Discussion:The Fire in the Reichstag: every Amer. School kid, listen up

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> General Chat --> The Fire in the Reichstag: every Amer. School kid, listen up

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

17 November 2012
Goal: get Hitler into power as chancellor.

Materials to Work with: a mentally challenged Dutchman.

The "Big Emergency to Galvanize the Nation"---to burn down the Reichstag, create a (false) national emergency, and have the people beg for a "strong man" like Hitler to lead the nation.

A good, strong man to lead the nation. (Their words, not mine.)

This is an absolutely ideal covert action operation...because you have a perpetrator and the perpetrator is not even German. So you use the perp,, i.e. you put him on the scene of the crime, and then the real operators (SA) make damn sure that the fire the Dutchman (perp) started burns the Reichstag to the ground.

Every American school kid should be required to learn this because it's widely known now among covert action types as being an the gold standard of creating (false) national crisis to achieve an ulterior motive.

Some would say this exact MO has been copied in the more recent past. I will reserve comment on that, but I will say that the 2000s so far in our national politics has been the creation of one "emergency" and one "crisis" after the other.

The burning of the Reichstag would be somewhat like burning our Capitol in DC, or burning another large, iconic structure somewhere else in our country.

PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

17 November 2012
I get it Crow.

You have advance knowledge of a planned terror attack and you know who the perpetrator will be. So essentially you incorporate the expected action of the perpetrator into your own larger plans, then use the perpetrator as the fall guy, or make sure he dies during the terrorist act.

It's even more ideal if the perpetrator is an evil foreigner.

That is genius. The goal being of course to create a huge false emergency or crisis so as to manipulate the people. No question but that that MO is the gold standard.

But of course, you could then create an industry in government to create crisis in order to manipulate people. Such false emergencies and crises work where bread and circuses might fail.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

17 November 2012
Because of these false emergencies, we now have drones flying over the skies of the USA, for our own protection of course.

I can't even flirt with my neighbor's 21 year old daughter over the back fence any more without the all seeing eye of Uncle Sam knowing about it.

But according to the G-man down at the county office, the drones are for my protection. I think he's pulling my leg.

But yet, we did it to ourselves. We fell for it hook, line and sinker and I guess we got what we deserve. You watch, it won't be long before they arm these drones flying over our territory. Heck they are probably already armed.

NMexEA (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
Sad dam has weapons of mass destruction and bought some uranium!

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
On the topic of the war in I rack: before the war, we were getting excellent intelligence from the Russians. The Russians have a knack for intelligence work, and this continued after the fall of the USSR. Russia, Israel, and the Britain are really excellent at this business.

The Russians told us repeatedly there was no threat to the US from I rack. And we believed them. We had every reason to believe them. But our Administration had it's own narrative to play out in I rack. It's actually quite common for these intelligence services to communicate with each other.

For this effort and for other friendly efforts, Putin received a personal invite to the Bush ranch. The deal was to thank Mr. Putin for his help (like his personal call to the White House two weeks before 911 to warn the US), and to beg Putin to keep his mouth shut about it. No problem, a Russian generally doesn't have to be told to keep his mouth shut in public.

Snowbird (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
The student need a little more history ... the Reichstag fire was predated by 1,869 years by another mad man! I though Polly was alluding to it with "bread and circuses".

NM ... Crow will probably disagree, but Bush's failure was believing the Iraq exiles that the Iraqians were ready for self government. They are still blowing each other up!

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
That was a part of it Snowbird, no doubt about it. There were definitely some good people in the Bush Administration who were totally sold on the exiles' stories. They sincerely believed these men. And the exiles did tell a compelling story.

Bush was actually not such a bad guy in many ways.

On a slightly different topic, I do not believe that Bush had any foreknowledge of the details of 911 or any involvement in it. There were two other men in his Administration who I am not so sure about.

Bush ended up detesting Cheney at the end of his Administration. A real drama played out on the last day as Cheney really tried to strong arm Bush to Pardon so and so (I think the guys name was Scooter Libby).

Bush had already commuted his sentence I think, but he would not expunge his criminal record.

Bush had a score to settle with Dick Cheney, and Bush stood absolutely firm and would not grant that pardon/expungment. This definitely improved my opinion of Bush, and I think Bush was trying to send a message by it: you won't pull the wool over my eyes again, about anything.

