Like Flipping a Switch - Corsi Paranoia

Why can a person make the absurd statement that the gunman at Fort Hood was a consultant to President Obama.

Jerome Corsi thrives on terrorism and increases his power over unsuspecting people who live in fear. Corsi is a purveyor of paranoia keeping large numbers of people under a paranoid cloud.

This is how he does it:


"Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the alleged shooter in yesterday’s massacre at Fort Hood, played a homeland security advisory role in President Barack Obama’s transition into the White House, according to a key university policy institute document.The Homeland Security Policy Institute at George Washington University published a document May 19, entitled Thinking Anew Security Priorities for the Next Administration: Proceedings Report of the HSPI Presidential Transition Task Force, April 2008 January 2009,in which Hasan of the Uniformed Services University School of Medicine is listed on page 29 of the document as a Task Force Event Participant."It is a lie, of course Hasan only attended a meeting of a private organization that gave the transition some unsolicited advice. To a group of conspiracy theorists, this is the connection.How long before Fox News picks up the story?

Corsi treats this non-relationship as if Hasan was a major (no pun intended) consultant on policy during the transition of the Obama administration.

Jerome Corsi is making people mentally ill, fearful and living in constant fear that the reality of life is dangerous.

Definition

Paranoia is an unfounded or exaggerated distrust of others, sometimes reaching delusional proportions. Paranoid individuals constantly suspect the motives of those around them, and believe that certain individuals, or people in general, are "out to get them."

“In the aftermath of 9/11, many Americans were so afraid of flying that they chose to drive instead. That decision, based on the perceived threat of another airliner hijacking, led to 1,600 casualties in the following year. The families of the people who died in those crashes thought they had lost them to “the routine traffic accidents we accept as the regrettable cost of living in the modern world.” Daniel Gardner begs to differ: What killed them was fear.” ~ Jane Bosveld (Discover Online)

[Martha] Stout defines terrorism as "violence committed with the primary goal of manipulating the minds of the surviving population." It creates a paranoia switch in our minds, or turns on an already existing one. Its "most cherished ambition is to affect us psychologically, to instill a sense of helplessness in the minds of individual citizens, and to steal, in wholesale grabs, from our collective store of hopefulness."

It is in this way that terrorists (whether they be Western intelligence agency puppet masters or foreign "terrorist" patsies) are able to steer a battered public in the direction of their choice. However, we can make sure that terrorism does not work on our minds by being aware of its effects and its purpose, and the tactics of those who exploit it. Martha Stout from The Paranoia Switch,

In this way, corrupt politicians can keep their enemy divided by focusing on side issues. While a population is busy infighting over gun control, abortion, religion, etc., the deviants in office can escape notice.

If the people were aware of the manipulations being used on them by their leaders, such manipulations would prove ineffective. "Witnesses, and the clear light of day, are crucially important to our safety from abuse, and anathema to abusers. In The Wizard of Oz, the little man in the draped compartment, working the knobs to project the image of a gigantic, frightening wizard, shouts, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" - because he knows that, as soon as people pull back the drapes, the illusion will be over." Wife abusers depend on the secrecy of their abuse, and do everything they can to keep it that way. In the same way, corrupt politicians use a controlled media to present their mask of sanity, operating behind a veneer of cheap propaganda and conduct their black-ops under "top secrecy".

The Landscape of the US

So who really lost or won in the elections yesterday?

Both parties really lost and it's becoming clear the two major party's representatives have shown us all they have no clue of what most people really want. The angry "right" have shown that there is a frustration with rules. The vocal "left" think they "know it all" with intricate, nuanced and convoluted answers. Their "blind followers" fail to question and have great faith in core leadership.

That takes care of 40 percent of the country. Of course we cannot forget that is the 40% that makes up 60% of those who vote. Of course there is the "independents" made up of "Libertarians" and a wide spectrum of the disenchanted who do vote at about 10% and growing.

True moderates who are the largest group make up about 50% of the populace and vote at a rate of about 50% in presidential elections and 20% in off years unless some issue with "legs" pops up.

So what is wrong with this picture? We are all confused. Confused by spin, false information, ads, "bait and switch" tactics and a variety of overwhelming problems.

What we need is a clear Vision and mission statement and a set of goals both major parties and the "Independents" can work together on using a new approach - no slogans, sniping, no continuation of the same tired arguments that have proven wrong. Above all that the prime issue is jobs. We are finding quickly that we are no longer self-sufficient.

The main strength of out country was the sense that being strong internally is what made us strong throughout the world. We are no longer there. Look at almost any product today and not just consumer products and ask one question. How can we survive as a country if the global economy collapses? The answer is we cannot.

All the abortion laws, gay marriage laws, tax lowering bills, health care reforms, bank bailouts and crooked/unfaithful/immoral/corrupted by lobbyist politicians, and smaller/larger government cannot save us from degeneration from the greed, selfish and inconsiderate behavior of us all.

There is hope, however, but time is running out.

We WILL Vote

Strategy experts have convinced politicians that the vocal tea bagger passion is worth 10 apathetic voters who really want change. They believe a riled up citizenry full of hate will be more likely to vote. What they do not understand is that the frustration of the tea baggers will not totally close the minds of everyone. We are realizing more and more the dishonest arguments about cost, the "government," taxes, torture, lack of regulations, lack of any sense of the victimization of the American public is being understood by more and more Americans.

We are not safer, healthier, wealthier, happier, more secure under Republican't rule. In fact were were attacked at home under Bush/Cheney, more in debt, less safe from threat, our government is more distrusted by the Americans and the rest of the world. The Health Care system from Insurance to Pharmaceuticals to health care supplies to are robbing us of health, wealth and well being. We DO notice and we will vote.

It's time for a campaign with a simple slogan to be added at the end of every message to congressmen and congresswomen. Very simple to let them know the progressives and moderate forces of the Democratic party is being mobilized and does care about the direction Congress has shown in the Health Care proceedings or lack thereof - Very Simple Slogan:

We WILL Vote!

What a Warrior - or Not

While Cheney shoots first and asks questions later (Harry Whittington doesn't look remotely like a quail) he seems to think everyone should do the same.

How stupid do you have to be to make this statement:

"The White House must stop dithering while America's armed forces are in danger," Cheney told the conservative Center for Security Policy. "It's time for President Obama to do what it takes to win a war he has repeatedly and rightly called a war of necessity."

and follow it with this:

"Make no mistake. Signals of indecision out of Washington hurt our allies and embolden our adversaries..."

While I personally do not confusion with responsible thoughtfulness. I do recognize that saying the President is dithering is saying to our enemies that we are weak. Does this guy really give a flying flip about how our is seen in the world or whether our actions take lives like the 5,000+ Americans and 100,000 lives of Iraq citizens.

He can talk to the American Enterprise Institute and idiots like Frank Gaffney all he wants about patriotism but it isn't patriotic to give awards to people who out our covert agents and are convicted felons but they do.

All in all I'd say let him talk though so history can record the insidious nature of the man and his callous use of our soldiers for his own self interests.

Good riddance Mr Dick Cheney

Run for Our Lives

I believe the Public Option is the Compromise.

Republicant - Where Logic and Reason Fail

Will Obama’s Nobel Prize Backfire on Peace Efforts?
Written by Arieh O’Sullivan

Even as the Nobel Peace Prize was being announced, Obama’s own special Mideast envoy was in Jerusalem holding intensive meetings with Israelis and Palestinians, trying to restart peace talks.

Yet, George Mitchell’s shuttle diplomacy in the region, now boosted by the fact that he not only represents a determined American President, but also a Nobel Peace Prize laureate-designate, was still being seen as a failure.

After nine months and one uncomfortable summit of leaders, American diplomacy in the Middle East is no closer to its goal of brokering peace between Israel and the Palestinians within two years.

Reuven Rivlin, the Speaker of Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, said he believed that the Nobel prize would cause Obama to step up the pressure on Israel. Echoing a concern among many Israelis, Rivlin said Obama is now going to want to prove that he was deserving of the prize.

So what does this say? President Obama is pushing for peace by having Mitchell start up the talks then how is the peace prize a problem?
~~~~

Talk show host Rush Limbaugh's website featured the headline "Our president is a laughingstock" and portrayed Obama as the darling of "European leftist elites."

Rush is so damned jealous her can't remember who our allies are anymore. I'd like to know who Rush is allied with if not Europe? Perhaps Rush doesn't need allies since he couldn't get any if he tried other than those who hate this country and our elected government. Anarchy sucks Rush.

BARACK Obama should have been "man enough" to refuse the Nobel Peace Prize, former foreign minister Alexander Downer writes today.

Alexander Downer won't ever have to worry about turning down the peace prize. What a downer


The president should use the acceptance ceremony in December “to remind the Nobel Committee that each one of them sleeps soundly at night because of the U.S. armed forces,” she said. So instead of attending the ceremony himself — which she said would only “add to the farce” — Obama should “send the mother of a fallen American soldier to accept the prize on behalf of the U.S. military,” Cheney said.

Liz Cheney is proof of nature over nurture or any combination thereof, personally I sleep a heck of a lot better knowing Dick and George are out of office and I'm sure 80% of the world is sleeping better today.

Conservative columnist George Will said “The Nobel Prize committee would with this decision have forfeited its reputation for seriousness if it had a reputation for seriousness,”

I wonder if George Will would feel the same if George Bush or Dick Cheney or Ronald Reagan or Dick Nixon had gotten the peace prize instead of Barack Obama, Jimmy Carter and Al Gore. Maybe your guys are not working very hard for peace George

William Kristol said, “This is an anti-American committee,” Kristol said on Fox. Mr. Obama should have turned down the prize, Kristol insisted. But barring that, “the second-best thing would be to go over and give a pro-American speech” at the acceptance ceremony.

Oh sure Bill, giving The Nobel Peace Prize to the American President is the most blatant Anti-American act a committee could do - are you stupid or stupefied.

Grapes to Vinegar - Obama's Nobel Peace Prize

I am a President Obama supporter so when he won the Nobel Peace Prize I was elated. I also immediately wondered what the party of Status Quo would say but I already knew. It goes something like this:

Washington » The surprise announcement that President Barack Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize turned into an almost instant partisan brawl in the nation's capital, with Republicans claiming he's not yet worthy and Democrats calling such remarks anti-American.

"I just lost all respect for the award," said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah. "It used to be one of distinction, but it is hard to give it any credibility."

He called Friday's announcement "a political statement" based less on anything Obama has done and more on who no longer resides in the White House.

• "I just think they were glad George Bush is out of office and that is where the committee seems to be rooted in politics," he said. "Certainly there are people in this world more deserving than President Obama."

• Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele also didn't congratulate the president for claiming the coveted prize.

• "It is unfortunate that the president's star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights," he said. "One thing is certain -- President Obama won't be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action."

• "What has President Obama actually accomplished?" ~ Michael Steele

• "My first opinion is that he got it because he's black. What did he do that was so great? He hasn't even finished office yet." ~ A hospital worker on Broklyn

• "Obama gives speeches trashing his own country and he gets a prize for it," said conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

• "It looks less like an objective award than it does a political endorsement," said William Jelani Cobb, a history professor at Spelman College in Atlanta.
  

I'm waiting for the howls about how President Obama was campaigning of the Nobel Peace Prize when he should have been working on Health Care or sending troops to Afghanistan.

It seems to me this country is losing all perspective on life and what it means to be happy with in seeing another person honored. Sour grapes never taste good and never go down well. I do understand the usefulness of vinegar but I do not understand people who cheer when the loss of an opportunity to create jobs (the Olympics) is cheered and the honor of having our President awarded the Nobel Peace Prize id devalued and booed.

Should our president be derided because he and his expressed vision has world wide appeal as if it's appeasement rather than a call for us all to be better people and citizens of our community, state, country and the world.

President Obama won the Noble Peace Prize for the hope he has expressed and the vision he is working toward, not because he is "Not George Bush." Which, by the way, is a slap at George Bush and the party that supported him for eight years and now cant say "Ronald Reagan " enough.

Has the party of Lincoln become the party of Stromboli?