can the modern american left genuinely claim to be anti-racist?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
separate answers for the political, idealogical, and practical

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 15:39 (twenty years ago)

this is the wrong question to ask, and the even more wrong one to answer.

Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 15:42 (twenty years ago)

why should black voters support the party of robert byrd and welfare "reform"?

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 15:58 (twenty years ago)

*racist punchline deleted*

Chrisiah T Rockahole (blueski), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:00 (twenty years ago)

Are we talking about the modern American left or the Democratic Party? Cuz those two things are far from synonymous.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:01 (twenty years ago)

let me know when more than 10% of the modern american left begins to vote for any other party

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:06 (twenty years ago)

Cuz obv the reason why black voters vote Democrat is the seem reason I vote Democrat and you probably vote Democrat and most left-leaning people vote democrat: the alternative seems much worse.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:09 (twenty years ago)

I think if you change the "genuinely" to "generally," the answer is yes -- the modern American left is generally anti-racist. That's not to say it doesn't harbor some racists, or that its candidates are above a little Sistah Souljah bashing, but on the whole its policies and priorities are anti-racist.

(Welfare reform was not a race-based policy, either -- there's lots of white people on welfare. And it also wasn't a bad idea. The existing welfare system was nothing for anyone to be proud of -- underfunded, ineffective and wrongheaded on many counts. Whether what's come in its place is demonstrably better is still an open question, of course, and as social services at all levels continue to get cut, the "welfare to work" programs, with their promises of job training and child care, are going to be increasingly pinched.)

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:12 (twenty years ago)

well thats my question then, is it? do democrats deserve black voters and the votes of anti-racists more than republicans on that issue alone?

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:13 (twenty years ago)

dude cmon welfare reform wasnt a race based policy like when republicans say katrina destroyed white peoples houses too

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:14 (twenty years ago)

really despite weakly tryna promote a national dialogue on race (and having personal black friends) clinton was unconscionable when it came to dealing this

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:16 (twenty years ago)

a term as generic as 'black voters' is surely doomed in such an argument?

Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:16 (twenty years ago)

how is more generic than "the modern american left"?

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:18 (twenty years ago)

it's not, i am just following protocol by zoning in on the word 'black'.

i mean if you quote a statistic that the number of Afro-American people on welfare in the US is significantly greater than Hispanic or other ethnicities then i'll concede - perhaps it is, i'm a bit ignorant on this though definitely. either way i think placing the focus on 'social class/level of privilege' is surely better than just barking on about race in such topics. i mean surely 'can the modern american left genuinely claim to be more supportive to the underprivileged masses than the modern American right' is just as valid and perhaps more appropriate, if more waffley, a question?

Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:23 (twenty years ago)

i'm not talking about Americans with Afros I should add (nervously).

Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:24 (twenty years ago)

I know what you mean about welfare being a code word for race, but the program still breaks down something like 40 percent white, 40 percent black, 20 percent Hispanic and other. (Or it did last time I looked at the numbers, like 10 years ago.) But my point on it is that some kind of welfare reform needed to happen. It was structured badly and not doing anybody much good. Whether what we got is an improvement is very debatable, obviously -- we've mostly moved people into low-wage jobs with few or no benefits, and most are still living in poverty. But some of the ideas behind welfare reform were not bad ones. I did a lot of reporting on it round about 1996, and there was a lot of sincere thought and effort that went into it, by non-ideological people who actually wanted to improve the system. Where they got hung up, inevitably, was where welfare itself had always hung up -- having the resources to actually do the programs well. I'm just saying it's too easy to say "welfare reform = racism." The issue's a lot more complicated.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:24 (twenty years ago)

10 years is a long time though, esp. considering the growth of Hispanic in places like Georgia since then (source: some BBC news report eighteen months ago...) - it's presumably much closer now.

Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:27 (twenty years ago)

do yall understand proportionate representation?

