The below article caught my eye.

Five lies you probably believe if you get your news from the mainstream US media

Lies no 1. should be , America

is fighting a "war on terror"

and Iran is next,

to be bombed and invaded.

FIVE LIES YOU PROBABLY BELIEVE IF YOU GET YOUR NEWS FROM THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA

            According to most news outlets, and most definitely to Lou Dobbs of CNN, illegal Mexican workers are causing a huge problem.  They are?  I don’t see it.  Are they working too cheaply?  Too hard?  A recent series of LA Times articles confirmed what I have always suspected, that Mexican communities have lower crime rates than the nation as a whole.  Whatever the “immigration problem” is, we know we have to build a fence 3,000 miles long, and beef up border security, and spend billions to solve it.

            The fact is, Mexican immigration is what it has always been…an underclass coming to this country under deplorable conditions to work menial jobs for substandard wages.  They are not taking jobs that Americans won’t do. They are taking jobs that Americans won’t do for substandard wages.  They are a gift for every factory owner and industry bigwig in the country, keeping prices down and services affordable, and the economy humming along.  Without them, our food production would virtually disappear.  Instead of freaking out about “our borders,” we should be thanking them every day.  They’re our neighbors, for God’s sake, and we drum up hatred and suspicion of them on national news shows while they’re quietly cleaning up our crap for chump change.          

            2)  Ronald Reagan was a great president

            Oh Christ, this one has been drilled into us with a jackhammer.  Reagan was an Alzheimer’s addled incoherent boob for the second half of his presidency, who famously let the sailors run the ship while he drooled into a cup.  The first half, he was a pathological liar and an idiot.  Let’s not forget “trees cause pollution” and “ketchup is a vegetable,” to go along with his tall tales of actually being in places he only pretended to be in when he was acting in a movie.

            More importantly, Reagan initiated many of the shortsighted, business-friendly policies which are causing so much damage to the economy and the environment today.  He began the process of gutting most of our social programs, (a ball which was picked up and run in for a touchdown by Bill Clinton, see below) fed billions in subsidies to factory farmers, porked up the defense industry with our GNP, and basically sank the country into a pit of debt.  All this while defying Congress’ Boland Amendment, and selling arms for hostages. Then he began the Republican tradition of freaking everyone out over stupid shit, first, by blowing chunks of the federal budget on an ill advised “War on Drugs” and then by having his uptight Attorney General, Edwin Meese, investigate the porn industry.  His administration is most frequently remembered for releasing the hostages in Iran, and causing the demise of the USSR, two things Reagan had absolutely nothing to do with.

            The man was an incompetent douchebag who knew when to smile.  That’s all he had going for him.

             3) It is impossible for our government to provide universal healthcare without                       bankrupting the country

            Just about every industrialized democracy has government run healthcare.  What they don’t have is forty percent of their annual budget going to feed the defense industry, to make weapons to hold phantom monsters at bay.  Half of what we spend on defense would get full medical coverage for everyone in the country.  Any journalist that even hints at this will quickly find himself covering town council meetings in Adak, Alaska, however, because the defense industry has had a field day since Reagan (see 1) buying up media outlets.  General Electric owns NBC, so don’t expect any hard-hitting defense industry exposes on Dateline.

            But that’s where our health care money is going.  And that’s why we don’t hear about it.  Instead we hear about how unaffordable health care is.  Meanwhile, cruise missiles go for about $575,000 apiece, and sometimes don’t even hit the country they’re aimed at.  One of the missiles fired at bin Laden’s training camp in 2000 inexplicably veered off into Pakistan.  That’s money well spent.

           4) Crime rates can be lowered by a harsher sentences

            Every politician wants to claim that they can make the voter’s world safer.  So, for the last twenty years or so, everyone, Democrat and Republican both, have hawked “get tough on crime” policies, which have swelled our prison population to over two million.  The result?  Crime rates are pretty much the same as they were twenty years ago, only now we have two million people in prison.

            And we pay about $45,000 per prisoner per year, for mostly non-violent offenders.

