Mike Ruppert's Beyond Bush Part II is now out.

[JohnyCanuck]

As some DUers are already aware back in July Mike Ruppert publisher of www.fromthewilderness.com published an article "Beyond Bush Part 1" which suggested that GWB could have been setup to do the dirty work of invading Iraq and establishing a US military presence in Iraq but once the shine came off the rose, then Dubya could be dumped and another figurehead appointed to replace him in order to present a kinder, gentler face to the world for PR purposes. However, the plans would be in place to proceed with the neo-con type agenda under the premise that as long as we've invaded and are stuck in Iraq we might as well make the best of it.

Today Ruppert released Part II in the Beyond Bush series. I'll warn you up front that he goes after the front runners in the Democratic Party as being compromised by the system and with connections to the same string pullers he believed pulled the necesary strings to get Dubya and his gang into power, i.e. CFR, Bilderbergers etc. If that sounds too :tinfoilhat: for you, so be it. But I must say that after reading his assesment of what has occured to date, the problems we are facing (from Peak Oil to Black Box Voting) I believe he is on track. If a Dem does win the election in 2004, it will be interesting to see how accurate his predictions turn out to be.


There has been ample time to get a closer look at the various "early" candidates seeking to replace George W. Bush in the White House. We emphasize the word "early". A critical look at the Democratic contenders -- especially latecomer Wesley Clark -- reveals past behavior suggesting wolves in sheep's clothing or -- in the case of Dennis Kucinich -- campaign styles that promise little more than feel-good futility as insiders wonder if his campaign is being derailed from within. Yet, all this drama in an electoral environment, where mandatory voting software is hopelessly compromised, is little more than a tempest in a teapot. All told, it looks as if there is nothing much going on that gives grounds for enthusiasm or hope--especially as one focuses only on the "electoral" process.

More alarming, however, is the fact that attention is being diverted to wasted efforts, rather than to those that might make a real difference. In the final analysis, what we can expect after George Bush is a continuation of what came before and during George Bush. For those with their eyes open, there will be little difference in the outcome. Bush was not a marked historical or policy shift. The Clinton administration set the stage for 9/11 perfectly. George W. Bush is merely the captain of a brutal special team sent onto the field to make a few essential plays consistent with a larger plan. And if I have to spend the four years from January 2005 fighting deluded, guilty, self-aggrandizing progressives who want to convince us that things will be better under a Democrat, the same way I fought the current administration, that's exactly what I'll do. It is, after all, how FTW got its start.

And I will say -- one more time for the record-- that the destabilization and balkanization of Saudi Arabia with 25% of known oil reserves remains near the top of the main agenda. All of that oil lies in a very small area of land near the east coast of a country that we already have surrounded. All "we" need do is convince the American people of Saudi responsibilities for 9/11 in a way that will make convenient intervention tasteful to a war-weary American public that just doesn't get the concept of perpetual war. Then the US will help the Saudi regime crack from the inside and threaten regional stability, as the pretext for the seizure. In my opinion, the next president will be the one who can convince the powers that be that he can pull off that agenda, and sell it to the American people and the world.

Beyond Bush Part II

[booksenkatz]

1. Thanks for the heads-up

I don't know if I'm ready for Part 2, but I'll take a deep breath and plunge in! Part 1 scared the living hell outta me, if even an ounce of it is true, we are well and truly doomed.

[KFC]

2. Ruppert: a very credible source

[mojowork_n]

3. Such wounding, devastating wit...

...thanks for the link to your self-portrait.

While most people (automatically, I'd say) maintain a degree of caution about the ideas and opinions expressed on Ruppert's web site, no one can say he's afraid to connect the dots, in interesting and challenging ways.

I'm glad he's out there. (However far out in space some people believe him to be.)

[LibertyorDeath]

4. Ruppert kicks. We need more like him. The truth shall set you free !

[hang a left]

5. Read it about an hour ago. Very depressing. Talks about the 2004

election and that the dem candidates aren't gonna stop what is goin on. Talks about election fraud in the California Recall, and the test for 2004. Lots of stuff on CFR, Bildebergs, and trilateral commission. Very scary. Want to move to Baja and grow corn.

[SpiralHawk]

6. I was really troubled by Ruppert's revelations about

Daniel Sheehan in the Kucinich campaign.

Can you spell m-o-l-e ?

[birdman]

10. A mole in the Kucinich campaign ?

Isn't that kind of like stealing the signs of the Detroit Tigers
or swiping the Arizona Cardinals playbook?