P.S. I also think that Bush has shown a great deal of dignity, integrity and character in his retirement, at least from what I know.

My understanding is that former president Clinton could not resist running around the world with a pack of playboys for a while and having his last fling in Paris. Hopefully, Clinton has now sowed all his wild oats, and he won't be having any more last, last flings in Paris any more.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
So you think this Twinkee thing is rigged?

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
Yes, the Twinkie thing is being wrung for all the anti-unionists can get out of it.

People didn't want to eat the Twinkie because they didn't want to die. It was good, but deadly.

Now the evildoers have been able to twist this Twinkie around and say that the Unions caused the downfall of the Twinkie. There is some kid out there in the heartland who will always hate the unions now because his little lunch bag will remain forever lonely without his Twinkie. :)

It has been found that these artificial food products can preserve the human body for 30 years after death, and here's proof:


Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
Iraqi exiles like this one:


The author has been a friend since the mid-1980s.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
Gazoo: Thank you for reminding me that I have to weigh my options under Medicare Part D for 2013. Any change must be made by December 7th.

PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
Some people in the Bush Administration were more than willing to believe what they wanted to believe.

But in some ways I think the whole exile thing is static. Just my opinion. As I said above, the Americans were receiving excellent intelligence from the Russians right up to the time we invaded Iraq. We knew there were no WMD's of any substance in Iraq. We knew that Russian intelligence was good, for many reasons, one of which was and is the reputation of the Russians for good intelligence work, especially in that area of the world.

December 7 did you say Spell? Sly. You are getting more like the French every day.

There was one small difference about that alleged false flag operation. The difference was that after Pearl Harbor, there were actually some U.S. leaders who were held to account. They were so anxious to punish someone that I understand Adm. Kimmel (sic) might have been treated unfairly. I think it was Kimmel who was drummed out of the military.

After 9/11, and the biggest "intelligence failure" in U.S. history, George Tenet received the Presidential Medal of Freedom. 1) As an inducement to keep his mouth shut, and 2) perhaps as a reward for Tenet's efforts in trying to inform the Administration of the danger in advance.

I can't remember any person of power in the U.S. government who lost their job after the 9/11 disaster occurred. Maybe I'm wrong. If I am wrong, I hope someone here will correct me.

(A couple of old Defense hands in the Bush Administration didn't need to be told anything in advance about 911, in my opinion.)

Notwithstanding, could Pearl Harbor have been a Reichstag type event? Yes. The Administration wanted to get us into the war. We had a foreign element (the Nipponese) who had already planned the attack, so we had the foreign bad guy. We might have left a bunch of our planes on the airfield and our ships in the harbor to make the attack very successful and dramatic to boot.

And we did declare war.

And here we are in the year 2012, men and women of America. The strong-backed! The independent free souls! The very salt of the earth. All farce. All lies. We have been made to fear our own shadows. We'll pay any price to be protected from the boogy bear under our bed (that may be booger bear, I don't have time to look it up).

The government has got us all by the belly button and it won't let go. We don't resist our chains today, we beg for them. Send the drones over my house too, Uncle Sam. Show how much you love me. I need you. Protect me.

So yes, they did declare another war in 2001, and we've defeated us.

Snowbird (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
Crow, not even you are crazy enough to suggest that the POTUS should have believed the Russian intelligence over his own agencies and other allies!!! I could just hear it now ... but the Russians said he didn't have any WMD's after a bio attack in NY or one of our bases. The failure was not securing the country after the fighting ... the different factions armed and fought each other and us. The exception was the Kurds in the north, they were busy fighting the Turks.

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
No, the failure was one of buying a bridge that exiles proffered. POTUS and friends were determined to invade and would hear no dissent. William Randolph Hearst would have been proud.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
Crow, not even you are crazy enough to suggest that the POTUS should have believed the Russian intelligence over his own agencies and other allies!!

Not only am I suggesting that the President and other U.S. intelligence believed Russia, but it should be remembered that Russia was an ally in the sense that it also would have wanted to contain Iraq, if it was indeed dangerous. So Russia would monitor these areas continually. It still does.