            Harsher sentences result in hostility between the police and the public.  They reduce the likelihood that people will report crime, because most people in the position to report crime are in some way associated with it.  Example:  in my hometown of Raleigh, NC, a slightly drunk motorcyclist was giving a woman a lift, and she fell off the back of his motorcycle.  He drove off and left her on the highway rather than risk spending a year in jail.  She died.

            Of course, I’m not condoning that, but if we lived in a more tolerant society, it’s unlikely that would have happened.  In Denmark, the police are known for stopping drunk drivers, ticketing them, and giving them rides home.  The Swedes and the Germans rarely hand out prison sentences of over ten years, even for murder.  Mitigating factors are taken into account.  The result?  Crime rates that are but a fraction of our own.

            Just try presenting the argument in the media that lowering crime rates would require that we need to treat criminals better, not worse, and you’ll be on the next plane to Adak, Alaska. 

             5)  The Clintons are liberals

             Only in the US media could the president that trashed the US manufacturing base by signing NAFTA, then trashed virtually all the social welfare networks developed during the 1960’s, be considered a liberal.  His wife then voted to start, and consistently fund, the stupidest war in American history, while taking tens of thousands of dollars in donations from defense contractors.  

            The Clintons are the ultimate Bre’r Rabbit story.  By demonizing them as worst-case left wing scenarios, the media have presented the fiction that we just can’t get thrown into dat left-wing briar patch.   Hillary might have had a  pipe dream about universal health care sixteen years ago, but those days are long gone.

Bill Maher: Gatekeeper or Coward?

By Reggie, Contributing Editor, TvNewsLIES.org

Soon after 9/11, Bill Maher lost his job on mainstream television for his remark about the relative cowardice of the alleged hijackers. I have to believe that he’s been warned that any further discussion of 9/11 that does not follow the official Bush/PNAC line will mean the end of his career. It seems that Bill Maher, like so many others, has his price.’

Maher is a comedian who hosts a weekly show on HBO that includes commentary and discussion about relevant political topics. He has no qualms about broaching very controversial matters and is an equal opportunity host to people across the political spectrum who apparently may discuss any issue OTHER THAN 9/11.

Bill Maher has unequivocally labeled as fools all people who raise any questions about the official story of 9/11. He has made his own acceptance of the Bush/PNAC line the last word on the topic. Anyone who would dare to differ is an idiot. Period.

Maher’s histrionics this past Saturday night - running into the audience to personally oust a non violent, albeit somewhat disruptive 9/11 protester - was one for the record books. It seems that he will talk to anyone, no matter how extreme or controversial, from Ann Coulter on, but has zero tolerance for anyone who questions the official explanation of what caused the towers to collapse.

Maher went so far as to say that on this single topic, of all the controversial outrages of this administration… on this ONE topic, he agrees with George Bush. Those were his exact words. Strange, but I don’t recall the President ever offering an explanation of how the towers came down in an average of ten seconds. Maybe Maher had a private audience at the White House and knows something the rest of us do not. Sure.

You have to wonder why he would totally close the door to any possible discussion of the one event that made all the other horrors possible. Duh….

There were a number of scenarios he might have followed to deal with the protester. For starters, he could have offered to invite someone of repute to come on the show and present his or her case at a later date. That would have quieted the protester as well as others in the audience who were angered by Maher’s dismissal of anyone and everyone who dares to doubt the official lies offered by Bushco. His ridicule of the 9/11 Truth Movement is way out of character for someone so willing to call all the other Bush lies what they are….and you have to wonder who got to him and whose backside he’s covering.

One can only conclude that Bill Maher is either a coward, sacrificing principle to protect his job, or a 9/11 gatekeeper of the first order, working to keep any open discussion of 9/11 from ever reaching the airwaves.

This is not about what Maher believes or does not believe about 9/11. It’s about his absolute refusal to consider that there might be another side to the discussion, especially in light of all the evidence to that effect that has been unearthed by scholars and scientists. It is about his coloring members of the Truth Movement idiots and nut jobs. There has to be more to the story than what appears on the surface. It really makes no sense at all.

