<p>I'll try to find an article on the FEMA and the $2000 aid thing.</p>
<p>On another note, Michael Brown has been pulled off the hurricane relief operation.
"FEMA director pulled from hurricane relief"
<a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1126286105472_12/?hub=TopStories%5B/url%5D">http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1126286105472_12/?hub=TopStories</a></p>
<p>Edit: Never mind, Fandango has already found one :)</p>
<p>Scotch, I am affronted by what you have been saying here. you are refering to all Blacks having a bling!! bling!! mentality. Your logic is racist. You have the temerity to insult all African Americans. You have a dearth of intellect.</p>
<p>our Government dithered when it should have been proactive. However, Bush is now more hands on. We spend $5 billion every couple of days on the Iraq war. We send $7 million a day to Israel, and a corresponding $4 million a day to Egypt that is just for starters. Consequently, therefore, our Government should be as generous to its destitute citizens affected by the hurricane.</p>
<p>Scotch
You really seem ignorant and you should really open your eyes.
I'm getting the impression that you think all african americans are like animals or something.
No offence but you need a good beating.
I suggest you to change you view before somebody shoots you.</p>
<p>I think that FDR is the most overrated president. I do not believe he "solved" the depression at all, in fact many arguments can be made that he extended it. Of course, from young age school teachers drill into your heads that FDR was hero....but have you ever questioned this? </p>
<p>The government should not interfere with an economy which they clearly do not understand. Morever, it is doubtful that they have a right to interfere. What got us out of the depression was WWII, not FDR.</p>
<p>The powerhungry FDR ran for an unprecidented 4 terms, even though he was clearly becomming unfit for the job towards the end. </p>
<p>And when the court continually termed his new deal programs unconstitutional.....court packing...um, hello? How would you feel if bush just added a couple justices so he could overturn Roe?</p>
<p>"FDR got this country out of the worst depression in its history without having to crack down on millions of protesters/riots and without turning towards marxism (although he did turn towards socialism to solve several problems)."</p>
<p>Video-WMP</p>
<p>Check out link</p>
<p>Link didn't work. Oh well!</p>
<p>The Order of Skull and Bones
Everything You Ever Wanted to Know, But Were Afraid to Ask </p>
<p>By Kris Millegan </p>
<p>Editor, Conspiracy Theory Research List </p>
<p><a href="mailto:RoadsEnd@aol.com">RoadsEnd@aol.com</a> </p>
<p>The story begins at Yale, where three threads of American social history -- espionage, drug smuggling and secret societies -- intertwine into one. ParaScope is pleased to present this treatise on the Order of Skull and Bones, whose initiates fill the ranks of the global elite. Is Skull and Bones the American branch of the Illuminati? Are national and global events manipulated as part of a grand Hegellian equation, thesis and anti-thesis yielding a New World Order synthesis? The evidence and events surrounding the Order of Skull and Bones will shock you. Read on. </p>
<ol>
<li><p>The Secret Origins of Skull & Bones</p></li>
<li><p>Secrets of the "Tomb"</p></li>
<li><p>Networks of Power </p></li>
<li><p>Name Roster of the Secret Establishment </p></li>
<li><p>China and the Opium Wars </p></li>
<li><p>The War on Drugs: An "Intellectual Fraud"</p></li>
<li><p>George Bush, Skull & Bones and the JFK Assassination </p></li>
<li><p>Motives for the Conspiracy </p></li>
<li><p>The Illuminati: Subverting the Body Politic </p></li>
<li><p>Skull & Bones = Illuminati? </p></li>
<li><p>World History: Plan or Accident?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>George Bush, who uses race-baiting tactics, like quotas to turn public opinion against affirmative action, clearly doesnt realize or doesnt care that now is not the time to remove affirmative action. Does that make him a racist? Not necessarily, but he is certainly biased against the black community in that regard.</p>
<p>Look more closely. George Bush refused to meet with the NAACP, the most important and oldest civil rights organization in America --the first President not to do so in a generation. The poor masses have grown larger under his watch, while the rich got richer, even though it was obvious by the makeup of his tax cut that this would happen. The largely white, wealthy parents of schoolchildren used Bush's voucher-program to get away from African-American dominated schools, while blacks were left to rot in inadequate schools in the ghetto, (with no escape), just like in Katrina.</p>
<p>Bush has decided it is a priority to cut Social Security benefits while maintaining the exploding cost of the war in Iraq. This will only harm the poor, while exploiting a disproportionate number of blacks fighting and dying in a war in a foreign land. The the reckless spending of George Bush and the Republican-led Congress (and the associated balooning budget deficit) will result in wholesale inflation in the future. Clearly a larger burden will be placed on the poor in this environment --where food, clothing, and shelter make up a much bigger proportion of their total available cash. Bush has decided that re-importation of drugs from Canada is just too dangerous to the profits of Merck and Pfizer, than allowing the program and getting cheaper medicines to the poor.</p>
<p>Look even closer still. Bush and the Republican party have decided that even though they have renounced the Southern Strategy of race baiting to get white, prejudiced Southerners to vote Republican, those same white, prejudiced Southerners are the base of the Republican party that are constantly pandered to. Instead of poll taxes and intimidation, Republicans now use a subtle Southern strategy --by making difficult requirements for voting, like special IDs that will disproportionately disqualify blacks and other minorities. Furthermore, they refuse to allow reformed felons to vote, knowing many are black. They even purge black names off voter rolls like the Presidents brother did in Florida in 2000 and tried to do in 2004 before he was caught. Furthermore, they give inadequate resources to heavily black voting districts, like what happened in Ohio, so mostly black voters will have 8-10 hour lines and will hopefully go home without voting.</p>
<p>Some will argue Bush appointed Colin Powell and Condi Rice to high positions and that proves hes not a racist. Not really. It just proves he will use his own internal quota. If a black American is willing to help him implement his anti-black agenda, they will be the first on the list of people he will appoint. This is a PR tactic, and nothing else (in Republican terms, this is how they reach out to the black community). Does this make George Bush a racist? It is hard to say but I think Kanye West is on to something. It is no wonder 90% of blacks vote Democrat.</p>
<p>hardstyleprep, you are full of bs</p>
<p>
[quote]
90% of blacks vote Democrat.
