From Sander Hicks’s book
Slingshot to the Juggarnaut:  Total Resistance to the Death Machine Means Complete Love of the Truth, published 2012
pages 301-304

Then they lined us up for the Chney meet and greet.  I asked Cheney during our photo op, “What do I say to all these people who tell me 9/11 was an inside job?”  I was smiling when I said it, leaning over him and grinning at the camera.  In the moment when they shutter cliked, he heared the joy in my voice.  I think it angered him.  [note:  “I think?”]  You can see some glumness in the photo.

[note:  I can see glumness in any photograph of Cheney, 9/11 Truth question or not.]

Calmly, he turned his whole body and gave me this wave of cold energy.  [what’s the difference between Cheney warm energy and Cheney cold energy?]   “Just look at the evidence,” he said evenly.  “It’s not true.”

Cheney’s calm was eerie.  He sounded like he was trying to project confidence, but really there was a deep sandess inside him.  [Was there?]  His spoke softly.  [sic]  He was trying to exude “cast iron strength.”  He wasn’t strong as iron, but he was cold the way iron is, the way it takes heat out of your hand.  It all seemed an act.  [It is a fundraiser photo op and signature, which is the same thing.]  His faced looked translucent, like that of someone in the hospital.  [Yes, Cheney’s health problems are the stuff of legend.  So?]  I could see tiny veins in his puffy cheeks and nose.  [You’re standing way too closely.]

I felt greasy and siorintaed for twenty-four hours after that moment.  Most people react with dramatic emotion when you bring up the “9/11 is an inside job” talk.  [Personally I react with a bit of an eye-roll, and can imagine Cheney would too.]  Cheney wasn’t surprised at all.  He knew it all.  [Huh?]

Cheney wasn’t surprised some guy had just popped up in the $5,000 donors’ photo-op line at a GOP fundraiser and started talking about 9/11 being an inside job.  [Or maybe he was, but didn’t think it was worth disrupting the steady flow of party supporters?]   He didn’t detail what “evidence” he had to the contrary, or where one could fin dit to prop up his besieged official sotry.  [Not enough time, and not worth disrupting the steady flow of party supporters.]   He didn’t care what I thought I knew.  [I imagine he thought he knew what Hicks thought he knew.]  He didn’t want to hear what “all these people” were saying.  [Wasn’t he told what all those people were saying?]   He had a quick answer prepared and was ready for the next photo.  [Yes.  That’s the way this works.  It would be the same if he was queried on Abortion or Iraq or –?]

I saw a man running down the street, to arrive at a position in front of a major Bus Stop Intersection.  He was holding a sign.  Which had two pictures on it.  One was of Adolf Hitler.  The other — right next to Hitler — someone not as recognizable.

“Neal McFarlane,” the sign waver helped me out.  “CEO of Tri-Met.”

“Cool,” I said, before walked off — my curiosity satiated.

Now, granted, there are legitimate issues to be had with the operation of the city’s public transportation — pay raises to top executives against the backdrop of service cuts and ticket price increases and the demands of putting unused trains into spots that aren’t using them —

But, you can figure me if my general reaction is… “Huh?”

Is the message that if Adolf Hitler’s power were restricted to that of operation of public transportation bureau, he would operate it as Neal McFarlane has Tri-Met?  I suppose there’s something of pointing to Adolf’s friend Benito Mussolini, who I’ve read counter-veiling opinions pro and against that he “Kept the Trains going on time”.  (The Peter Principle in action with him.)  I have to wonder what would happen if you hired Hitler to walk your dog — or, is there a Nazi method of walking a dog?

In sum: the only city employee who should be placed next to an image of Hitler is Mark Kruger.

“Modern Nazis don’t give Hitler Salutes”.

In the dead of night, a person apparently sticks some … “poetry”… onto the sides of the city’s parking meters.  He has a message he wants to send the city.  This poem’s next line (or is it the third line) rhymes the “Salutes” with “boots”, and we also see a line about sending their kids to the “best schools” to (next line, or the one after that) “learn the rules”.  Really digging deep into the rhyming here.

The big tell for this guy may come in with “and they hide their views on race”, which — I suspect is a bit of projection.

