An Inconvenient Truth

[Slacker]

Happened to run across this yesterday. Has to do with Uncle Binny. Ck it out.

http://www.infowars.com/al-qaeda-100-pentagon-run/

 

[max_caper]

Happened to run across this yesterday. Has to do with Uncle Binny. Ck it out.

http://www.infowars.com/al-qaeda-100-pentagon-run/

Interesting theory...govt creates fear, sells it to the public, public swallows it, govt uses the fear as a tool to complete its agenda, public backs b/c it protects them from terrorists. Who'd belive it?!

Blaine

 

[max_caper]

I mentioned before of a news email I received a couple years ago. It mentioned of the Russians discovering fossil fuels weren't. Just happened to think of it this eve and quickly found these sites. Not only is the make up of oil interesting, but the carbon thing, also. I think we've royally been zoomed.

http://climateresearchnews.com/2009...t-victim-of-green-hysteria-by-peter-j-morgan/

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3952

http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Theory/SustainableOil/

I really enjoyed these articles. Makes a lot of sense!

Blaine

 

[Slacker]

Got this in an email this morn. Kinda goes with this subject. Compressed air car.

http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com...ar-that-runs-200-miles-on-compressed-air.html

 

[max_caper]

Got this in an email this morn. Kinda goes with this subject. Compressed air car.

http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com...ar-that-runs-200-miles-on-compressed-air.html

I've heard of compressed air for use in warehouse vehicles but didn't know they had a range this far!

I just watched "Who killed the Electric Car". This film really points to a conspiracy to keep us dependent on oil. I'm sure it's no coincidence that many high-level politicians either have considerable personal stock in the gas/oil business or are "subsidized" by those who are.

Blaine

 

[Redbone]

And that's how and why governments do what they do, to keep those in power in their position and the rest of us in ours. They sometimes are not to subtle in their methods to maintain this balance, you just have to look past the gloss of the news outlets and the pitchmen/ politicians.

 

[max_caper]

And that's how and why governments do what they do, to keep those in power in their position and the rest of us in ours. They sometimes are not to subtle in their methods to maintain this balance, you just have to look past the gloss of the news outlets and the pitchmen/ politicians.

Is it fair to say that there is a greater probability of US military intervention in countries with oil reserves over those that have none? It was stated in this thread that the US sat out Rwanda and Cambodia.

Blaine

 

[85 MAX-fan]

Is it fair to say that there is a greater probability of US military intervention in countries with oil reserves over those that have none? It was stated in this thread that the US sat out Rwanda and Cambodia.

Blaine

Absolutely. Again, every aspect of our lives revolves around oil, like it or not. Why did we back the Muj in Afghanistan back in the 80's? Because the Russians had their sights set on a strategy to control oil flowing out of that region. That doesn't just hamper a war machine relying on oil, it throws on the brakes that crush the profitability of a capitalist society (either those selling OR buying oil). We turned that around on them by providing the means of destroying their planes, attack helicopters etc. A very costly campaign that they threw in the towel on.
That means intervention on behalf of the US or our allies.

 

[85 MAX-fan]

Thank-you for you opinion on where you'd spend your nation's money. That's all I was wondering. We will have to agree to disagree on the best place to spend our tax money both as a couple of individuals as two different nations. I would choose to care for my own over an idea that military efforts overseas might somehow protect me at home.

I will also have to disagree on a "right military target". It has been proven that terrorist cells don't occupy any one region. 9 years trying to find Bin Laden should prove this. He could just as easily be hiding in Pakistan as Afghanistan. There's a lot of countries where he could hide and Al Quiada has continued to strike in spite of occupations in the Middle East.

I've enjoyed our debate!

Blaine

I too have enjoyed the debate Blaine, and that you have had the fortitude to not become overly emotional on a very emotional topic.
I regards to finding Bin Laden, that would not stop Al Quiada, or Wahabism. Terror is not the cause of one persons actions, but of a movement. I disagree that it will only anger and increase the numbers of terrorists if we engage them with force. We stopped this crap in the Philippines effectively decades ago because we matched or exceeded the vicious tactics of our adversary the Moro Islamic fanatics. As they say, they stopped when they feared us more than they hated us.
I believe the real question is whether we are willing to do what it takes to win against terror, and currently we do not. I read an article after 9/11 where a pundit made the point that when we are struck with, for example, a nuclear device that was smuggled over our non-existant southern border our sleeping public would wake up to exactly what we are dealing with and approve of the necessary actions. We shall see. Wahabism is not the result of a bunch of pawns that want to live and let live.
Our military actions are as always a political war instead of an effective war of strategy.

