- ABC talk radio's Rush Limbaugh and FoxNoise's magnum
mouth Bill O'Reilly, the latter also known by fans of MSNBC journalist
Keith Olbermann as Bill "Orally," are the Bush regime's primary
propagandists in America. And just like Grandpa Bush, Prescott, whose
banking ties to Adolf Hitler and his Nazis inGermany before and during
World War II have been exposed, Limbaugh and O'Reilly's ties to the criminal
Bush regime strike a very disquieting note of similarity to the propagandists
of Hitler's time.
-
- It's been observed that empty barrels make the most noise.
Noisy and vicious propaganda generated in support of all the lies and
falsehoods propping up the Bush regime can now be counted upon to punctuate
the smashing success of those who would stand up to those who either question
Bush-Cheney and those who attempt to politically outmaneuver their conspiratorial
arrangements to embroil America and the world in yet another global war.
And you just know that neither Limbaugh nor O'Reilly "believe in
conspiracy theories." That's because, instead, they believe that
Republicans are always right, and Democrats and all others are always wrong.
-
- In other words, in their simple minds, which allow them
to get through their days in the real world of adults, Republican is good
and everything else is bad. And how do they define "Republican?"
Certainly not by the true and former centerpiece of Republican philosophy,
so ably represented by President George Washington's concept of a free
nation of individuals independent from foreign entanglements and free from
crushing police state domestic policies. True conservatism holds that
a nation's government should cultivate individual freedom and creativity
thereby setting an example of the "shining beacon on the hill"
for the whole world to emulate.
-
- Even at the outset of the Bush regime, then-GOP head
Ed Gillespie offered remarks that shocked gasbag Limbaugh and almost rendered
him speechless in front of his "golden microphone." Let us now
return to those thrilling days of yesteryear, when BOTH political parties
stood for something, at least in terms of their continuing general party
theme.
-
- Quoted from the website of the Georgia Constitution Party's
website, which can be accessed via www.gaconstitutionparty.org/s.nl/it.I/id.48/.f?sc=12&category=4,
the cite begins, "Tim Russert interviewing Ed Gillespie, 'Meet the
Press' TV Show, 9/7/03: 'Here's the problem. Here's the headline that
greets people across the country. 'Federal work force largest since 1990.'
Mr. Gillespie, you went up to New Hampshire and caused quite a stir.
This is how the Manchester Union Leader, a conservative newspaper, described
your visit: 'Had there been any doubts about the direction the Republican
Party is headed, they vanished last week when Republican National Committee
Chairman Ed Gillespie visited New Hampshire. '...No longer does the Republican
Party stand for shrinking the federal government, for scaling back its
encroachment into the lives of Americans, or for carrying the banner of
federalism into the political battles of the day.'
-
- You called the Union Leader; you sent them letters.
They stand by your comments, and this is their second editorial: 'We wanted
to take this opportunity to assure Rush [Limbaugh] and everyone else that
the editorial was and is 100 percent true. Over the course of an hour-long
meeting with Ed Gillespie, the chairman of the Republican National Committee,
we took great care to give him every opportunity to explain himself fully
so that nothing could be misunderstood. The result was a surprisingly
frank admission that the Republican Party defines 'fiscal responsibility'
as increasing the federal budget at 'a slower rate of growth' than the
Democrats (his words). We asked him three times to explain why President
Bush and the Republican Congress have increased discretionary non-defense
spending at such an alarming rate, and why the party has embraced the expansion
of the federal government's roles in education, agriculture and Great Society-era
entitlement programs. 'Those questions have been decided,' he said. 'The
public wants an expanded federal role in those areas, and the Republican
Party at the highest levels has decided to give the public what it wants.'"
-
- But now the American public wants an end to the "war"
in Iraq! By a November election mandate to the Democratic Party, America
wants a return to the "Republican" central theme of conservatism
that rejects BOTH big government international policing and BIG BROTHER
police state domestic policies. And considering as well that the USA
PATRIOT Act had been ready-written and stored on a shelf simply awaiting
implementation, and that it was written in all probability during the Clinton
administration, it begins to bring focus on a justifiable inquiry as to
the precise nature and possible real motives behind 9/11. Was 9/11
a prerequisite for Bush's unjust, unnecessary, and unconstitutional and
criminal invasion of Iraq, or was it necessary ONLY to suspend our Bill
of Rights?