The attacks on 9/11 remain the single remaining taboo topic forbidden by all of the mainstream media. They alone made all the ensuing horrors possible - from the Patriot Act and NSA spying to the wars against Iraq and Afghanistan. By placing a wall of silence around any discussion of 9/11 Bill Maher now has established himself as either an official gatekeeper or a coward.

Either role is despicable.

Reference:

They Are Not “Conspiracy Theories” They Are, in Fact, “Discoveries”

More: Bill Douglas responds to Bill Maher

THE SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT ENDS THE 911 TRUTH DEBATE.

thisisby.us pays its writers based on the number of reads and votes of each post. So, if you like this post, vote for it, or share it with your friends.

Each post on thisisby.us is the property of its author. Please do not copy and paste this content to your own websites or blog.

9/11 Truth Has the Power to Unravel Fascism

For the news the networks won't tell you..

watch the INN World Report

Here is the top  news  the Corporate Media won't report:

Top 25 Censored Stories of 2008   PROJECT CENSORED

 
NEW! The Release of Censored 2008 Top 25 Top 25 Censored Stories of 2008


#16 No Hard Evidence Connecting Bin Laden to 9/11
Source:
The Muckraker Report, June 6, 2006, and Ithaca Journal, June 29, 2006
Title: “FBI says, ‘No Hard Evidence Connecting Bin Laden to 9/11’”
Author: Ed Haas

Student Researcher: Bianca May and Morgan Ulery
Faculty Evaluator: Ben Frymer, Ph.D.
Osama bin Laden’s role in the events of September 11, 2001 is not mentioned on the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted” poster.
On June 5, 2006, author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 1998 bombings of US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, the poster does not indicate that he is wanted in connection with the events of 9/11.
Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” Asked to explain the process, Tomb responded, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”
Haas pauses to ask the question, “If the US government does not have enough hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11, how is it possible that it had enough evidence to invade Afghanistan to ‘smoke him out of his cave?’” Through corporate media, the Bush administration told the American people that bin Laden was “Public Enemy Number One,” responsible for the deaths of nearly 3,000 people on September 11, 2001. The federal government claims to have invaded Afghanistan to “root out” bin Laden and the Taliban, yet nearly six years later, the FBI said that it had no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.
Though the world was to have been convinced by the December 2001 release of a bin Laden “confession video,” the Department of Defense issued a press release to accompany this video in which Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “There was no doubt of bin Laden’s responsibility for the 9/11 attacks even before the tape was discovered.”
In a CNN article regarding the bin Laden tape, then New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said that “the tape removes any doubt that the US military campaign targeting bin Laden and his associates is more than justified.” Senator Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said, “The tape’s release is central to informing people in the outside world who don’t believe bin Laden was involved in the September 11 attacks.” Shelby went on to say “I don’t know how they can be in denial after they see this tape.”
Haas attempted to secure a reference to US government authentication of the bin Laden “confession video,” to no avail. However, it is conclusive that the Bush Administration and US Congress, along with corporate media, presented the video as authentic. So why doesn’t the FBI view the “confession video” as hard evidence? After all, notes Haas, if the FBI is investigating a crime such as drug trafficking, and it discovers a video of members of a drug cartel openly talking about a successful distribution operation in the United States, that video would be presented to a federal grand jury. The participants identified in the video would be indicted. The video alone would serve as sufficient evidence to net a conviction in a federal court. So why, asks Haas, is the bin Laden “confession video” not carrying the same weight with the FBI?