[arendt]

13. Danny "Christic Institute" Sheehan - nothing but trouble

Ruppert is right about this guy. I watched him screw up
that whole Nicaraguan-Contra lawsuit. He could have
outed The Enterprise, but he blew it. At best he is
a granstanding idiot, at worst he is exactly what Ruppert
thinks he is.

The fact that this clown is a major player in Kucinich's
campaign is bad news for Dennis. I thought Dennis
was smarter than that.

Kucinich supporters: you should really check out Danny
Sheehan. I have nothing against Dennis except that he
is not my candidate. For the good of the what little genuine
leftism there is in the US, please get rid of Danny Sheehan.

arendt

[Beam Me Up]

7. Everyone progressive needs to read this article

whether you agree with him or not. I think Ruppert is on target and, unlike most folks out there who have a clue, not afraid to tell it like it really is.

Why is that important? Because, if you believe a lie and you operate from that lie, then your efforts are doomed from the start. If we are going to survive as a species, we have to face the realties that are right in front of us. At the moment we are by default allowing immensely powerful moneyed and vested interests to make decisions and power plays that effect everyone on this planet.

Even if under the guise of Democracy, this is fascism. Global fascism.

If Mike Ruppert is right, and I believe he is far more right than wrong, then we have to face this reality. AND ANYONE WHO WANTS TO THINK OF HIM OR HERSELF AS A PROGRESSIVE MUST COME TO TERMS WITH THE REALITY HE IS PRESENTING. We must begin to build alternative geopolitical economic strategies even as the Age of Oil comes crashing down around us.

:kick:

[JohnyCanuck]

8. Well said beam_me_up.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

if you believe a lie and you operate from that lie, then your efforts are doomed from the start. If we are going to survive as a species, we have to face the realties that are right in front of us. At the moment we are by default allowing immensely powerful moneyed and vested interests to make decisions and power plays that effect everyone on this planet.

[gristy]

9. Glad this is finally out.

And I am also glad that Ruppert has apparently recovered from his health emergency this summer (I forget what it was). He is a resource our country cannot afford to lose.

Beyond Bush Part II is an excellent but VERY long article. I recommend printing it out and reading it in a couple sittings.

[Thoth]

11. Certainly thought provoking

I appreciate what Mike Ruppert does while not agreeing with him on everything. I do agree that high levels of the Bush cabal knew something big was coming re 9-11 and did less than nothing to prevent it. Shadowy elements of the CIA may also have very well assisted in the planning and logistics. But I think the plot lies more squarely with the neo-cons, and not necessarily with the Bilderberg group or some other transnational entity, though I could very well be wrong.

I agree we're at or near peak oil and that this is the main factor behind recent US foreign policy. However, I'm not quite willing to give up all hope for effective political opposition, on many of the fronts Ruppert mentions, by the Democratic Party, if someone like Dean (or better yet Kucinich - though he's more of a long shot) gets the nomination. At least Dean and some of the other Dems are not totally in the pocket of the Sharon Likud party and by extension may be less willing to do Israel's bidding via more proxy wars in the middle east. Even if Dean, Kucinich or other candidates suspect US government complicity in the 9-11 attacks, they know it would be the kiss of death if they brought it up in the campaign. I don't think any official investigation will ever get to the bottom of what really happened on that day.

I am more suspicious of Clark for some of the reasons Ruppert states. He seems more in bed with the powers that be. Nonetheless, the first step in taking our country back is to get rid of Bush. If Bush stays in power there can be no progress on any other front anyhow. We'll still have our work cut out for us no matter who gets in, but at least there'll be more of a fighting chance if Bush is gone. The second American revolution of regaining govt of the people, for the people and by the people will not take place overnight. Step one is to get rid of Bush! We can work on the other 99 steps once that is done.

[truth2power]

12. I printed it out and read it.

He paints a pretty grim picture. I, too, think he is more on target than not.

His assessment of George Soros is interesting:

"Major power brokers like international financier George Soros are backing moves to remove Bush, and Soros is opening his sizeable checkbook to do it. I was dismayed recently to see that a board member of the ostensibly independent Pacifica radio network advocated direct solicitation of funds from both Soros and the CIA-connected Ford Foundation. Soros, who has or had business ties with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger, the Carlyle Group, the CIA's Radio Free Europe, Wesley Clark, Richard Allen and George W. Bush (through Harken Energy), is not a friendly, tree-hugging, progressive out to save the world. He is the fist in a velvet glove to the Neocons' baseball bat across the nose."

[Beam Me Up]

14. Soros is a "liberal"

in the sense that he believes global domination by Capitalist elites can best be served by sustaining "liberal" Capitalist societies:

cf:

Soros warned that hyper-capitalism might become its own worst enemy. Free-market capitalism did not always coincide with liberal democracies.

http://www.disinfo.com/site/displayarticle274.html

[cthrumatrix]

15. we have been had repug vs dem.... liberal vs conserv....we lose

this is not news to those that have followed david icke or earlier messages from ruppert

big business and those that control politicians always win

[Pastiche423]

16. Kucinich supporters?

Were you aware of Daniel Sheehan and what part does he play in Kucinich's campaign?


I've got a long way to go to finish this article, but I'm listening a little closer due to my exact same reaction as Ruppert's when he heard that Michael Moore was supporting clark. ;-)

[OneBlueSky]

17. not bad points to consider when selecting a candidate . . .

"While so many people are getting excited about one candidate or another, FTW has remained firm. We will not endorse any candidate who does not address all of our issues. These include:

- Peak Oil and Gas
- US Government Complicity in 9/11
- The Criminal Fabrication of Intelligence Justifying the Iraqi Invasion
- More Than $3.3 Trillion in Taxpayer Money Stolen From the US Treasury
- Repeal of the Patriot Act, Mandatory Vaccination Laws, and Protection of Civil Liberties"

seems that Kucinich is the only current candidate that's spoken out about at least some of these issues . . . the others certainly know about them, which to me means that they're as complicit as the Repubs in covering them up . . . it's the failure to address issues like these (and a few more I can think of) that has caused me not to support any particular candidate . . . probably vote for DK in the primary, but Ruppert's point about it not making any difference who's elected is something that I've come to believe more and more . . . sad but true, I fear . . .

[maggrwaggr]

18. I liked part 1 better, but kicking nonetheless

He sorta lost me with his diatribes on the democratic candidates -- it's obvious he's letting his personal preferences get in the way of his thinking.

I do like his thinking, however. Seems he's really onto something.

Certainly would explain why the institutionalized Dems were so against Dean when he came blowing out of nowhere. How dare he, he's not part of the game, he's NOT supposed to be here.

It makes me like Dean all the more, actually. We HAVE to get this Israel/Washington thing done away with, it's a freaking mess and just corrupt as all hell.

He seems just plain paranoid about Clark. I think he's wrong about Clark.

We need fresh blood, someone from the outside. We need the whole damn mess of the institutionalized professional politicos to get swept away in a big voter flood.

Oh yeah, elections are rigged, they're our ultimate optiate. Democracy is a sham, our loaves of bread tossed to us in the gladitorial stadium. SHIT. Now what?

[DUreader]

19. kick

[Dover]

20. Ruppert seems to be having the conversation with Kucinich

about Sheehan that he was unable to have in person. I guess if Kucinich gets the FTW material, he or his staff will probably see this.

I agree with Ruppert that the powers that be are fully entrenched and that most people, regardless of party, are completely caught up in what is actually a broken, or rigged system. As for his arguments, some of them seem rather weak. But it's clear who the political "insiders" are that are part of that entrenched group. And like any exclusive club, they won't allow any outsiders in who don't play by their rules or share their values and goals.

It also seems quite plausible that the Democrats (the Bushlite variety) have every intention of continuing in the same basic direction as Bush, and that the PNACers were just the hired thugs to do the dirty work. I agree with this because, while the Dems give a lot of lip service to their supposed differences and outrage with GOP actions, their actions tell another story.

[Wonk]

21. kick

[Tinoire]

22. Sad thoughts

1. This fills in a few details I was unaware of

2. This somewhat excuses Kerry

3. This confirms my analysis that Bush is definitely out. When someone like Soros monetarily destabilized Ukraine, Indonesia, Malaysia, and who pushed for the Yugoslavia war (guess who now owns the dabulous Trepca mines as well as other wealth-producing Yugoslavian treasures) starts wringing his hands saying that Bush has got to go, you know his reasons of doing it out of the goodness of his heard are lies, lies and damned lies. People like Soros NEED Bush II Inc out because that inarticulate frat boy has exposed and jeopardized their game. Bush is out. The problem is now who is in... Who does Soros and and rest of the CFR want in?

3. George W. Bush may have been set up - much as Lyndon Johnson was in Vietnam - to create an unwinnable war for the benefit of globalized monetary interests whose objective is the destruction of the US as a nation-state, while at the same time securing a top spot for US-based corporations in an increasingly globalized and energy-hungry economy. ((I think this is obvious.)) More alarming, however, is the fact that attention is being diverted to wasted efforts, rather than to those that might make a real difference. In the final analysis, what we can expect after George Bush is a continuation of what came before and during George Bush. For those with their eyes open, there will be little difference in the outcome. Bush was not a marked historical or policy shift. The Clinton administration set the stage for 9/11 perfectly. George W. Bush is merely the captain of a brutal special team sent onto the field to make a few essential plays consistent with a larger plan. And if I have to spend the four years from January 2005 fighting deluded, guilty, self-aggrandizing progressives who want to convince us that things will be better under a Democrat, the same way I fought the current administration, that's exactly what I'll do.

<snip>

the destabilization and balkanization of Saudi Arabia with 25% of known oil reserves remains near the top of the main agenda. All of that oil lies in a very small area of land near the east coast of a country that we already have surrounded. All "we" need do is convince the American people of Saudi responsibilities for 9/11 in a way that will make convenient intervention tasteful to a war-weary American public that just doesn't get the concept of perpetual war. Then the US will help the Saudi regime crack from the inside and threaten regional stability, as the pretext for the seizure. In my opinion, the next president will be the one who can convince the powers that be that he can pull off that agenda, and sell it to the American people and the world.

<snip>

Major power brokers like international financier George Soros are backing moves to remove Bush, and Soros is opening his sizeable checkbook to do it. <snip> Soros, who has or had business ties with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger, the Carlyle Group, the CIA's Radio Free Europe, Wesley Clark, Richard Allen and George W. Bush (through Harken Energy), is not a friendly, tree-hugging, progressive out to save the world. He is the fist in a velvet glove to the Neocons' baseball bat across the nose.

Soros, a member of both the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderberger Group, also sits on the World Economic Forum with many Rockefeller interests. http://globalresearch.ca/articles/TAL307A.html.>

<snip>

DEMOCRATIC PARTY DUPLICITY - LOOKING AT THE CANDIDATES

Excellent analysis!

5. ALLELUIA MIKE RUPPERT for telling it like it is about Kosovo!

the reasons for that invasion were as fabricated as were the reasons for Bush's invasion of Iraq. For weeks, the American people were bombarded by warnings about mass graves containing tens of thousands of bodies. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and there were no mass graves holding tens of thousands of bodies ever found in Kosovo. Yet, as we documented in 1999 using reports from Jane's Intelligence Weekly and The Christian Science Monitor, in the process of conducting that war Clark made safe the KLA's control over 70% of the heroin reaching Western Europe. ((sound like Afghanistan??))

ACXIOM IS A JACKSON STEPHEN'S FIRM???!! HOLY SHIT!! Well, everyone already knows what I think of both those firms- I had no idea they were that related. This is looking worse for Clark. NO MORE CFR candidates!!!

On Dean. Fully agree. Especially like the "he may be someone the elites regard as not sufficiently controllable". The elite likes him because he has and will play their game but they would prefer someone a bit more controllable.


On Kerry: A key sign that Kerry might be the anointed one came for me when George W. Bush's chief counter-terrorism adviser Rand Beers resigned in a dramatic moment last June, in protest over Bush's handling of the war on terror and his headlong rush into Iraq. Beers immediately became Kerry's senior foreign policy advisor, as Kerry continued to state that he would improve on and expand the war on terror. Beers' protestations concealed what I considered to be a much more sinister objective, the placement of a key, hands-on operative to manage a smooth transition of power and a continuation of secret policy. Beers, who had served in national security roles for three Republican administrations, was the man who had replaced Lt. Col. Oliver North after North was fired in 1987 during the Iran-Contra scandal. WHY HAS NO ONE AT DU BROUGHT THIS UP? Or did I miss it?

Lieberman: Good DU-ish summation: "He's been almost a better Neocon than some of the Neocons."

And now my guy, Kucinich: ((I am almost afraid to read this because so far I have agreed 100% and thought he was even a little...kind))

But he has not spoken of Peak Oil and Gas, nor has he made any effort to pursue the glaring unanswered questions of 9/11. Sadly I agree but he's done and asked waaaaay more than the rest of them put together.

Now this Sheehan bit... Wow. This is the last person I want anywhere near Kucinich- giving him "advice". Sheehan MUST GO!!! Going to bed... This was fascination but heavy reading. Much food for thought here!

Thank you for posting this!