-
- And please understand that Bush's suspension of our Bill
of Rights wasn't undertaken as simply an evil and mean-spirited attack
upon our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms, but rather as an act necessary
to assassinate the spirit and character of the American people's rugged
individuality that Limbaugh has formerly so often boasted of. This national
character of the American people has always been a most-feared attribute
and presents the greatest obstacle to the Bush-Clinton crime families'
efforts geared to the creation of a one global government New World Order.
-
- How far has the Bush-Cheney gang pushed both the GOP
and its isolated propagandist Limbaugh off the track? How far have they
isolated O'Reilly? And how vulnerable are they all to their own total
destruction by their greatest natural enemy: the TRUTH? And at the risk
of once again stating an embarrassing redundancy in offering that I was
once a great fan of both commentators, I admired both until they abandoned
the truth. I was on their side until they both embraced Bush-Cheney and
thereby renounced our Constitution and embraced instead a mentally deranged
leader who mocked prisoners on death row and blew up frogs with firecrackers
as a boy.
-
- And when yet another "conservative Republican,"
Tony Snow, who had substituted for Limbaugh on many of his radio shows,
was handed the job of White House press secretary, Snow himself contradicted
his former anti-Clinton views wherein as a "conservative" commentator
he had formerly complained about the secrecy and arrogance of Clinton and
his administration. Not wishing to falsely represent myself as a physician
or any sort of medical practitioner, I suggest that Tony Snow's medical
problems have returned in earnest due to his new assignment requiring him
to abandon the truth in order to protect a mass-murdering genocidal lunatic.
I attribute the return of Snow's problems to the stress created by his
need to manufacture fiction that conflicts with truth!
-
- And then there's O'Reilly. The simplest question in
the world is now an object of abject terror for "compassionate"
commentator O' Reilly: why would the greatest military power on Earth,
with the most sophisticated and advanced systems of detection, alarm, and
decisive military response have been so completely and totally vulnerable
on Tuesday, September 11, 2001? To simply inquire and raise this basic,
simple question is now unpatriotic in the troubled eyes of Bill O'Reilly.
Some "compassionate conservatives," seeking only to protect
America from bad thoughts and bad words, are extremely concerned that anyone
would think these highly vicious, evil and mean-spirited thoughts. How
dare they?! Off with their heads! They have been recorded as suggesting
death to those who question. Are we still in America?
-
- But if this basic question is so obviously answerable,
then why didn't the 9/11 Commission at least ask it? Why didn't they and
the regime they are protecting answer it? Why has it gone so long both
un-presented and unanswered? And if there were drills taking place that
precluded an immediate defensive posture, why doesn't the government fess
up and admit to them? We all know why! It was indeed an inside job, an
inside job to marginalize US for the New World Order that Rove, Bush and
Cheney decided to further capitalize on by blaming Saddam and invading
Iraq!
-
- This space had intended to viciously attack Nancy Pelosi
for caving in to the agents of that foreign government that has hijacked
ours, commandeered our military and compromised our nation's defenses.
But that may need to be deferred until another time. As for now, the
enemy of my nation's enemy is my friend! Speaker Nancy Pelosi's sole diplomatic
adventure has indeed been a refreshing breath of fresh air in an atmosphere
of noxious war-mongering hatred and the threats supported by the noxious
and obnoxious venom spewed by the Bush propagandists, apologists and fellow
war criminals.
-
- In the eyes of at least this observer, Pelosi's efforts
during her Middle Eastern tour punctuated by diplomatic overtures, seems
at first blush to atone for her scampering away from the foreign agents
of America's greatest false ally, Israel. Pelosi's efforts, along with
the clever political theater provided by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmandinejad
in releasing the fifteen British sailors, has all but shut down the Bush-Cheney-Rove
planned nuclear attack on Iran. The Iranians now come across as what they
really are: human beings!
-
- British Prime Minister Tony Blair was not only shocked,
shocked I tell ya, but royally pissed off too! Like Limbaugh after the
Gillespie betrayal, he too was speechless! What to do now? Thankfully,
four British invaders in Iraq bought it and of course Blair seized upon
that marvelous opportunity to falsely accuseIran hoping to negate Ahmandinejad's
having outflanked him. Of course Blair has no proof to substantiate his
accusations. But since when do international liars need proof of anything?
