More on the coming coup

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

More on the coming coup

Postby Dreams End » Sat Oct 21, 2006 1:21 am

From my blog. <br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> <br><br>In my last post, I gave an example of what it looks like when US intelligence forces, along with a network of other government, quasi-government and private organizations and companies, take action to remove a “problem” government. This was the “soft coup” version. Please take the time to familiarize yourself with more violent coups sponsored by our government, such as the one in Indonesia which led to the slaughter of at least half a million people, or in Guatemala, where the numbers weren’t much better.<br><br>And I suggested, in my paranoid reverie, that what looks to be a spontaneous rise in anti-Bush sentiment and a groundswell of opposition to the Bush administration, might actually be at least partly as a result of similar games. I think that case can be made pretty clearly…but the question is, how do regular folks and political activists respond? Do we back the high level forces seeking to oust Bush, only then to accept the slightly less overtly fascist replacement parts installed by them? Think about that as I try to convince you that I’m not actually crazy…but just paying attention.<br><br>I’m going to have to ask you to wrap your mind around two, seemingly contradictory, facts. One, is that we are in the process of a coup d’etat via means I can only hope STAY electoral…at least that way no one gets killed. Two, is that the coup plotters are not really any different from the people they will displace and, in fact, remained in power behind the scenes the whole time. In other words, unlike Australia, our coup is primarily political theatre.<br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://dreamsend.wordpress.com/2006/10/20/anatomy-of-a-soft-coup-part-2-careful-what-you-wish-for/">more</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: More on the coming coup

Postby chiggerbit » Sat Oct 21, 2006 1:42 am

"Coming" coup? Hon, it happened several years ago. <p></p><i></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: More on the coming coup

Postby bvonahsen » Sat Oct 21, 2006 4:12 am

OSS.net is not a credible source. Nothing there can be trusted. Nor is there much coherence on your blog. "Reality based" is so not you.<br><br>Just because you read it on the internet doesn't mean it's true.<br><br>But by all means, give your demon siguls all of your energy. It's what you want isn't it? You created them, you brought them to life, so feed them your life source, just don't complain about the consequences. <p></p><i></i>
bvonahsen
 

Re: More on the coming coup

Postby robertdreed » Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:44 am

"the question is, how do regular folks and political activists respond?"<br><br>Well- how <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>do</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> you respond, Dream's End? Any helpful hints for us? <br><br>Or is this posited scenario simply a foray into ideological framing? <p></p><i></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: More on the coming coup

Postby Dreams End » Sat Oct 21, 2006 12:39 pm

oh...dang. rdr figured me out. I was just foraying into ideological framing. That's what I like to do when I'm not feeding my life source to demons. I tried to get into demon framing for awhile, but those suckers do tend to squirm.<br><br>Just ignore the blog post. I was suffering from paranoid delusions. I'm seeking treatment for it, but it may be a little while so you should probably ignore the next few blog posts as well. Probably I'll be better after the elections.<br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: More on the coming coup

Postby darkbeforedawn » Sat Oct 21, 2006 2:27 pm

Chiggerbit, I'd wager the coup happened about when LBJ took over the WH. I think they just came very careless about who knows it in 2000. In fact, they may have wanted us all to know....an ego thing maybe? DE may be referring to yet another coup within the coup involving factions that disagree with Bush faction. These monsters are devouring each other. Let's hope they kill each other off before they get to us...a dim hope but still a hope. <p></p><i></i>
darkbeforedawn
 

Re: More on the coming coup

Postby MASONIC PLOT » Sat Oct 21, 2006 6:44 pm

Incorrect on all counts. The coup began on December 23rd, 1913 with the federal reserve act. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=masonicplot>MASONIC PLOT</A> at: 10/21/06 4:45 pm<br></i>
MASONIC PLOT
 

A compromise.