And then we get to the railings of the “Modern Nazis” — a “Progressive bunch” (I don’t remember what word he rhymed with “bunch”), but they vote Democratic because of the “right to choose” and you know what the right to choose is all about and then…

The restriction of the right for a Christian to voice outrage at the “least deviation of pc” in condemning perversity.  I assume this mostly means “homosexuality”.

Anyway, we get tossed a reference to Circe.  Which is interesting.  It appears our poet has a Circe fixation — his favorite minor Greek Goddess, I suppose — as Circe figures prominently in the other poem he’s plastered onto a parking meter — which — I seem to have misplaced these items so I’m working from memory — is about how the masses have been brainwashed to accept perversity and bay-killing.

Also there are about half a dozen cringe inducing mis-spelling in each poem.

I don’t know why this poet chose the nom de plume “Hatman” — it might be to remain anonymous in our city of Hat wearers, but I premuse that I will see a third poem from this poet in short order, and its message will be about the same.

Interesting tidbit of history found here, from forgotten primary opponents to semi-forgotten general election opponents.  Nixon won re-election against a Liberal “Hollywood” Democrat with the meme “The Pink Lady” — or, “Pink right down to her underwear”.  Apparently he just took the line from the primary run.

In May 1950, just weeks before the primary election, Boddy labeled Douglas the “Pink Lady” by implying that she was aligned with Communists and was part of a group of “red hots” trying to seize control of Democratic county committees in the state. Boddy and Douglas ran a bitter primary campaign, leaving Douglas, the Democratic victor, badly wounded in her race against the winner of the Republican primary, Congressman Richard Nixon. Boddy came up with the idea of comparing Douglas’ voting record to that of leftist Congressman Vito Marcantonio of the American Labor Party—a tactic that was seized on by Nixon and his campaign manager, Murray Chotiner in the final election.

On June 6, 1950, Douglas beat Boddy at the polls largely on the strength of her popularity with African-American voters. She garnered 889,000 votes to Boddy’s 532,000. Nixon, who had crossed-filed in both parties in the primary, won 1,060,000 votes. Douglas lost to Nixon in the November general election.

Oddly, leafing through Boody’s political record, it strikes me that his eccentricities were further afield than Douglas — giving a “fair hearing” for EPIC and Technocracy — at least this makes him more easily brandished as “Red”dish “Pink”.

And granted, the general thrust of the campaign was in place and this was how Nixon was going to run against Douglas regardless, but the specifics — our election history is sort of littered with this — see Gore assisting Bush against Dukakis, see Yorty assisting Reagan against Brown.

In terms of Nixonian history, I’m always a tad curious about the Republican Primary opponent for the 1962 Governor’s race — Joseph C Shell — reportedly Nixon was stunned by the difference between travelling the state in 1950 and in 1962 and now being yelled at by Shell supporters and called a, yep, Commie.

As for this question:  What in the hell were Democrats doing with Tricky Dick?   Republicrats – Apparently an interesting job of Nixon beforehand to win the 1948 Democratic Primary against an opponent this site can’t even be bothered to drag up a photograph for with a lousy name  — he spent the previous year fading his Party identification in his literature in order to prop up a Non – Partisan image.  Of course, we fall into the land of “appealing to Open Minded, Common Sense Democrats” against the Socialists and RadLibs taking over the Democratic Party, or Zell Miller Land, but it’s the common appeal of things, I suppose.
The repsonse:  Who knows? They didn’t after this to my knowledge, though. is amusing enough — see Labor non support for McGovern.

ITEM NUMBER ONE:   ALEX JONES, LYNDON LAROUCHE, and WEBSTER TARPLEY FISTICUFFS

I’ve been wondering when Larouche would join the Alex Jones Show again.  The answer may possibly be… Never.  (slight update: then again… maybe next week or in a week or two. — heh this:  Apparently there are two knuckleheads who think Lyndon LaRouche is a “statesman”:Alex Jones and,er,um,Lyndon LaRouche.)