All he offers is regurgitated past propaganda blaming Iran without any
modicum of proof or irrefutable logic based upon investigation and objective
analysis.
-
- Pelosi did make a false step in speaking for Israel,
the one nation that offers the greatest threat to America and to world
peace. Speaking for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, mass murdering
butcher Ariel Sharon's successor, Pelosi did posture herself awkwardly
in trying to defuse and defang belligerents in the Middle East. But Israel
is represented by the most powerful political party on Earth, AIPAC, which
totally controls both American domestic and foreign policy. Any political
party that serves as the foreign agent "lobby" controlling BOTH
the Democratic and Republican Party, and displaying the power to make or
break any and all of America's elected politicians, obviously controls
all levels of American government and ALL its policies.
-
- If Israel didn't command such superior power over the
entire world, and its tiny population was in any way proportional to its
international political voice, Olmert might have found himself obliged
not to have so vociferously and boastfully exposed Pelosi's "mistake."
However, it is not beyond the consideration of this writer to suppose
that Olmert did make the very overtures Pelosi alluded to, knowing full
well that she would bubble over with enthusiasm at the prospect of a Middle
East peace which Olmert could then refute thereby furthering Zionism's
objective of eternal wars and providing more power to our Evil Emperor.
-
- In their editorial of Thursday, April 5th, the Zionist-Bilderberg
propaganda rag, the Washington Post, set the tone for those who dare not
to toe the Zionist agenda 24/7: "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi [D-Calif.]
offered an excellent demonstration yesterday of why members of Congress
should not attempt to supplant the secretary of state when traveling abroad.
After a meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, Ms.
Pelosi announced that she had delivered a message from Israeli Prime Minister
Ehud Olmert that 'Israel was ready to engage in peace talks' with Syria."
-
- The Bilderberg Washington Post continues: "Only
one problem: The Israeli prime minister entrusted Ms. Pelosi with no such
message. 'What was communicated to the U.S. House Speaker does not contain
any change in the policies of Israel,' said a statement quickly issued
by the prime minister's office. In fact, Mr. Olmert told Ms. Pelosi
that 'a number of Senate and House members who recently visited Damascus
received the impression that despite the declarations of Basher Assad,
there is no change in the position of his country regarding a possible
peace process with Israel.' In other words, Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented
Israel's position, but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr.
Assad's words were mere propaganda."
-
- "Mere propaganda?" In other words, Israel,
AIPAC, Olmert and Bush all speak the truth, and anything anyone else says
is "mere propaganda." Freedom of speech, thought and opinion
are only reserved for Israel, AIPAC, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and our
Evil Emperor; anyone else should just shut up! The rag continues: "Ms.
Pelosi was criticized by President Bush for visiting Damascus at a time
when the administration rightly or wrongly has frozen high-level
contacts with Syria. Mr. Bush said that thanks to the speaker's freelancing
Mr. Assad was getting mixed messages from the United States." "Mixed
messages?" In other words, Bush intends to declare war on everyone,
and therefore does not wish to send any messages indicating that he is
humble enough to seek peace and understanding.
-
- Then the Post bares its fangs: "Two weeks ago Ms.
Pelosi rammed legislation through the House of Representatives that would
strip Mr. Bush of his authority as commander in chief to manage troop movements
in Iraq. Now she is attempting to introduce a new Middle East policy that
directly conflicts with that of the president. We have found much to criticize
in Mr. Bush's military strategy and regional diplomacy. But Ms. Pelosi's
attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive,
it is foolish." Of course, there's no mention of Pelosi's panic after
her AIPAC speech that gave Bush the legislative green light to nuke Iran.
-
- I thought that the Washington Post, the paper of Bernstein,
Woodward and Bradlee, was a "leftie-liberal" pro-Clinton propaganda
rag. At least it was so-designated by GOP gasbag Limbaugh when he was
attacking left-liberal "Slick Willie" Clinton. I distinctly
remember Limbaugh often citing the Constitution as "the greatest document
ever written" when it served his purpose to demonstrate how Clinton
had violated it. Yet his Evil Emperor, Bush, has written off the "greatest
document ever written" as merely "a goddamned piece of paper."
And Limbaugh always made fun of and twisted Clinton's statement citing
the "error of big government." What happened? Hmmmmm!
-
- Not to be outmaneuvered by the evil Democrats, Limbaugh
had the President of Vice, Dick Cheney, on his blab radio show, and posted
the exchange on his website, rushlimbaugh.com. Limbaugh queries the great
vice guy: "You and the president both have derided the theatrics of
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and a number of Democrats, and I don't know
if your being politic [sic] with the statement because I frankly need to
ask you if you really think its 'theatrics' or is this who they really
are? Is this what they really intend: to lose this war, to make sure we
come home defeated?"
-
- Limbaugh is trying to camouflage the real opposition
that the great majority of the American people have who oppose the criminal
Bush regime's Israel-first policies and its costly Iraqi invasion/occupation.
He relegates America's objections to mere partisan differences. But how
does he fall back to a "liberal media" when the Zionist media
fully support Bush? Now it's the evil Democrats who want US to lose.
Sheer nonsense! It is a majority of the American people and a majority
of the American military who want US out. Limbaugh is really upset with
the American people, but simply cannot say so. The Bush regime's desires
and operations to serve only Israel along with Bush's military-industrial
corporate friends, smacks of unconstitutionality. Bush-Cheney intendnever-ending
wars and global terrorism, which constitute treason under the definition
set forth in the United States Constitution.
-
- Congress has NOT declared a war, and Iraq, Iran and South
Korea have not attacked nor invaded US. But Limbaugh has misrepresented
the spirit and intent of the Constitution to his audience, betrayed the
true GOP theme of conservatism, and has fooled his listeners into believing
that Israel's interest are the same as ours. They're not! But they are
definitely Bush and Cheney and AIPAC's interests. So Limbaugh is forced
to reiterate the thin, false veil to vilify Democrats: "Can you share
with us whether or not you understand their devotion, or their seeming
allegiance, to the concept of US defeat?"
-
- My sincere apologies for citing this tripe. This is
precisely why I cannot stomach Limbaugh and his "show." I cannot
possibly listen to this low-level, mindless, pap! Later in the transcript,
Limbaugh asserts of the Pelosi tour: "She's not entitled to make her
own foreign policy, is she?" Is this the same guy who's so familiar
with the "greatest document ever written" that's asking this
idiotic question? If any of Limbaugh's fans could really think, they would
be highly insulted by this sophomoric lead-in for America's great vice
guy.
-
- The Bush propagandists are coming out in force to stop
any and all from questioning the Evil Emperor and his fellow AIPAC sock
puppet stooges. O'Reilly has got his shorts all bunched up after Rosie
O'Donnell exercised her First Amendment right by simply asking to know
more about 9/11. And why shouldn't she? The basic question of our unbelievable
vulnerability, along with the ludicrous notion that white kerosene building
flame outs lasting only an hour or so were hot enough to uniformly and
evenly collapse perfectly two architecturally sound and well built skyscrapers
into their own structural footprints. And that they could collapse at
the speed of freefall gravity pull. This is beyond either words or belief.
Yet sell-out O'Reilly feels the need to spring to the Evil Empire's defense
when the whole world already knows about the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf
of Tonkin, U.S.S. Liberty, Ruby Ridge and Waco.
-
- Why aren't Limbaugh and O'Reilly looking into why Alberto
[VO5] Gonzales is still drawing a federal paycheck after it was proven
that he obstructed justice? Why aren't they inquiring why Bush blocked
the security clearances of Department of Justice investigators looking
into the legal implications of Bush's illegal spying on Americans? Why
is the greatest document ever written now only a goddamned piece of paper?
Is this loyalty to the rule of law, or is it loyalty to a dictator whose
political party is the agent of a foreign government?
-
- Pelosi's actions, and the actions of Rosie O'Donnell,
are exactly what is needed to blow the lid off the boiling, bubbling cauldron
of lies, corruption, greed, and mass murder plotted and planned in the
cave of the Wicked Witch of the West. It will serve to expose the chief
lying monkey and smirking chimpanzee. It takes someone of stature, someone
people know and admire, to finally stand up for America and show the courage
needed to expose these horrific criminals and gangsters. Pelosi's efforts
may have been either half-hearted or designed to silence criticism of her
actions after the hiss and boo session at despicable AIPAC; but it nevertheless
served to trash some of Bush's protective propaganda armor. Cracks are
beginning to show. Let's hope we can stop this dangerous fiend before
he embroils US in Zionism's third world war.
-
- © THEODORE E. LANG 4/7/07 All rights reserved
-
- Ted Lang is a political analyst and freelance writer.
|
