The Bush administration and The New York Times are again at oddsover national security, this time with new exposures of the administration's immoral attempts to protect imperialist America from the heroic freedom fighters of Islam.

In today's issue the fearless NYT showed the world how the militaristic US government was co-opting major capitalist financial institutions to track global financial transfers.

The message this sends is clear - give up, George Bush! Protecting America is a useless task when you face the glorious destructive force of progressive media! America must be destroyed! It is a historical inevitability whose time has come!

“If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other.”

George Orwell,
Pacifism and the War: 1941 essay

I remember at the beginning of the war, CNN was at an Air Force base just as a B2 took off and they told where it was planning to strike, and an estimate at what time it should arrive at it's target destination. Brilliant.

I remember news crews standing on a beach covering an amphibious landing, (somalia maybe?) at night, with enough camera lighting to have made it wiser to let the boys sleep and seize the beach in the morning. But that would not have given us, the deserving public the information we need to keep tabs on our government and our immoral military. That was the start of a very bad Op. Good thing the War Lords got Clinton to cut and run on that one.

I remember in WWII, the NY Times kept it's organ stifled when it had the exact date for D-Day before the landing. After all, it was the opening of a glorious second front to save their Comrade Stalin, World Socialism, and France. Thousand of lives were saved and so was France and the Soviet Union. Stalin lived happily for another 8 years and the NY Times was awarded "Hero Rag of the Great Patriotic War" for keeping quiet.
The NY Times knows precisely when not to leak information in the interest of World Peace. The NY Times also knows that "national defense" is a term that reeks of "nationalism" and is to be ignored, because it is politically incorrect.

We have a right to know! It's in the constitution.

It's not responsible for journalists to take the government at its word that some information would harm America if the "enemy" were to know of it.

Comrade Otis wrote:We have a right to know! It's in the constitution.

Comrade, we know everyone has a right to know. Have you read the article on the motherpage? That is what the glorious Times has done! Al-Qaeda has a right to know as well! Now Comrade bin Laden can easily outmanouver those evil Americans as he tries to kill you and I! However, it is unfortunate that the glorious peoples' newspaper never exposed Clinton's warrantless wiretaps and searches of property like they did that of evil Bush. But fear not, when the Democrats win control of the Peoples' House of Representatives and the Supreme Soviet Senate this fall, freedom fighters like bin Laden will know all of our evil secrets!

Comrade Otis wrote:We have a right to know! It's in the constitution.

Comrade, can you tell me where in the Constitution it says that? I have a degree in political science and I don't know of any part of the U.S. Constitution where it says the government must tell us everything it is doing to ensure I'm not blown up by glorious freedom fighters.

Branish wrote:Comrade, can you tell me where in the Constitution it says that? I have a degree in political science and I don't know of any part of the U.S. Constitution where it says the government must tell us everything it is doing to ensure I'm not blown up by glorious freedom fighters.

Dear comrade Branish,

Our centers of higher learning and the creation of the intellectual class are the backbone of the revolution. But the university can only teach you the foundation of Marxism and the dialectic. It is important to transcend the cold black type of university book knowledge and maintain your humanity as you make important decisions. This is why the constitution is known as a "living" document. A "living" constitution is society's means of subordinating the individual to the rights of the Party.

Just smile and nod agreement,

Comrade Otis
Doctor of Dictatorship
Karl Marx Treatment Center
"Our friendly staff is standing by for you!"

Comrade Otis,

I have studied the Constitution outside of the glorious revisionist textbooks issued by open minded Marxist professors, so I do not need to transcend, as you call it. Besides, doesn't the Constitution need the Party's consent to live? After all, the Party is all knowing and can decide what lives.

The New York Times: read it in the fifth-column.

Chairman Meow's Ditchliving and Collective Gardening™ Tips:

After indulging myself in all the National Security secrets the Times has to offer, I like to recycle the soft progressive pages as toliet paper to help get all those hard to reach spots. But if its pages are to rough for your red fanny, then use it as a decorative wall-paper that will ensure good insulation through tough winters and also block all subliminal transmissions sent out by Karl Rove. When entertaining your progressive friends, use the Times as "piss-pads" and scatter them in social areas like the kitchen or dining area, this will greatly save the effort of finding a bathroom and will keep your guest comfortable and happy while they guzzle down more French wine and drone on about the 60's.

Chairman Meow-Say-Pun wrote:Chairman Meow's Ditchliving and Collective Gardening™ Tips:

while they guzzle down more French wine and drone on about the 60's.

Party Chairman Howard "Mao Tse" Dean has already commented that America is ready to relive the 60s. So we no longer will need to feel nostalgic. Perhaps the peoples' inventor, Al Gore, has invented a way to turn 2006 into 1966?

Branish wrote: Party Chairman Howard "Mao Tse" Dean has already commented that America is ready to relive the 60s. So we no longer will need to feel nostalgic.

Dearest Comrade Branish,

I admire your zeal and love for our glorious screamer Howard Dean. However; I find the word "relive" abrasive,offensive and utterly "republican". The only past the party is concerned with is re-writing it. Progress is THINKING ABOUT TOMMOROW comrade and nostalgia is the experience we have to make that socialist tommorow today. Only disinformation slinged out by the Bush Plantation House would have you abandon nostalgia of the great Soviet Union and the parties glorious revised history for a racist war-mongering reactionary "republican" concept of "reliving the past". Comrade Branish, I suggest you re-line the interior of your ditch with the finest of NYT pages to prevent further thought-crime infiltration.

"Don't Stop Thinking About Tommorow" Comrade Branish.

-Chairman Meow
Bureaucrat Extraordinaire

P.S- Sign up for a subscription to my magazine Ditchliving and Collective Gardening™ and recieve a worthless ration card to a bread line of your choice!

"Don't Stop Thinking About Tommorow" Comrade Branish. ??????????
Meow, I don't ever want to hear that phrase again, got it? That bitch Stevie Nicks is not only a witch, she's a Republican Witch! And what did she do? She didn't come to our Nuremberg Ra....I mean Democrat Convention in 1992 and sing for her supper! She refused! How dare she! ME of all people! When are the masses going to learn that it's all about me? When?

I am dreadfully sorry Your Excellency, it will NEVER happen again... Oh how I tremble in your presence, those beady eyes, the greasy hair. TERRIFYING YOUR EXCELLENCY, JUST TERRIFYING! Now I see why Ms. Nicks wouldn't neck with you, you're too beautiful... Now if you will excuse me I have Mark Warner on Line 2.

Tootles!

I've finally figured it out! Obviously no one in Afghanistan reads the New York Times. Hell, no one READS AT ALL there...except one guy....OSAMA BIN LADEN. All we have to do is look through the New York Times subscription lists and look for the address in Afghanistan/Pakistan/someplace in the Middle East. Then BOOM, blew the hell out of it, and NO MORE BIN LADEN! Maybe then we can declare "Mission Accomplished" with the war on terror, and we can finally take our ball and go home! Yay!

Comrade Goldbook!

Your well-meaning assumptions are based on the way the KGB used to operate in the pre-Internet glory days. But today, comrade, everyone can read any news via the internet with impunity and without a trace. This puts certain restrictions on the cloak-and-dagger industry. The situation will certainly change after the People's Revolution, when the all-powerful benevolent Socialist Government will start controlling access to all information again for the benefit of the people, the way they're doing it in China with the help of our progressive comrades at Google.

If they had such system in place in 2001, nobody would even know that 9/11 ever happened! All malicious rumors about some two buildings collapsing in Manhattan would be thoroughly discredited on the pages of the New York Times, the one and only Party Organ, and all the alleged "witnesses" would be re-educated through some enlightening hard labor experience (digging navigation channels in the Alaskan tundra for the Greater Good™).

According to our progressive dogma, if no one knows about a historic event, it's the same as if the event never took place at all. In that sense 9/11 would have never happened under Socialism.

Red Square wrote:If they had such system in place in 2001, nobody would even know that 9/11 ever happened! All malicious rumors about some two buildings collapsing in Manhattan would be thoroughly discredited on the pages of the New York Times, the one and only Party Organ, and all the alleged "witnesses" would be re-educated through some enlightening hard labor experience (digging navigation channels in the Alaskan tundra for the Greater Good™).

And you people call us paranoid.

You know what's interesting? At 9:49 a.m. July 28, 1945, a B-25 Mitchell bomber accidentally crashed into the Empire State building. I guess those terrorists were trying to get us even back then...it was horrible when the Empire State building collasped as a result....wait a second.

Alva Goldbook wrote: You know what's interesting? At 9:49 a.m. July 28, 1945, a B-25 Mitchell bomber accidentally crashed into the Empire State building. I guess those terrorists were trying to get us even back then...it was horrible when the Empire State building collasped as a result....wait a second.