We do too, but we don't hold a candle to Isreal, Russia and Britain. We are good at collecting information using technical means, but we have never been that good at analysing it. We haven't been that hot in human intelligence operations either.

(This is in accord with the Boy Scout Syndrome which American domestic and foreign intelligence and analysis are infected with. It's not because of some laws passed to handcuff our intelligence. It is the inability of the choir boy types to think out of the box. Other countries don't hire choir boys or girls for this line of work. )

If you want intelligence, you go to the best source, and they do share a lot of information among themselves.


POTUS and friends were determined to invade and would hear no dissent

Exactly, they had a narrative and they were going to play out that narrative. Period. What some of the exiles said was what some in the Administration wanted to hear, plus it was something valuable to sell to the public.

Backgrounder: Bush was no foreign policy pro. Cheney and Rumsfeld were...planted.... in his administration. Not only to sell Bush to the public as surrounded by old sages, but to get the job done for the boys who count.

Bush was a man of common sense, along with his sometimes very admirable stubbornness, but he was also a fellow who could be played for a fool (at least at first), and be manipulated by the old hands...to accomplish x, y, z ulterior motives for the money interests.

It's good money. It's a twofer and the present Administration is playing the game too. You get to spend money all over the world, use up equipment and order more, and keep the sheep under control at home by the use of fear tactics, crises and emergencies.

NB: Rumsfeld had been Sec. Defense 1975-77. Cheney had been Sec. Defense also. These fellows knew our capabilities and how to exploit them from that ever deepening well called the Department of Defense. It takes an expert to know how the place really operates, and most importantly, what the various capabilities are and how to use them.

I'm on the road and I've got to stop this. Just remember, while I'm gone you can kick me around, but when I get back, you won't have Crow to kick around anymore. I will be rested, and fed, and ready.  :)

Fr. Mackelhenry (talk|edits) said:

18 November 2012
Bush had this in common with Reagan. Neither man could ever be accused of being at the head of his class at school, but when either one of them had convinced himself that he believed...he would not compromise.

Did you hear that Obama? What about you other spineless Democrats up there in Washington, D.C.?

Snowbird (talk|edits) said:

19 November 2012
I was going to say I was sorry that I even started the Iraq discussion ... but, it wasn't me ... it was NM!!

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

19 November 2012
The Elephants are a strange breed. Well I guess the Jack Ass is too.

A Republican claims to be a mountain man.

An explorer. An independent thinker. Freedom lover. In my experience, he is nothing of the kind. None of the above.

I think many Republican men were good at sports as kids and they need a coach to look up to. To be guided by. Even today they want to try to cover up for their coaches and some sports professionals.

I don't mean this as an insult. Everyone should have something or someone to look up to, to trust.

(Except me. I've given up. <Smile> As Nixon said, I know too damn much.)

The thing I will never understand about the Elephant type is their need for authority, their need to be told, and their their deep need to respect and even to revere authority, and this is ironically combined with their professed claim to be free and independent thinkers.

"I'm a feller who thinks for myself, after coach tells me what to do."

I think what may get confused here is that there are both conservatives and libertarians in their party, and a whole lot of both combined.

Yes, there may be a few good people to trust in this world, but I think you Republicans need to raise your standards.

Of course, I know that I am now going to bring down a heap of abuse on the Jack Ass type for the comments I just made. Yes the Jack Ass may be flighty. He may have the arrogance of a Hillary, or the flightiness of a Jane Fonda, or even the exaggerated tendency to bore, like the Al Gore type.

A Jack Ass can wake up one day as Malcolm X, and the next as Elton John. Whatever is IN, is Jack Ass.

I prefer to think of myself in the mould of the simple men of old. Men like our Founders were. In fact, I model myself after Thoreau. My dream is to live on Walden Pond with a washer/dryer, central HVAC, Gucci loafers, soft sheets, firm bed, dishwasher, and some very loose squaw ladies in the area willing to spend time with a white man.

Let's face it, what a Jack Ass is is a jack ass.

It's time to heal, my friends. Let's listen to Peter, Paul & Mary: This Land is Your Land


PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

4 December 2012
New Report, Even the French Get What Happened on 9-11-2001:


To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.
Personal tools