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:29 (twenty years ago)

i mean look i got personal experience being white and on welfare but bringing the relatively tiny proportion of whites on welfare into a discussion about racism is just the same old bullshit republican defense that exploits ignorance of how population numbers work

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:34 (twenty years ago)

Of the total number of welfare recipients in this country, 39.8% are black, 38.8% are white, and 15.7% are Hispanic.

http://poverty.smartlibrary.org/NewInterface/segment.cfm?segment=1823&table_of_contents=1425

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:38 (twenty years ago)

http://www.socialistalternative.org/justice37/12.html

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:40 (twenty years ago)

Of course, proportionately a lot more blacks are on welfare, are poor, are in prison. That's the legacy of a racist society, we all know that. But the issue of "reform" is not so cut and dried as that Socialist Alternative article suggests. Clinton was responding to the Republicans, yes; he was "selling out," OK, he did that a lot. (The continued affection of some liberals for Clinton has long puzzled me.) But "welfare reform" was a broader issue than Clinton or Gingrich. The AFDC system really was badly conceived and structured, and it really didn't do a lot to try to improve anyone's lot. The system that replaced it is probably just as poorly put together, because whatever interest there was in genuine reform got sidelined by an interest in cutting social spending. That's a problem, but one that has a lot more to do with Republicans than Democrats.

Anyway, like I said, I think the modern American left is generally, and mostly sincerely, anti-racist. It defends affirmative action. It promotes social spending for the most disadvantaged. It also sometimes signs onto things like the stupid bankruptcy bill, so it's hardly full of idealists or altruists. But on the whole, I'm not sure that pondering the failings of the American left on racial issues is useful as anything more than an academic exercise right now, because those aren't the failings that are keeping it out of office, and as long as it's out of office, much much worse and actively racist policies will be pursued the the modern American right.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:56 (twenty years ago)

Affirmative action in and of itself is kind of troubling, actually!

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:57 (twenty years ago)

haha xpost w/ dan proving my point!

what are some examples of actively racist policies pursued by the right and not the left? besides ending affirmative action, which a large number of black people agree with

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:59 (twenty years ago)

i really want this defended better than some wishy washy 'i FEEL like democrats are less racist!' or whatever, i was somewhat offended by the silence from the white left on condi rice's appointment to secretary of state considering how much dap clinton got for albright being an old white woman, and you start to wonder why anyone would side with robert byrd over colin powell (unless you wanna simplify it to anti-war vs my lai apologist, which is like making hitler vs roosevelt into vegetarian vs philanderer)

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:02 (twenty years ago)

Worth highlighting how those welfare figures compare to the general population, which is like 13% black, is it?

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:03 (twenty years ago)

could you define "racist"? or for that matter "anti-racist"? (seriously)

ryan (ryan), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:04 (twenty years ago)

not so much 'silence' as whining and racist caricaturing (aunt jemimna, house negro, etc)

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:05 (twenty years ago)

That Robert Byrd/Colin Powell dichotomy is bullshit. Can you understand why someone would side with Robert Byrd over Trent Lott?

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:05 (twenty years ago)

what are some examples of actively racist policies pursued by the right and not the left?

Apart from building a national governing coalition based partly on Southern white resentment of the civil rights movement?

Well, to use your welfare reform argument, cutting social services generally has disproportionately negative effects for nonwhite populations, which are proportionately poorer and more likely to receive the benefits of those services. Bush in his press conference today (in response to a question about his massive expansion of the federal government) was bragging about how he has actually cut "discretionary non-defense spending", and also said those things will need to be cut more to pay for hurricane relief.

And yeah, affirmative action is complicated too, I know.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:07 (twenty years ago)

im using racist as shorthand for white supremacy, i guess, a certain dislike, indifference, or condescension to the non-white population. i want to understand how the democratic party or the left in general (socialists, greens, etc) are more relevant in progressive racial matters

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:09 (twenty years ago)

dude of course powell vs byrd is bullshit, its hard to construct an opinion you basically disagree with!

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:09 (twenty years ago)

Condescension is where the DING DING DING happens here. The "right" strawman has a dislike, disdain. The "left" one has a condescension. Who is worse? The snake that is openly going to bite you or the one who pretends to be your friend?

sweeping generalizations blah blah blah

Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:10 (twenty years ago)

southern strategy yeah but the civil rights act was pushed thru by a republican and voted against by something like 25 democrats, why dont we hold that against the party?

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:14 (twenty years ago)

does the right really have more of a disdain than the left? does john kerry like black folks more than george w bush??

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:14 (twenty years ago)

his wife is african american

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:15 (twenty years ago)

Uh because those 25 Democrats almost immediately ceased to be Democrats and switched to the Republican party (and those that didn't switch immediately waited until '80 and switched when Reagan came along.)

