Ok kiddies; gather around, I have a riddle for you. I'm going to list some things previously available to a nation before the Zionists ruined it. Here it goes!
What country provided $20,000 to newlyweds for purchase of a home? Who paid half for a vehicle? Who made petrol 7 cents a gallon? If you wanted to be a farmer, who provided free training, free land and a home, free equipment and livestock, free seeds and money to hire help? Who made all loans interest free by law from the state before we instituted and evil Zionist Rothschild central bank? Who spent millions if not billions on water and electricity to nations other than his own? Who provided free education and quality healthcare, and if you couldn't get adequate of either in the country, they paid for you to travel abroad? Who said that a home was a basic right and he would make sure everyone would receive housing before his own father, which he honored because his father died before getting housed? Who had a quality of life higher than Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil? Who had the support of nearly the entire country?If you guessed Libya and Col. Gaddafi, you are correct.
Obama went on live TV and said the people of Libya were tired of the tyrant Gaddafi and we had to remove him. This is an outright lie, demonstrated by how 1/3 of the entire country came out in Tripoli to protest out bombing. It was said that it was the Libyans revolting, which was a lie; they were Zionist foreigners who were supplied with arms from NATO.
How do we know this? Well, they lied and said they got their arms from raiding Libyan army bases. How do we know this? Well, they lied and said they got their arms from raiding Libyan army bases. This is simply not true because the Libyan army used AK-47's, and these rebels were armed to the teeth with shiny new FNFAL rifles with new 7.62 NATO rounds. And not only did we provide state of the art Anti air missiles, they came complete with their own CIA handlers to train in how to operate them.
We lied and said he was bombing his own people, but it has been proven that was a lie, and videos of rebels firing anti- aircraft guns and scores of dead bodies were staged for the media. The also showed men and children dead or with injuries, but there is video of them applying Hollywood style fake blood, and one guy in a coffin starts laughing.
It was said Gaddafi was crazy and supported terrorists, most namely the Lockerbie bomber. The problem with that is the only thing that convicted him was eyewitness testimony, and since then the witnesses recanted their stories and said they were paid 2 million dollars each to lie for the FBI and finger him
. He was also made out to be crazy by having those women bodyguards. In reality he used women because in Islam, it is not allowed to kill innocent women and children. And the fact that they were attractive can be attributed to most females who are in shape and athletic happen to be good looking. You would think if he was so hated and everyone wanted him gone they wouldn't have to make up stories and outright lie, right?
Let's get to the real reason for his removal. In the year 2000, the only countries without an evil Zionist Rothschild central bank were Libya, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Afghanistan, and North Korea. Since then we have toppled all but Iran, North Korea, and Cuba.
It was said that Saddam was going to change from the fiat monopoly money Petrodollar to the Euro to buy his oil. It was also said that Libya was only going to accept gold for theirs. In a country that runs on fake made from thin air money, the USA knew that if the world stopped accepting its monopoly money for commodities, the dollar would fail as the world's reserve currency and a country like China would move in and become the new global player.
They simply could not let that happen. So when they said that 9/19 hijackers attacked the world trade center, despite 9 being alive still to this day and Usama Bin Laden, a CIA operative named Tim Ossman, was the ringleader, despite he denied any involvement up to his death in Dec 01', somehow that equaled to invading Iraq and Afghanistan. When they realized that the people would not go for this, they then said he supported terrorists and had WMD, which we all know how that turned out.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
WOW! Bumbler came up with a great site... It should be named:
Conspiracies R US!
Check it out... they have a conspiracy theory for every occasion... ~ Pearl Harbor... NO problem we've got a conspiracy for that attack. ~ The Big Bang???... YUP! "THE "BIG BANG" IS JUST RELIGION DISGUISED AS SCIENCE" ~Fake Terror Attacks??? Sure... we've got em from 70 BC to the Oklahoma bombing. ~ The Sept 11th WTC attack?... Looks like they got hundreds of em!
All Conspiracy, All The Time! What a great site for WingNuts!!!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
To the credit of news agencies such as CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News, Egypt was at least mentioned. Wolf Blitzer, feverishly covering every aspect of the Zimmerman trial, noted that something "historic" was happening in Egypt. Additionally, he stated that CNN was monitoring the situation. Apparently we don't need to hear the news anymore; news agencies just monitor news for us.
CNN pundit Ashleigh Banfield actually tried to at least announce future coverage of the situation in Egypt, but was literally cut off for a commercial break. Nice try Ashleigh.
The biggest crime of the news agencies is actually influencing what Americans care about. Some might even call that entertainment. A recent chart for Google Trends shows a deep fascination with the Zimmerman trial, and very little interest in Morsi and Egypt.
This isn't to discredit the implications of the Zimmerman trial. The role of race in the trial is part of a larger discourse in American society, and is certainly more relevant domestically.
However, there's a pretty big case for covering the coup in Egypt. The removal of a democratically elected president, who had taken power after the revolution of the Arab Spring, has some pretty big implication in the world of foreign policy, regional stability, sustainable democracy, etc.
Yes, news agencies should be covering both, because both are important. However, they're not even close. Prior to the coup, Morsi gave a final speech to retain his power. This would be what Blitzer called, "historic." Despite the importance of the speech, the three major news networks did not cover it. The only way to watch it was on the internet. Yet, live coverage of the Zimmerman trial dominated the channels, and Egypt is merely a footnote, a cut-off footnote at that.
It's bad enough that these same agencies have already taken criticism for poor coverage of the Boston bombing. Not reporting the news may be an all time low, considering that reporting the news is the main role of a news agency. Prioritizing one story, for entertainment value, while essentially not covering another is nothing short of terrible.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Logged