Haas strongly suggests that we begin asking questions, “The fact that the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11 should be headline news around the world. The challenge to the reader is to find out why it is not. Why has the US media blindly read the government-provided 9/11 scripts, rather than investigate without passion, prejudice, or bias, the events of September 11, 2001? Why has the US media blacklisted any guest that might speak of a government-sponsore d 9/11 cover-up, rather than seeking out those people who have something to say about 9/11 that is contrary to the government’s account?” Haas continues. “Who is controlling the media message, and how is it that the FBI has no ‘hard evidence’ connecting Osama bin Laden to the events of September 11, 2001, while the US media has played the bin Laden-9/11 connection story for [six] years now as if it has conclusive evidence that bin Laden is responsible for the collapse of the twin towers, the
Pentagon attack, and the demise of United Flight 93?”
UPDATE BY ED HAAS
On June 6, 2006 the Muckraker Report ran a piece by Ed Haas titled “FBI says, ‘No hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.’” Haas is the editor and a writer for the Muckraker Report. At the center of this article remains the authenticity and truthfulness of the videotape released by the federal government on December 13, 2001 in which it is reported that Osama bin Laden “confesses” to the September 11, 2001 attacks. The corporate media—television, radio, and newspapers—across the United States and the world repeated, virtually non-stop for a week after the videotape’s release, the government account of OBL “confessing.”
However, not one document has been released that demonstrates the authenticity of the videotape or that it even went through an authentication process. The Muckraker Report has submitted Freedom of Information Act requests to the FBI, CIA, Department of Defense, and CENTCOM requesting documentation that would demonstrate the authenticity of the videotape and the dates/circumstances in which the videotape was discovered. CENTCOM has yet to reply to the FOIA request. After losing an appeal, the FBI responded that no documents could be found responsive to the request. The Department of Defense referred the Muckraker Report to CENTCOM while also indicating that it had no documents responsive to the FOIA request either.
The CIA however claims that it can neither confirm nor deny the existence or nonexistence of records responsive to the request. According to the CIA the fact of the existence or nonexistence of requested records is properly classified and is intelligence sources and methods information that is protected from disclosure by section 6 of the CIA Act of 1949, as amended. Therefore, the Agency has denied your request pursuant to FOIA exemptions (b)(1) and (b)(3).
Many people believe that if the videotape is authentic, it should be sufficient hard evidence for the FBI to connect bin Laden to 9/11. The Muckraker Report agrees. However, for the Department of Justice to indict bin Laden for the 9/11 attacks, something the government has yet to do, the videotape would have to be entered into evidence and subjected to additional scrutiny. This appears to be something the government wishes to avoid.
Some believe that the video is a fake. They refer to it as the “fat bin Laden”video. The Muckraker Report believes that while the videotape is indeed authentic, it was the result of an elaborate CIA sting operation. The Muckraker Report also believes that the reason why there is no documentation that demonstrates that the videotape went through an authenticity process is because the CIA knew it was authentic, they arranged the taping.
It is highly probable that the videotape was taped on September 26, 2001—before the US invaded Afghanistan.