 

[max_caper]

I too have enjoyed the debate Blaine, and that you have had the fortitude to not become overly emotional on a very emotional topic.
I regards to finding Bin Laden, that would not stop Al Quiada, or Wahabism. Terror is not the cause of one persons actions, but of a movement. I disagree that it will only anger and increase the numbers of terrorists if we engage them with force. We stopped this crap in the Philippines effectively decades ago because we matched or exceeded the vicious tactics of our adversary the Moro Islamic fanatics. As they say, they stopped when they feared us more than they hated us.
I believe the real question is whether we are willing to do what it takes to win against terror, and currently we do not. I read an article after 9/11 where a pundit made the point that when we are struck with, for example, a nuclear device that was smuggled over our non-existant southern border our sleeping public would wake up to exactly what we are dealing with and approve of the necessary actions. We shall see. Wahabism is not the result of a bunch of pawns that want to live and let live.
Our military actions are as always a political war instead of an effective war of strategy.

I appreciate your insights on a difficult topic too, 85 MAX-fan. Considering I am the one questioning the politics of your country I am glad you were not offended by an outsider's opinions/questions. I wish I had more to offer to this topic because it has been good to hear the opinions of those who are directly affected by the political and economic situations at hand.

If you are able to confine your adversaries to specific area (as you did in the Philippines) you may well win your objectives overseas. I hope this is the case.

Blaine

 

[Slacker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZalyKzXnlo&feature=player_embedded

Got this in an email this eve. It has TX Rep Poe talking about those merc bulbs. Too funny.

 

[85 MAX-fan]

Got this in an email this eve. It has TX Rep Poe talking about those merc bulbs. Too funny.

Are the new bulbs more energy efficient? Generally yes.
Do they contain toxic, and perhaps dangerous compounds? As I understand it YES.

If I had children I would not use them particularly in living spaces where they spent their time. As a parent that should be your choice. How many light bulbs did you break in your life?
The federal government has made the decision for you, propped up by the notion that "climate change" has forced us to accept it. We have become a socialist nation by every definition of the term. This is a prime example.

 

[Slacker]

You ain't a chit'n, 85. Don't havta convince me. EGore and Soros prob have stock in these Chinese made bulbs. The EPA prob won't allow them to be made here. Don't laugh but I bought a sack full of std bulbs already, just in case this ignorant law isn't changed.

 

[85 MAX-fan]

You ain't a chit'n, 85. Don't havta convince me. EGore and Soros prob have stock in these Chinese made bulbs. The EPA prob won't allow them to be made here. Don't laugh but I bought a sack full of std bulbs already, just in case this ignorant law isn't changed.

As did I

 

[85 MAX-fan]

"Cap and trade" is being promoted by our politicians, AND PRESIDENT. Again propped up by the supposition that it will result in a cleaner environment. ********! the only way it will reduce "greenhouse gasses" is if it results in the destruction of manufacturing, and lower standards of living in our nation. Pure and simple, that is the goal.
The very idea that forcing you to pay an additional 5, 10, or 75% more for goods does not result in one iota of improvement in the environment. And there will be no proof of any of that money being used for anything other than entrenching the political elite. This is a money grab designed to con you into giving up your hard earned income to fund the socialist/marxist machine.
From the New York Times yesterday:

So, has cap-and-trade actually dented Europe's greenhouse gas emissions?
Views vary, but an evaluation today shows that the system has so far delivered more promise than results. But gradually, most analysts say, it is changing the way Europeans manufacture goods, produce energy and conduct business.
"It was not built to revolutionize our economy. It was meant to give impetus to long-term change," said Hans Bergman, a top official of the European Commission on Climate Action, the European Union's executive arm that drafts policy to fight climate change.
"It takes some time to create bigger things," Bergman told The Associated Press.
But critics say planning flaws, coupled with the 2008-2009 recession that slowed industry's pace, has stripped the system of much of the incentive to go green. The economic downturn, they say, is the real reason for the cleaner skies.
Oscar Reyes, of the Barcelona-based nonprofit group Carbon Trade Watch, said the system is merely directing funds to the wrong places. "It hasn't really reduced emissions," he said. "It has pushed money in the wrong direction and actually acted as a subsidy for the heaviest polluters."
Rather than feel a financial bite, some companies ? including some of the worst polluters ? are making windfall profits. Power companies were given free carbon permits, but they raised electricity fees anyway ? as if they had paid the market price for their permits ? and pocketed the markup. Many companies were allocated too many allowances, often the result of powerful industries lobbying the governments that give the permits.

 

[Slacker]

Seen this advertised on a news blog. I know the Fed Res isn't of the gov't. The 13th tribe (not of the original 12), world rich elite Jews own it and the 8 supporting banks. A former White House worker stated that the Fed Res has taken 12-14 tril out of the taxpayer's coffers since it's existence. I read her report about two months ago. I do believe McKinley was popped to bring the Fed Res into existence, and Kennedy too, because he was going to trash the Fed Res. Didn't know about the IRS. Will do some more studying on this.

http://ricoforsheriff.com/irs-liens-and-levys