Re: Is America at war with China? (*Not* with Bushy & Co.?) [WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK

2002-07-01 Thread Rolf Martens

HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---

At 08:55 2002-07-01 -0400, you ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:

>---Why did you even bother to post this stuff? 
>Stopnato is more serious than this, and
>you are being irresponsible to post the ravings of some drug 
>addict-paranoid-LaRouchian nutcase!

Heather,

I posted this in order to show one more of the *desperate CIA
"red herring" attempts* to throw people off the real scent (that
of Bushy & friends) in the case of 11 September 2001.

As a such (as I pointed out it was too), it was of some
interest, I believe, and not at all "irresponsible" to show,
*with those comments by me added*.

And *you* are quite wrong - might even be called "irrespon-
sible" - in trying to make people believe that *this* thing
came from that small LaRouche bourgeois group in the
USA, *not* from (main) CIA quarters.

I among other things, rather early on, quoted, to this
list too, what *LaRouche* on his part *did* say - even
the very same day, 11 Sept 2001, when he happened
to be in a radio interviwe at the very time those Bushy-
(etc) directed planes were flying smack into the WTC
towers:

*He* said - as you must know - that clearly, such a
thing could *not* have been done without the *connivance
of some "highly-placed" persons in the USA itself*.

And in this, he of course was quite right. By no means
did LaRouche - then or later - hint anything about
"China".

And you, Heather, expressed *anger* at that time,
back in September 2001, at my "even qouting" such
a person as LaRouche, saying - then too, but *then*
with *another* "reason" given by you for this - that
he was "a nutcase", implying too that his correct
pointing at such "highly-placed US persons" was
"all wrong".

"Responsible" acting, then, on your part? "Respon-
sible" acting by you now?

True enough, the theory of LaRouche was, "some
*rouge* influential people in the US", *not* "the
administration itself". And in this, he clearly was/is
wrong, it has turned out later - or hasn't it?

Trying to pin the "China done it?" red herring on "the
LaRouche" people, that's pretty bad anyway, Heather
- I did appreciate your info on quite another matter,
having to with the people's justified defence against
the present attacks on democratic rights in the US.

Rolf M.
Malmö, Sweden

---
ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.bacIlu
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: Is America at war with China? (*Not* with Bushy & Co.?) [WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK

2002-07-01 Thread Rolf Martens

HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---

Haha, "Agent Smiley", this really is funny!

An article trying to get people to believe that behind
11 September 2001 was not good old Bushy and his
good old mass murder gang after all, but - China!
(Ruled today, likewise, by no nice people at all, of
course.)

This is on an "intelligence level" quite on a par with
that old "word explanation", in Mad Magazine, back in
the late 1960s: "Crèpe de Chine - Red Chinese
propaganda".

Only today, China by no means is red any longer, of
course. The herring in this posting of yours is, however.
It smells just as if it had been delivered "fresh" from one
of those CIA fishery factories, in another primitive
attempt at saving the Bushies from their present plight!

Rolf M.
Malmö, Sweden


At 19:14 2002-06-30 -0700, you (Agent Smiley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - a name straight
out of that good old spy fantasy) wrote, to the
Free Palestine list:

>PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY !!
>
>~
>
>I think that when we are sleeping or otherwise
>abosrbped mentally that our organic CPU is still
>engaged in computation and sorting of information,
>driven by the need to make sense of the world. Last
>year I lived in Santa Rosa, California up until late
>September. It was here that about two thirds of the
>experiences I have detailed, the psychological
>operations aimed at de-stabilization, occurred. It is
>here that I had methamphetamine offered to me
>unceasingly. I was homeless due to the fact that A) I
>had left Michigan to keep from jeopardizing my family
>and friends during the height of the Jam Echelon Day
>campaign due to cryptic threats and B) I had been
>denied, somehow, every opportunity to make a better
>situation for myself. It is also here that I was
>offered heroin regularly. As I go on here you will see
>how this is key.
>
>It was in Santa Rosa wherein the person I eventually
>fled, the girl who was obviously assigned to me for
>about a year and a half, was at the center of attempts
>to shove certain memes (paradigms) down my throat. One
>of those was a reverence for the now popular dragon
>iconography you are seeing about. I must caution
>against assuming that anyone bearing such, be it on a
>t-shirt or a tattoo, is in cahoots with what I am
>leading into.
>
>It was in Santa Rosa that I had a very disturbing
>dream and this is the gist of what I was
>circumlocuting in the first sentence of this text. I
>do not have dreams like this and I did not even during
>the height of my psyop induced angst, except for this
>once. I submit that my unconscious was speaking the
>only language it knows how to transmit to the
>conscious mind, the language of the mythic, of dreams,
>of symbolism. I believe my unconscious had pieced
>together something that my conscious mind was only
>vaguely aware of, in its endless computations. I
>believe this is the nature of prophecy and I believe
>we are all prophets at times.
>
>My dream was of billowy Arabian tents, of a dragon,
>and of much blood. The words “The dragon has shed its
>spines and gone undergound” echoed for months in my
>head. We had gone from the year of the dragon into the
>year of the snake. I am sorry that it was not more
>specific. It bothered me all night and I hardly slept.
>This was June, 2001. In case you are wondering, I am
>NOT making this up.
>
>See:
>
>"How do you recruit a person to rain terror, death and
>destruction on people they do not even know? Do you
>look for someone who is already evil?
>
>No. You use bait. The best bait is information that
>can easily be accepted as true and may, from a certain
>perspective, in fact be true."
>
>http://www.factnet.org/letters/FACTNewsOctober2001.html
>
>
>~
>
>Now what the hell does this have to do with anything?
>I was driven to relay the story above by what I
>believe is a revelation of sorts that I had today.
>
>FACT: China bought four hundred million dollars worth
>of the very 757's that struck the World Trade Center.
>Someone needs to explain to me why this was done if
>these jets had just been shown to be vulnerable.
>
>Boeing signs huge China deal
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1574000/1574486.stm
>
>
>FACT: The international cabals we have been often
>speaking of (or CLUBS if you prefer) always seem to
>cross paths with Henry Kissinger.
>
>FACT: Last year, in the spring, Kissinger and his CFR
>buddies presented China with what was allegedly new
>incriminating evidence regarding the Tiennamen square
>incident years ago.
>
>You've heard a lot of mixed info on Lyndon LaRouche
>for sure. This is because his research department is
>phenomenal but his conclusions as to what to do about
>he world he paints with an accurate brush are
>questionable. It IS he that reports this information.
>Here is the url. Take it in context with the following
>two items.
>http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2001/2803_cfr.html
>
>FACT: Kissinger now sits as "top advisor" to a huge
>Chines oil firm. What does TOP advisor exact