Larry Johnson is a CRIMINALSo. Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson are now criminals, partners with Bush, and thus must be put into prison by Barack Obama. And how do we know this? Simple: Plame and Wilson did not support Obama in the primary election!
I ill say it again...the reason he and Joe Wilson have been such BIG supporters of Clinton and have said such horrendous things about Obama is because...Obama will NOT let the criminality of government remain the status quo.....Clinton would of covered up for Bush and the CIA etc like her husband did, Obama will NOT and Larry and his buddies and Joe and Valeries budddies may just be caught for whatever criminal acts they were part of.....
Is the Obama movement a new form of Maoism? Or is it simply an online insane asylum?
The idea that Clinton and Bush are "in it together" is laughable. Get a clue, Obots: At the Tony Rezko trial, we had testimony under oath tying Obama's posse of Chicago hoodlums to the Bush administration. Tony felt confident that his pals in the Bush DOJ would can Patrick Fitzgerald. That's why he knew he could get away with helping Obi buy that mansion.
Enough. Let's deal with the fascinating topic of the original Kos post, which recapitulates an interesting catch made by the National Review.
It seems that many details of the "Whiteygate" story parallel the events in a 2006 novel called The Power Broker, by Stephen Frey.
In that book, a black presidential candidate named Jesse Wood faces a problem: His enemies have hold of a tape in which he rails against "whitey."
Hewitt thought for a second. “I’m going to let Jesse win the nomination and let the public get used to him as the Democratic candidate. Give the country some time to get to know Jesse Wood, to start to like him. And they will because he’s a very likeable guy. Then I’m going to drop the bomb, after everyone’s started to like him. That way the clip will have maximum effect and people will be as angry as they can be.Is this the origin point for the Michelle tape rumor? Perhaps.
But at the risk of sounding like a "coincidence theorist," we should note that history gives us many examples of literature offering eerie forecasts of real-life events.
I'm old enough to recall seeing an exploitative novel called Black Abductor on the paperback racks. (Wish I had bought it!) This quasi-pornographic opus was infamous for presenting a kidnap scenario which mirrored the later abduction of Patty Hearst. In the novel, an extremist left-wing group, led by a black man named after a revolutionary leader, kidnaps an heiress named Patricia.
Both kidnappings take place at night, not far from the campus.The details were so strikingly similar that some conspiracy buffs presumed that "they" -- the CIA, the Illuminati, whoever -- had published the thing as a grand psychological experiment. (Such theorists also theorize that "they" engineered the actual kidnapping.) Even after another publishing house reprinted the work to capitalize on the real-life fulfillment, the pseudonymous author refused to step forward and claim his share of the royalties. To this day, no-one knows who wrote Black Abductor. (I like to think it was Ed Wood. Call me a romantic.)
In both abductions, the victim is dragged away half-naked.
Both Patricias are with boyfriends when seized, and both boyfriends survive bad beatings.
Both boyfriends are initially regarded as suspects, but later cleared.
The abductors are a multiracial, ragtag clutch of ideologists, of both sexes, led by an embittered young black man.
Fictional and actual abductors use the mails to communicate with the anguished parents.
Fictional and actual abductors mail Polaroid pictures of their victims along with their messages.
The fictional abduction is described as the United States' "first political kidnapping." That description has frequently been employed to describe the Hearst case.
Both the fictional and the real-life abductors model themselves after Latin American terrorists who have used kidnapping as a revolutionary technique.
The fictional terrorist band includes a woman who is more interested in sex with women than with men. At least two women reputed to be members of the Symbionese Liberation Army, the nonfictional guerrillas, are known to have lived together as lovers.
The fictional Patricia, depicted as a political ingenue with fairly conventional sexual experiences, joins the revolutionary cause after submitting--with increasing willingness--to a variety of sexual impositions at the hands of her captors. According to taped communiqués from Patty Hearst and the SLA, her mildly political consciousness has been transformed into revolutionary activism.
You probably already know about the numerous literary and artistic (if that is the right word) forecasts of the tragic events of 9/11. The most striking example: An episode of The Lone Gunmen centers on a plot to fly an aircraft into the World Trade Center. If I recall correctly, the infamous neo-Nazi novel The Turner Diaries ends with a zealot flying his plane into the Pentagon. Even this classic WWII-vintage Bugs Bunny cartoon has a brief sequence which carries a 9/11 vibe.
The most striking example of a predictive literary work is, of course, the novel Futility, which describes the sinking of a ship called the Titan on her maiden voyage. The book was published in 1898; the Titanic went down in 1912. Many details of the actual event had an exact parallel in the fictional account.
