Volume 2: The
World's Banker: 1849-1999; Penguin
VMANN: yeah, and the jp morgan thing is well known.
Are the Rothschilds the dominant family within the global
neoconservative billionaire network? I don't know. I haven't seen
anyone prove that case yet with solid research. It smells like a
cheesy conspiracy theory, not something factual. Certainly you
haven't come close to making the case. But it is a fact that all
neoconservative billionaires are singlemindedly preoccupied with
the interests of Israel, and that they exert enormous power over
the American political system and the American mainstream media.
They have been the main drivers behind the Iraq War and the
campaign to attack Iran.
VMANN: part of what makes these billionaires effective is their
secrecy. however, we can see the lines of force. the rothschilds
are very pro-israel. as are the neoconservatives. here we have
two examples of "oligarchs" who were later revealed to be lackeys
for the rothschilds. by inference, it is logical to conclude that
others are as well.
of course, the real question at hand is whether the upper level of
control is in the hands of "irrational cultists." this appears to
be one of your presupposed axioms. so we can both agree that the
neocons are "irrational cultists." i suggested that irrational
types are very easily manipulated, in this case being manipulated
to cause war in iraq and now iran, as support of the US dollar as
world reserve currency.
you then argue my case for me by admitting that the rothschilds are
very pro-israel and would in fact, be likely to support the pro-
israel cause. i show two examples of supposed oligarchical types
who in fact turned out to be merely "holding" wealth for the
rothschilds.
so are you going to stay with your thesis that the "irrational
cultists" are at the "top of the pyramid," or are you going to
continue with my thesis, that they are being manipulated or used by
forces "higher up?"
it seems to me that the so-called "trilateralist" types are also
beholden to the rothschilds. have scowcroft, brzezinksi, colin
powell or bush sr ever spoken out on or moved against the federal
reserve? or have they rather in fact worked to serve and promote
its interests?
frankly i think tarpley makes a better case for the "breakdown in
the oligarchy" theory than you do.
vigilius haufniensis
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.39/1044 - Release Date:
10/2/2007 11:10 AM
