THE CONSERVATIVE SOUL IS A TROUBLED ONE. It struggles against the destruction of its country, while at the same time embracing the very thing that is destroying it. It yearns to fly its flag, and to march proudly in its patriotism, but ignorantly wonders why it is constantly tripping over the obstacles put in its path by its government.
I received an email yesterday that was entitled: Thoughts for Americans. In this email one of these troubled conservative souls was trying to make the case for why we should vote for Bush in November. Since the media controls the election, its results are, unfortunately, meaningless. However there is more to what this conservative has to say than just whether you vote in Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum.
Here are some thoughts that every American should contemplate in this election year! Learn these facts to properly debate our poor misguided friends & family before election time!
Poor misguided friends abound unfortunately. The ones who are going to cause us the greatest heartache in the end will be ones who call themselves “conservatives." These are good people who actually are proud of our White heritage, though they are afraid to call it that. They do, deep in their souls, agree with White Nationalists, but they are so well programmed by the all-encompassing propaganda campaign that they are willing to let their own children’s future be sacrificed rather than allow themselves to be called “racists" or “anti-Semitic." Their patriotic pride is made worthless by the mental shackles that they wear, provided by the Media Lords.
It is good to be informed and to list off facts that support your position, provided that your position is one that is in line with reality. But alas this troubled soul has nothing but pain in his future as he watches things unfold, and his country continues down the dark and destructive road it is on today. He will hate it, but he will not be able to lift a finger to stop it. He thinks that George W. Bush is his friend, when he couldn’t find anyone who will do more damage to his children’s future than our current president will.
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January...... In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That's just one American City, about as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq...
There are several points here to be dealt with. First off, when a major military superpower takes on a backwater third-world nation, you don’t expect the superpower to sustain high casualties. A high school senior who beats up an eighth grader doesn’t expect to get a lot of injuries as a result, and the USA didn’t expect a lot of casualties when it attacked Iraq.
On May 1, 2003 the war was officially considered to be over, and our president declared that it was “Mission Accomplished!" But the US body count keeps growing day after day. So far we have lost 894 American military men, in addition to having several thousand being wounded without dying. Most of those lives were lost after the war was “over." The declared mission hasn’t been accomplished, and it never will be. We will continue to lose more American lives as long as we remain in that country where we don’t belong.
According to GlobalSecurity.org, in January the American Service Members who died in Iraq totaled 48, not 39. However, in April it skyrocketed to 150, and only fell to 88 in May. It varies from month to month, but for well over a year, it has never been less than 20, and it is projected that it will be over 70 in July 2004. Remember, this is after all official military opposition has been crushed! There is no Iraqi army opposing us any longer. This is strictly gorilla warfare (or terrorism if you use the official White House terminology), perpetrated by an enemy whose army was completely crushed by a mightier power over a year ago.
Remember please that we have “liberated" this country of Iraq, a country with a pre-war population of 22 million. They should be our friends, and happy to have their liberators there taking care of them. However, even with all the stops pulled out, and the US military armed and in place throughout the country of Iraq, the death toll is consistently higher than in Detroit, our sometimes murder capital of the USA.
Baghdad, Iraq’s largest city, has a population of nearly 5 million, and that is very close to the size of the Detroit metropolitan area. The country of Iraq covers 168,754 square miles.
To get an idea of what exactly our gallant leader has proudly taken us to war with, picture this: if you added all of the land of Oregon, Washington and California together, and also pooled their populations, and then cut the land mass and joint population into two equal parts, either one of those two parts would have about the same land area, with about the same number of people in it, as has the country of Iraq.(1) California all by itself is very close to the same physical size of Iraq, but it is a third larger in population than that Arab nation, and has a GDP over 53 times as large!(2)
The point that our conservative friends seem to miss is that unfortunately, Detroit is no longer a White city and it has the crime rate to prove it. Indeed it is so bad that we can compare its murder rate to the US military death rate of “the entire war torn country of Iraq." Yes, there is a point to be made here, but it is not in support of keeping our soldiers in Iraq! We should have those soldiers back at home guarding our borders, and exporting our boarders! The reason that Detroit is no longer safe is because it is no longer White!(3)
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following ...