Postby slimmouse » Sat Oct 21, 2006 6:54 pm

<br> A compromise between just about all posts on this thread can be found here;<br><br> <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>When John F. Kennedy inherited the responsibility of the presidency he also inherited the wars that banking and the military industrial complex were heavily invested in promoting and profiting from. Presidents Truman and Eisenhower had subsidized the French war against Vietnam under the auspices of the Marshall Plan from 1948 to 1952, giving France five billion two hundred million dollars in military aid. By 1954, the U.S. was paying approximately 80% of all French war costs.<br><br>[More:]<br>In 1951 the Rockefeller Foundation had created a study group comprised of members from the Council on Foreign Relations and England's Royal Institute on International Affairs. The panel concluded that there should be a British-American takeover of Vietnam as soon as possible. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles one of the CFR founders and his brother, CIA Director Allen Dulles and many others immediately championed the council's goals.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br> Link ;<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2006/10/10/dynasty_of_death_part_2">www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2006/10/10/dynasty_of_death_part_2</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><br><br> Kennedy was whacked ( IMO) by the MI complex, and all associated interests, including the international Banking elite.<br><br> These interests are like Siamese twins, and with deference to DE, I would like to emphasise, that MY interpretation of international Banking has fuckall to do with Jews.<br><br> I like to think I have a reasonable Idea how the game is played.<br><br> Ordo Abs Chao.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: A compromise.

Postby MASONIC PLOT » Sat Oct 21, 2006 7:32 pm

Slim--for sure. Excellent post.<br><br>"DEUS MEUMQUE JUS" <p></p><i></i>
MASONIC PLOT
 

Re: A compromise.

