ElijahRadioProphet

T

The Assassinated Press




"Opinion poles are designed to gauge whether the agitprop of the
corporate state is having the desired narcotic effect on the general
population. The more the average citizen can parrot back what he has
been told by his betters, the more democracy, as defined by the
elite, can be preserved."---Edward Bernays




Pew Research Poll Whores For White House:
Oil Never Mentioned In Survey
By YASO ADIODI
Assassinated Press Writer

January 17, 2003, 9:15 AM EST

WASHINGTON -- Despite months of lies, President de facto Cheney, up
to his elbow in the sphincter of Old Glory's favorite hand puppet,
G.W. Bush in what is rapidly becoming one of Uncle Sam's classic
political fist fucks, has not yet convinced most Americans there is
justification for U.S. military action to depose Iraqi leader Saddam
Hussein, polls show. This despite a complete black out on the word
OIL in the official press as regards Iraq.

"Are the polls asking the right question? Or more accurately are
they whoring the administration WMD line to the exclusion of the
real reason for invading Iraq---OIL?" asked Assassinated Press
pollster Edward Bernays. "I mean, WMD launched against Kurds and
Iranians? How many Americans give a rat's ass about that? Of course,
the results are mixed. Americans are being asked to validate
administration lies through sham polls. Its like being asked to
believe that that cum soaked condom behind your husband's ear is
there because he needed it to reach in and scratch his hemorrhoid
without getting his finger stinky. Lies, even to a group of morons
like the American public, arouse a certain amount of suspicion."

We showed Bernays and his colleague, Ivy Lee, a typical response to
the Pew poll. "I think a little more diplomacy would be in order,"
said Creig Crippen, 84, a retired Air Force veteran from Deland,
Fla. "I don't like this pre-emptive idea. That's imperial. That's
not democratic."

"Now if you asked Mr. Crippen whether the attack on Iraq was over
oil and the little bulb went off and he answered yes, the reason for
the lack of diplomacy would become clear and his insight about
imperialism would be automatically validated. Ockam's Razor? No?"
chimed in pollster Ivy Lee.

The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press poll stated
that there is widespread support for ending Saddam's rule, but that
support is conditioned on proof of a threat from Iraq and on the
support of U.S. allies.

"Here you have the whole scam. The parameters of the so-called
debate are set by the media and the most obvious argument is
eliminated---OIL. Then, after the public is indoctrinated by Dan
Blither and Ted Kripple, the Pew hires go out and measure the
effectiveness of the propaganda via the poll.

Further, they reinforce the agitprop devised by the power elite by
steadfastly refusing to mention the obvious reason for the Cheney
administrations hegemonic moves on Iraq. And just like the
experimental method in the sciences from which all of this is
derived, they work at it and work at it, until they get the result
they want. In the meantime, a kind of pathology based on lies
created by the elite infects the electorate and this pathology,
reinforced by the electorate's own ignorance, is called 'a
divergence of opinion' or 'example of democratic expression.' That's
what we shoot for. A sham democracy of baseless opinions. No wonder
the rest of the world thinks were nuts or worse," said Edward
Bernays.

The poll became public as the United Nations said U.N. inspectors in
Iraq looking for evidence of weapons of mass destruction had
discovered about 11 empty chemical warheads south of Baghdad, a
number equivalent to the holdings of a medium sized scrap dealer in
any state, Arkansas or Texas, anywhere, that depends on
military/industrial contracts to survive, which is practically all
of them.

Two-thirds or more in the Pew poll and other recent polls say they
favor military action against Iraq, but only under circumstances
that didn't smack of an all out grab even though OIL, the only thing
worth grabbing, was never mentioned in the poll. Thus, the depth of
the pathology.

For example, the Pew poll suggested that support for war is strong,
76 percent, if U.N. inspectors find nuclear, biological or chemical
weapons in Iraq. But the support for war dwindled to 14% if it could
be demonstrated that the U.S. was the source of these
weapons. "Sure, it's important to keep OIL out of the equation. That
doesn't serve the interests of the people who write my paycheck,"
answered Pew researcher Kip Themdown. "But its just as important to
cut the American people off from their own history because its
widely believed among the kleptocracy that they couldn't handle the
things that have been done in their names. They actually think they
have a stake in things like the Iraq grab. And that cuts both ways.
If you don't really have the stomach for this kind of wholesale
murder, it can radicalize you, or worse."