--br-

#2 Bush Moves Toward Martial Law

# 3 AFRICOM: US Military Control of Africa’s Resources

# 4 Frenzy of Increasingly Destructive Trade Agreements

#5 Human Traffic Builds US Embassy in Iraq

#6 Operation FALCON Raids

#7 Behind Blackwater Inc.

#8 KIA: The US Neoliberal Invasion of India

#9 Privatization of America’s Infrastructure

# 10 Vulture Funds Threaten Poor Nations’ Debt Relief

# 11 The Scam of “Reconstruction” in Afghanistan

# 12 Another Massacre in Haiti by UN Troops

# 13 Immigrant Roundups to Gain Cheap Labor for US Corporate Giants

# 14 Impunity for US War Criminals

# 15 Toxic Exposure Can Be Transmitted to Future Generations on a “Second Genetic Code”

#16 No Hard Evidence Connecting Bin Laden to 9/11

# 17 Drinking Water Contaminated by Military and Corporations

# 18 Mexico’s Stolen Election

# 19 People’s Movement Challenges Neoliberal Agenda

# 20 Terror Act Against Animal Activists

# 21 US Seeks WTO Immunity for Illegal Farm Payments

# 22 North Invades Mexico

# 23 Feinstein’s Conflict of Interest in Iraq

# 24 Media Misquotes Threat From Iran’s President

# 25 Who Will Profit from Native Energy?

*Project Censored is a media research group out of Sonoma State University which tracks the news published in independent journals and newsletters. From these, Project Censored compiles an annual list of 25 news stories of social significance that have been overlooked, under-reported or self-censored by the country's major national news media.
Between 700 and 1000 stories are submitted to Project Censored each year from journalists, scholars, librarians, and concerned citizens around the world. With the help of more than 200 Sonoma State University faculty, students, and community members, Project Censored reviews the story submissions for coverage, content, reliability of sources and national significance. The university community selects 25 stories to submit to the Project Censored panel of judges who then rank them in order of importance. Current or previous national judges include: Noam Chomsky, Susan Faludi, George Gerbner, Sut Jhally , Frances Moore Lappe, Norman Solomon, Michael Parenti, Herbert I. Schiller, Barbara Seaman, Erna Smith, Mike Wallace and Howard Zinn. All 25 stories are featured in the yearbook, Censored: The News That Didn't Make the News.
In 1996 and 1997, the yearbook won the Firecracker Alternative Book Award, celebrating the best in alternative publishing. The release of Project Censored's yearbook has developed into a national alternative press event. In 2003, along with several independent national magazines, over 40 alternative newsweeklies carried the Top 10 Censored stories in metropolitan areas throughout the country, and Project Censored was featured on more than 125 independent talk radio and television shows. Throughout the next year and into the next decade, Project Censored will continue to inform the public, advocate for independent journalism, and strive to spark debate on current issues involving media monopoly.
Project Censored is a national research effort launched in 1976 by Dr. Carl Jensen, professor emeritus of Communications Studies at Sonoma State University . Upon Jensen's retirement in 1996, leadership of the project was passed to associate professor of sociology and media research specialist, Dr. Peter Phillips.

All the "Conspiracy Theories" About George W. Bush have come true

existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com

In the wake of 911, you could count critics of George W. Bush on one hand. Three courageous exceptions to the climate of fear are notable: Gore Vidal (The Enemy Within), Rep. Cynthia McKinney and, somewhat later, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer who proclaimed August 15, 2005 that the 9/11 committee investigation was either a cover up or a cover story. Shaffer charged that his unit had warned the FBI about "terrorist cells" but was ignored.

"There is only one politically serious explanation of this now-indisputable fact: powerful forces within the US military/intelligence complex wanted a terrorist incident on US soil in order to create the needed shift in public opinion required to embark on a long-planned campaign of military intervention in Central Asia and the Middle East. Whether or not they knew the scale of the impending attacks and what the precise targets would be, they acted in such a way as to block the arrest of known terrorist operatives and allow them to carry out their plot."

--Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, Army intelligence officer

On 9 September 2001, Bush was presented with a draft of a national security presidential directive outlining a global campaign of military, diplomatic and intelligence action targeting al-Qaeda, buttressed by the threat of war. According to NBC News: 'President Bush was expected to sign detailed plans for a worldwide war against al-Qaeda ... but did not have the chance before the terrorist attacks ... The directive, as described to NBC News, was essentially the same war plan as the one put into action after 11 September. The administration most likely was able to respond so quickly ... because it simply had to pull the plans "off the shelf".'

Finally, BBC News, 18 September 2001: `Niak Naik, a former Pakistan foreign secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October. It was Naik's view that Washington would not drop its war for Afghanistan even if bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taliban.'

Was Afghanistan then turned to rubble in order to avenge the 3,000 Americans slaughtered by Osama? Hardly. The administration is convinced that Americans are so simple-minded that they can deal with no scenario more complex than the venerable lone, crazed killer (this time with zombie helpers) who does evil just for the fun of it 'cause he hates us, 'cause we're rich'n free 'n he's not. Osama was chosen on aesthetic grounds to be the most frightening logo for our long contemplated invasion and conquest of Afghanistan, planning for which had been 'contingency' some years before 9/11 and, again, from 20 December, 2000, when Clinton's out-going team devised a plan to strike at al-Qaeda in retaliation for the assault on the warship Cole. Clinton's National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, personally briefed his successor on the plan but Rice, still very much in her role as director of Chevron-Texaco, with special duties regarding Pakistan and Uzbekistan, now denies any such briefing. A year and a half later (12 August, 2002), fearless Time magazine reported this odd memory lapse.

