Skip to main content

paranoid theory of the week [supplementary] :: who's invading texas now?

so it seems i might have spoken a little prematurely about yesterday's paranoid theory having died down. while it does seem that people aren't quite so concerned about the top secret except for truckers and random passers-by chinese military base in mexico, there is indeed a plan afoot to invade texas in the almost immediate future.

what evil foreign power is behind this imminent incursion? the united states. wait, what?

well, it's not the united states so much as barack obama and his cronies. that would be the united states government and their army, who are already situated right in texas and no one has noticed. at least, no one has thought of it as menacing, because those military bases are cleverly disguised as military bases of the country that texas is actually in. [no time for grammar here! it's an emergency!]

the plan is apparently to place texas under martial law. why? we don't have time for logical questions here!

of course, there's no way that the largest and best equipped army could subdue one of its member states all on its own, so the obamadministration [no time for spaces between words either!] has joined forces with the mexican army, the mexican drug cartels and isis, all of whom are apparently operating out of a place just a few miles away from el paso.

you know what's just a few miles away from el paso? mexico. and the mexican army is like right there as if they own the place. clearly, the only purpose that the mexican army could have being deployed inside one of the most violent areas of the world and a battleground for vicious drug cartels is invading texas.

yesterday, i characterized the conspiracy theory that the chinese army had a huge base inside mexico as being "strictly for the hardcore". and clearly, the idea that there's been a foreign power on mexican soil [other than the united states] for over a decade is completely preposterous, which is why even die hard conspiracy buffs don't tend to believe it. the idea that obama, isis and mexican drug cartels are about to place texas under martial law, however, is completely acceptable and boasts at least one extremely high profile believer: texas governor wayne "greg" abbott, who's concerned enough that he's mobilized the national guard to keep an eye on these american military installations in his state.

apparently the smoking guns for this theory are literally smoking guns, because there are mexican drug lords and islamic terrorsts running around with american military weapons. it's not like you can get those just anywhere, people. there's no black market for weaponry. [note :: the author of this blog is not responsible for what happens to your brain if you click that last link. you're on your own. like texas.] there's also the matter of several wal-marts that have been closed and are just sitting there, as if they're all innocent. [ok, quite honestly, if i were going to train an insurgent army, an abandoned wal-mart is exactly the place i'd choose to go. i've said too much.]

the other big deal is that this story has the backing of the king of conspiracy theorists, alex jones. and here he is interviewing former congressman and presidential candidate ron paul on the subject earlier this week. [spoiler alert: paul seems a little uncomfortable with the topic, as if he isn't yet entirely convinced of the encroaching evil.]



current presidential candidate ted cruz has expressed some concerns about the military installations and has asked the pentagon about it. [you fool! now they'll know you're on to them!]

so to recap:

old and tired :: chinese military massing along the mexican border.

new hotness :: obama, isis, mexicans preparing to put texas under martial law.

now you know.

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

don't speak

you might think that it sounds dramatic, but linguistic genocide is something that happens. people in power will go to great lengths to eradicate certain languages, not just for the sheer joy of making the world a lesser place, but as a way of beating down the culture that's associated with it. language has a unique reciprocal bond with culture, and every group that has attempted to break down another has recognised that forbidding a cultural group from communicating in their own language is an extremely effective way to tear apart their culture.

there are lots [and lots and lots and lots] of examples of this sort of thing, some successful, some not, but far too many to cover in one blog post. however, i thought it was worth looking at some languages that have been the subjects of active repression, and what the political consequences of that have been.

devastation :: the native north american languages :: it should come as no surprise that the largest genocide in history [by a ma…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …