Chat & Post

BartCop Reader

Contact Us


Online Journal

Bart Cook


Gene Lyons
New Every Wednesday


Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!
.Support Bartcop.com
POBox 54466.... Tulsa,OK 74155 



New to BartCop?

Back Issues


Project 60

Demo Underground

JFK Conspiracy?


Julie Hiatt

Volume 628 - I Think I'm Paranoid

Mirna, you are an opprobrious,lying whore.
sincerely, suarna

Your ad Here

 October 29-30, 2001

  VCR Alert - ABC replaying the Alias premier. Oh, that red hair...

 'SoreLoserman' arrested for mailing white powder

  Click  Here

From: TREVOR206@aol.com

Subject: Republican Response to Late Reagan Papers

BC, I am on a list with my fraternity alumnus from college.  There's a couple hundred on the list.
I often argue with the loud mouth conservatives on there.  I posted the question to the list as to why Bush
keeps delaying the release of the papers.  Here's a  typical response that I've copied and pasted for you...

"Just because things are late does not mean there is any "conspiracy" here.
  Not unless you are watching too much X-files."

 Cute, but wrong.
 There is, without any doubt, a conspiracy here because Bush 41 pardoned the guilty to keep
 the conspiracy from being discovered. That's a fact.

 It's my opinion that Bush threw the 92 election to help bury the secret forever.
 I think Smirk was appointed as payback for Bush throwing 1992 away.
 I doubt the Reagan papers contain a "smoking gun," but they certainly contain clues
 or why would Bush fight so hard to keep documents we own from seeing the light of day?

"Virtually all of Reagan's stuff has been released."

 Good thing they put that "V" word in there.
 It sounds like, "But Officer, your searched virtually the entire car.
 There's no need to search the glovebox, too."

 Why not let the American people decide what's important and what's not?

"Usually, things are released late because there just isn't the organization to take care of
  third tier presidential papers.  There is no reason to think anything big is going on there."

 If that means the Bush people are bungling idiots who can't get the job done, I might buy that.
 But when Ken Starr demanded 400,000 different documents be delivered to him by Monday,
 the right screamed "What's Clinton hiding?" again and again, over and over, again and again.

 ...and Clinton never pardoned anybody to hide anything.

"Don't be paranoid.  Those "files" will come out.  When they do, and there is nothing to it,
  you'll see what a fool you are.  Oh wait, you never see that."

 ha ha

 "Don't be paranoid?"
 When fighting a former(?) head of the CIA?

 ha ha

 Sure, they'll come out after Weak & Stupid leaves office.
 I think we should get the facts before our vote gets stolen a second time.

"You made one hell of a jump to some Big Conspiracy.
  Why don't you tell us what's in the papers so you can say "I told you so" when they come out."

 No, when Bush pardoned Reagan's felons, he shifted that burden from us to him.
 He pardoned those people to keep something hidden.  The press is afraid to ask why.
 Whatever it was, it would've destroyed Reagan's reputation and would've probably caused
 a whole nother round of pardons.

 Why is it the people had a "right to know the facts" when it was Clinton's cock,
 but when it's multiple felonies by dozens of people at the highest levels to arm terrorist nations
 we don't need to bother with all the details?

 Tell those Listboys I'm right here if they ever grow a pair.

 A military base inside Afghanistan,
  that's what Rumsfeld says he's going build

 When they do, I predict the Taliban will get a few miles upwind of the new base
 and unlease a few tons of super-refined anthrax spores.

 What will our boys do?

 Shoot the anthrax spores?
 Pray for rain?
 Track it with futuristic radar?
 Wear space suits 24/7?


From: bushblowsus@yahoo.com

Subject: What a load of horseshit


BC, this has to be the biggest load of horseshit you've ever printed.

Oh, I've printed lots crazier stuff than that - ask around.

Under these rules, then the Masai of eastern Africa ought to be leading the charge of terrorist activities,
since they live (or lived) in a culture where young men are seperated from the village at age 12
and sent off to live with the warriors.

There, they enter into homosexual relationships with older men, some of them as old as their late 20s.
Because they are young, they are subordinate to the will of these older warriors. They live in these
warrior societies until they are 30, at which time they are allowed to return to the village life, get married,
and have a family. Meanwhile, girls as young as 12 are married off to men in their 30s or older.

Yet the Masai have been living this way for thousands of years. So did the Greeks.
Read Socrates and Aristotle and see them talk about their boys.

What disrupts these societies is not their ages-old sexual practices, it is the repressive sexual beliefs
of the Christian missionaries who come in and stigmatize the behaviors they have practiced normally
and healthily for thousands of years. It is the images of rampant sexuality combined with sexual represssion
delivered by western media. It is the foisting off of puritanical western morality upon these people that creates
clashes in their cultures, creates the guilt and victimization this article claims is happening. The writer might
have a pee aitch dee, but he is an utterly clueless homophobe with a right wing agenda to demonize Islamic
cultures so we'll all feel better about bombing children. He used a lot of words to say, basically, this -
"Islam creates an entire population of repressed, self-loathing, suicidal fags."

Jeff Crook

Jeff, I'm not sure what you're saying...
Are you saying that writer is so wrong the idea shouldn't have been read?
Are you saying the writer can't possibly have been right?

I've never lived in a society with out females, so there's no way I can...

Wait, I went to Catholic High schools where they had no women,
but we were to busy building tunnels and trying to escape to worry about,
so I don't know what the camel-humpers do when women are less-than zeroes.
I remember in 1980 the Ayatollah Khomeini (R-Reagan-partner) said it was OK
to have sex with goats. (Female goats only, let's not get weird or anything.)

But, in the middle of your note you seem to say this stuff happens all the time,
while towards the closing of your note, you say it can't happen in Afghanistan .

Perhaps I'm reading with tired eyes...


 "The military is dropping leaflets in Afghanistan that say
   'If you see a square yellow box, that's food.   Open it and eat it.
   But if you see a round yellow cylinder, that's a cluster bomb.
   Don't try to open it or you will die.' "
       -- Aging horse molester Paul Harvey, who apparently didn't get the memo...

 Hey, Mr Ed, is Paul Harvey a patriot?

A Need for Honest Answers

 Isn't it strange that we have to get the news of Mubarak's dissatisfaction with
 the "official" story regarding 9-11 from the MOSCOW Times?

 Click  Here

 The famous address by British Prime Minister Tony Blair that won the support of the British parliament, by his own
 admission,  did not contain sufficient evidence for a British or U.S. court. Most of it had absolutely nothing to do
 with the attacks on New York and Washington on Sept. 11, but merely described the prior and already well-known
 terrorist activities of bin Laden.

 The official version of events leaves such a large number of unanswered questions that even Egyptian President Hosni
 Mubarak, a loyal ally of the United States in the Middle East, could not refrain from voicing certain doubts. Mubarak is
 himself a professional pilot and does not understand how terrorists with minimal flying skills could have steered the planes
 to their targets. The Russian General Boris Agapov, a well-known specialist on Afghanistan, cannot understand how
 bin Laden and the Taliban, with their primitive organization, could have executed such a large-scale act of terrorism;
 he believes that one of the more competent secret services must have had a hand in things. The German Berliner Zeitung
 and the Indian Mainstream asked how the terrorists could have implemented their plan without a single U.S. citizen
 as accomplice.

 Deaf Rush Update
  by R.B. Ham

 Click  Here

Wag The Bush:
Why The Pentagon Spin Of The War Through PR Is Failing
 by Jerry Politex, Bush Watch, 10/29/01 (www.bushwatch.com)

 Click  Here

 Larry Klayman is being a pain for Usurperboy

 Click  Here

From: (withheld)

Subject: Re: Idea for a story from BartCop

Dear Bartcop,

You wrote:

> Reagan/Bush and our military were conspiring against the legally-elected Carter administration
> to doom the "October Surprise" so the hostages could only be "saved" by Saint Reagan months
> after they could've come home if the "October Surprise" had been successful.

