![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
A Critical Eye Towards the News
Today there's two stories I wanted to look at:
Israel won't accept nuke weapons in Iran
By LAURIE COPANS, Associated Press Writer
JERUSALEM - Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told a powerful parliamentary panel on Monday that Israel rejects "no options" to block Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, a meeting participant said.
The statement was the Israeli leader's clearest indication yet that he is willing to use military force against Iran.
"Israel clearly will not reconcile itself to a nuclear Iran," the meeting participant quoted Olmert as telling the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. "All options that prevent Iran from gaining nuclear capabilities are legitimate within the context of how to grapple with this matter."
[So we have four paragraphs, or lines of text, and four times Iran is coorelated with nuclear weapons. I'll highlight them all... lets see how many more they'll throw in.]
The meeting participant spoke on condition of anonymity because the session was closed.
Olmert addressed the panel days after discussing Iran's nuclear ambitions in talks with President Bush in Jerusalem.
During that visit, Israeli officials disputed the recently released conclusions of a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate that concluded Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003.
[So at least we have some lip service to the NIE Report, but the facts on the ground as suggested by this report are that Iran has no nuclear weapons, no program, NOTHING, yet these Pathocrats want their wars so of course they're going to 'dispute' the facts. It's all 1+1=3 for these guys. They also have NOTHING to back up their assertions, yet they keep repeating them over and over as if to make them true by fiat.]
In Jerusalem, Bush declared that Iran remained "a threat to world peace," but reasserted his commitment to trying to resolve the standoff over Iran's nuclear program diplomatically.
[Hmm the actual threat to world peace is the US/Israel and their allies, interesting, accusing others of what you do yourself... that's a psychopathic trait.]
Israel, which sent warplanes in 1981 to demolish an unfinished nuclear reactor in Iraq, advocates a diplomatic solution to the Iranian standoff as well. But in his comments to the parliamentary committee, Olmert said: "It's clear that Israel won't reconcile itself to a nuclear Iran. We reject no options a priori."
Israel considers Iran to be its most dangerous enemy and rejects Tehran's insistence that has only a peaceful nuclear program designed to produce energy for civilian uses. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the dissolution of the Jewish state. Iran possesses long-range missiles that are capable of striking Israel and can be fitted with nuclear warheads.
[Here they're crafting the story very carefully, and twisting his words. They're associating his speech with the use of nuclear missiles, again this stuff is so transparent when you look at it in depth, the problem is no one does that and accepts it without question.]
Meir Javedanfar, an Israel-based Iran analyst, said Olmert refused to rule out a military option "in order to increase the urgency to find a diplomatic solution."
"I think this is Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's way of making sure that the international community stays alert on the Iranian nuclear issues," Javedanfar said. "The concern in Israel is that after the NIE report, the world is just going to sit and watch Iran continue with its nuclear weapons program."
[That may be the concern, but the REALITY, which Pathocrats like Bush and Olmert are completely dissociated from, is that Iran has no nuclear weapons program, thus no reason for us to potentially go to war with them. Hmm... shades of Iraq anyone?]
Two sets of U.N. sanctions have failed to push Iran to abandon its enrichment of uranium, a process that could also be used to develop fissile material for a warhead.
[That's not really true, you have to enrich it a whole hellova lot more in order for it to be weapons grade.]
Although Israel successfully knocked out Iraq's nuclear program with a single airstrike 26 years ago, any attack on Iran's nuclear program would be more complicated because its facilities are scattered, with some hidden underground.
Such an attack would also almost certainly unleash an Iranian reprisal against Israel, U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf or both.
And that's it, seven mentions of 'Iran' and 'nuclear weapons.' Now why is this story on the front page of yahoo news, and likely elsewhere? My guess is that they're trying to create an association between 'Iran' and 'nuclear weapons'. In short, a crude form of mind control or thought-programming. In this article the author words it thusly:
What it all boils down to is the exposure rate. You take a simple message and you repeat it over and over, such as mentioning Saddam and 9/11 [or nuclear weapons and Iran]. You don’t have to say Saddam was involved in 9/11, because that is not true. You just have to mention Saddam and 9/11 in the same simple repetitive message thousands of times and people will support an attack on a country that didn’t have anything to do with 9/11 because they’ve been psychologically conditioned to link the two.
It’s psychological operations on a grand scale, mass psychology. The scientific art of manipulating public opinion is 100 years old now. PsyOps have evolved to the point, thanks to the all pervasive mass media, where we can make you believe, or at least passively accept, whatever we want you to. I secretly worked with the world’s most powerful media companies to get you to believe what “they” want you to believe. The media is the most efficient weapon of tyranny and oppression ever created. No need to physically control populations anymore when you can do it mentally - program it in, internalize the rules.