Remember now, there follows a list of items that is supposed to support the idea that America should have attacked a nation that has never been a threat to the US or its national interests. Most of the nasty weapons Iraq had, it got from the United States! We armed them and then attacked them for being armed.
What the following list of items, provided by our conservative friend, actually demonstrates is not justification for what President Bush has done, so much as a desperate grab at any straw that will allow its author to justify voting for Bush. He is terrified of what Kerry will do, not in love with what Bush is doing. America is at war, so he will wave his flag and jump up in support of our troops, no matter what. Anyone who opposes the war, even if he truly loves America, treasures America’s heritage, and agrees with her White Forefathers, is considered an enemy. This is truly sad.
Iraq was attacked because it was a threat to Israel, and Israel is far more important to George Bush than America could ever be. The people who own the mass media of news and entertainment(4) control whomever is president (senator, congressman, governor, etc.), and they only care about Israel, not America. Until you understand that, you will be routinely amazed by the destructive decisions that your politicians make. How else can you explain our spending of billions and billions of dollars to kill Israel’s enemies in Iraq, while not lifting a finger to stop the massive non-White flood across our borders?
FDR ... led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did. From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.
This is a very important point! The only trouble is that it proves the opposite of what the conservative was trying to establish.
FDR certainly drug the USA kicking and screaming into World War II. Charles Lindberg was leading the charge to keep us out of the war, and he was winning until FDR intentionally provoked Japan into attacking us,(5) and stood by and eagerly watched them do it, knowing full well it was going to happen. Why? Because he wanted us in the war against Germany. And if you think about it, he had the same interests in mind as George Bush does, and those interests are NOT the interests of the United States.
In order to promote his chosen goals, Franklin D. Roosevelt planned and executed a conspiracy that led to the death of those 450,000 American soldiers, as well as of millions of Germans after the war, and the rape and subjection of all of Eastern Europe by the Soviet Union.
This is one of the blackest parts of American history and it is really sad to see a conservative dredge it up in order to try to justify our senseless attack on Iraq, so that he may justify voting for Israel’s toady in the White House.
Truman... finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never attacked us.. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.
It is amazing how this could inspire support for our war in Iraq in anyone's mind. The end of World War II was a complete shame, and we disgraced ourselves in how we handled it. We allowed the Nazis to be tortured to extract confessions, and then used the confessions as if they had real value. (Can you imagine the outcry if we tried that on one of our accused criminals in the USA today?) We allowed the Soviets to displace millions of Germans after the war, knowing they would starve to death, and they did just that. We gave Eastern Europe to the Soviets, and let them do whatever they wanted with it. WE DID THIS!
And then we sacrificed 55,000 of our boys to save the South Koreans from the communists in the North. Well if we couldn’t fight to keep the commies out of the lands of our White brothers in Europe, why on earth did we do it for Asians who couldn’t care less about us? Korea was far less our concern than was Eastern Europe. We had no business being there.
John F. Kennedy... started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson... turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.
Vietnam was a tremendous mistake. Not only did it cost us 58,000 men, but it was also used as a catalyst for the Jewish leftists like Jerry Rubin, Abby Hoffman, Gloria Steinem, and Bella Abzug to stir up support for anti-American ideas and causes. Much of the destruction that was put upon us in the 1960s would have been much slower coming if it had not been for the useless Vietnam war. If Iraq is like Vietnam, it is strong argument against voting for the man who instigated the war!
Clinton... went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never attacked us.. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing.
Bill Clinton was and is a scoundrel of the lowest order. He has no loyalty except to himself. He even cheats on his wife openly and is unrepentant, and that is nearly a virtue by comparison with what he has done to others.
In Bosnia he bombed the Serbs in order to stop them from creating a homogeneous land. The conflict was completely internal to Bosnia, a civil war. It was none of our affair. But Clinton decided that the US was the diversity police force for the world and he was willing to kill people to make them accept his point of view.
