At least bring common sense to the table
… the movie – 2004 – By Michael Moore
Published on May 4, 2011 By BoobzTwo In Politics

I must confess that I actually thought I hated this man and everything he was about until I started experiencing an overload of inaccurate and fictitious information the USG keeps pounding out and calling it the truth … so I decided to try an independent review of what I thought I knew and didn’t really. So I never watched or read anything Moore was involved with but I was more than willing to tell you how screwed up he was. So I rented the movie from Netflix and watched it … and I was amazed.

I have watched it twice now and I cannot find one shred of much information that is not factual or accurate. Beyond some idiosyncrasies in his sense of humor (they are funny); he presents very valid arguments and backs them up with documentation and interviews. He brings to light many of the things I have discovered in my own research into deceit, terrorism and the USG.

When I was a liberal (before I knew better) the only accurate information had to come from another liberal else it was a lie??? Later when I made my second mistake and became a conservative I learned the error of my ways … the truth could only be had from like ilk … so imagine my confusion when I called the neolibs and neocons for what they are and went independent. Suddenly, I have no source of valid information at all now (seemingly hehehe). I have had no success at all trying to walk the moderate tightrope between all the sharks without one side or the other dragging me down, go figure.

As far as Democrats/Republicans are concerned, their only care about the independent majority is how many they can acquire each election. But no matter which side is the best recruiter or who gets most independent votes … matters that concern the moderates will largely be ignored or sidelined and the neo-politicians will go their own course virtually unrestricted and completely unaccountable.


Comments (Page 32)
34 PagesFirst 30 31 32 33 34 
on Feb 04, 2012

BoobzTwo
The Taliban while in control and probably for the wrong reasons almost annihilated this trade ... we removed the Taliban and the trade is back ... how are we not culpable in the extreme???

I understand your point of view, however the USG does not control the Afghanistan Govt. or have the authority to deal with every problem that has sprouted up since the invasion of that country. It is the responsibility of the Afghanistan Govt to create and enforce the laws that govern their own country.

BoobzTwo
We had no problems with it while we were financially supporting the Contras (no list needed right)

There are several cases where the CIA has allowed certain illegal activities to continue in exchange for information or support of an unrelated objective. However....

BoobzTwo
but that was just unacceptable to US interests ... so the USG intervened again with its destructive version of democracy.

This kind of statement is BS. We did not invade Afghanistan because their heroin trade was dwindling. What has transpired is a result of what was done and the state of anarchy which existed while the action occurred, however it has nothing to do with the reasons we invaded Afghanistan and was not some sort of objective. I would call CIA involvement indirect complicity and not direct culpability. Very different from the picture you try to paint.

 

on Feb 04, 2012

Smoothseas
We did not invade Afghanistan because their heroin trade was dwindling.
I guess it was ill worded, my statement ... but still, I don't see how you could jump to a conclusion like this. I am just as well aware of why we said we went there ... as much as most anyway. I thought I was just talking drugs ... not policy. I am also aware of the fact that the stated reasons were not reflective of the actual reasons ... as in providing a path to Iraq. I do not think there was one altruistic reason why we invaded in the first place as far as the USG was concerned ... but there sure could have been were that in our interests.

on Feb 04, 2012

on Feb 04, 2012

BoobzTwo
I guess it was ill worded, my statement ... but still, I don't see how you could jump to a conclusion like this.

It's like I said I understand your viewpoint...Mine is simply that the increase in the drug trade there is mostly one of consequence. I put most of the blame on the people directly involved not the people who manipulate or turn a blind eye to the situation because it is politically expedient to do so. They certainly deserve their share of the blame but not overall responsibility. The USG needs to be criticized for what their actual involvement is and not the whole ball of wax. Better stated would be that the individuals within the government who are directly involved or turning a blind eye need to be called out and criticized.

The CIA has a long history of supporting drug trafficking. I don't blame the entire USG for it. Blame belongs to the people who have supported those actions and not the entire USG. And each action needs to be looked at independent from the others. Most of it happens because the executive branch wants to execute things that congress will not or would not approve. Some of it happens because the DEA/CIA wants to get inside to find those that are further up in the food chain. It is hard to get to the truth when the only thing presented is two extreme views (propaganda) revolving around which party controls the White House. 

on Feb 04, 2012

myfist0; Geeze … this is much more complex than I realized. Amazing how the same names keep popping up at the worlds illegal drugstores. No patriot likes to have to even consider that their leaders are anything but what they pretend to be but doubts and questions arise over time … this doubt has to creep in in stages … not all at once. But there has to be a catalyst that begins the process, a certain line has to be crossed, but once that door is opened … it is amazing what can be re-learned in retrospect … with just a little difference in perspective.  Great clip!!! Died of a melted brain … some Chemical toxicity of unknown medical diagnosis, hahaha under the care of the state, whoa…

on Feb 04, 2012

Smoothseas; we have run into this problem before... The line in the sand was crossed many years ago IMO ... you do not seem to have crossed it yet (???)? You are starting to sound quarrelsome with things like "I don't blame the entire USG for it" and such. I thought we (I was) talking drugs here? You like whistle blowers ... did you look at myfist0's clip ... drugs indeed. I believe the USG is in charge of the USG etc., etc. ... but we know how semantics can be used to make it seem otherwise.