You may be able to name other instances in which a piece of fiction seemed to offer a prophecy of real life events. So, yes, coincidences of this sort do happen. Indeed, the parallels linking Black Abductor to the Patty Hearst case strike me as far more bizarre than are the parallels linking The Power Broker to "Whiteygate."
The Power Broker makes reference to a "nutjob preacher" whose big mouth and irrepressible speech threaten candidate Wood. Coincidence? Or did author Frey base his character on Barack Obama, and did he do more research into the man than had the national press?
The Power Broker is the third in a line of thrillers centering around a hero named Christian Gillette. Here's the Amazon description:
Murder, global conspiracy, treason, blackmail, sexual infidelity and perversity propel bestseller Frey's entertaining, if highly implausible, third financial thriller starring Christian Gillette (after 2005's The Protégé). Christian, the CEO of Everest Capital, a hugely successful Manhattan-based investment firm, faces a host of adversaries, chief among them the Order, a secret society made up of nine white American businessmen and government leaders whose predecessors have been manipulating financial and historical events since the society's inception in 1839. Led by Jackson Prescott Hewitt, chairman of U.S. Oil, the Order fears that America is falling under the control of minorities whose agendas include statehood for Puerto Rico and Mexico and the election of the nation's first African-American president. Christian comes to the attention of this cabal and, aided by series regulars Allison Wallace and Quentin Stiles, is soon fighting for his very life. The action roars along like a small tsunami, sweeping logic aside and carrying aloft those readers willing to suspend a substantial amount of disbelief.The customer reviews are mixed. One negative reviewer threatens to toss away his copy. I suggest that he hold onto it; it might be worth money some day. That's why I wish I had purchased an original edition of Black Abductor.
And finally...
For another entertaining bit of nuttiness, check out this Rigorous Intuition board, where my name becomes "Joe Cannonfire," and my post on Cynthia McKinney -- described as my "beloved Cynthia McKinney" (!!) -- is summarized with skull-popping inaccuracy. Once again, Obots display an appalling inability to read. One reader's verdict:
I've come to the conclusion, after careful observation, that he [i.e., me] is a prick or works for the man.It's the former, bub. And proud of it! Oddly enough, I once again find myself agreeing with RI head honcho Jeff Wells, who says that he too would have voted for Jesse Jackson or Malcolm X, but not Obama. You're a cool dude, Jeff -- so why are your readers so ghastly? Then again: Why are so many of my readers so ghastly?
23 comments:
Hi Joe,
Who are you quoting "Larry Johson is a criminal"?
I don't understand how a comment left on Kos by a visitor to that blog means anything at all. As you very well know people online say just about anything they want to for any reason they want.
To then take extreme random comments and say that they somehow relate to Obama and his campaign is silly and unfair.
How can it be "Whiteygate" ? There is no whitey and there is no gate.
The venom and insanity running rampant on the prog blogs is no small thing. Indeed, this very phenomenon is what forced me to take a second, harder look at Barack Obama. More than that. The "warrior madness" suffuses the progressive movement has cuased me to rethink -- well, everything. And not just me. Sites like The Confluence are growing rapidly.
It amazes me that the Obots still don't know how repellent they sound. The pro-Hillary movement was, to a large degree, an anti-Obama movement.
You know damn well why someone coined the term "Whiteygate." It's funny. "Allegations-the-Michelle-used-the-term-Whitey-gate" would be a more accurate exercise in nomenclature, but it lacks euphony. And it's not funny.
HALFMOON OVER VEGAS
As I gaze out over the Las Vegas cityscape from my high rise enclave I am left to wonder "What would Elvis do?"
Thank you Joe for illustrating how tirelessly life imitates art in even it's most desperate and demented manifistations.
<>_<> HIDE AND SEE
Obama/Obama '08
Because the Messiah multitasks.
I don't really understand what the point is in recounting coincidences from literary history, when the only connection this has here is a suggested one.
Why not examine the coincidences which directly correlate to this case instead.
This isn't the first time Larry Johnson has been co-opted to spread rumours fed to him by republican sources, despite the fact that these turned out to be wholly unsubstantiated and contradicted by all subsequent investigation.
Larry had the precise same "confirmation from multiple sources" for the single-sourced lie about Karl Rove being indicted.
Do you really need to be looking elsewhere for context in examining how this happened again?
Larry is either knowingly willing to be co-opted by Karl Rove et al for their purposes (or so gullible and easily duped that it amounts to the same thing) each and every time this need arises.
