Do most Republicans and Democrats realize that their parties are simply fronts for organized crime?

Answer 1

Political parties are merely an ILLUSION, because THIS secret and evil group has been in control of everything for far too long!...
http://www.rense.com/general58/suspre.htm

Answer 2

No. Most dems and repubs are good honest people. The parties are held to strict reporting rules. Of course, a few bad apples spoils the barrel as far as public opinion goes.

Answer 3

Simple answer - no. Both parties are equally corrupt, it is just more visible with the party in power.

Answer 4

The only crime I see is that you're still running free across the landscape.

Answer 5

Let’s talk a little about foreign affairs. Having worked in research I am privy to information that is public but not well known.
Anybody who is curious just about how the upper echelon thinks about us should purchase a copy of the Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs 2004 study. There is a question in the questionnaire asking the sample, phd holders, Fortune 500 CEO’s, Cabinet Department Heads, Senators (who mostly refused comment), and even the office of the Executive Branch.
(Funny thing they did not have any average Americans in the sample. The 98% of us that have access to 11% of the working capitol. That’s 253Mil people divided out using the 2004 GNP, $3,300 a year.)
When asked who’s opinion is most valued when making foreign policy decisions, the Pres scored a 6, congress got an 8. Not bad, 8 out of 10. The American Public rated a 2. What does that tell you?
The basis for our Foreign policy is determined by the outcomes of these studies. The current political system relies on ‘research’, in the form of massive amounts of data collection just to write a speech. They are telling you what you want to hear. That is why the last two elections where so close. Both sides do the same things, they hire the same companies, they are mirrors. An illusion of choice at best.
When they want to do anything other then tell you what you want to here, there is a select group of people they ask. Oddly enough, the study sample was referred to as ‘elite’ by the Council. How ironic.
And this group of folks, the Senators won’t talk, they don’t care. The rest of them give the American public a 1, the military folks have a little more respect for the American public, but of course they rate the pres a 10, what else would a military man do?
Basically, the CEO’s make up a large portion of the sample (they modify the tables to reflect extrapolated samples). WHY are we asking CEO’s what we should do with foreign affairs? WHY won’t the Senators chime in? Something is array in the town of Washington.
So, we asked all kinds of wonderful questions, about N. Korea and Uzbekistan, Iran. The answers taken about those situations from CEO’s was used to determine foreign policy. I wonder why it seams the government is out of control.
I really don’t like to think in terms of woulda, coulda, shoulda. All that does is lead to hours of pointless finger pointing and speculation. What is done is done, we cannot undue it. I want to think in terms of what I would do.
The first thing I would like to do is make the foreign affair decisions of the United States determined by a consensus of the people. These guys call 10,000 people in 1 hour to test a statement for a debate. Both sides. But they can’t use the same technology to ask us if we want our families to go slaughter other families for oil profits. I know for a fact with 1 dialer on 1 airport hub you can call and ask everyone a yes or no question in less then 2 weeks. I have worked with the technology that does it.
Back to the subject, I have a more simple approach to this mess we are in. I think it is time for us to break this down. When working on that study I was thinking to myself, ‘these people actually think they are better than everyone else’, teamsters excluded.
We are not dealing with complex republic democratic want to be’s, we are dealing with individual leaders. Given that, you could almost say we are dealing with a human. Okay, so we are dealing with a human. Now we can relate.
We have to do what we do as good people. People have forgotten that Americans are good people because the only side of us they see is the sword. We got pens you know.
I think the easiest way for me to express my point is an analogy.
Imagine that the world is a middle school recess. We can all relate to that right?
We have characters. They can be represented many ways. I have a story featuring little Johnny Afghanistan.
The arm of the US they see can be represented by Tommy Tuff Guy, the school bully. Tommy is able to get away with whatever he wants. His parents (the American Public) does not know what Tommy really is doing. They ask him to act a certain way, to respect others and their possessions, but Tommy does what he wants.
Tommy has a rival Bully, Rusky Russia. Rusky Russia has been trying to manipulate Johnny Afghanistan to do his bidding. When Tommy gets wind of this, he bribes Johnny to go kick Russia in the nuts. So, Johnny does it, gets a black eye and goes back to collect his snickers bar. This goes on for some time, until all of Johnny’s friends and family are kicking Russia incessantly in the nuts for candy and food. Then one day Russia transfers to another school. Johnny asks Tommy who he can kick in the nuts for candy, and Johnny tells him to piss off. His friends and family now reliant on Tommy’s candy now start to wail with hunger. So Johnny, hearing his families cries, thinks about revenge. He could not possibly attack the bully, Tommy, his too strong, he has all the new weapons, and he has a gang, the little rascals. England, France, everybody ready to throw down because they are afraid that Tommy will not let them play with the toys anymore. So Tommy eggs the parent’s house. After all, Tommy thinks the Parents make the decisions, that is what happens in his family. And the parents are enraged and call the principal. And the principal issues punishment. Tommy neither gets a hand or a chance to speak his peace.
The point I am trying to make is:
America needs to start respecting the rest of the world. Instead of bomb, build. We should ask these people what we have done. We spend millions doing pointless research about pointless statements meant to woo the public. Lets use those resources to ask those people what has been done to hurt them. Then explain that we are sorry that our government got out of control. Offer them a handshake of peace instead of a handshake of terror. That is why they say we are terrorists. Because when we come to the negotiating table people’s hands shake. I don’t think Teddy meant this when he said “speak softly and carry a big stick”.
Then, let’s explain in a unified voice. We are here to help. Lets bring them industry. Let’s put laptops (they are making a windup for $100) in their lap. Let’s give them access to the internet and the knowledge that comes with it. WE CANNOT HOLD SOMEONE ACCOUNTABLE WHO LIVES IN A COUNTRY WITH A 99% ILLITERACY RATE. They do not even know what freedom is. All they know is that we blew up their relatives who never personally attacked any Americans. They barely know who we are.
WE can change what WE are doing to the world. But we need a voice.
If we do not address these issues that the rest of the world has with us, the will have their way with us.
One by one, we can correct the mistakes we have made. In a personal relationship, a well adjusted person listens to the other party, and extends an open mind and a respect for the ability of the other party to make their own decisions. Let’s just apply this basic principal of communication to the world.
For a long time, our country has had a history of making mistakes and not admitting them.
Why don’t we just open the files and take a look. :Lets make it public, lets apologize, and lets change as one nation, together, United we stand, divided they will do what they want.
I have much more, but that is good for now.

Answer 6

You may have a point there. I will go further and say most religions are too.

Answer 7

No they do not.

Answer 8

Freedom creates all kinds of expression-be aware that crime has consequences if caught, sometimes.

Trivia question for you now-who is the Under Secretary General of the United Nations? And what is he known for?

Hillary Clinton says about the North korean problem>> "Part of the reason for these problems is the Bush administrations policy on the situation" HA! I feel that N. Korea won't do anything. I feel Iran and Syria may want to get more into the insurgency business by hiring their oppressed poor, including Afghanis. We will just keep fighting off insurgents. I have a good friend from Iran who thinks that if Iraqs economy picks up, as it should, without terrorism of innocent to stop it, Irans youth will want what Iraq has, lkie Afghanistan wants now too. He si presently, with paranoia, also buying Iraqi Dinar...lol Russia and China have too many oil, interests in iran to get DIRECTLY involved. Noone struck Israel when they fought back lebanon, that tells you something. Israel would crush Syria and Lebanon militarily, very quickly. Japan alone (besides us, Britain, S. Korea) would crush N. Korea. And Iran would be done within a month. My Irani friend said most Iranis secretly WANT a capatalistic society, but they don't want to get "sang-sarred" for saying so. <> It is my opinion that maybe some of the above mentioned may happen, but more than likely, the iraqi economy will just fluorish, and other countries will make threats so THEY can have a better economy too. Realize, they don't have what WE realize as even POLICE in Iran (the way we know it) or social security, or ALOT of things. Also, from EXTREMELY good sources, the death count of Iraqi since the war is around 50,000-sad-but compare that to our civil war. AND, look at what happened yesterday!!! Innocent teen girls and below age ten girls kidnapped and killed by terrorists???? HOW are these people dying? From direct orders of Oppressors, that's how. And how do they get them to do it?, not with religion. With promises. As soon as the oppressed terrorists figure out that REGARDLESS of religion, the promise of FREEDOM and PROSPERITY (food, water and non-oppressive leadership included) is ALOT longer lasting than a run and gun of innocents, they'll come around........but as to hillary's comment.......................... Bin Laden Invited to the White House?
Christopher Ruddy
Thursday, June 6, 2002
Osama Bin Laden Invited to the White House!
Now that sounds more than far-fetched. And certainly President Bush would rather see bin Laden's head on a platter than to have him as a dinner guest.

But a senior former CIA agent who served in the Middle East for almost two decades fighting terrorists thinks that bin Laden may believe that, like fellow terrorist leader Yasser Arafat, he may find himself someday a guest of a future U.S. president.

This former CIA officer, Robert Baer, recently wrote the explosive book "See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism."

Baer writes that when he sees Arafat "standing in the Rose Garden at the White House or when I hear that a CIA director has met privately with him at some desert tent, I wonder sometimes if Arafat's example doesn't make Osama bin Laden consider that he, too, might become a statesman in time."

Baer's point seems fantastic. However, we now know for a certainty that Arafat has masterminded and backed too many terrorist acts to count, from the Munich massacre to jet hijackings and worse.

A veteran of the Mideast, Baer knows Arafat. Baer writes that while "terrorist organizations operate like the most complicated interlocking directorate ever created," he discovered that many of the trails of these groups and their activities "converge at the feet of Yasser Arafat."

Yet today our liberal media prefer to describe Arafat as a freedom fighter. Baer's observations are deemed politically incorrect.

That may be one reason his book, with many important revelations, with a foreword by Seymour Hersh and published by Random House, has gotten such little media attention since it hit bookstores earlier this year.

Perhaps a companion book might have been titled: "Speak No Evil: Why A Veteran CIA Officer Should Keep His Mouth Shout About How Bill Clinton Undermined America's National Security."

While Baer fairly criticizes problems in the CIA and its handling of terrorism from the days of the Reagan and Bush administrations, he also clearly shows that the infrastructure of the CIA's ability to fight terrorism completely collapsed under Bill Clinton.

Here are just some of Baer's key points:

In 1991, the CIA closed up its activities in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. During the Clinton years things got even worse, when CIA operatives around the globe were directed away from spying on the bad guys and told to start worrying about "human rights, economic globalization, the Arab-Israel conflict." By 1995, the Clinton administration thought spy operations were so unimportant that a CIA analyst who had never served as a spy or even overseas was made director of operations, the CIA's chief spy.

Iran remains a major player in the terrorist world. Baer says that in 1982, Arafat "had put his entire worldwide terrorist network at Iran's disposal." Baer believes that the Iranians were clearly the culprits behind the bombings of the U.S. Embassy and Marine barracks in the early 1980s. In 1996, bin Laden formed an alliance with Iran. The purpose of the alliance was simple: Attack America.

The Clinton White House's gross negligence and malfeasance was demonstrated by its handling of Saddam Hussein. Baer states that in 1995, top staffers at the National Security Council prevented a planned coup by Iraqi military leaders against Saddam Hussein. Baer was the top CIA man in Northern Iraq working with Iraqi dissidents.
Baer also reveals just how much the Clinton White House sought to protect Hussein.
In 1995 Baer was summoned by the CIA back from Iraq to Washington. Upon reporting to CIA headquarters, a CIA superior told him why he was called home: "Tony Lake [Bill Clinton's national security adviser] ordered the FBI to investigate you for trying to assassinate Saddam Hussein."

After months of investigation, the charges were found to be baseless and dropped.

Like many other CIA veterans who were thwarted from doing their jobs by their own government, Baer retired. Still, the CIA gave him due recognition. He was awarded its Career Intelligence Medal.

But the coddling of Hussein was not isolated to just targeting Baer and removing him from Iraq.

In fact, the Clinton White House clearly decided to keep and maintain Saddam Hussein in power. [Note: I suspected this back in 1998 and wrote about it in "Maybe Saddam Actually Likes Bill Clinton."]

In one of the most important revelations in "See No Evil," Baer reveals that Saddam Hussein might well have been deposed by his own troops, especially if the economic sanctions had been rigorously applied.

But with U.S. complicity, Saddam Hussein was able to sell millions of barrels of Iraqi oil by shipping them overland through NATO ally Turkey.

During the mid-'90s Baer says, the smuggled oil through Turkey "was a lifeline for Saddam, who used the money to fund his intelligence services and Special Republican Guards – the forces that kept him alive."

The pipeline of smuggled oil was no hidden, disputed fact. Baer reports the Iraqi oil trucks stretched back anywhere from 20 miles to 70 miles as they waited to cross into Turkey.

Baer was baffled. He writes, "What I couldn't understand was why the White House didn't intervene." He says the U.S. could easily have closed down the truck pipeline into Turkey.

"It was almost as if the White House wanted Saddam to have a little walking around money," Baer writes.

Baer concludes that the Clinton administration "helped Saddam pay for his praetorian guard, just what you'd expect of a clever superpower that was secretly supporting the local despot."

Why would Bill Clinton, our president, do such a thing? Why would he help Saddam Hussein at the very time his public rhetoric against him was so strong?

Nobody who has studied Bill Clinton should be surprised by his duplicity. The facts show, and future historians will discover, that Bill Clinton was no friend of the United States.

Answer 9

You are absolutely WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!