Posts Tagged conspiracy
1. The Jews Did It
And that picture proves it.
The website compared satellite footage and imagery of the area with Israel’s outline and concluded that the main house – where bin Laden was captured and killed – is located where Jerusalem can be found on a map of Israel. The compound’s gate parallels the location of Tel Aviv, its dumping ground matches the location of Tiberias, and another building matched the location of Haifa.
2. He was a Jew anyway
At least according to the Iranian government.
“He was just a puppet controlled by the Zionist regime in order to present a violent image of Islam after the September 11 attacks,” he said, adding that the al-Qaeda leaders assassination proves he had “an expiration date” forcing the US to kill him. ”Bin Ladens death reflects the passing of a temporary US pawn, and symbolizes the end of one era and the beginning of another in American policy in the region,” Kosari said.
3. I guess he’s a cat person…
Some Palestinian preacher.
Preacher: “Today, the dogs of the West are rejoicing at the killing of one of the lions of Islam. Today, the West rejoices at the killing of one of the lions of Islam. We say to them, from the Al-Aqsa Mosque, from the heart of the Caliphate, which, Allah willing, is soon to come: Dogs should not rejoice at the killing of lions. A country of dogs will always remain a country of dogs, while a lion remains a lion even after it is killed.
“We will not forget all the crimes being committed by these American dogs in all the Muslim countries.
“Even if a lion is killed, the nation of one billion Muslims will give birth to hundreds of millions of lions.
“We say [to President Obama]: You said yourself that you personally gave the order to kill Muslims. Know that the day will soon come when you find yourself hanging from the gallows, next to little Bush, and next to all your cronies involved in the killing of Muslims.”
4. The Jews loved it
Well, at least one Young Adult Chabbad rabbi did.
Is It Okay to Celebrate Bin Laden’s Death? – The Big Picture
What is so terrible, after all, about celebrating the death of a wicked evildoer? Why would you even think it decrepit to rejoice that a man who himself rejoiced over the demise of thousands of others, and connived ingeniously to bring destruction and terror across the globe, should now be removed from it? Is it so horrible to feel happy that the world has just become a better, safer and happier place?
No, it’s not. That’s perfectly legit. On the contrary, someone who is not celebrating at this time is apparently not so concerned by the presence of evil upon our lovely planet. Those who are outraged by evil are carrying now smiles upon their face. The apathetic don’t give a hoot.
Below are a couple of Israel boycott-inspired images. Feel free to distribute them, but please put a link to my blog somewhere when you do.
My first image is responding to this story. I figured that there was something to what old Iran was saying, so I decided to really give Iran something to boycott:
The second image was inspired by this VexNews story:
The NSW Greens party is in a state of panic about signs appearing throughout the Sydney state electorate of Marrickville highlighting their candidate Fiona Byrne’s involvement in supporting causes associated with Israel’s homophobic and racist enemies, including a notorious council boycott of the Jewish state.
One anonymous broomstick-wielding Greens party hack, described by onlookers as acting in a manner that was reminiscent to them of a witch, was seen near the Petersham train station this morning attempting to use her powers to dislodge the signs that were out of reach of mere mortals.
So I figured that it would be a good idea to make Fiona Byrne look like The Wicked Witch of The West from The Wizard of Oz, just to illustrate the effect that she’ll have on NSW if elected. Anyone in Marrickville not planing on voting for Carmel Tebbutt, please preference her above Byrne, we really don’t want this moron running our state.
This is just stupid. The London 2012 Olympics logo above is supposed to read “2012″, but according to some, the top-left “2″ looks like a “z”, the “1″ looks like an “i”, the “0″ is obviously an “o” and if you tilt your head to the right, the second “2″ is kind of like an N.
So by Iranian thinking, the sign is:
z O rather than 2 0
i Z (sideways N) 1 0
And this is enough to warrant a boycott of the games.
Iran has made an official complaint over the logo for next year’s London Olympic Games, because the design is considered to be a “disgraceful” reminder of the word “Zion”.
In a letter posted on the website of state-backed Iranian Students News Agency, the National Olympic Committee of Iran said that unless a new logo was designed “the presence of some countries in the games, especially Iran” could be called into question.
Back in the cold war, Amrica and the USSR boycotting each other’s Olympics sent a strong message. Both countries had very strong teams and their absence was very much felt.
Iran, on the other hand, won only 2 medals at the 2008 games. Their absence would make very little difference to anything, except to make them look like idiots.
As usual, Paul McGeough’s weekend missive left me seething for about 30 minutes on an otherwise beautiful Sydney Saturday. It actually wasn’t so bad for a few paragraphs, until, naturally, he started blaming America for everything that went wrong in the Middle East
But Gaddafi had oil – lots of it. From time to time, leaders in the West would pay lip service to gross human rights violations in the region, but as long as Gaddafi and his ilk kept the oil flowing and were willing to act as Western proxies in fighting extremism, they could do as they pleased.
The West would buy their oil and arm them, asking for little more than a darkened room out the back, where ”enhanced interrogation” techniques that are frowned upon in the civilised salons of the West could be carried out on the QT.
He even figured that Council on Foreign Relations director Leslie Gelb “entirely ignored the nature of the revolutions” because he observed that the new Arab leadership will probably need to be more anti-Western in order to cater to various groups in their constituencies. McGeough’s quarrel with Gelb is that Gelb “missed the price that the Arab rank and file has been paying under Washington’s and the West’s deal with the dictators”.
That man’s ability to attribute every evil to the “puppet masters” sitting in the White House never ceases to amaze me; neither do the facts that he is still employed and people keep reading his work. He ends his “analysis” by condescendingly dismissing everyone who has doubts that Egypt and Libya are about to turn into Sweden, quoting analyst Fouad Ajami, saying:
”Grant the Egyptian people their right to swat away these warnings,” he writes. ”From afar, the ‘realists’ tell the Arabs that they are playing with fire, that beyond the prison walls there is danger and chaos. Luckily for them, the Arabs pay no heed to these ‘realists,’ and can recognise the ‘soft bigotry of low expectations’ that animates them.”
So apparently expecting that after thousands of years of dictator after dictator, a series of protests is not going to create a democratic haven overnight, is “soft bigotry”, but then expecting them to hate the rest of the democratic world is just common sense. After all, think of the “past crimes”. Luckily, not everyone shares this opinion. Israeli diplomat Dore Gold has pointed out that these revolutions may actually moderate the Arab world.
“For years, Arab leaders who thought they had legitimacy problems because they were not elected played several chords to the populace — Arab unity, Islamic solidarity, and most important, the struggle against Israel. So if you have regimes legitimized by democratic elections and accountable governance, then they will depend less on the conflict for their own internal standing.”
You see, most Arab dictators tended to use Israel and the West as distractions when their people began questioning why exactly these rulers were stealing all of their money. This policy has been very successful, creating a strong anti-Israel and anti-Western sentiment that is perpetuated hugely in the Western Left, meaning that a certain Sydney Morning Herald journalist and his ilk were ultimately helping to prop-up Arab dictators by re-enforcing the idea that it was really the US and Israel causing all of their problems and not the evil asshole sitting in the palace up the road.
In fact, this was the ideology that initially separated Al-Qaeda from the rest of the Islamist extremists, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood has always been focussed on overthrowing the “un-Islamic” regimes in Muslim countries and introducing Islamist regimes instead. Bin Laden, on the other hand, had the bright idea that the problems of the Muslim world were really a “Zio-Crusader” conspiracy, so attacking the Jews and the Christians wherever they were was the real way to “liberate” the Muslims. This is the ideology that eventually led to the terrorist threat that we in the West face.
So to sum-up, through his decades of embellishing the myth that the problems of the Arab world are solely caused by the US foreign policy and Israel’s undue influence on it, Paul McGeough has kept Arab dictators in power and supported terrorism. Good going McGeough…
Why am I not surprised? It had to be those damn Zionists, always plotting to bring down the Muslims!
But that’s ok, because Khatami knows how to deal with them – “harshly and in a legal manner”. I wonder what they could possibly mean by that.
Note: doesn’t this kind of undermine all these claims of Israel propping-up dictators? Those Iranians need to think about the implications of what they’re saying.
Iranian Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami Accuses America and the Zionists of Being the “Real Instigators” of the Riots and Calls to Deal with Oppositionists “Harshly and in a Legal Manner”
Following are excerpts from a speech delivered by Iranian Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, which aired on IRINN, the Iranian news channel, on February 15, 2011.
Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami: The Association of Researchers and Teachers of Qom,1 which exists only on the Internet, appears only in order to publish communiqués denouncing [the regime]. They caused this battle by initiating this fitna.
We say to the Americans and to the Zionists that we consider them to be the real instigators of the fitna. We will never forget who the main enemy is. We continue to shout passionately: Death to America, death to Israel.
Crowds: Death to America, death to Israel!
Death to America, death to Israel!
Death to America, death to Israel!
Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami: We, the clergy, explicitly say that we demand that all the rioters be dealt with harshly and in a legal manner – especially Mousavi and Karroubi.
And this is not the first time! Apparently, the protestors were caught eating KFC – proof that they were in league with not only Hizballah and Hamas, but also the CIA and Mossad. Pretty nefarious, right?
Tens of phone calls have been received by the television channel, whereby callers made the smart point that they had seen the protesters eating from KFC, and that this was proof that they have foreign agendas. They seem to believe that no one can eat from the American chain without being an agent of foreign forces.
It has filled people’s minds with thoughts of hidden agendas – the agents of Mossad, Hezbollah, and CIA allied for the first time in history to take the Egyptian regime down. I do not know how Mossad has allied with Hezbollah and Hamas, but the media insists that this has happened.
Pretty much everyone, depending on who you listen to. I mean we all know that it was this Jarred-Lee Loughman dude, but why did he do it? Was he an anarchist? A Communist? A Fascist? Clinically insane? Since no one listens to Maralyn Manson these days, we can’t blame him anymore, which has put us all in a bit of a pickle. No one can figure it out.
Well, a select
many few people do seem to think they have it have it down-pat. Here are a few of my favourite theories:
#1: Fox News did it
From New York Times columnist Paul Krugman:
I remembered the upsurge in political hatred after Bill Clinton’s election in 1992 — an upsurge that culminated in the Oklahoma City bombing. And you could see, just by watching the crowds at McCain-Palin rallies, that it was ready to happen again.
…And it’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence.
Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: It’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. It’s hard to imagine a Democratic member of Congress urging constituents to be “armed and dangerous” without being ostracized; but Rep. Michele Bachmann, who did just that, is a rising star in the GOP.
And there’s a huge contrast in the media. Listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, and you’ll hear a lot of caustic remarks and mockery aimed at Republicans. But you won’t hear jokes about shooting government officials or beheading a journalist at The Washington Post. Listen to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, and you will.
…Unfortunately, that hasn’t been happening: The purveyors of hate have been treated with respect, even deference, by the GOP establishment. As David Frum, the former Bush speechwriter, has put it, “Republicans originally thought that Fox worked for us and now we’re discovering we work for Fox.”
So it was all a conspiracy orchestrated by the Republicans at the behest of the all-powerful Fox News. Nice one Mr “I write for one of the most respected newspapers in the world”.
Of course, most of this has been directed specifically at Fox News anchor and generally ridiculous personality Sarah Palin. There are thousands of these, but David Weigel for Slate magazine was particularly good because in response to accusations of the anti-Palin camp just jumping at an opportunity to accuse her, he says:
This strikes me as smart media strategy. Think back: Why is Palin involved in this story in the first place? In the first hours after the shooting, with the media flooding the zone but lacking real information about the crime scene, there was 1) a history of Giffords being threatened over votes and 2) video of Giffords saying she worried about the consequences of Palin’s map. Rebecca Mansour found in her “surveying symbols” interview that this was unspinnable. Indeed, it was — you cannot outspin video of a woman who has been shot worrying about threats to her life. Heading into the bunker and waiting for the media horde to find a new narrative seems like the right response.
This just seems ludicrous to me. My mind will not stretch to the point where Giffords worrying about the consequences of the map meant “some dude is gonna go into a shop and shoot me and a bunch of other people” rather than “Palin is crazy, vote Democrat for a sane America!” or something to that effect. Credibility, please!
#2: It was all Americans
Or more specifically, America’s hatred of authority. Lee Siegel from the New York Observer:
The discourse following the Tucson shootings was all the more mind-numbing because no one wanted to talk about the elephant in the room. The uncomfortable fact is that we share the same culture as Loughner. We swim in it; we bask in it. Loughner’s YouTube ravings are like a perverted reflection of ideas and sentiments that are our daily bread.
…But a mountain slide pulls down everyone, good and evil, innocent and corrupt, in its rush to the bottom. We all dwell complacently among the same cultural assumptions. Some of those assumptions are helping to drive society, through no conscious purpose of their own, to the bottom. The feeble-minded, like Loughner, are the first to sink.
Apparently this Nihilism is everywhere:
According to news reports, Loughner went to one of Congresswoman Giffords’ public meetings and asked her this question: “What is government if words have no meaning?” It also appears in his YouTube video. In the light of what later happened, the question chills us. Its nihilism and its unbalanced lack of basic trust are haunting. Yet they are also the stuff, not just of right-wing suspicion of government, or of radical left-wing suspicion of same, but of scores of Hollywood movies, from Taxi Driver and Three Days of the Condor, to Guilty by Suspicion and Mercury Rising, to The Sentinel and Syriana, and, well, I can’t keep up. For at least half a century, our movies, from simple to complex, have been driven by the idea that official words have no meaning and that government is either criminal or a sham.
If that strikes you as too earnest an assertion, then you are perhaps too sophisticated to draw moralizing conclusions from mere entertainment. In that case, you have probably read the standard texts of advanced American attitudes. Thus you have absorbed throughout college, like any number of Hollywood screenwriters and American tastemakers, the idea-from Nietzsche to Wittgenstein to Foucault to Derrida to Chomsky to Stanley Fish-that the words used by any type of official, political entity, like a government, are nonsense. “What is government if words have no meaning?” That could be the motto of The Daily Show.
Yup, it’s all because everyone is too suspicious of the motives of the government and the “system” and because “fighting the man” is too ingrained in what Americans think. The author, apparently, is no exception:
Yet when a member of Congress is shot along with other innocent people, Congress becomes concerned about mass murder.… But why does concern for their own welfare suddenly make the politicians speak words with meaning, and not concern for ours, or concern for the social and economic forces that drive some people over the edge and put us all in jeopardy?
Yeah, why does Congress only care about shootings when it hurts one of them? It’s not like they did anything about any of those other massacres that happened is it? Oh hold on, where does this logic that he is following come from? Mistrust of society, apportioning blame to authority figures…I swear I read about that somewhere…
#3: It was the NRA
This is an old favourite – particularly for people like Michael Moore, who figured he’d leave a photo of a 6-year-old girl who was killed in the Columbine massacre at Charlton Heston’s house because apparently as the head of the NRA, Heston killed her and so needs to feel guilt and public shame.
Fred Martin in the San Fransisco Chronicle:
The fundamental issue in the Arizona shooting was that a pot-smoking, chronically mentally ill person went untreated, was expelled from an educational institution with a warning to get treatment as a prerequisite for return, yet was permitted to buy a gun.
I particularly like the “pot-smoking” part. Those damn hippies! IT MUST BE THEM!
And the New York Times editorial was full of fire and brimstone:
The ludicrously thin membrane that now passes for gun control in this country almost certainly made the Tucson tragedy worse. Members of Congress are legitimately concerned about their own safety now, but they should be no less worried about the effect of their inaction on the safety of all Americans… they will need to stand up to the National Rifle Association and its allies, whose lobbying power continues to grow despite the visceral evidence that the groups have made the country a far more dangerous place. Having won a Supreme Court ruling establishing a right to keep a firearm in the home, the gun lobby is striving for new heights of lunacy, waging a campaign to legalize the possession of a gun in schools, bars, parks, offices, and churches, even by teenagers.
Dramatic hey? What was that about blaming Congress for everything?
There are definitely arguments in favour of tougher gun regulations, particularly in Arizona apparently, but if there’s one thing Timothy McVeigh and most recent terrorists show, it’s that guns are not necessary if you want to create a massacre. Home-made explosives from instructional YouTube videos will do just fine. Americans just seem to love blaming “lobbies” for everything.
So what do I think caused Mr Loughman to go over the edge? Probably video games and that rap music.