[/quote]
Where did you pull that from? Out of your @$$?</p>
<p>Hardstyleprep,</p>
<p>your logic is so far-fetched. From your perspective, Bush would be in a lose-lose situation when it comes to whether he is racist or not. If he had not appointed Condi and Colin, he would be viewed to be 'racist', and if he did, it would only seem like an excuse to not look racist? You are truly paranoid if you believe any of this to such a degree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I'm sure that happened in other places around the country. Picking out a single example of such an instance is not a strong argument.</p>
<p>Americans aren't virtuous enough to embrace the joys of self-immolation and that's the good news </p>
<p>by Justin Raimondo</p>
<p>Charles Krauthammer blithely dismisses the widespread belief that, having diverted so many resources to Iraq, we were unable to take care of our own in New Orleans:</p>
<p>"The problem with the evacuation of New Orleans is not that National Guardsmen in Iraq could not get to New Orleans, but that National Guardsmen in Louisiana did not get to New Orleans."</p>
<p>This is nonsense. The troops and the equipment that might have ameliorated the tragedy were off building "democracy" in a foreign country. This is confirmed by a raft of officials:</p>
<p>"The deployment of thousands of National Guard troops from Mississippi and Louisiana in Iraq when Hurricane Katrina struck hindered those states' initial storm response, military and civilian officials said Friday. Lt. Gen. Steven Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau, said that 'arguably' a day or so of response time was lost due to the absence of the Mississippi National Guard's 155th Brigade Combat Team and Louisiana's 256th Infantry Brigade, each with thousands of troops in Iraq. 'Had that brigade been at home and not in Iraq, their expertise and capabilities could have been brought to bear,' said Blum.</p>
<p>"Blum said that to replace those units' command and control equipment, he dispatched personnel from Guard division headquarters from Kansas and Minnesota shortly after the storm struck.</p>
<p>"Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., whose waterfront home here was washed away in the storm, told reporters that the absence of the deployed Mississippi Guard units made it harder for local officials to coordinate their initial response. 'What you lost was a lot of local knowledge,' Taylor said, as well as equipment that could have been used in recovery operations. 'The best equipment went with them, for obvious reasons,' especially communications equipment, he added."</p>
<p>Krauthammer ought to check out his own newspaper, if he still isn't convinced, where a helpful timeline of the federal government's failed response has been printed on the front page. An excerpt:</p>
<p>"The federal disaster response plan hinges on transportation and communication, but National Guard officials in Louisiana and Mississippi had no contingency plan if they were disrupted; they had only one satellite phone for the entire Mississippi coast, because the others were in Iraq. The New Orleans police managed to notify the corps that the 17th Street floodwall near Lake Pontchartrain had busted, and Col. Richard Wagenaar, the top corps official in New Orleans, tried to drive to the site to check it out. But he couldn't get through because of high water, trees and other obstacles on the road ."</p>
<p>Adding insult to injury, members of the Mississippi National Guard fighting in Iraq who lost their homes to Hurricane Katrina are being prevented from going on leave to help their displaced families. Commanders have informed them that there aren't enough troops in Iraq to keep a lid on the insurgency, and their presence is required. The response from the ranks, as evidenced in e-mails procured by the Washington Post, has not been good:</p>
<p>"'All I know is that we are combat-ineffective due to the problems at home,' wrote the Guard member, whose wife and young child escaped before their apartment building was washed away. 'We will start patrolling again soon so we have to get back out and try not to get blown up,' the Guard member said. 'We have served our country honorably for the last nine months and it is time for them to return the favor.'"</p>
<p>Not likely. These guys (and gals) are just cannon fodder as far as the War Party is concerned: having been effectively kidnapped via "stop-loss" programs, they are being forced to "stay the course," while their families are treated like "refugees" in their own country. "Return the favor"? You have to understand that this is not a "favor," in the eyes of the War Party, but a duty. It's all about "sacrifice" but, somehow, people like Krauthammer and his fellow neocons never get around to doing any of the sacrificing.</p>
<p>How dare we enjoy life when we ought to be immolating ourselves on the altar of the war god! Instead of enlisting in the military where they will be sent to some Middle Eastern hellhole to fight the neocons' wars of "national liberation" our children are content to watch television and indulge in other "decadent" activities. And Americans are still bellyaching about burdens they ought to bear with a smile. Kaplan recalls with nostalgia the good old days of World War II when Americans of a certain political coloration, that is paid their taxes eagerly, even patriotically:</p>