/rant on
So what the fuck!? They're pulling the same bullshit they pulled with Iraq, only now the nation isn't traumatized like we were after 9-11. They're building this mental rappaport of 'Iran' and 'nuclear weapons' probably because they're planning another false-flag 9-11 style event.
Hell, a meteor could come crashing down in a populated area and instead of blaming the meteor they might shift the blame to Iran's mysterious 'nuclear weapons'. In Tunguska circa 1908 the meteorite that exploded there resulted in devastation similiar to a nuclear weapon, so it's entirely possible and in this concern citizen's opinion - probable.
This is all so predictable, so pathological, so twisted and transparent yet my parents, friends, and coworkers all refuse to see it. They plume along thinkin everything is hunky doory and that the democrats will 'fix it all in 08'.
/rant off
::sighs::
Speaking of the (s)election, I saw this story and totally rolled my eyes:
Clinton, Obama clash over race issue
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
LAS VEGAS - Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have become embroiled in racially tinged disputes as large numbers of black voters prepare to get their first say in the Democratic presidential campaign.
ADVERTISEMENT
The candidates and their surrogates are heating up their rhetoric, and it could prove to be combustible beyond South Carolina's Jan. 26 primary.
Clinton, on defense over comments that she and her husband made regarding Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy and Obama's fitness for the White House, tried to turn the tables on her top primary rival. She accused his campaign of looking to score political points by distorting their words. [...]
I snipped it cuz there's no point in picking apart the story. You can see the idea behind it from the get go. The two top democrats are bickering with each other over an emotional issue, they're trying to divide the party. To keep the top candidates isolated and focusing on a petty issue like race, or sex, when the real division should be between Psychopaths and Normal Humans. I might inject here that Ron Paul is the only candidate that has put any info on his website referring to the Pathocracy and the rule of psychopaths. That is the biggest step forward any candidate could make towards progress, in order to fix a problem you must first acknowledge it exists.
I won't be voting for the-dark-knight-Obama, and I won't be voting for cunt-rag-whore-Hillary. In all odds I'll vote for Ron Paul, even if I have to write him in.
Israel won't accept nuke weapons in Iran
By LAURIE COPANS, Associated Press Writer
JERUSALEM - Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told a powerful parliamentary panel on Monday that Israel rejects "no options" to block Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, a meeting participant said.
The statement was the Israeli leader's clearest indication yet that he is willing to use military force against Iran.
"Israel clearly will not reconcile itself to a nuclear Iran," the meeting participant quoted Olmert as telling the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. "All options that prevent Iran from gaining nuclear capabilities are legitimate within the context of how to grapple with this matter."
[So we have four paragraphs, or lines of text, and four times Iran is coorelated with nuclear weapons. I'll highlight them all... lets see how many more they'll throw in.]
The meeting participant spoke on condition of anonymity because the session was closed.
Olmert addressed the panel days after discussing Iran's nuclear ambitions in talks with President Bush in Jerusalem.
During that visit, Israeli officials disputed the recently released conclusions of a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate that concluded Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003.
[So at least we have some lip service to the NIE Report, but the facts on the ground as suggested by this report are that Iran has no nuclear weapons, no program, NOTHING, yet these Pathocrats want their wars so of course they're going to 'dispute' the facts. It's all 1+1=3 for these guys. They also have NOTHING to back up their assertions, yet they keep repeating them over and over as if to make them true by fiat.]
In Jerusalem, Bush declared that Iran remained "a threat to world peace," but reasserted his commitment to trying to resolve the standoff over Iran's nuclear program diplomatically.
[Hmm the actual threat to world peace is the US/Israel and their allies, interesting, accusing others of what you do yourself... that's a psychopathic trait.]
Israel, which sent warplanes in 1981 to demolish an unfinished nuclear reactor in Iraq, advocates a diplomatic solution to the Iranian standoff as well. But in his comments to the parliamentary committee, Olmert said: "It's clear that Israel won't reconcile itself to a nuclear Iran. We reject no options a priori."
Israel considers Iran to be its most dangerous enemy and rejects Tehran's insistence that has only a peaceful nuclear program designed to produce energy for civilian uses. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the dissolution of the Jewish state. Iran possesses long-range missiles that are capable of striking Israel and can be fitted with nuclear warheads.