Fortuantely a B-25 didn't carry as much aviation fuel nor, as a prop airplane, use the same fuel formula as a Boeing 767 jet aircraft. Nor was the Empire State building constructed by the same building code as the World Trade Center. It was constructed in a much less enlightened age when they used things like asbestos as a fire retardant. Apples and oranges are still apples and oranges, Alva. Perhaps you should pursue the apples and oranges line of reasoning in the People's Blog section. Here is an interesting article on the Empire State building crash:

http://www.withthecommand.com/2002-Jan/ ... plane.html

Yes indeed Margaret.

Also of note, there is a vast difference of "tensile strength" (look it up, Mulva) between poured concrete and masonry with a steel superstructure like the Empire State Building vs. the steel & aluminium superstucture of the WTC.

Damn facts just keep getting in the way, don't they Troll?

L.

Another "informative" website on the WTC: http://vincentdunn.com/wtc.html

(Of Course it is clearly fabricated information to support Bushitler and his crusade; if you look up Vincent Dunn, there is no such man. In addition, "There are no Amerikan infidels in Baghdad. Never!")

Branish wrote:

Comrade Otis wrote:We have a right to know! It's in the constitution.

Comrade, can you tell me where in the Constitution it says that? I have a degree in political science and I don't know of any part of the U.S. Constitution where it says the government must tell us everything it is doing to ensure I'm not blown up by glorious freedom fighters.

I completly agree.

Branish wrote:Comrade, can you tell me where in the Constitution it says that? I have a degree in political science and I don't know of any part of the U.S. Constitution where it says the government must tell us everything it is doing to ensure I'm not blown up by glorious freedom fighters.

LOL....your mask slipped.

We have so many rights not spelled out in the constitution but reading between the lines reveals them all. I think we all can agree there is so much not included in the constitution, one can only conclude obvious absences of rights is a greedy capitalist conspiracy.

Rights such as:
Free health care
Free food,
Free housing
Free transportation
The right not to work and still eat
The right to steal from your neighbor and sue if you get hurt
The right to steal from your neighbor and not get shot
The right to deserve the politicians we elect

It only stands to reason the rights of our enemy are violated if CNN and the NYT fail to keep them up to date on our battle plans.

Red Square wrote: According to our progressive dogma, if no one knows about a historic event, it's the same as if the event never took place at all. In that sense 9/11 would have never happened under Socialism.

I've never doubted the merits of socialism but when I read your words in action...in only strengthens the fibers of my being.
We are denied utopia whenever socialism is held at bay.

Anonymous wrote:

Branish wrote:

Comrade Otis wrote:We have a right to know! It's in the constitution.

Comrade, can you tell me where in the Constitution it says that? I have a degree in political science and I don't know of any part of the U.S. Constitution where it says the government must tell us everything it is doing to ensure I'm not blown up by glorious freedom fighters.

I completly agree.

Most of our agenda can be covered by the Interstate Commerce clause and the General Welfare clause.

Does a thing have anything to do with Interstate Commerce? Yes. Everything does. So Congress can regulate it. Everything.

Does a thing have to do with the General Welfare? Yes. Everything has to do with the General Welfare. So Congress can regulate it. Everything.

We have a right to know everything. This has to do with both Interstate Commerce and the General Welfare. Especially the General Welfare. People can't sleep at night not knowing. This affects their work. This affects Interstate Commerce.

Bernard Cornwell wrote a series of novels about a British solder named Sharpe. There is a character in the novels, Sergeant Hakeswill, when justifying his actions always says:" It says so in the bible." Hakeswill has never read the bible. In the same way we can justify any government action by saying: "It says so in the Constitution."

If you are a reactionary with no redeeming social conscious you may have some bizarre idea of Original Intent of the Framers, but the Constitution speaks nothing of Original Intent so if we're supposed to take a literal interpretation of the Constitution we can forget Original Intent and a literal interpretation. In this way Original Intent cancels itself out. Very few people seem to be able to untangle that argument so use it as needed. The late 18th century was a different time. They still had to throw off the shackles of Feudalism. Progress marches on! Keep you hands off the Peoples Progress and get the hell out of the way! We have work to do.

I'll meet you in Potyomkingrad, the bright shining city on the crater.

Navigator wrote:
We have so many rights not spelled out in the constitution but reading between the lines reveals them all. I think we all can agree there is so much not included in the constitution, one can only conclude obvious absences of rights is a greedy capitalist conspiracy.