> ...but now, we're told to "watch what we say" because it might endanger the troops?
> Why wasn't that good advice 21 years ago?

As you know, one of our mantras has been that a healthy democracy needs honest
history and honest journalism. It has seemed to me for years that the current round of
problems dates back to that period of the late 1970s and early 1980s. But because of
the parallel construction of an aggressive conservative media/propaganda apparatus
and the failure of the Democrats/left-of-center-types to counter it, that history was
grossly distorted and covered up.

So, I'm afraid we're left in that murky world where we half-know important facts and I'm
afraid the October Surprise story remains in that category, despite what we've been able to dig up.
The scorched-earth reaction to that story as well as to the contra-drug stories has become
an object lesson for reporters who are tempted to press too hard for these kinds of secrets.


 "Enron Energy company contributed $1.8 million to the Bush campaign and they got
   a $254 million tax break.   That's a pretty good return on their investment."
    -- Mark Shields, Capital Gang, October 27

  ...and those who didn't give at least a million can go straight to hell.

From: fred@arisart.com

Subject: Say What?

October 29, 2001 from CNN.com
'Calling the Taliban "an illegitimate, unelected group of terrorists," Donald Rumsfeld accused
the organization of using civilians as human shields by placing military equipment in residential areas.
Defending the U.S.-led military campaign against terrorist targets in Afghanistan, Rumsfeld blamed
the Taliban for "every single casualty in this war."'


Seems to me that  Rumsfeld is part of the U.S. version of the group he is decrying...

And as for blaming the Taliban for "every single casualty in this war," I guess it depends
on how far back one goes in a search of cause and effect. From where I stand the blood
is on the hands of Reagan, Bush Sr. and all the criminals they had and/or have in their employ
(Rumsfeld included). The same stain covers the Supreme Court who installed this junta and
the talking radioheads who fomented the hate necessary for people of this ilk to rise to power...


 Important Tequila News

 Click  Here

 Stroke Me, Stroke Me

"You know who I have a lot of faith in?
  Don Rumsfeld and the Chief Joints of Staff."
    -- El Pigbo, last hour Monday

 I think his hearing loss is just part of his stroke.

From: imk-01@home.com

Subject: Short thought

Hello BartCop,

What do you think, what percentage of Lockheed-Martin employees
are republicans who think the government is too big and their taxes too high?

Just a thought.

Ilkka Kokkarinen

Consumer Confidence Hits New Low

 Consumer confidence plummeted like a sack of wet cement as the
 bungling of President Weak & Stupid continued to amaze analysts.
 "President Simp has sapped Americans' optimism about job
 security and the economy," said one Wall Street bond trader.

 Full Sad Story

 The New York-based Conference Board said Tuesday that its
 Consumer Confidence Index sank to 85.5 from 97 in September.
 Analysts were expecting a reading of 96.

"Widespread layoffs and rising unemployment do not signal a
  rebound in confidence anytime soon,'' said Lynn Franco, director
  of the Conference Board's Consumer Research Center. ``With the
 holiday season quickly approaching, there is little positive
 stimuli on the horizon. What we need is the BartCop Tax Plan.''

 The BartCop Tax Plan

>Rebate $1500 to every taxpayer two weeks before Thanksgiving.

> Rebate 10% of any income,  for a total of $1500.
> Families with two workers could get $3000.
> If Dad, Mom and two teenagers are paying taxes on $15,000 or more,
> the family would get a rebate of $6,000 from the federal government.

> Every person with income qualifies. Retired people, people on Social
> Security - anybody with taxable income. What could be more fair?

> Think of the economic benefit.
> It would be the best Christmas ever for millions of families.

 We could maybe still have that "best ever Christmas," if the Failure in Thief
 was looking out for more than just his super-rich billionaire campaign contributors.

 But noooooooooooooo.

   by   Mark Nassar

 Click  Here

From: pauln@adhe.arknet.edu

Subject: Dr. Stanley Grogg

I'm sure the good citizens of K Drag will be planning a reception and parade
upon the courageous Dr. Grogg's return.  (See yesterday's issue)
Will Bartcop provide us first hand coverage from airport to the Williams building reception?

Paul M. Nations

Paul, there's a rumor he's considering a run for the House seat of Steve Largent (R-Jesus Twin)
He could win.

 The Smirk Administration speaks

 Click  Here


 Last night, Dave said the Foul-mouthed bookmobile lady died.

 If you never saw her do what she did to Dave, this won't give you much of idea,
 but this sweet, grandmotherly lady had a mouth worse than Jay of Jay & Silent Bob.

 It was one of the Top Ten hardest laughs I've ever had to work through.
 She did this bit a bunch of times, maybe a dozen, I don't know...

 Each time she'd play a different character, but always with the foulest of mouth.
 Dave would say something totally and completely innocent, like,
 "Excuse me, may I borrow this library book?"

  and the elderly lady would answer,

"No, you can't, you stupid son of a bitch. Only an ignorant cock-sucking motherfucker
  would even ask such a stupid goddamn question in the first place, you asshole prick."

 ha ha

 That's what everyone heard between the sloppy edits and reading her lips,
 because NBC would let the "mother- ---ker" come thru, so you knew what she was saying.
 And when she was done, the gasp of the crowd was big enough to sink the Titanic.

 ...and Dave would stand there - looking shocked after hearing this little old lady's language.

 Seriously, the first or second time you ever saw her do that was hueueueuege.

 ...and don't think it's because I want to hear bad words on TV, that's not the point.
 The point is, even after Paulie's Walnuts has been shot, his language is cleaner than
 the Foul-mouthed Bookmobile Lady, or whatever her official name was.
 You can bet the people in the audience will never forget her...

 ...and poor Dave - this has been a tough stretch for him.

       by Jamie Glazov

  Click  Here

 Socially segregated from women, Arab men succumb to homosexual behavior.
 But, interestingly enough, there is no word for "homosexual" in their culture in the
 modern Western sense. That is because having sex with boys, or with effeminate men,
 is seen as a social norm. Males serve as available substitutes for unavailable women.
 The male who does the penetrating, meanwhile, is not emasculated any more than if
 he had sex with a wife. The male who is penetrated is emasculated. The boy, however,
 is not, since it is rationalized that he is not yet a man.

From: blocked

Subject: it's cheney, he's the one behind all of this


Check this out from "Frontline"

it's from last year during the campaing.  Cheney is the one who thought up the term "homeland defense".
He talks about biological and nuclear attacks against the United States.

"I think about the whole need for homeland defense. If there is an area where we have not done
nearly enough in terms of thinking about our vulnerability as a society--thinking about how an
adversary might want to come at us and attack us--it's in the whole area of vulnerability
that we find here inside our continental borders."


"But think about the possibility of somebody bringing a weapon of mass destruction into
the United States, or detonating a nuclear weapon inside the United States, or releasing
biological or chemical agents. It's not a traditional kind of attack from an adversary from
enemy territory, but it's something that is internally generated.  Or think about attacks on
our intelligence or energy infrastructure. It is important for us to begin to think about how
do we defend against that. How do we collect intelligence against those kinds of threats?"

The man is either psychic or knows too much about what's going on.


Well, compared to President Nosebleed, even Ol' BartCop looks pretty damn sharp.
I just heard on ABC Radio that with this new terrorism threat, Cheney is having to stay
in whatever secret, fortified location they hide him in.

Meanwhile, Weak & Stupid is at the World Series tonight with 50,000 potential attackers,
hogging the spotlight and proving he can toss a ball to the correct base on command.

Please God, protect Dick Cheney and keep our country safe.

U2 on Dave last night
Two of the best three bands inside of a week

Click  Here

Democratic Underground's Top Ten Conservative Idiots

Click  Here

Not sure why, but I have Rocky Raccoon stuck in my head today.

 Read the  Previous Issue

 It had everything.

 Copyright © 2001,  bartcop.com
   Thanks for the fumble, Dude.

Privacy Policy
. .