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:15 (twenty years ago)

byrd was one of them! he didnt switch!! strom thurmond was a democrat and only renounced his segregationist stance when he became a republican

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:16 (twenty years ago)

I give Bush some credit for appointing Condi and Powell. They were symbolic moves, but symbolic moves count. And even though I don't like Condi and have lost respect for Colin, they're somewhat less horrible than some of the other people in the administration.

But I think, whatever taking-for-granted might go on, Democrats in the last few generations have been more sincerely interested in courting black votes and encouraging black participation in the democratic process than Republicans. Democrats try to encourage black voter turnout, Republicans try to suppress it. That's been a matter of political pragmatism, but that's always true of political alliances. Given that black Democratic legislators still outnumber black Republican legislators by some ridiculous ratio, I don't see how anyone can say that Democrats aren't doing a better job representing black voters. Democrats are more likely to support better funding for public education, childhood intervention programs like Head Start, public health programs, and any number of other things that -- while income- rather than race-based -- have significant racial effects because of the racial income gap.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:18 (twenty years ago)

So wait are you advocating not voting democrat because of Robert Byrd's stance of 40 plus years ago (a stance he's since repudiated, not that it means much he's still obviously a product of his time)? He's only one guy ya know! And it's not like his views then represent the current party platform or anything close to it.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:18 (twenty years ago)

All of my relatives who were alive before the Great Depression were Republicans from the South.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:19 (twenty years ago)

its the same as blaming republicans in 2005 for the southern strategy!

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:20 (twenty years ago)

haha dan all mine were white racist democrats!!

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:20 (twenty years ago)

Esp. since that strategy has been most effective for Republicans in Ohio and Pennsylvania!

(xpost Hahaha!)

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:21 (twenty years ago)

"its the same as blaming republicans in 2005 for the southern strategy!"

Uh no it isn't! They are still using the southern strategy!

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:22 (twenty years ago)

see you can be pro-worker, pro-union, quasi-socialist, whatever, and still have a disconnect or contempt or paternalism or WHATEVER for black folks and i dont think white liberals want to acknowledge that so they build their racial credentials up on ad hominem attacks towards republicans

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:23 (twenty years ago)

they are? is that why bush appointed powell and rice, and bush 41 appointed thomas?

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:23 (twenty years ago)

i mean yeah republicans still take advantage of white racist votes, robert byrd still says the n-word on cnn, whats your point?

_, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:24 (twenty years ago)

see you can be pro-worker, pro-union, quasi-socialist, whatever, and still have a disconnect or contempt or paternalism or WHATEVER for black folks

Upton Sinclair's The Jungle to thread! That is one of the most offensive books I've ever read.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:25 (twenty years ago)

That's why he visits Bob Jones University. That's why he smeared McCain left and right in South Carolina with miscegenation. That's why thousands of black votes were supressed in Florida.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 17:25 (twenty years ago)

http://www.americaslibrary.gov/assets/jb/progress/jb_progress_police_3_e.jpg

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 03:21 (twenty years ago)

http://img.web.de/c/00/57/76/B2.420

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 03:22 (twenty years ago)

http://www.apolitical.info/images/copperquiz.gif

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 03:23 (twenty years ago)

oh hey you're doing that thing you do.

Dan I. (Dan I.), Thursday, 6 October 2005 03:24 (twenty years ago)

Feign dumb, or 'role-play' (oh, I get it...'eye-rolling' ah ha ha ha ha...) anymore, and you WILL be considered an accomplice.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/raspberrywho

And you have the right to remain silent.

How many times do I have to say "attempted murder".

You have been warned enough times: start co-operating, or be considered an accomplice.

simian (dymaxia), Thursday, 6 October 2005 03:24 (twenty years ago)

OK OK, what do I do?

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 03:36 (twenty years ago)

REPENT SINNER

Dan I. (Dan I.), Thursday, 6 October 2005 03:40 (twenty years ago)

http://www.crankycritic.com/archive/posters/thatthingyoudo.jpg

Dan I. (Dan I.), Thursday, 6 October 2005 03:41 (twenty years ago)


Post everything you really know about Scientology...'cos this has all the marks of 'fair gaming'.

Don't know what I'm talking about?

Then you're either part of it, or you haven't done your homework about what Scientology really does.

simian (dymaxia), Thursday, 6 October 2005 04:01 (twenty years ago)

John Edwards is right, there really are two Americas.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 6 October 2005 04:13 (twenty years ago)

kerry email me plz!

j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 6 October 2005 04:24 (twenty years ago)

I changed my mind, I kind of like your thing John.

Dan I. (Dan I.), Thursday, 6 October 2005 04:27 (twenty years ago)

Kerry, please call a doctor and get some help. Call your family. Do something to get yourself help. It isnt good for you posting your personal info all over the internet like this. Everyone's worried.

Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 6 October 2005 05:25 (twenty years ago)

Did I miss the part where credit card numbers were distributed? I need to buy some stuff.

Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 6 October 2005 05:59 (twenty years ago)

you apparently missed the part where common human decency was dealt out. a very sad day for ilx.

j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 6 October 2005 06:03 (twenty years ago)

JB OTM.

suzy (suzy), Thursday, 6 October 2005 06:12 (twenty years ago)

(true, but you can't exactly blame people for taking a while to figure out wtf is going on. i had to spend 20 minutes finding different threads on different boards and reading the livejournal before i got the picture. if you just wandered into this thread or any of the others there'd be no way to immediately pick up on it, you'd just think 'hey weird')

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 6 October 2005 06:33 (twenty years ago)

yah dont assume everyone is going to know what going on. this shit is pretty confusing and pretty funny at first look.

howell huser (chaki), Thursday, 6 October 2005 06:44 (twenty years ago)

jesus, until the last two posts made me go back and read things more carefully I thought it was all just ILX fucking around like normal, screwing-with-Marissa type stuff.

Dan I. (Dan I.), Thursday, 6 October 2005 07:09 (twenty years ago)

Can a mod googleproof the personal info please? I don't think that this is good.

J (Jay), Thursday, 6 October 2005 12:07 (twenty years ago)

Kerry, I would like to talk to you about the infiltration of the KKK you brought up. I think everyone is ignoring your point because of all the other distractions you've brought up. You are right about it, there has been known cases of infiltration of the KKK. However, these are very small numbers of people, a tiny percentage of KKK members. For infiltration to be a valid reason to NOT assume KKK membership implies racism, you'd have to have infiltration numbers so high to make infiltration useless--ie entire chapters worth of infiltrators. And why bother then, right? So yes, you are correct that there have been infiltrations but only a small number of people, too small to be statistically significant (though obv. culturally significant), and former infiltrators have been open and honest about it after the fact. If Byrd was an infiltrator, it seems highly unlikely he'd be sitting around apologizing for his past instead of saying, "Well actually it was a mission to find out more about the inner workings of the KKK."

Is there some friend you can go hang out with for a little while? I seriously thought you were joking around at first on ILB but I see you are not. I think it is best for your safety if you go to a friend's house.

Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 6 October 2005 13:05 (twenty years ago)


You don't write like Ally K------ and you know it.

You have that sing-songy Scientological tone.

Fact is, you are essentially arguing in favor of a permanent 'blackballing' of someone who was ever in 'the KKK'.

My sister's name is Kelly. My brother's name is Kevin. My name is Kerry.

And I've seen you bitches talking in code about 'the KKK', so you stop talking in code.

The less you ignore me, the more you play into my hands.

simian (dymaxia), Thursday, 6 October 2005 15:07 (twenty years ago)

Call your siblings.

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 15:11 (twenty years ago)

Kerry, can you call your brother or sister? I think you should talk to them about all of this, see if they're alright and what they think.

xpost

Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 6 October 2005 15:14 (twenty years ago)

yeah, i think that's good advice!

kerry, to my knowledge, no one here has anything against you at all. and, just speaking personally, you've been one of my favorite ilXORs!

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 6 October 2005 15:16 (twenty years ago)


Um, you're lying again.

You are intimating that I haven't. And I have.

I told my brother and sister about the stalking stuff, and they believed it. Oh and...I notice how you avoid anything regarding my father....why is that? And you forged e-mails from my mom too, and you know it. She used an easy password on purpose to see if you'd take the bait. You forged an e-mail telling me to "get my prescriptions filled". So I answered her and spanked the shit out of her, and told her to "fuck off", and you know what? The next time I saw my mother, she made no mention of it, she never told me I needed to "take medication", she never cried or asked for an apology for telling her to "fuck off".

You know why? 'Cos it was a fucking forgery, that's why. And I never got those fucking forgeries again.

You think I don't know my own mother's writing style? She was an English major at Northern Illinois before she dropped out, but who do you think taught me to write? I suppose you'll use that in my next response. I wonder what you'll have to say about my father, 'cos you hate him and you're scared shitless of him...that's why.

I have the e-mails from my brother and sister indicating that they believe me and that they'll help me any way they can. They have NEVER repudiated me. What's next? You want those e-mails? How dare you intimate that they would take your side over theirs. You're slandering and stalking my sister as well, and you ran her out of the building at 4950 N. Marine Drive based on lies.

Oh and...speaking of 4950 N. Marine Drive, how the fuck did that show up in databases on the 'net as my home address? 'Cos I never had a lease there, never had a phone number there, never had a phone bill there, never had a utility bill there....I only had ONE credit card bill sent there ('cos I started using all sorts of addresses in an effort to throw them off), and guess what? It was ChaseManhattan.

I'm not playing your games. And you flat-out say that I haven't talked to them, and I have. You've got a lot of nerve.

That's the game, people - I give them personal information, and they take that, adapt, and base their next volley on it. Let's see what you do with THIS.

Go ahead and call me disruptive, paranoid schizophrenic or whatever.

This is the private dirt that Scientology set up, and then used it against me when I had no choice but to cave. You harass the shit out of someone, and when they break and "see a doctor" or "seek help" or whatever, you seize the opportunity to use that against them.

This is exactly what they don't want....and that's why I have to do it.

When they make a factual error, when I call them out on libel, when they make an accusation they can't prove, and I post the facts....they go back, try again, revise, and come back with a more subdued, polite version of the same intimations...this time using whatever information I've given them.

I've done it in the past, and it's worked for me.

So, oh yeah - I have a brother and a sister. They knew that already, of course, but now I have given them permission to use that information (this is what they think). They're so dumb that they don't realize that there are all sorts of assumptions in the suggestion that I talk to them. At this point, they're just trying to convince themselves that they've "got something". When all else fails, get them to personally disclose.

You just watch this thread. There was some role-playing and gaslighting up above, and that's why I stepped in. 'Cos I found that covert 'KKK' shit on another board, and once, a long time ago, when I worked in Northwestern's Library, a black co-worker joked about my initials being "KKK". That's a "mark". That was bait for them, and now they're pretending they don't know what I'm talking about.

You know I hate to be the center of attention and "disruptive", but it feeds them, and every time I go offline for a while...it gets worse, and I usually end up having "an accident" or something.

So, I am bound by conscience and I have a duty to myself to do this, but I also have to do it to "clear" all of the slanders and make worthless all of the private info they have gathered on me.

Just watch how it works.

Oh, and J - no need for e-mails. I'm feeling fine. The more I play this role they want me to play, the better I feel actually. I guess I am supposed to do this.

simian (dymaxia), Thursday, 6 October 2005 16:41 (twenty years ago)

I'm feeling fine.

That's a relief. Feel better than fine soon.

Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 6 October 2005 20:24 (twenty years ago)

Eric please restrain yourself thnx

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 6 October 2005 20:33 (twenty years ago)

I meant it.

Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 6 October 2005 20:44 (twenty years ago)

Whether you meant it or not, responding doesn't help.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Thursday, 6 October 2005 20:45 (twenty years ago)

For over a year, the military has been spraying the skies throughout America, Canada, and now parts of Europe (including Britain, France, and the Netherlands) with substances that were initially referred to as "mystery contrails" , but later were named "chemtrails" by investigative reporter and author William Thomas. When questioned, military and government officials either deny any knowledge of these sprayings outright or they offer unbelievable and ludicrous explanations that only a moron could believe. Joe Burton has been aggressively investigating and reporting on this story from early on. Apparently he had been too aggressive, because his house had been targeted for direct spraying by low flying, unmarked aircraft. In a story posted Feb. 15, 1999, Joe reports the physical symptoms that his family and his pet have been experiencing from the sprayings. Joe believes that many of these military tankers responsible for the sprayings are remote controlled aircraft, but Al Cuppet (6 years with the US Joint Chiefs of Staff) has told radio talk show host Jeff Rense during interviews on June 1, 1999, May 16, 1999, and May 7, 1999 felt that many of these tanker planes were more likely being flown by foreign pilots, possibly Chinese or Russian.

Some Background
Symptoms from Chemtrail sprayings

A One, Two Punch?

On February 20, 1999, strange "Contrails" were reported over Long Island, NY by 'concerned citizens' who also took photos. These photos reveal the characteristic "X" mark seen in almost all cases of chemtrails. Earlier this year, reports by Ken Welch have been posted on various sites on the Internet. His reports are titled Contrail Spraying of Cities is Real Part 1 , Part II, and Part III These articles chronicle Ken's apprehension and dismay at the discovery that the United States government was brazenly spraying the skies of southern Texas on April 9, 1999 with Chemtrails. Ken has also posted E-mails at his web site that were sent to him in May '99 of reports of sprayings over South Carolina and Indiana . In June, a report from Florida said that sprayings had been going on for weeks over the Ft Lauderdale and Jacksonville areas, including military bases.

It is being reported that people with average or below average immunity are experiencing pneumonia-like respiratory symptoms, while people with stronger immunity are only experiencing slight discomfort for a day or two or no symptoms at all. Some people have gotten very ill and the symptoms seem to keep returning after a short period of improvement. It's possible that some of these sprayings might contain special bioengineered pathogens designed to affect only certain racial groups.

Radio talk show host Jeff Rense has offered the idea that these sprayed pathogens might be part of a Binary weapon system. In other words, a second substance might be required (aerial spraying or substances added to the water supply for example) to bring out the virulent phase of the pathogen, but of course this is only speculation. Rick Malinowski's long and detailed article also suggest the notion of a 2 or 3 part piggy back element to the chemtrail sprayings. My own suspicions are that these sprayings are intended for multiple purposes including low level population reduction (see NWO Population Control), mind control and/or tracking, and to foster weakness and apathy among the general population in anticipation of the New World Order takeover agenda which will likely include the imposition of martial law (a sickly population is a lot more controllable and compliant than a healthy, vigorous one).

William Thomas
William Thomas was the first reporter to attract national attention to the chemtrails issue. He has been interviewed many times on the Art Bell Radio show to discuss the chemtrails story and has many excellent articles and Photos posted at his own web site as well as other locations including-Jeff Rense's Sightings on the Radio . Thomas has concluded that these sprayings are genocidal in nature and are intended to reduce or weaken the general population. In a November '99 interview with Art Bell, Thomas also voiced the idea that there might be a mind control element to the most recent spraying, since many people are reporting mental confusion and depression following recent sprayings. Thomas has reminded radio listeners that the government has had a long history of exposing the public to biological pathogens without their knowledge or consent.
Thomas has also reported that spraying samples have been analyzed and have revealed that many deadly and toxic pathogens have been found including Mycoplasma Fermetens Incognitus (the SAME bioengineered pathogen that Dr Garth Nicholson had discovered in about 45% of the veterans who came down with Gulf War Illness). Thomas found that Mycoplasma, however, was only ONE pathogen among a group of highly toxic biohazard substances analyzed from the chemtrail residues.

Why?
The evidence is obvious and plentiful that these sprayings have been taking place almost daily since the Fall of '98 and many people have gotten sick and undoubtedly some have died from the effects of these pathogen/toxin sprayings, but the $64 question is WHY ?

Some writers have wistfully speculated that the government is trying to vaccinate us against a coming plague of bio terrorist origin. Most people would like to believe that, but the evidence is too strong in the opposite direction. Of course, sprayings might have different intentions for different sectors of the population: Possible population reduction for the weak and immune compromised; possible vaccine protection intended for certain ethnic groups; and possible ID tracking. It's hard to say. Only insiders know the real story, or more probably know some parts of the Real Story.

What most Americans don't realize is that the upper echelons of the United States government is no longer a government "of , by, and for " the people (See the New World Order). The United States government-as with all other major governments of the world-is under the total domination and control of the Illuminati (architects of the so-called New World Order). The Illuminati's plan to reduce the global population by 4 billion people before the year 2050 was laid out in the Global 2000 report assembled by the Carter administration. in the late 70's.

It should be obvious-that in order to REDUCE the world's population from its present size of six billion down to 2 billion (even over a fifty year span) would require that the majority of people now living would have to be exterminated in some way. The amazing thing about the Illuminati is that they place all their ghastly plans right out in the open for everyone to see, if people would only look and read what they are saying.

Debunkers
A genocidal operation of this size and scope would require the Illuminati controllers to promote contravening propaganda in the opposite direction in order to limit or defuse political agitation, possible retaliatory action, and to quell the concerns of the average American who might stumble upon the chemtrail story. It's Standard Operating Procedure for the Illuminati. For example, when Senate committee hearings took place a few years ago (early '90's) on re-examining the Kennedy assassination, just coincidentally an author (and CIA asset) by the name of Gerald Posner, who had recently published a book titled "Case Closed", suddenly appears on the national scene. In his book, Posner claimed unequivocally that Oswald was the lone assassin, that there was no conspiracy involving others, and that the Warren Commission was correct in its original findings. Reviews of his opinions and that of his book received front page coverage throughout mainstream media. Frontline produced a 2 hour "documentary" on Posner's claims which failed to offer opposing views by other Kennedy assassination investigators/authors to refute or take issue with Posner's position.

In 1997, on the 50 year anniversary of the Roswell, New Mexico UFO Crash of 1947, the government offered up a high ranking Air Force officer to make an utter fool of himself on national TV (CNN) by stating that the so called "bodies" of aliens beings-which were recovered from the Roswell crash-were "in fact" really only test dummies that the Air Force had sent aloft to see how they would fare under crash conditions. This orchestrated and staged press conference had already stated that the dummies were deployed in 1954. When one reporter asked this Air Force officer what the connection was between a 1954 test of crash dummies and the 1947 Roswell UFO crash, the stunned officer could only mumble that apparently "time compression" had "taken place". It was a Golden Moment for those of us who rail against the unending stream of lies and unmitigated deception fostered upon the American public by the (corportate/Illuminati controlled) mainstream media and government spokesmen.

[Update January 2002]
The party line from chemtrail debunkers has changed over the past 3 years. Early on, debunkers wanted the public to think that chemtrails were really just ordinary contrails that were persisting longer than usual due to changing atmospheric conditions and similar tripe. Later, debukers needed to create some sort of logical excuse for chemtrails and were peddling the aerial immunization against 'terrorists' biologicals or solar wind protection gambit.

Lately, the current unofficial party line seems to be
1. protection of the ozone layer,
2. secret military radar blanketing technology,
3. aerosol 'vaccinations' of some sort and
4. some vague reference to 'protection from aliens' (??? you got me).

Debunkers will usually offer themselves as experts or authorities on chemtrails and will always give you a good mixture of real info layered in with their hidden propaganda message. Another trait I've noticed from debunkers is the the sheer volume of their presentation coupled with a lot of technical jargon, scientific looking graphs and pictures to bolster the image of scientific validity and depth of investigation. But if you read their 'reports' carefully enough, you can spot the party line. Lastly, debunkers will usually yell "fraud" the loudest for those articles or reporters that hit closest to home where truth is concerned. A good place to start honing your discernment skills is with the highly circulated and often referenced"Chemtrails Report".

Do not assume that you are helpless to do anything

I've photographed chemtrails in my area on many occasions and I've been breathing the fallout from these sprayings right along with everyone else, but I haven't come down with any symptoms or discomfort yet. If you build up (or possess) your immunity to a high enough level, you can resist most any pathogen. There are numerous ways in which people can improve their self defense by learning how to boost immunity.

What to do
Prepare by building up your immune system. A sufficiently strengthened immune system can withstand a far greater biological assault than the designers of these highly virulent "killer microbes" would have the world believe. It's important to remember that ANY lethal biological organism, whether it be a virus, bacteria, fungus, or parasite, has to replicate itself in your body in order to harm you. This includes those weapons grade 'super killer microbes' that Russia, the United States., Israel, Iraq, China, and other countries have developed. The conventional orthodox method to acquire protection against a deadly organism is to administer a vaccine that is specifically tailored with inactivated microbes of the killer bug or fragments of its protein shell. The body produces antibodies against this specific antigen and provides immunity in the event of exposure. Undoubtedly, the designers of these killer bugs and members of the elite who are "inside the loop" have already been vaccinated for their protection. BUT, there are other ways to acquire protection, that the rest of us can utilize.

As stated elsewhere on this site, a sufficiently strengthened immune system can withstand practically any biological assault. I've put together a page called Immunity Boosting which will outline a number of steps you can take to boost your immunity. At the very least, take colloidal silver on a regular basis. Even if you did nothing else to improve your immunity (and you should), colloidal silver will substantially increase your germ fighting capabilities since no bug, even a bioengineered one, can develop a resistance to its germicidal action.