Rights such as:
Free health care
Free food,
Free housing
Free transportation
The right not to work and still eat
The right to steal from your neighbor and sue if you get hurt
The right to steal from your neighbor and not get shot
The right to deserve the politicians we elect

It only stands to reason the rights of our enemy are violated if CNN and the NYT fail to keep them up to date on our battle plans.

Navigator, you forgot the most important right of all: My right to an abortion anytime, for any reason, without any waiting period or receipt of information that might dissuade me from it, all at the expense of the government, which should otherwise keep its dirty paws off my body and its hateful, mean-spirited, intolerant laws out of my womb.

How could you forget such an important right? Are you so busy chowing down on your breakfast that--

(GASP!)

NAVIGATOR!!! Are those EGGS you're eating? Future baby chicks who are so cute and fluffy, and make the most adorable little peeping noises? How can you be so cruel? How can you be so inhumane? Don't you know that even when they're still whites and yolks, they can feel the horrible pain as you fry them on the skillet? (What do you think that sizzling noise is? That's the terrible scream of a murdered baby chick!)

You filthy rotten fiend! You evil murderer! You--you--oh, you GEORGE W. BUSH, you!

That's right, comradess Pinkie. Abortion is the most important right. That's because Roe vs Wade broke new ground on interpreting the constitution. You have the right to abortion because, as per Roe vs Wade, abortion actually has to do with your right to privacy under the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment. You have a right to privacy therefor you have the right of abortion. The Constitution says so.

Dear Comrade Otis--

Please use your laser sharp Constitutional scholarship to find the clause/amendment/intent/non-intent/evolution/extrapolation of the Constitution that insures my right to get laid by really, really hot women. I'm tired of getting turned down and I'm pretty sure it's in the Constitution. And please hurry; it's getting close to closing time.

Ivan Betinov wrote:Dear Comrade Otis--

Please use your laser sharp Constitutional scholarship to find the clause/amendment/intent/non-intent/evolution/extrapolation of the Constitution that insures my right to get laid by really, really hot women...

At first I was going to dismiss your request out of hand as the foolish ravings of a potted brain. However, after much considered reflection, I've found that your situation is covered in the US Constitution. In fact, while lying in bed last night thinking about this I discovered, (thanks to you - so thank-you) an entirely new branch of Constitutional scholarship that I have named <i>SITUATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS</i>.

I've found the actual word "sex" in the Constitution. Amendment XIX reads:

THE RIGHT OF CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES TO VOTE SHALL NOT BE DENIED OR ABRIDGED BY THE UNITED STATES OR BY ANY STATE ON ACCOUNT OF SEX.

Just as a woman is being denied the RIGHT TO PRIVACY if she can't get an abortion on demand, there's no denying that you are being DENIED OR ABRIDGED ON ACCOUNT OF SEX.

Therefor you have the constitutional right to "get laid by really, really hot women..." And, in fact, since this is in the US Constitution your situation is a Federal matter and thus enforceable in Federal Court all the way up to the Supreme Court. As your Constitutional Scholar I advise you: If you are denied sex by a really, really hot woman tell her she is violating the law of the land and you are going to contact the authorities. It is your right.

THE CONSTITUTION SAYS SO.

Comrade Otis
Constitutional Scholar
Karl Marx Treatment Center
<i>I'll meet you in Potyomkingrad, the bright shining city on the crater!</i>

Comrade Otis wrote: Therefor you have the constitutional right to "get laid by really, really hot women..." And, in fact, since this is in the US Constitution your situation is a Federal matter and thus enforceable in Federal Court all the way up to the Supreme Court. As your Constitutional Scholar I advise you: If you are denied sex by a really, really hot woman tell her she is violating the law of the land and you are going to contact the authorities. It is your right.

THE CONSTITUTION SAYS SO.

Brilliant Comrade Otis Brilliant!
That is if “you” includes me.

Thank you, O sage Otis. I now have hope that things will change.

Laika the Space Dog wrote:I remember in WWII, the NY Times kept it's organ stifled when it had the exact date for D-Day before the landing.

Unfortunately, the Times no longer has the same staff today. If todays staff were running things back then. My father and uncles would have died in Europe and the rest of my family probably wouldn't exist either as we're not exactly pure Aryans.

NY Times entrance exam leaked:

The Media has more power than anything else, except The Party of course.

Blarg?

Time to bump up this thread, since the New York Times has done it again, and Michelle Malkin is linking to this page with the lead picture.

https://michellemalkin.com/2010/07/26/t ... kes-again/

It is annual readership drive.