What's the name of the book that compares to that track record on placing absolute faith in unsubstantiated rumours sourced from unreliable accounts from multiple republican sources?
Gullibility For Dummies?
Oh, enough already with the Karl Rove thing. Jason Leopold got the same info. We don't know yet who was saying what at that time -- but I've long felt that there's a story behind all that. One we can only guess at.
Meanwhile, sites like Kos print lies all freaking day, and nobody ever calls 'em on it. Really, my blog might not have taken the course it took if Kos had just apologized for that smear about the "darkened video."
But lying in the service of the Messiah all goes to the greater good, I suppose.
Joe, I really don't care to get into the drama because I do not have the passion with either side, but I seem to recall receiving a spam email from my Grandmother about this. She is a dyed in the wool republican and gets all the hate email circulated. In any case, I usually delete them and I did delete this one. I can ask her about it and see if she still has it -if so I will get her to resend and we can check the date on it. Will forward your way if possible.
kc
"The venom and insanity running rampant on the prog blogs is no small thing."- Joe
Sorry but this blog has plenty of venom of its own and it sounds somewhat hypocritical for you to accuse others of the very thing you do as well.
Here's the link for the comment:
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008...
What's ridiculous about this isn't just what he said, but that 11 people scrolled down far enough to read the comment and then reccommend it. Then the user posted that "Joe Wilson has been horrendous" and even more people recommended it. These people are nuts.
My question is, which of the insane comments are written by idiots (for whatever reasons... outside the scope of this comment), and which are written as part of an intentional operation directed toward influencing public opinion?
To deny the probability of the latter occurring, is to me, just ignorance (or worse). I presume Joseph and many readers could rattle off examples of intentional disinformation fluently. I could fluently "rant" about it imprecisely, probably including some bad examples which could be shot down, so I won't and simply don't have time to research and check my examples. I would, however, suggest that some familiarity with operations run by such people as Palmerston and Conti (going back to the times of the Revolutionary War and earlier, in Britain and on the European continent) are most useful in understanding such operations. They certainly did not start with Karl Rove, and there certainly are institutions which are quite expert in carrying out such operations. Further, the principal ones I have read of can be traced back to (for lack of a better term) "corporatist looting operations," who care not for the common good or general welfare of our republic's Constitutional model, but rather seek to attack, undermine and destroy that model because it is a threat to their financier operations. {And, no, Mr potential troll, I am not implying any sort of anti-semetic comment here; financiers certainly do not all share any single common religious or ethnic background.)
Am I alone here in holding this view? Is there an argument to be made against it? Is anyone interested in investigating or pursuing some study of it? I am frankly amazed that I don't see it more widely discussed. I myself, attribute that lack of discussion to the fact that the view has been actively suppressed by my above-mentioned enemies. One mode of such suppression in recent decades is to have promoted an "anti-"conspiracy theory" attitude (in part, probably, by promulgating absurd "conspiracy theories" just to show how absurd conspiracy theories are).
So, roughly sketched, goes my conspiracy hypothesis. Arguments? Discussion? Questions?
Scott,
Ditto ...
A. Huxley (creepy father, linage and associations) and H.G. Wells (taken in under the wing of the oligarchy I know not why--perhaps because of his creepiness) also produced culture-shaping stuff, did they not?
"Is the Obama movement a new form of Maoism?" ...Bertrand Russell, who was a very influential shaper of our, and world, culture (raised by very creepy, powerful, imperialist grandfather with very creepy linage and creepy associations) played no small part in the cropping up of Maoism.
To quote a very recent comment by an elder statesman:
"It is doubtful that either [McCain or Obama] will actually be nominated. Some people in the back room of politics have a different idea, people operating from behind the scenes at a very high level in the circles of world power. McCain and Obama are political chess-pieces on the board; the fellows in the back room are chess players who know how a pawn becomes a queen."
Got some scribblings that tell that story?
Let's see what vile creature comes out of the woodwork...
"Oh, enough already with the Karl Rove thing. Jason Leopold got the same info."
Well yeah, he did. He also got the same unsubstantiated rumour from the same republican sources that he bought into lock-stock with no result other than painting him as a gullible tool of republican whisper campaigns and destroying his credibility.
Larry doing that twice now is either what's significant in relation to this video story or Jason Leopold also doing it is.
"We don't know yet who was saying what at that time"
Yeah, you do. Republicans who wanted to use those easily duped reporters on the left to disseminate lies. If their names were Bob or Ted, this really doesn't change the motivation or the outcome.
You could also say you don't know who was running a whispering campaign about McCain fathering a black baby. That was just as hard to figure out.