Web sites with in-depth coverage of Chemtrails (posted November 1999)
One of the most articulate, succint and cogent report assembledto date on the chemtrails story comes from Rick Malinowski. Take the time to read his excellent reportage carefully and thoroughly. His story is avialable on the web at: (old url deleted)
http://home.earthlink.net/~wolfmind/ (*Rick's new web site as of 2/27/00)

Other informative and interesting web sites include:
1) http://strangehaze.freeservers.com/index.html
2) http://www.contrailconnection.com/
3) http://www.islandnet.com/~wilco
4) Cliff Carnicom (http://www.carnicom.com/contrails.htm)
Good site for chemtrail infomation, but overly cautious and worried about upsetting The Powers That Be to call a spade a spade. Informative all the same with many good photos.

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 20:49 (twenty years ago)

Whether you meant it or not, responding doesn't help.

My new internet mantra.

Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 6 October 2005 20:56 (twenty years ago)

Suddenly I want to beat the crap out of both of you.

nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 6 October 2005 21:02 (twenty years ago)

Jon, when your fucking hour of need comes, remember how fucking glib you were here.

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Thursday, 6 October 2005 21:14 (twenty years ago)

Are you implying that I am going to have a breakdown?

My hour of need:

Hypoglycemia

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 21:19 (twenty years ago)

No, Jon - I'm saying that life's full of vicissitudes, and there'll surely come a time when you're in a really hard emotional place - many such times, probably, though may you have as few of them as possible! But such times will come, when you're on a sort of out on the ledge, figuratively speaking, and you feel friendless and desperate even if you've got friends around you telling you they're on your side and so on. This sort of experience isn't confined to people who're "having breakdowns"; it's just part of being alive. What I am saying is that when you find yourself suffering in such a moment, as you surely will, I hope that you'll remember for just a second how you behaved here; and I hope that your imagination at that point lets you experience what it might feel like were someone to then repay you in kind.

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Thursday, 6 October 2005 22:55 (twenty years ago)

Dude, I've been there before. I got into hugely serious legal, financial and academic trouble in the middle of winter in Rochester NY.

Fuck off, you don't know who I am.

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 23:06 (twenty years ago)

One knows rather well enough by your actions - long after it becomes clear to pretty much everyone that we're dealing here with a person who's in crisis, you come with the long Chemtrails post. Next time you're in loads of financial trouble, make sure you find somebody to send you a fake but convincing statement of legal action by your bank or something. You will roffle all day, I'm sure.

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Thursday, 6 October 2005 23:18 (twenty years ago)

Do you have a borderline personality?

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 23:23 (twenty years ago)

several!

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Thursday, 6 October 2005 23:24 (twenty years ago)

Irrespective of the rest of this shit, Goddamn it's good to have you back.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 6 October 2005 23:27 (twenty years ago)

thanks Andrew!

Jon I hope you know I'm not like "Jon is permanently evil! fuck that guy!" but you crossed a line upthread, and deserve to be called out for it, and frankly I think you should apologize for it, but since you're now in "fuck you" land I'm guessing it's too late to hope for that

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Thursday, 6 October 2005 23:33 (twenty years ago)

I don't think my actions make a difference, mr moral authority!

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Thursday, 6 October 2005 23:43 (twenty years ago)

for what it's worth i feel pretty bad about being rough upthread. i've seen so much put-on instability in these parts that the real deal took a while to seem alarming.

geoff (gcannon), Friday, 7 October 2005 04:22 (twenty years ago)

to be honest nutrament i think jon's posts were the least of it & you are making a convenient scapegoat out of him

s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 7 October 2005 14:35 (twenty years ago)

i read this morning according to washington post bush's current approval rating with black voters is TWO PERCENT!?!

_, Friday, 14 October 2005 12:27 (twenty years ago)

http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2005/10/simple-sambo-wants-to-move-to-big.html

_, Wednesday, 26 October 2005 18:18 (twenty years ago)

Wow, that's bad. Does it make a difference that Steve Gilliard's black? I'd say it makes a little difference, but not enough for it to not be offensive.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Wednesday, 26 October 2005 18:45 (twenty years ago)

yeah this aint a 'can he say nigga' issue, shit is genuinely racist & hateful

_, Wednesday, 26 October 2005 19:05 (twenty years ago)

three years pass...

obamas record so far is not very progressive or interesting. he gives good speeches- yeah so does trent lott!
― _, Tuesday, October 4, 2005 1:15 PM (3 years ago)

lol ethan

velko, Sunday, 2 November 2008 05:38 (seventeen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.