<p>"In 1943, FDR declared that 'Doctor New Deal has been replaced by Doctor Win the War.' And, through scrap drives, rationing, war bonds, and a doubling of their tax burden, the public responded in kind. 'You see those bombers in the sky,' the Irving Berlin tune went, 'Rockefeller helped build them and so did I. I paid my income tax today.'"</p>
<p>Why shouldn't we be happy nay, ecstatic! to hand over the greater part of our income to our Supreme Leaders in Washington? That Kaplan doesn't know the answer to this question shows how distanced from the true spirit of this country how un-American he is. We should be eager to hand over our hard-earned money so that bureaucrats can send it to Iraq even as our own National Guardsmen are unable to rescue the drowned and the despairing from the wreckage of New Orleans? Surely Kaplan jests. </p>
<p>It's sickening, really, to contemplate the supreme arrogance of the neocons, as they berate the American people for not being virtuous enough to turn themselves into government-directed automatons. If I were Kaplan, I wouldn't obsess over this so-called shortcoming, and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the trend to reverse itself, either, because it'll be a cold day in Hell before that happens and thank the gods for that. </p>
<p>Americans are an ornery, cantankerous, individualist lot, and always have been. What Kaplan and his ilk describe as the "degradation" of American life the desire, and, yes, the determination to be happy, and find individual self-fulfillment, and to hell with the myth of collective "goals" and "national purpose" is, in reality, their greatest virtue. This nation was founded in a libertarian revolution, which was also an anti-imperialist struggle against a colonial master that thought it was the center of the universe: the Sons of Liberty, however, soon disabused King George and his "loyalists" of that notion. If intellectuals in search of "national purpose" and hubristic visions of "National Greatness" want to enroll in a Foreign Legion in which they can act out their delusions of grandeur and secondhand heroism, then let them do so without involving the rest of us. And good riddance to them! </p>
<p>Hurricane Katrina has blown away the pretensions of the "National Greatness" neocons, as well as their dreams of glory at home and abroad. The bitter winds of a cold realism are sweeping away the cloudy delusions of self-infatuated intellectuals whose Walter Mitty-esque dreams of glory are paid for in the blood of other people's children, never their own. And not a moment too soon </p>
<p>In surveying the federal government's response to the Katrina disaster and trying to make some sense of it, one is moved to ask: What is wrong with these people? How could our government be so utterly clueless? Georgie Anne Geyer put it well:</p>
<p>"Since the first election of George W. Bush as president, the Republicans have also turned dramatically from their traditional conservativism and prudent moderation. They've been taken over by the group around 'W' that can only be described as radical or even Robespierrean.</p>
<p>"His administration has always been more like a traditional French court, disconnected from the people, run by an unknowing dauphin (the president), plotted by a wily Cardinal Richelieu (Dick Cheney), led into foolish wars by a hyper-aggressive Napoleonic figure (Donald Rumsfeld) and all of them manipulated by a group of winking and whispering courtiers with their own agendas and foreign ties.</p>
<p>"A group like this is far from concerned about levees in New Orleans, or landslides in California or air conditioning in Baghdad: Those are minor issues for men like these, with their Great Plans. Obviously, their grandiose mentalities contributed to both of these tragedies."</p>
<p>Speaking of "foreign ties," the response to Katrina by the Israelis and their American amen corner has been predictable:</p>
<p>"There is talk in Washington about suspending U.S. foreign aid in 2006, or an across-the-board cut in aid to all countries. This means that Israel will get much less, or even no, regular civilian or military aid in 2006. </p>
<p>"Israeli sources stress that the Bush administration has made no decision about the special aid package to Israel, but the feeling in Israel is that good taste requires a lower a profile. Israel's dilemma is that it would be inconsiderate to ask for aid now, but neither should it announce foregoing the aid."</p>
<p>Instead of doing the right thing, and telling the Americans to keep their money and help their own people, "the position of both the Israeli government and the American-Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC) is to sit quietly and do nothing." God forbid the Americans should be excused from sending their yearly tribute. Not even a natural disaster on the scale of Katrina is enough to get them off the hook.</p>