Postby dbeach » Sat Oct 21, 2006 7:53 pm

THANX Slim<br><br>I aslo think the coups have happpened and the bush regime is extension of the coups " with vigor"[a JFK slang term]<br><br>the killing of the King serves many functions including cutting<br>a severe psyce shock to the well being of the masses .. that is the shattering of the assumptive world [assuming the world is a safe place]..thus traumatizing a nation and making them easier to conquer ...soon after the drugs hit the streets of the USA and the rest is bushistory..<br><br>I dont agree with all this authors pts but Jack was offered up with the signature ritual<br><br><br>BTW 1 month will be 11/22/06 and 43 yrs after <br>the king was killed<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.cuttingedge.org/NEWS/n1547.cfm">www.cuttingedge.org/NEWS/n1547.cfm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br>"ILLUMINIST KILLING ACTIVITIES -- MOST PROMINENT CARRY A 'BROTHERHOOD SIGNATURE ' OF AN ETERNAL FLAME <br><br>Subtitle: White Magic Practitioner David Icke reveals that, when a really prominent public leader is assassinated by the Brotherhood, the Illuminati creates a monument that serves as a "Magical Symbol" signature to communicate to fellow Satanists that this killing ritual was carried out by their agents. This 'signature' is an eternal flame! President Kennedy, Princess Diana, Martin Luther King, and Israel Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin are the best contemporary examples. <br><br><br>The Illuminati always leaves some occult signature when they carry out an event, especially one designed to move the world into the Kingdom of Antichrist, i.e., New World Order, also known as Aquarius.<br><br>One of the speakers of this rally told his audience that a memorial to the World Trade Center disaster was planned and that it would contain an "eternal flame". My ears shot right up, for the torch -- a lighted torch -- is one of the most important signatures of the global Illuminati. Further, whenever anyone is killed by the Illuminati, either by ritual or through an elaborate plan, their grave is usually adorned with an eternal flame!<br><br>Before we get deeply into this subject, let us examine the importance the flame has to the global Illuminati, whose #1 goal is to successfully stage the New Age Christ, who is the Biblical Antichrist. Let us first hear from White Magic practitioner, David Icke. <br><br>"The flame or lighted torch is the most obvious Brotherhood signature ..." [Chapter, "Goddess and the King", by David Icke, in his book, The Biggest Secret, Bridge of Love Publications, 1999, p. 409]<br><br>Why would a flaming lighted torch be an important and obvious Brotherhood of the Illuminati signature? Christian author, Dr. Cathy Burns, in her monumentally important book, Masonic and Occult Symbols Illustrated, tell us why, but she then ties the meaning of the lighted torch directly to Antichrist! Listen:<br><br>"Lucifer, having regained his star and his diadem, will assemble his legions for new works of creation. Attracted by his flaming torch, celestial spirits will descend ... and he will send these messengers from unknown spheres to earth. Then, the torch of Lucifer will signal 'From Heaven to Earth!' -- and the New Age Christ will answer, 'From Earth to Heaven!' " [Burns, p. 26<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START 0] --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/alien.gif ALT="0]"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>This scenario will occur, in Satanic doctrine, after Lucifer defeats Jesus Christ at the Battle of Armageddon. Once Lucifer has defeated Jesus Christ, then he and his legions are to storm the gates of Heaven where they will defeat the God of Abraham and physically conquer His throne. This is standard Satanic belief; they believe the lie that Lucifer and the God of Abraham are equal, but opposite, gods. Even though the God of Abraham got temporary victory over Satan in the Garden of Eden, and even though Satan could not prevent Jesus Christ from appearing as the Jewish Messiah, yet Satanists the world over believe that Lucifer will prevail over Jesus at Armageddon.<br><br>Fresh from his victory over the God of Abraham, and sitting on his throne in Heaven, Lucifer will then use his lighted torch to send a signal to his personally chosen man on Earth, the New Age Christ, "From Heaven to Earth". And, The Christ will respond back in loyalty and pride, "From Earth to Heaven".<br><br>Thus, the lighted, or flaming torch, is not only a symbol of the global Illuminati, and it is not only a symbol of Antichrist, but it is a symbol of the Satanist's belief that Lucifer will achieve the final victory over Jesus Christ and then the God of Abraham, the God of the Holy Bible.<br><br>Thus, all the meaning of the entire plan to so reorganize the nations and peoples of the world so the leaders can successfully turn the control of the governments, economies, and religions of the world over to Antichrist, is symbolized neatly in one major symbol -- the lighted or flaming torch!<br><br>It is no wonder that the lighted torch is so critically important to the Illuminati.<br><br>BOLD BROTHERHOOD SIGNATURE<br><br>Now, let us return to occult author, David Icke, for more revelation as to how this lighted torch is specifically used in certain cases, where the Illuminati wants to signal to other occults the world over that they were behind an event, specifically one in which a person or persons have died.<br><br>"The flame or lighted torch is the most famous Brotherhood signature, and on Kennedy's grave the flame is within a circle, an ancient symbol of the Sun ... a lighted torch ... is the most obvious Brotherhood signature of them all , and after President Kennedy's ritual killing, the Freemasons erected an obelisk in Dealey Plaza with a lighted torch at the top. Another flame was placed on his grave." [Icke., Page 409, 447; Emphasis added]<br><br>New Age author Icke thus delivers a blockbuster message from the bowls of the abyss, giving us all the signs by which we know we are looking at an assassination of a public figure that was carried out expressly by the Brotherhood, sometimes using occult ritual. Icke then lists several prominent figures who were assassinated by the Illuminati, with the event then signaled to the rest of the occult world, while hiding the truth from the "ignorant masses".<br><br><br><br><br>President John F. Kennedy -- JFK was assassinated by the Illuminati for several obvious reasons and one not-so-obvious. Let us begin with the obvious reason: President Kennedy was planning to reverse the plan of the Illuminati to carry out the war in Vietnam. I was a sophomore in high school at the time, and had been very active in politics for about three years; in the Spring of 1963, I heard JFK say that he was going to pull America out of Vietnam, and in the Fall, I heard Kennedy say that he would "have a thousand boys home by Christmas". He was killed weeks later, on November 22 [the 11th month, 22nd day], at Dallas, Texas, which lies nearly exactly on the 33 rd parallel of the 33rd degree of latitude. [Ibid.]<br><br>Further, JFK was killed in Masonic Dealey Plaza, the site of an original Masonic Lodge in the early days of Texas. As David Icke notes, "Dealey Plaza is a mass of esoteric symbolism and is officially named after a 33rd Degree Freemason called George Bannerman Dealey ... Dealey Plaza is shaped like a pyramid with the capstone missing. The top is truncated by a railway bridge." [Icke, Ibid., p. 407] Icke further says that Dealey Plaza was a outdoor Sun Temple [Ibid., p. 408], and his killing corresponded to the "ancient fertility oblation of the 'Killing of the King'." [Ibid.]<br><br>The not-so-obvious reason JFK was murdered would be known only to a dedicated Satanist and Freemason. As Icke points out: "Kennedy was killed on November 22, 1963. This date was the anniversary of the order, or papal bull, by Pope Clement V for the Knights Templar to be subjected to torture by the Dominican Inquisition. It [the Papal Bull] was issued on November 22, 1307." Thus, Icke believes that Freemasonry/Knights Templar finally exacted its long-awaited revenge by killing the only Roman Catholic President this country has ever had, on the anniversary date of the attack on Knights Templar, and in a specific satanic ritual called, "The Killing of the King".<br><br>To tell the world that the assassination of JFK was Illuminist, our government put an eternal flame at his grave site, as the above picture illustrates. JFK's eternal flame was also in the middle of a circle, which carries a double Illuminist symbol -- a circle encircling a flame. As Dr. Burn notes, the circle is derived from the Sun, and it symbolizes the pagan god [Burns, quoting Masonic author, J.S.M. Ward, Freemasonry and the Ancient Gods , London: Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent and Company, Ltd., 1921, p. 3<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START 0] --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/alien.gif ALT="0]"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>Witches also use the circle drawn on the ground during ritual to "enforce demons to appear". [Burns, Ibid., p. 27]. Thus, a circle is a powerful Illuminist symbol, and is doubly powerful when a flame is in its middle.<br><br>These are the reasons President John F. Kennedy got an eternal flame at his gravesite. "<br> <p></p><i></i>
dbeach
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 7:40 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