Or were you thinking it was an accident that a liberal blog was selected to run the hardest with this rumour now regarded by most as despicable, racist fearmongering ?
Hmmm ?
Or that the same one selected to carry that previous misinformation from republican sources, and performed so dutifully at it, just happened to be selected again ?
I thought you said you didn't want to come across as a "coincidence theorist".
Scott: You overlook the factor of chronology. The question of "who hit first" is not childish.
1812: Napoleon's army is in Moscow. No historian today will justify his decision to go there.
1814: Czar Alexander's army is in Paris. No historian today will condemn his decision to go there.
Get it? Brutes force a brutish response.
K: I know a little more about the Leopold thing, but since it came from an acquaintance in private conversation, I cannot deal with it here. Suffice it to say, I suspect (but cannot prove) that there really was a sealed indictment, and that Karl Rove is quite lucky to be walking around free right now. I don't know what went on behind the scenes, but one day the story will come out, and Leopold will be justified.
That's a guess, or somewhere between a guess and a prediction. Only time, as the cliche has it, will tell.
Even if the "whitey" video proves false, Johnson was not indulging in racist fearmongering. Barack Obama did that, in order to turn the black vote against Hillary.
joseph -
i found your comments and illustrations very informative. you worked a lot of useful history into this post.
There is a reason I called the Kossacks and their ilk in the blogosphere the "nutroots" before Marshall Wittman and the right started using that term. Their behavior is truly unhinged, but they are hurting the Democratic Party in ways unimaginable a decade ago.
susan, I think that whenever a "mass madness" movement takes hold of the populace (or a segment thereof), there comes a point where everyone stops, engages in a self-reflective moment, and says: "Hey, wait. Do I really want to be part of...of THIS?"
I once read a memoir of the McCarthy era which described such a moment. The author, as a boy, heard a public speech in which Tailgunner Joe refered to to Adlai Stevenson as "Alger." It was one of the on-purpose accidents, and it got a laugh. But it also made people queasy, because it was such a low blow.
These days, of curse, the blows are much lower.
Early in the W administration, the Bush daughters went out drinking, even though they were then underaged. A female bartender carded them, and the girls got in some minor trouble.
The Free Republic reaction was shocking: They published the personal contact information for the bartender -- who, of course, received numerous threats of violence. All because she had done her duty and had not made a special exception for King George's whelplings.
So. Now that the left has become the right, where is the line and when does everyone admit that it has been crossed?
For me, it was the "darkened video" controversy -- and Moulitsas' refusal to apologize when the whole thing was definitively exposed as a fraudulent accusation.
For others, the call to incarcerate Valerie Plame may be the moment where people step back and ask "Hey, do I really want to be part of this madness?"
For most, though, that moment has yet to come. Come it will. I am positive of that.
"...whenever a 'mass madness' movement takes hold of the populace (or a segment thereof), there comes a point where everyone stops, engages in a self-reflective moment, and says: 'Hey, wait. Do I really want to be part of...of THIS?'"
At what point did the Jacobin mobs of the French (failed) revolution do that? At what point did Goebbel's brainwashed do that?
Wish I could be comforted by your faith here, Joseph.
"Johnson was not indulging in racist fearmongering... "
And if Johnson was really indulging in racist fear mongering, how would you know the difference ? Replace the word "Obots" with "Jews" on "No Quarter" and you get the idea. The vitriol coming out of SusanUnPC is incredible, she sounds like Ann Coulter with an adam's apple on steroid. And it's difficult to qualify his blog and yours as poor "victims" of the vile oBots since you are trolling for it by insulting them at every occasions. Like you are doing, some people are quoting your blog as an example of how crazy the anti-Obama people are.
"Barack Obama did that (indulge in racist fearmongering), in order to turn the black vote against Hillary."
It's not by repeating this over and over that it will become true. You would need more proof than ONE memo from one local campaign HQ or an article written by a longtime friend of the Clintons to have the proof that it was a systematic campaign. Why don't you apply the same rule concerning evidence against Obama that you use to judge evidence against Clinton ? On the other side, I agree Hillary has been the victim of sexism, but like the racist attack against Obama, it was not from the Democrats, it was mostly from stupid right wing pundits on TV. I would say that Hillary got even more mileage because of sexism since there's more woman than there's black people in the democratic party.
Considering that every comment by every blogger out there is controlled by Obama would be the equivalent of saying your are paid by Hillary. But if I was a republican strategist, I would hire an army of "fake" blogger to create exactly that kind of "zizanie", they are the big winner here. It's the Mossad technique, you let your enemy destroy itself by making them perceive their brothers as greater enemies than the real enemies: the Republicans. How do you know who all the anonymous people leaving comments are really Obama supporters ? If some Republicans went to vote for Hillary to keep the race going, what stops them of leaving comment here ?