His attack on Yugoslavia was also completely illegal, unprovoked, and disgusting. He killed Serbs for “ethnic cleansing" and then used military support to back the Albanians while they in turn ethnically cleansed the Serbs out of Kosovo Province.
All the while, he allowed Mexicans, who still celebrate Cinco De Mayo to this very day, while ignoring the Fourth of July, to pour across our borders unopposed. We were under full-scale attack and he was fighting wars with people who were no threat to America’s interests.
This is certainly nothing to be proud of, or in any way a supportive argument for voting for Bush.
Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
Does Osama Bin Laden reside in Iraq? No! Is he allied with Iraq? No! Was Saddam Hussein affiliated with him? No, they did not like each other at all! Therefore, bombing and invading Iraq in no way has anything to do with what Osama Bin Laden has done.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has ... liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
Let’s see, I must assume that the two countries referred to here, based not upon their current state, but only upon the fact that we have sent our military in to kill thousands of their people, are Afghanistan and Iraq. Who was it that had previously invaded and conquered these countries so that they required “liberation"?
We lashed out at Afghanistan because the Taliban was sympathetic to Osama Bin Laden. The nation was not in alien hands and it was not in need of “liberation," at least until we arrived. Iraq was not under the rule of an external country either. It wasn't even under the control of Islam fundamentalists bent on destroying the USA. It probably soon will be, now that we have done our work in upsetting the Iraqi applecart, but that is the fault of George W. Bush not Saddam Hussein.
I grow weary of people of any political persuasion proclaiming that their war of aggression is a war of “liberation." Wars of liberation are never fought, only proclaimed. Wars are fought for reasons that suit the ones with power, and then justified to the masses with absurd names like “liberation."
The Taliban, the ruling body in Afghanistan has been displaced, but what of that? Has the Islam faith been moved even a hair’s breath out of its place in that country? Are we so insane to think that by removing one Islamic body from power that another will not fill its place soon? It is like a laughing moron scooping water out of the ocean with a cup and thinking that more seawater will not rush in to fill the void that he has just created.
As long as Osama Bin Laden lives, al-Qaeda is not crushed. And even if Osama Bin Laden were captured and killed, and all the members of al-Qaeda were exterminated, there would simply be another Arab group that would rise up in its place.
Who cares if President Bush has put nuclear inspectors into places that do not have nuclear weapons, when Israel sits uninspected, or under any outside control, with a huge nuclear arsenal, that goes so well with its chemical and biological arsenal? Iraq was bombed to its knees ostensibly because it was supposed to have WMD (which it didn't!), while Israel definitely does have them in great quantity, but remains untouched. What is wrong with this picture?
When it comes right down to it, the only problem we have in the Middle East is Israel. We had no real enemies in the Middle East before Israel came along and the reason the Arabs hate us, is our support for that treacherous little country. We allow Israel to continue to murder and torture the Palestinians, ethnically cleansing the lands under their control, without fear of reprisal from our military bombers. Meanwhile the Arabs are left to defend themselves against not only the Israelis, but from us.
Saddam Hussein was indeed deposed and captured. When he was brought to trial he declared that he was the "President of Iraq," and that George W. Bush was the real criminal. I find his position far more tenable than the one taken by those who would support Bush’s war against Iraq.
Is Saddam Hussein a terrorist? Did he “slaughter 300,000 of his own people"? Perhaps we should put this in perspective. Charlie Reese has pointed out that Abraham Lincoln made “war on his own people, killing 262,000 of them, burning their cities, destroying their food supply and placing the survivors under military occupation."(6) Saddam Hussein crushed a rebellion by the Kurds, and in the process many of them died. That is just a bit different than a terrorist slaughtering innocent people unprovoked. I am no fan of Saddam Hussein, but that is not justification for attacking his country and killing thousands more of the Iraqi people.
The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation.
It is interesting that such a comparison has been made. Because it was in reprisal for that terrible act that another terrible act occurred: the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Not only that, but it was the absurd excuse put forward by Clinton's appointee Janet Reno that they were concerned that there was child abuse going on inside the compound. That was supposed to justify their actions that culminated in the burning alive of many Branch Davidian children, not to mention their mothers and sisters.