I really do pity......

Postby slimmouse » Sat Oct 21, 2006 8:15 pm

<br> Thanks MP and DB,<br><br> I really do pity those who have listened to all the crap talked about Icke, without having checked out some of his published work for themselves.<br><br> Not that I altogether blame them. Spent a long time myself in that zone. <br><br> But Anyone who's read the vast majority of his stuff,as I now have, will find that his work, to the best of what Ive read, has got very little to do with the "Jewish" conspiracy.<br><br> They would also very quickly understand, that this guy has got a far greater grasp of how this game is played than many are prepared, even on a site like this , to give the guy credit for. <p></p><i></i>
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: I really do pity......

Postby robertdreed » Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:34 pm

Dreams End, your response wasn't all that responsive. <p></p><i></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: I really do pity......

Postby Dreams End » Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:05 pm

cb....a palace coup is still a coup. The change in power will not be about democracy in action. <br><br>rdr: the solution to how activists should respond is an open question. My viewpoint at the moment seems to be an awfully miniscule minority viewpoint. So I'd start by saying...refocus efforts locally and let groups like ANSWER die on the vine. I think educating ourselves about COINTELPRO and the tactics of the state might be helpful. I think removing people with connections to the CIA and other elements of the national security apparatus from positions of leadership might be helpful. <br><br>I think I'd ask activists to have a look at who is funding a group before becoming involved with them. I'd also ask people to focus on efforts to transform the economic structure of the country. I'd like to see better understanding of class and less emphasis on single issue and identity politics. I'd like to see the left picketing wal-mart for its working conditions and effects on local economy and not lauding some PR campaign walmart has launched promising to offer more "green products." I received such an email recently) Was that initiative given public support by Gore? LIkely, but I don't remember...but let's have a little discernment and let's build a movement that sides with the regular people against corporate excess and the corporate state itself.<br><br>I think electoral reform is a great place to focus...in terms of logistics to prevent fraud, instant runoff voting..but also public financing of campaigns and absolute and complete transparency concerning donations. Soft money must die. And this is one area that traditional leftists can unite with people across the politicat spectrum.<br><br>how bout u?<br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: I really do pity......