When asked by The Assassinated press Americans seemed torn. "What
your implying is that every time I fill the tank of my SUV or
whatnot, am I willing to walk around to the back of the vehicle and
sacrifice an Iraqi baby or whatnot on the rear bumper? I'll have to
think about that. My coke dealer lives all the way over in Langley,"
mused Congressional aid, Alan Slothrop.

The support, according to the Pew poll, is evenly split if they find
no weapons but determine Iraq has the ability to make these weapons.
The numbers go way down when manifests from major U.S. corporations
are shown laying out the arming of Iraq with WMD by this country's
business elite.

Because the OIL reason is so obvious, the public does not buy the
administration's canard that Iraq must prove it does not have these
weapons to avoid a U.S. attack. Almost two-thirds, 63 percent, said
Iraq's failure to prove it does not have weapons would not be a
sufficient reason for a war.

More than half, 93 percent, say the president does not have the
mental or moral capacity to explain clearly what's at stake to
justify the United States using military force to end Saddam's rule,
according to the poll. "We feel that if we went to the American
people and said 'Look. This is about OIL and enriching the people
who put us in power,' that we could spin it so that it would not
threaten our plans to snack on Iraq," said Secretary of Defense Don
Rumsfeld. "We've demonstrated that we can sell these schmucks
anything. Even the amoral and criminal truth. But that's not our
way. We prefer the challenge of hawking the immoral and criminal
lie. It just feels right."

The number who say Bush is incapable of thought has grown since his
September address to the United Nations. Those who generally agree
with Bush's position say that his ignorance and stupidity absolves
him of responsibility for his actions.

"That's as American as nipple pie," crowed White House spokes
person, Ari Fleischer. "One way to justify your criminality is to
say you were just incapable of knowing what you were doing. Bush has
got that luxury. He's an idiot. But I wouldn't try to sneak that by
the Rehnquist/Scalia/Pickering/Frist/Lott lot," he quipped making a
gesture as though he was a poor, black or hispanic, retarded,
juvenile being hanged.

At the White House, spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush continues to
work on his Cheetah impressions.

"But if Saddam Hussein will not surrender his OIL peacefully and it
becomes necessary to disarm him by force, then what we would be
doing would not be disarming a real and growing threat, but
liberating Iraqi OIL for our betters.," McClellan said in a moment
of shroom induced candor.

The Pew poll of 1,218 dolts was taken Jan. 8-12 and has an error
margin of plus or minus 630,000,897 percentage points depending on
how the questions are worded, if alcohol and blunts are served, or,
as in Orange County, if cash remuneration is stuffed in the elastic
band of your underpants.

"I believe that this is an action that is due because of Saddam
Hussein's complete lack of respect for the international oil
community and their investors," said Philip Pederson, 65, a sales
manager from Wheatland, Calif. He is a Vietnam veteran so he knows a
bit first hand about imperialist wars.

"Saddam has been dissin' us for too long. We gonna bus' a cap in his
ass. But firs' I got's ta gits the 3rd Infantry and the 1190th
between me and dem bullets," is the way Mobil/Exxon CEO, Lee
Raymond, put it at a recent meeting of the board of the OIL giant.

Though the president has been making his case against Iraq in front
of the mirror since September, White House officials say the heavier
lifting doesn't begin until Jan. 28, when Bush has to know how to
read his State of the Union address. That's one day after U.N.
weapons inspectors issue a preliminary report on what the Cheney
administration recommends that they found in Iraq in order to
maintain their health and that of their families.

The drumbeat for war continues Jan. 31, when Bush meets at Camp
David with his staunchest anti-Iraq ally, British Prime Minister
Tony Blare and they both strip down to the scivvies, blow each
other, do a chocolate sandwich with Colon Powell, and perform a war
dance for the amusement of their international investment handlers.
If Bush is told he has chosen to go to war, whenever that might be,
there would be a final, Oval Office address in which he would be
told what reasons to spell out, White House officials say. This task
may be more difficult than it appears. On a dry run for the address,
Mon[k]ey Boy actually began 'spelling out' every word of the speech
handed to him. It took him 6 hours to 'spell out' the 4 minute
speech.

Some in the public will be skeptical no matter what the president
tells them about Iraq.

"I think they've made it very clear," said Rachel Wheatley, 23, of
Washington, "that they're not really interested in what the
inspectors have to say."

"Fuck the inspectors," countered Secretary of Defense, Don Rumsfeld.

my copy right or wrong The Ass. Press 2003