Smoothseas
Most of it happens because the executive branch wants to execute things that congress will not or would not approve.
You don't see a problem with this???

 …you seem to find all kinds of excuses for things like “Some of it happens because…” well who cares why ‘some of it happens’ … most of it happens because of the purchasing power. Or “The USG needs to be criticized for what their actual involvement is.” … again did you review the above clip? We are trying to be specific now … you are not. How can you excuse the USG from the loop when the proceeds are used to support USG foreign policy and false flag incidents? This is not just a difference in opinion ... it is a fact.

on Feb 04, 2012

BoobzTwo
you do not seem to have crossed it yet (???)?

There is no line. There is not simply two sides to this issue. What is happening in Afghanistan is not directly related to what happened concerning Iran Contra or other instances where drug trade is or has been used to influence politics. Iran contra was all about supporting the overthrow of a government using drug money. It was horrendous and is simply one example of American Imperialism.Imperialism at its worst.

BoobzTwo
again did you review the above clip? We are trying to be specific now

There is no doubt that elements of the govt are involved in these things. They use drug money to support covert operations. That is obvious. But simply because I disagree with "specific statements" that you make does not mean that I disagree with all of them and does not mean that I am somehow supporting the exact opposite viewpoint of every statement that you present. The clip is old and shows nothing more than a picture of what was happening more than two decades ago. It cannot be taken to prove much of anything about the reality of the current situation in Afghanistan.

BoobzTwo
How can you excuse the USG from the loop when the proceeds are used to support USG foreign policy and false flag incidents? This is not just a difference in opinion ... it is a fact.

I don't excuse them for anything. I simply don't substitute what is happening in Afghanistan today with information from what happened more than two decades ago to come to some conclusion.

on Feb 04, 2012

Smoothseas
Smoothseas
Guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I am not even sure we are talking about the same thing here anymore. Maybe it would help to drop the word "Afghanistan" from the center of the discussion (it might help you) and center it on the illegal "drugs" issue because that goes way beyond the Contra affair and the war in Afghanistan by far ... we might get back to the same page at least??? As far as the crossing of lines go, you are not following that either. If there is none you will not hesitate to cross … then you are a lost apologetic soul.

on Feb 04, 2012

BoobzTwo
Maybe it would help to drop the word "Afghanistan" from the center of the discussion (it might help you) and center it on the illegal "drugs" issue because that goes way beyond the Contra affair and the war in Afghanistan by far

Go for it. Totally different discussion since what you originally stated was all about Afghanistan.

on Feb 05, 2012

Smoothseas
Go for it. Totally different discussion since what you originally stated was all about Afghanistan.
Is ok. I just started talking about the drugs in Afghanistan first is all. At least we can safely proceed then. Geeze, got to start somewhere ... I just wasn't sure where it was going to go so I didn't say more. Is it your opinion then that the USG (through proxies in the least) are not capitalizing big time on the illegal Afghan drug trade?

on Feb 05, 2012

BoobzTwo
are not capitalizing big time on the illegal Afghan drug trade?

They are capitalizing politically by not pushing the issue too hard because it is believed that Karzai's brother and other elements of the Afghani Govt are involved in the drug trade. We don't want to lose all influence over the Afghani Govt. I suspect we are also turning a blind eye to some druglords there who are in one way or another supporting US goals. As to whether the CIA is doing the same thing as it did back with the Mujaheddin.....I don't know, however since we are currently siding with Karzai in trying to negotiate a treaty with the Taliban I think it is less likely than likely.

on Feb 09, 2012

How you can separate the CIA from the Fed is beyond me. The CIA works directly under the Executive branch???  It seems like you are trying to tell me that even though the drug money we garner is used to fund many military indiscretions around the world ... the Fed is somehow not responsible??? It is not like this is not public knowledge, but like so much today this stuff seems to be ignored by many. We should not have more people in our prisons than say Russia … don’t you think? Do you believe they just stopped dealing in the lucrative drug markets because they grew something like a conscience, I think not. We are talking about lots and lots of money here ... and you KNOW how the USG feels about that ... unaccountable $$$'s ... what could be better ...

CIA - The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is a civilian intelligence agency of the United States government. It is an executive agency and reports directly to the Director of National Intelligence, with responsibility for providing national security intelligence assessment to senior United States policymakers. Here are thgree names to look up. Amadeus, Pegasus and Watch Tower … redacted as only the government can do so well and get away with it … for sure.

Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoUMyudlYFY&feature=related

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/ssci.shtml

Could we please STOP talking about Afghanistan now ... I thought we agreed that that was just a starting point and since your mind is so firmly set on THAT issue, it could only be productive if we move ON.

on Feb 09, 2012

Case files of the CIA:

on Feb 09, 2012

Smooth … I cannot believe you are unaware of this kind of illegal drug shit … it is all over the place. That is why I was puzzled about Afghanistan … the only country the USG is not capitalizing on from drugs … it just took me aback a bit is all. This is where I was headed is all.

on Feb 10, 2012

BoobzTwo
Smooth … I cannot believe you are unaware of this kind of illegal drug shit

I'm not. I am well aware of much of what happened during the Iran Contra ordeal. But that does not make me automatically assume we are involved in the same kind of thing in Afghanistan. Like I said earlier....I would guess we are turning a blind eye there but I have seen nothing that proves direct involvement,

34 PagesFirst 30 31 32 33 34