Postby robertdreed » Sun Oct 22, 2006 12:08 am

DE, what you're proposing seems rather routine, as a response to a supposedly impending military coup. <br><br>If there's one in the works, how do you think it can be warded off? Personally, I don't think there's any way for me to influence matters in that regard. If there's a covert movement in power centers of the US government to stage a military coup d'etat, I think they're taking a risk of meeting resistance from the loyalist faction and failing. But strictly as a practical matter, whoever it is who's going to array to try to stop them, it isn't going to be me. And I doubt that they'll be looking to enlist you, either. <br><br>Mind you, I'm dubious about the coup scenario. But if it does happen, that's one of those extreme political moves that's far beyond the purview of ordinary citizens to affect. That's the nature of a military coup d'etat. It gets settled by the military units who remain loyal to the sitting administration versus the military units on the side of the coup plotters, not by leafleters attempting ad hoc consciousness raising. Military coups are a matter of somewhat more gravity and urgency than that. <br><br>Given that fact, what I was really seeking by way of response was your suggestions on what the pragmatic responses should be to the aftermath of a successful replacement of the Bush regime by a military coup- Grab a packed suitcase and book passage overseas? Go underground? Adopt a "wait-and-see" posture? Attempt to link up with a wider resistance movement? <br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: I really do pity......

