Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Just_Observing who wrote (3938)	1/26/2003 7:49:58 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 25898

J.O., Thanks for the Michael Parenti link. I'm only just getting to know his work lately. His analysis of the Bush Cabal's scheme is brilliant, IMO. One of the most lucid expositions of the Evil Empire and its machinations that I've ever seen. If the American public read this and understood its implications, Bush would be out of office within weeks. Fortunately for Bush, the bread and circuses are still working. The Super Bowl attracts the nation's attention and a zombified nation is fed a continuous stream of violence on the field and in the commercial breaks. -Ray

To: Just_Observing who wrote (3938)	1/27/2003 1:45:14 AM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 25898

So many appetizers for understanding are included in the Parenti analysis. michaelparenti.org If ever I get the time, I'd like to dissect it all paragraph by paragraph. But, heck, I've already got my girlfriend mad enough at me for the time I'm devoting to this thread--lol! Anyway, I thought most interesting among Parenti's many tidbits is the posture that the US is going after Iraq's oil not to get control over it in order to sell, but rather to get control over it so that it won't be sold; thereby preserving other already invested markets. And that, eventually, once those other market investments pan out, then the Iraqi oil card can be played for yet another round of profiteering. Very, very interesting. Anyone agree?