Anyone have any memories of Mills Lane?

[max baer]

- - Would've been widely respected for getting out of Vietnam, but Dlckie had a paranoia complex exacerbated by his position of power. He was always gonna melt in that position.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qPUJhy0Dz4 queeny your fav song!!!
images.jpg queeny and his mates looking for hippies to drown. only kidding i love your wit my friend,

[max baer]

- - What he did was legitimize Mao's China who benefitted the most by adopting Western technology and better diplomatic relations.

Nixon could've coasted on the rest of his presidency and gone down as a decent prez but for his tragic flaw of congenital paranoia that created that looney plumbers gang that broke into Dem Headquarters to mine their info. He was already well ahead in the polls before that idiocy, and even won his reelection after the idiocy had been exposed.

He won his reelection after claims about watergate were published but few people believed woodward and bernstein till later but you are correct that it was insane of nixon to create watergate even though these antics have always gone on at lower levels of government.

[Willie Pep 229]

https://www.brookings.edu/books/the-professor-and-the-president/

Willie do you really believe that they could have transformed healthcare in america?
I really feel that as history passes and the clock ticks on that Nixon has slowly become more respected by the wider public? Am I wrong?
In the UK many many people hated Thatcher but as the decades have rolled on quite a few have begun to see that she did a lot of good to the UK. Some up north would kill me for saying so such as the families of coal miners.
I am not saying that she has become a hero but she was strong and she did make the UK prosperous and proud again after the terrible 1970's blackouts and tensions.
But do you really believe that those two unlikely bedfellows could have transformed health care across the whole of the USA????? Is it even possible in your country??
The NHS has become impossible to work due to the wastage of funds and the huge growth in our population.
I was just noticing your line about how nixon and Moynihan could have transformed america's healthcare.
Was that EVER really within their abilities?

That is a good question. I am not sure. It is part of why I believed, Nixon believed, he needed the landslide win in 1972.

At that time there was not the exaggerated fear of 'socialism' in the political temperament as there is today. Post war America still believed in, and looked to, government for its answers.

But not only was a national healthcare plan going to be an uphill battle, he was also talking about a 'negative income tax bill' that would have replaced welfare as we know it. That was going to be as big a political battle as the healthcare plan.

Nixon was a great administrator, and a reasonably good politician, but he lacked a moral compass. So while he usually did his job well, his character failings were just unacceptable. (Not like today, it seems.)

The Watergate cover-up was just the final staw in a long, long history of unethical behavior.

Today it is easy to forget the flaw, and look back on his presidency as being successful, but we have to ask do we want amoral men leading us, even if they are proficient?

[Willie Pep 229]

He won his reelection after claims about watergate were published but few people believed woodward and bernstein till later but you are correct that it was insane of nixon to create watergate even though these antics have always gone on at lower levels of government.

Nixon didn't engineer "Watergate," his crime was covering it up.

John Mitchel his attorney general resigned and formed CREEP (Committee to Re-Elect the President). They had a sick sense of humor about themselves. They broke the law.

People don't realize that Nixon did not cheat during the general election against McGovern.

They cheated during the D emocratic primaries, trying to force the very left leaning McGovern onto the D emocratic ticket by destroying all the moderate D emocratic candidates. And they succeeded.

In fact when the "Plumbers" (Liddy and crew) were caught in the Watergate hotel they were taking 'bugs' out of the phones not putting them in. (Phones which were scheduled to be returned to AT&T.)

The D e m o c r a t s were disassembling their Primary Offices and were retooling for the general election. The 'bugs' had to come out before the phones were returned.

As I said before, Nixon's crime was cover-up. If you get the chance read the (never used) Impeachment charges (they're on line).

You will see that the break-in was not important. It was his preversion of the FBI and CIA, whom he blocked from investigating the break-in, and his use of the IRS as a political weapon, as to why he needed to go.

[billeau2]

Nixon didn't engineer "Watergate," his crime was covering it up.

John Mitchel his attorney general resigned and formed CREEP (Committee to Re-Elect the President). They had a sick sense of humor about themselves. They broke the law.

People don't realize that Nixon did not cheat during the general election against McGovern.

They cheated during the D emocratic primaries, trying to force the very left leaning McGovern onto the D emocratic ticket by destroying all the moderate D emocratic candidates. And they succeeded.

In fact when the "Plumbers" (Liddy and crew) were caught in the Watergate hotel they were taking 'bugs' out of the phones not putting them in. (Phones which were scheduled to be returned to AT&T.)

The D e m o c r a t s were disassembling their Primary Offices and were retooling for the general election. The 'bugs' had to come out before the phones were returned.

As I said before, Nixon's crime was cover-up. If you get the chance read the (never used) Impeachment charges (they're on line).

You will see that the break-in was not important. It was his preversion of the FBI and CIA, whom he blocked from investigating the break-in, and his use of the IRS as a political weapon, as to why he needed to go.

Your absolutely right. The thugs at the highest levels work much like the thugs who will shoot you in an alley... The president is there to protect, and can get away with damn near anything provided he does not try to challenge the authority of another government institution that has its providence (Not divine providence by any means)... It is even occult, in that spiritual districts you see from Creole, Puerto Ricans etc, define the landscape of appeasement to demons, in very similar language.

Kennedy was killed for a transgression including against the Luciferian elements of the mob...The father's son(s) did not hold to the deal Joe made... And that was not including Kennedy's challenge to the military industrial complex. Nixon challenged the districts, the power controlled by the CIA and FBI. Prior to? Nobody cared about Nixon's crooked ways lol.

I know this sounds hair brained (the above) but it comes from looking at a lot of theories and making a judgement.

[max baer]

So to put it simply the president and his men kept digging a deeper and deeper hole for themselves from something not that incredibly serious but made so by their denials.
I don't know where I get my information from, it must be deepthroat my garage freak!!!!??
presidents.jpg

[max baer]

That is a good question. I am not sure. It is part of why I believed, Nixon believed, he needed the landslide win in 1972.

At that time there was not the exaggerated fear of 'socialism' in the political temperament as there is today. Post war America still believed in, and looked to, government for its answers.

But not only was a national healthcare plan going to be an uphill battle, he was also talking about a 'negative income tax bill' that would have replaced welfare as we know it. That was going to be as big a political battle as the healthcare plan.

Nixon was a great administrator, and a reasonably good politician, but he lacked a moral compass. So while he usually did his job well, his character failings were just unacceptable. (Not like today, it seems.)

The Watergate cover-up was just the final staw in a long, long history of unethical behavior.

Today it is easy to forget the flaw, and look back on his presidency as being successful, but we have to ask do we want amoral men leading us, even if they are proficient?

I often wonder if being amoral is completely inherent in someone wanting to lead a country. But then Ob am a may disprove that idea!

[max baer]

Your absolutely right. The thugs at the highest levels work much like the thugs who will shoot you in an alley... The president is there to protect, and can get away with damn near anything provided he does not try to challenge the authority of another government institution that has its providence (Not divine providence by any means)... It is even occult, in that spiritual districts you see from Creole, Puerto Ricans etc, define the landscape of appeasement to demons, in very similar language.

Kennedy was killed for a transgression including against the Luciferian elements of the mob...The father's son(s) did not hold to the deal Joe made... And that was not including Kennedy's challenge to the military industrial complex. Nixon challenged the districts, the power controlled by the CIA and FBI. Prior to? Nobody cared about Nixon's crooked ways lol.

I know this sounds hair brained (the above) but it comes from looking at a lot of theories and making a judgement.

Bill, I have noticed something in your posts and wanted to ask you, do you have an interest in the occult?
Perhaps you are just talking in sociological and historic terms but I have a keen interest in all things other worldly and wondered if you are well read in things to do with the occult such as New Orleans voodoo?
Just that i noticed here and previously you mention the occult in your historic take on politics and society and sport.
Is there an interest of yours?

[billeau2]

Bill, I have noticed something in your posts and wanted to ask you, do you have an interest in the occult?
Perhaps you are just talking in sociological and historic terms but I have a keen interest in all things other worldly and wondered if you are well read in things to do with the occult such as New Orleans voodoo?
Just that i noticed here and previously you mention the occult in your historic take on politics and society and sport.
Is there an interest of yours?

Good question! I do not have a desire in to use occult power as a distortion... But having studied Sikh Yoga and old Japanese martial arts, the occult is part of the landscape at a certain level. I will tell you how: Certainly you have Shugyo... a time, as a young man where you go into the mountains to meet a demon, or, die trying. Of course this is not literal, but often involves a great test of will and spirit... Today? the equivalent might be to get in the ring and **** around to toughen oneself... Then you have the obvious and the hidden aspects of things... In older Japanese arts this means, a gesture might have an obvious function, but when you explore it, it has other hidden applications. For example, one art has characters that mean "bone breaking" but a more occult (hidden) reading that only some understood would be "a knack" when we have a knack for something we know it in our bones.

We see this in our own language: What is a "birth?" People birth, and ships birth... the occult, hidden here is the relationship of water to the power of material... a person, a ship.

So my interest is is what is hidden from our everyday experience, not as someone who wants to use a source of power with karma attached to it! lol. I first got interested when studying diffrent conspiracy theories. Putting things together... I learned to respect these "connections" and not to automatically discount people who noted them.

[Kid Cauliflower]

Good question! I do not have a desire in to use occult power as a distortion... But having studied Sikh Yoga and old Japanese martial arts, the occult is part of the landscape at a certain level. I will tell you how: Certainly you have Shugyo... a time, as a young man where you go into the mountains to meet a demon, or, die trying. Of course this is not literal, but often involves a great test of will and spirit... Today? the equivalent might be to get in the ring and **** around to toughen oneself... Then you have the obvious and the hidden aspects of things... In older Japanese arts this means, a gesture might have an obvious function, but when you explore it, it has other hidden applications. For example, one art has characters that mean "bone breaking" but a more occult (hidden) reading that only some understood would be "a knack" when we have a knack for something we know it in our bones.

We see this in our own language: What is a "birth?" People birth, and ships birth... the occult, hidden here is the relationship of water to the power of material... a person, a ship.

So my interest is is what is hidden from our everyday experience, not as someone who wants to use a source of power with karma attached to it! lol. I first got interested when studying diffrent conspiracy theories. Putting things together... I learned to respect these "connections" and not to automatically discount people who noted them.

Do you feel you could you break any man's grip on your throat?