[Here they're crafting the story very carefully, and twisting his words. They're associating his speech with the use of nuclear missiles, again this stuff is so transparent when you look at it in depth, the problem is no one does that and accepts it without question.]
Meir Javedanfar, an Israel-based Iran analyst, said Olmert refused to rule out a military option "in order to increase the urgency to find a diplomatic solution."
"I think this is Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's way of making sure that the international community stays alert on the Iranian nuclear issues," Javedanfar said. "The concern in Israel is that after the NIE report, the world is just going to sit and watch Iran continue with its nuclear weapons program."
[That may be the concern, but the REALITY, which Pathocrats like Bush and Olmert are completely dissociated from, is that Iran has no nuclear weapons program, thus no reason for us to potentially go to war with them. Hmm... shades of Iraq anyone?]
Two sets of U.N. sanctions have failed to push Iran to abandon its enrichment of uranium, a process that could also be used to develop fissile material for a warhead.
[That's not really true, you have to enrich it a whole hellova lot more in order for it to be weapons grade.]
Although Israel successfully knocked out Iraq's nuclear program with a single airstrike 26 years ago, any attack on Iran's nuclear program would be more complicated because its facilities are scattered, with some hidden underground.
Such an attack would also almost certainly unleash an Iranian reprisal against Israel, U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf or both.
And that's it, seven mentions of 'Iran' and 'nuclear weapons.' Now why is this story on the front page of yahoo news, and likely elsewhere? My guess is that they're trying to create an association between 'Iran' and 'nuclear weapons'. In short, a crude form of mind control or thought-programming. In this article the author words it thusly:
What it all boils down to is the exposure rate. You take a simple message and you repeat it over and over, such as mentioning Saddam and 9/11 [or nuclear weapons and Iran]. You don’t have to say Saddam was involved in 9/11, because that is not true. You just have to mention Saddam and 9/11 in the same simple repetitive message thousands of times and people will support an attack on a country that didn’t have anything to do with 9/11 because they’ve been psychologically conditioned to link the two.
It’s psychological operations on a grand scale, mass psychology. The scientific art of manipulating public opinion is 100 years old now. PsyOps have evolved to the point, thanks to the all pervasive mass media, where we can make you believe, or at least passively accept, whatever we want you to. I secretly worked with the world’s most powerful media companies to get you to believe what “they” want you to believe. The media is the most efficient weapon of tyranny and oppression ever created. No need to physically control populations anymore when you can do it mentally - program it in, internalize the rules.
/rant on
So what the fuck!? They're pulling the same bullshit they pulled with Iraq, only now the nation isn't traumatized like we were after 9-11. They're building this mental rappaport of 'Iran' and 'nuclear weapons' probably because they're planning another false-flag 9-11 style event.
Hell, a meteor could come crashing down in a populated area and instead of blaming the meteor they might shift the blame to Iran's mysterious 'nuclear weapons'. In Tunguska circa 1908 the meteorite that exploded there resulted in devastation similiar to a nuclear weapon, so it's entirely possible and in this concern citizen's opinion - probable.
This is all so predictable, so pathological, so twisted and transparent yet my parents, friends, and coworkers all refuse to see it. They plume along thinkin everything is hunky doory and that the democrats will 'fix it all in 08'.
/rant off
::sighs::
Speaking of the (s)election, I saw this story and totally rolled my eyes:
Clinton, Obama clash over race issue
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
LAS VEGAS - Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have become embroiled in racially tinged disputes as large numbers of black voters prepare to get their first say in the Democratic presidential campaign.
ADVERTISEMENT
The candidates and their surrogates are heating up their rhetoric, and it could prove to be combustible beyond South Carolina's Jan. 26 primary.
Clinton, on defense over comments that she and her husband made regarding Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy and Obama's fitness for the White House, tried to turn the tables on her top primary rival. She accused his campaign of looking to score political points by distorting their words. [...]
I snipped it cuz there's no point in picking apart the story. You can see the idea behind it from the get go. The two top democrats are bickering with each other over an emotional issue, they're trying to divide the party. To keep the top candidates isolated and focusing on a petty issue like race, or sex, when the real division should be between Psychopaths and Normal Humans. I might inject here that Ron Paul is the only candidate that has put any info on his website referring to the Pathocracy and the rule of psychopaths. That is the biggest step forward any candidate could make towards progress, in order to fix a problem you must first acknowledge it exists.
I won't be voting for the-dark-knight-Obama, and I won't be voting for cunt-rag-whore-Hillary. In all odds I'll vote for Ron Paul, even if I have to write him in.