Another interesting aspect of that is that the anger at our government and the distrust created among the people because of that attack still burns under the surface. People have not forgotten Waco, just like the Iraqis are not going to ever let us remain on their soil without attacking us, and now they are going to continue to hate us once we are gone. It may have only taken a few days to conquer the Iraqi army but the war is not even close to being over, and the majority of the losses we have suffered have come after Iraq “was taken."
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.
I suppose this is meant to be humorous. If we had as many people looking, with the total access to Hillary Clinton’s records as we have had in Iraq searching for “weapons of mass destruction," even on a relative scale, the records would have been produced instantly. There was never any real worry about WMD. The only actual concern was that there existed a nation that might be able to do something in the future against the nation of Israel. Any nation in that area of the world that reaches the point of being a threat to Israel will find itself in the same state as Iraq is, unless they get real WMD before we realize they are a threat.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
The fact that we can destroy in a hurry does not make the destruction more acceptable. And the fact that Teddy Kennedy is a lowlife scumbag, and possible murderer, does not in any way impact on the fact that we were wrong to attack Iraq.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!
Once again, what difference does this make? "Taking Iraq" was quick but the war has not even begun yet. The vote count in Florida is over, but the casualties and the war continue.
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB! The Military morale is high! The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize the facts.
What a laugh! Those who control the media, don't have to hope. They KNOW that nearly all Americans, including conservative Americans, are ignorant of the facts, because those poor souls rely on those very media for their knowledge. They watch television, read magazines, and books all created for their consumption by the Media Lords. Any candidate that makes it to the ballot in November has been stamped with a Kosher Seal of Approval for his support of the Media Lords' agenda. It doesn't matter whether you pick Kosher candidate Tweedle Dum, or Kosher candidate Tweedle Dee. Both of these creatures have sold their souls to the dark side and will never do anything to stand in the way of what the Media Lords have planned to do to your children.
Our Commander-In-Chief has no intention of doing a great job, and he never will as long as he is in office. What is his job? As Commander-In-Chief he is supposed to direct our military in defense of this nation. As Commander-In-Chief he is instead using our military, and our tax dollars to take care of Israel, while completely ignoring our nation. Our borders are an open door, and the non-Whites are invading by the millions every year.
Just because they don't wear uniforms and don't carry army riffles doesn't mean that they are any less invaders. Why is it that nations have always sent out their sons to die horribly on the battlefield? To protect their land from invasion from those who will take their women, destroy their way of life, and displace their language. I defy you to show any significant difference in what is going on right now by those who are invading us from Mexico and other non-White lands and what would happen if an armed invasion had incurred. In the areas where the Mexican transplants have settled, the language spoken is Spanish. The signs in the shop windows are in Spanish. The music blaring out of the cars and the living rooms are all Mexican and sung in Spanish. They even have their own television and radio stations IN SPANISH.
But it doesn't stop there. They are taking our woman, and moving into our land, driving us out. Whites are welcome in ever decreasing areas in this country. We are being pushed back by this invasion, as surly as if we were being defeated on the battlefield. But there is no battlefield! Why not?
Because our Commander-In-Chief is not doing a "great job." No, far from doing a great job, he is doing a horrible job. He has our military thousands of miles away fighting on foreign soil, for foreign interests, even as the invaders are taking our country from us. It is taking years to complete the invasion. However that makes it even more deadly, because White Americans are not becoming as alarmed as they would be if it were happening under force of foreign arms and in months instead of taking decades. George W. Bush hasn't lifted a finger to stop this invasion and he has made it clear that he won't. He has completely avoided his responsibility to the American people, and he certainly does not need to be encouraged in his neglect of White America. He has turned traitor to White America and has instead pledged allegiance to Israel.
We have had one traitor to White Americans after another in the White house for decades. Traitors to White America have filled the congress and the court system. It is time for a change. In fact is long overdue!
|According to the World Almanac of 2001:|
|California||  155,973||  33.145|
|Oregon||  096,002||  03.316|
|Washington||  066,581||  05.756|
|Total||  318,556||  42.217|
|1/2 Total||  159,278||  21.108|