According to factnet poster fightapathy:
“Judy in Florida. Calling Judy in Florida.”
A certain LPAC supporter by the name of Judy in Florida spoke on Alex Jones Show the other day on the topic of staving off total disaster, asking “What about the prospect of what they’re trying to put through congress, the LaRouche Political Action Committee’s work to pass Glass-Steagal–“
Jones cut off Judy saying “Great idea, but it ain’t gonna happen. Ain’t gonna happen. Cause the criminals are running the show.”
Judy was persistent, though. “There is work to have it put through, there absolutely is–“
Jones cut her off again saying, “I know! I know there are groups working on it but the criminal cartels won’t let it through.”
That was the end of Judy in Florida’s promotion of LPAC and Glass-Steagal.
So much for Alex Jones carrying THE DEAR LEADER’s water. I guess that only happens when the great man is a guest on the show.

A bit more interesting than Jones acting in the “cut the phone” — the funniest example of this cut-off remains (god help us) Mark Levin and “go back to your circle whatever” — is the anti Larouche crusade of Webster Tarpley.

Only an hour after wrapping up listening to JUDY IN FLORIDA’s promotion of THE DEAR LEADER being unceremoniously cut off by Alex Jones — twice yet — we now have Dr. Webster Griffin Tarpley getting in a barb via his weekly Dooms Day programme “World Crisis Radio”, March 9th edition:  “There is a growing anti-CIA mood on capitol hill. Now don’t expect certain Brand X websites reporting on this anti-CIA mood, right? You know, don’t expect LaRouche PAC to tell you about this mood.”
Dr. Tarpley has been reporting for some time that THE DEAR LEADER is a CIA operative, in the pay of Langley, with all the EIR offices packed with CIA spooks.
Toward the end of Tarpley’s broadcast in discussion of Pepe Grillo’s electoral triumph in Italy, ANOTHER reference to Lyn emerges! The good Doctor says,
“And we also notice LaRouche is flirting with Grillo. Its very interesting that LaRouche’s Italian website long referred to Grillo, the Grillini, as zombies, the atrophy or degrowth, but that is all being overwritten in the interest of the CIA.”
Is this a case of deliberately sabotaging the LaRouche brand (BRAND X?), or just connecto by the dear Doctor regarding Lyn’s failure to discuss certain issues?
I’d say, Lyn’s failure to discuss CIA and other issues is because he is not interested in them. He is more fascinated with cone-shaped extinctions and reliving the assassination of JFK over and over and over. Period.

Actually this strikes me as evidence that Tarpley is in cahoots with Larouche.  The “CIA agent” talk smacks of pumping Larouche up to a level of… relevance.

ITEM NUMBER TWO:  There’s a mass of new crap from the Larouche HQ posted at laroucheplanet, the “Basement Meetings”.  While generally glad such a thing exists and is available for one’s pursual, the effect seems like that of wading through videos of Country Council meetings for “tidbits”.  If I had wanted to spend time listening to Larouchian meetings, I’d just join their cult, right?
I am glad someone is wading through some of it.  Here’s the best we can do so far, as per “fightapathy“…  Interesting is the occasional reference to “Sky” as though Lyn had forgotten his favorite had just defected. […]  The revealing part of this meeting is the part where Lyn sternly advises the candidates not to make general statements to an audience but focus on “Winning over only one or two people who are willing to carry the concepts you’re talking about. The rest are too stupid or distracted to take away anything of what you’ve just talked about.”  Plato’s bunch of “Golden Souls”, and all that I guess.

ITEM NUMBER THREE:  CONTINUING COVERAGE ON THE DIANE SARE FOR GOVERNOR CAMPAIGN
Diane Sare is campaigning at a Princeton Physics Lab.  You don’t see Chris Christie there.  Do you?

ITEM NUMBER FOUR:  POST OFFICE TOUR NOTES.

Something I find interesting about this…

North Korea declared the 1953 Korean War armistice nullified on Monday, following through on a longstanding threat that it renewed last week amid rising tensions with South Korea.

No, I imagine it is a whole lot of attention grabbing on the North Korean government’s part, and the usual “Crisis to stir up support amongst the Populace” antics of the totalitarian regime – and there isn’t much more to do than a lot of eye rolling, but this brings to mind some existential and definitional questions right about here, with the United Nations and International response…

The United Nations has come out clearly stating that North Korea does not have the power to nullify the agreement, and thus the treaty holds.  It’s right there in the 1953 Treaty.

Question from the peanut gallery… don’t you nullify by simply… violating the agreement?  Again, this doesn’t move into the field of policy — maybe we should just see to it to the end and proceed as though in the end, the Armistice exists… but it is an odd semantic issue.