"The pro-Hillary movement was, to a large degree, an anti-Obama movement."
How do you know that it was to a large degree ? I understand it was your case, but I find it a little presumptuous to qualify yourself as a "typical" democrat or to extend your own motivation (or those of a limited circle of bloggers). Also, I don't think a large proportion of Obama voters (like you) did it because they were against Hillary. Is it possible most people vote because they prefer one candidate over the other ?
From what I understand, your skirmish with the oBot started after the false allegations that the Hillary campaign darkened Obama's skins in order to play on the fear of the black man. If you had started by attacking a false allegation of the hBots, maybe history would have been different. From what I heard by "neutral" media people (like Thom Hartmann) or bloggers who tried to stay neutral in this campaign is that they received an generally equal amount of flak coming from both side. The assholes are on both side. But in a war, it's not because the other side has committed atrocious war crimes that it give you the right to do the same.
"and Moulitsas' refusal to apologize when the whole thing was definitively exposed as a fraudulent accusation."
By chance, this time Moulitsas was not stupid enough to peddle the Whitey tape fraud.
About That Moment...
I predict the third week of July. I think it'll be media recognition of the Rezko thing, followed by the "whitey" tape right before the convention. In between, I predict rumblings of lack of support from pledged delegates, a possible health crisis for Obama, a media softening on Hillary and other possible nominees, followed by a messy Dem convention that results in a non-Obama ticket.
Not sure how the public will react. My sense is that voters take it relatively well, actually. I'm conflicted about it, because I'm okay with this person getting it, but he's not exactly well-liked in this country.
"Incestuous amplification" explains what happens on the right and the left when they hear only from people of like mind. I thought the left was immune, but I was wrong.
That's one reason why civilized discussion with people who do not share your views is important.
djmm
Life imitates art? Artists sense the future and use it as unconscious inspiration? Perhaps.
Or maybe events large enough to ripple their effects through time once they've occurred also have (weaker) ripple effects prior to their occurence?
I remember back in the day of vinyl records, it wasn't that uncommon to sometimes get pre-'echoes' of upcoming loud chords. It was explained to me at the time that the master TAPE on its reel put the loud sound of that section of tape OVER an earlier section of tape, and mechanically/electromagnetically imprinted such a strong signal across the tape medium to the underlying earlier section of tape, and a weak version of the fortissimo section was transferred to a reel's circumference length prior section (since it was directly below the loud section).
Even if one doesn't think causation can work backwards in time for such effects, sometimes there is a Zeitgeist, a tenor of the times, where an idea's time has come or is about to come, is in the air, and creative types pick up on it. It is often the case that independent authors/screenwriters/scientists, whoever, develop the same themes quite apart from one another, in approximately the same time period.
Liebniz and Newton invented the calculus at about the same time. Marconi got the original patents for radio, but had them taken away when it was shown that Tesla's work was first by a nose. And something gets Hollywood scriptwriters often writing similar treatments of the same theme.
Another possibility argued by some is that there are a number of disloyal 'insiders' to a world-bestriding control group who wish to either forestall planned developments or at least make their planned nature and reasons more obvious to the public.
This is sometimes characterized as a Faction 1/Faction 2 power group schism. Some number of fans of Chris Carter's X-Files thought he had some inside information of this type, and there is an X-Files story line arc to this effect, calling the factions 'Owls' and 'Roosters.' (The Owls favoring the secrecy that has always covered this group and their actions, the Roosters favoring disclosure).
'The Lone Gunmen' was a Chris Carter-produced show for Fox, and it was eagerly awaited by his legions of X-Files fans, heavily promoted by Fox, and seen by millions of Americans. Yet its eerie parallels to 9/11 only a few months apart went substantially unmentioned in the mainstream media, probably because of its plot details: the planes were hijacked via remote control in the pilot program, and it was the CIA who was going to crash them into the WTC, in order to create a casus bellum by which to justify their military spending budget increases and geopolitical plans for hegemony.
...sofla
Don't you wonder of Frye knows something that we do not yet? He owes a little payback to oprah and maybe this is it. Perhaps something was whispered in his ear about,"you really want to see Oprah squirm?". Maybe this is really gonna happen. What a coincidence, NOT! I would say that Frye is on to something and its just a little too close for comfort. Don't ask me to follow a link to KOS, I won't do it for anything. No traffic for them from me.
Post a Comment