...Osama, if it was he and not a nation, simply provided the necessary shock to put in train a war of conquest. But conquest of what? What is there in dismal dry sandy Afghanistan worth conquering? Zbigniew Brzezinski tells us exactly what in a 1997 Council on Foreign Relations study called The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives.

Now can we tell all the assholes that deny

global warming is real, they are full of shit.

Including Ron Paul . See : Ron_Paul_On Global Warming.

Also read: In a surprise vote of 5 to 4, the United States Supreme Court have declared George W. Bush the winner of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize

And the Nobel Booby Prize Goes to George W. Bush (and his supporters)!

Nominated by Reggie, Contributing Editor, TvNewsLIES.org

Just think about it:  Some of this week’s awards from the Nobel Committee went to people who must seem like the anti Christ to our pretentiously pious President, George W. Bush.  For starters, the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine went to Mario R. Capecchi, Martin J. Evans and Oliver Smithies who were recognized for a series of ground-breaking discoveries concerning embryonic stem cells!  OH MY GAWD!

And, of course, this morning, the darkest of dark news descended on the White House when Bush’s nemesis Al Gore shared the Nobel Peace Prize with the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change!   ARMAGEDDON IS SURELY UPON US!

Give the man credit, he did his best.  The very first veto issued by this Presidnet of incredible scientific understanding greatly limited federal funding for stem cell research.  In his speech to the nation, this paragon of ethical governance explained that he could not support legislation that allowed researchers to “manipulate human life and violate human dignity.”  This self-proclaimed war president deeply values human life and never, ever violates its dignity…we all know that.  WAY TO GO, GEORGE!

And then there are his efforts to counter the opinions of experts who have warned for decades about the dangers of polluting the environment.  Sigh. George W. Bush has a steadfast and unparalleled record of ignoring, doctoring and manipulating scientific evidence and supporting corporate greed over the health and welfare of the nation.

Just last month we learned that  the number of EPA prosecutions, new investigations and total convictions  of criminal cases against polluters dropped off by more than a third during the Bush administration. That sort of summarizes the Bush approach to the environment, and clarifies the rarefied thinking that went into his actions to reduce restrictions of toxins in our water systems and lighten regulations on emissions by coal burning power plants.

And wasn’t it just special that this enlightened President ordered the EPA not to conduct any studies that may conflict with the administration’s agenda to pander to corporations at the expense of the health and safety of the public?  GOLLY GEE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE!

Okay, fair is fair.  If we applaud one side, let’s give the other a nod as well.  After all, we now live in a country in which war is peace and Fascism is democracy, good is evil and up is down.  Nothing is as is was and nothing at all is as it should be.  So why not enter the looking glass reality of George W. Bush and acknowledge what he has managed to ‘accomplish’ in so short a time?

In that pursuit, I hereby name George W. Bush, along with all of those who have supported his delusions, Booby Laureates of 2007!   Should there ever be a Nobel Booby Award, our present President must be given that award.

No man in recent history deserves this more.

Marching on Washington, Writing Congress,

Sending money to groups like MoveOn.Org,

Is a waste of time. We have to acknowledge

that we Americans, are a Fascist Dictatorship,

and 9-11 was an inside job! We cannot simply

"Move On" ! ~ Hello in there

TVNL Editor's Comments: Why Moveon.org Has and Will Always be Wrong

When a crime or an atrocity is in progress the solution is not to “move on” leaving the crime or atrocity in progress. The response should be “stop everything!” The political action organization called Moveon.org have succeeded in herding many Americans into accepting the current state of the state as politics as usual. They have kept their “members” busy and focused on supporting political solutions to criminal problems. Well I have news for you, political solutions do not work when the politicians are the problems! And “moving on” is not the answer the criminal problems facing our nation today! And that's the fact Jack!

Tom Delay: "The Second Coming is What I Live For"

"When America Went Fascist" by Chris Rowthorn