Postby Dreams End » Sun Oct 22, 2006 1:13 am

rdr....the article is not about a military coup. It lists this as a possibility but it's more of a palace coup via electoral means...or something in between coup and electoral or...I don't know. <br><br>In the event of an actual coup....heh...in my view one idea that Madsen was floating out there was that the left should support a coup. And given the narrow focus on neocons and bush...I think that could actually happen. By having certain folks already prepositioned via counterpunch or NION or whatever, the groundwork is laid. <br><br>Consider this scenario...along the lines of Madsen's call. Repubs steal the elections. Enough bad guys blow the whistle but Bush won't back down. Military moves in...with people like Wesley Clark putting the public face on it. Maybe even that General Honore of Katrina fame. <br><br>They install Gore in power.<br><br>Hah. Now what, leftists? Oppose the coup and side with Bush against Gore? <br><br>And likely all this would happen without a shot being fired. In fact, Bush Sr. would probably just tell Jr. that it's time to come home.<br><br>The shallow analysis of the current situation by the left would leave me, if I were one of THEM, salivating at this scenario. <br><br>IN that case...man oh man....I got nothing for ya, rdr. No idea how to deal with that. I'll keep saying what I'm saying and the I'll be met with "the neocons were war criminals...there was no choice...they stole the elections." <br><br>Maybe not Gore. Maybe McCain? I don't think Obama's ready for that yet. <br><br>Okay, what if it looks more like a traditional coup where the military seems to exercise control for a longer period and the forces behind it are more rightward in appearance. Maybe then the progressives would mobilize...but in the event of that kind of coup..yeah, leafletting...not so good.<br><br>If that actually happens...which is not a scenario I'd put money on...it will hit the country in a way that no one is ready for and real opposition would take a long time to build. by the time it did, the military would have "stepped down" having established the precedent that you wander off the reservation...you get removed. Meanwhile, who knows what sort of troublemakers could be rounded up in the process.<br><br>If I were one of THEM, I'd keep it as subterranean as possible. And since it really is a sort of palace coup, I wouldn't expect any sort of real resistance on the part of the Bush forces. So I really do think the initial transition would be quick. I think you'd get Wesley Clark types reassuring everyone that the military are committed to restoring the civilian government as quickly as possible. Some sort of commission would be formed and leaders would be named. Their first act would be to pardon Bush and Cheney and all the rest in the interest of "healing" and "moving forward". <br><br>Here are the scenarios in the order from greatest to least likelihood in my paranoid opinion. Keep in mind that I have been expecting an actual tanks in the streets kind of coup since the 2000 election. It was the fact that the Dems continued to roll over that led me to understand that whatever that election and 2004 were about, they were NOT about elections being stolen from a real opposition party. Mexico shows us what that looks like.<br><br>1. Dems regain control of Congress. Lots of commissions are formed. Impeachment discussed but rejected. Lower level minions continue to be "scandaled out" of the Bush administration. Bush becomes ultimate lame duck. This process will look democratic but will partly be a result of orchestrated leaks and critically times announcements by the military. See Foley, e.g.<br><br>2. Dems don't regain. Election fraud happens...again not proven and Dems don't fight. But the plan to pull out of Iraq proceeds via Baker commission..and all sorts of bipartisan commissions pop up. More people scandaled out. Bush administration weakened to the point that even the Daily show stops making fun of him. Somehow or another, Bush is forced behind the scenes to resign. Maybe for health reasons. This is the kind of scenario in which military pressure behind the scenes could accomplish a sort of palace coup without any overt military action. While things like the Patriot Act might actually be repealed...laws similar in substance stay around. Because the important thing is that everyone agrees we are fighting a war on terror, but some simply think it is being waged incompetently.<br><br>3. Election fraud is considered widespread. A well orchestrated campaign of laying groundwork for support of military action is launched. Oh, wait, that already happened. Personally, this sort of scenario made more sense to me for a Presidential election...not having a clear President seems a better reason for military action than not knowing who some Senators are. But anyway, before any sort of coup actually happens...talks are held and the Bush Cheney team resigns taking a large segment of neocons with them who are condemned to lives of bookdeals and Sunday talk shows. <br><br>4. Number 3 but either the factional infighting is more real than I am thinking or else the bad guys think a more dramatic coup is advantageous...allowing greater curtailing of rights...martial law, etc. In any event, there really are tanks in the streets. Still, I think it would be met with little real opposition. However, holding the entire country in that sort of tension for awhile would have psychological effects that could be helpful. A far deeper relief when it is resolved without (further?) bloodshed. A handy side effect is the complete death of posse comitatus.<br><br>5. Number 4 but there's a real split in the military and the "We fight Satan when we fight Islam" wing holds out. This scenario assumes that the folks behind the scenes are in less control than I think they are. Or, that a really, REALLY big military event is desired...perhaps with knowledge that an upcoming financial calamity is going to necessitate the acceptance of a sort of permanent martial law.<br><br>6. And October surprise really does happen of significant magnitude to make 1 - 5 irrelevant. <br><br>The key here is that through avenues like the Baker commission, establishment types who benefitted directly from the war have made it clear that it's time to put a stop to it (or, as I'd argue, this phase of it). Since this is all there really is to Bush's reign, one way or another this means Bush has to go. I really don't think they mean to wait till 08 because a purely electoral strategy suggests they think there will be a big enough landslide that impeachment, or resignation in the face of impeachment, is possible. However...THAT leaves the sticky problem of who the hell becomes President. It may be that all of the leaks and the groundswell of opinionmaker opposition to Iraq as well as leaks of more damaging documents (remember Hersh's description of the Abu Ghraib material that DIDN'T get released?), make it clear to those in the administration who actually believed they were running things that the game is over. All your base are belong to us. So in that case, Bush may be allowed to limp along as bipartisan commissions proceed to undo things JUST ENOUGH to keep the newly roused masses happy. Little however, will actually change.<br><br>A final possibility has already been forecast by some moviemakers. Bush is assassinated. The year zero curse returns (Reagan barely dodged it.)<br><br>Speaking of Reagan...I guess that would be a good comparison. Bush was v.p. and since he'd been head of CIA and Hinckley's brother was slated to dine with Neil Bush the following evening, we can speculate without complete fear of institutionalization that that was another palace coup attempt. Maybe Reagan wasn't supposed to win that election or for some other reason he needed to be removed quickly. <br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Next

Return to Deep Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests