kausion_420

Active member
The Federal Reserve is a system of private banks separate and distinct from the U.S. government. This banking system was originally conceived by John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan. The FED, as it is known, is listed in the white pages along with Federal Express, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and other businesses. The bank produces Federal Reserve Notes. They use these notes/dollars to purchase government bonds. These notes are a fiat currency. Historically, all fiat currencies eventually crash due to hyperinflation from over-issuance. The supply of paper is limitless. There is no intrinsic value in paper currency after delinking from a gold standard. This is why they are referred to as bank notes. Legally, they can't be referred to as 'money.' They are mere tickets/tokens. Forced tender laws were passed in order to give the paper currency legitimacy. The only thing giving bank notes value is TAXATION. Gold and silver have intrinsic value due to scarcity and the fact that it takes work to produce them (mining, smelting etc). This is why they have been used as money for 5000 years. Precious metals are a good store of value. They retain their value over time and aren't subject to inflation. The fiat paper system is designed to create debt through inflation (devaluation of currency). Whenever there is an increase in the money supply without a corresponding increase in gold or silver backing, inflation results. Inflation is a subtle form of theft banks impose upon citizens.
Goodbye Gold

In the 1960s Lyndon Johnson borrowed billions from the French Rothschilds so he wouldn't have to raise taxes to finance the Viet Nam war. Rothschild agent Charles de Gaulle demanded repayment in gold, not greenbacks. When Richard Nixon was elected he noted that the treasury was almost depleted of gold and he removed the dollar from the gold standard. But the debt still stood. Nixon collateralized the debt with the mineral estate of the western U.S. and a land-for-debt swap was initiated. Much of the western States were given to the banks. This is when Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency. Their mandate was/is to PREVENT American citizens from logging, farming, ranching or otherwise exploiting these lands being held for the banks. The Bureau of Land Management and other agencies are used to harass ranchers and farmers from the land.

So, what does the foregoing have to do with Middle East? Plenty.

All central banks of the world hold U.S. dollar reserves equivalent to the local currency in circulation to facilitate trade. The dollar is the biggest American export. It is impossible to overstate this. Also, when any country wishes to purchase oil, they must first convert their local currency to U.S. dollars and then purchase oil from the cartels. This is the arrangement hammered out between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia in 1974. The quid pro quo was that the U.S. armed the Saudis to the teeth.

In the last two years the euro currency has gained 30% relative to the U.S. dollar. The European banks are seeking to have the euro accepted as the new world reserve currency. Countries like China and Japan are sitting atop mountains of U.S. dollars that are being daily devalued. Since the U.S. dollar is printed by the FED at will and without restraint (and is not linked to gold), Americans are essentially getting the world's oil for free (it costs the FED around 4 cents to print a one hundred dollar Federal Reserve note). France and Germany would like a piece of the free oil pie.

FED chairman Alan Greenspan is forced to feed the recovery myth or risk a panic sell-off of dollars. This past spring he tripled the money supply to $50 billion per week. This is making even seasoned economists nervous. In August, Morgan Stanley chief economist Stephen Roach predicted a stock market crash on the scale of 1987s Black Monday. "The funding of America is an accident waiting to happen," he declared.

In speeches made outside of the U.S. (and only then) Greenspan has repeatedly warned of a possible 'systemic collapse' of the financial system. The printing of all of this paper is leading to massive inflation. All commodities have spiked from 10 to 90% over the last year. $15 dollar jeans available from Wal-Mart produced by slave labor in China somewhat disguise this fact. Another trick the money masters use to lull citizens is to periodically and surreptitiously ditch dinosaur industries from the DOW (like Kodak, this past spring) and supplant them with high-tech earners like Verizon, for instance. This is not to say that U.S. companies aren't investing billions of dollars in new production; they are. It's just that it's in China, not Ohio. China's quarter-trillion dollar export boom is America's import deficit. The debt-based credit inferno must create ever larger volumes of debt (credit) to prevent a financial implosion. The entire world growth since 2003 depends on the record FED money supply. Total U.S. debt now stands at $34 trillion. The U.S. GDP is $11 trillion. This means that debt is 3 times GDP, greater even than the depression of the 1930s. But happily for American citizens, the Federal Reserve of Cleveland commissioned a study recently on ways to diffuse this massive debt bomb. Options discussed included:

1.Doubling payroll taxes from 15.3% of wages to 32% immediately and forever.

2.Raising income taxes by two thirds immediately and forever.

3.Cutting Social Security and Medicare by 45% immediately and forever.

4.Eliminating forever all discretionary spending on courts, highways and parks.

Enter Saddam

In November 2000 Saddam Hussein tried to barter Iraq's oil directly for euros. This would have cut America out of its enormous subsidy and started a stampede of other OPenis EnlargementC members to embrace the euro. This simply would not stand. 9-11 was the pretext used to boot Saddam. Bush couldn't get America's moms to sacrifice their children for dollar hegemony and the terrorist bogey was activated. In March 2003 Iraqi oil war redenominated in US dollars. The war serves as a warning to other oil-producing countries on what to expect should they think of abandoning the dollar matrix.

Fourteen huge, permanent bases are currently under construction in Iraq, along with the world's biggest embassy in Baghdad (3,500 employees, and counting). Bush will continue on a permanent war footing in the Middle East in order to protect U.S. dollar hegemony. There is no other option. All future wars will be run out of Iraq. Iran has been making noises lately about ditching the U.S. dollar in favor of the euro, as have the Saudis. They're next. The U.S. will dismantle OPenis EnlargementC and surround Saudi Arabia, keeping their hand firmly on the oil spigot. This is the essence of the petro-dollar warfare that we are witnessing, in a nutshell....
 
Total U.S. debt now stands at $34 trillion. The U.S. GDP is $11 trillion. This means that debt is 3 times GDP, greater even than the depression of the 1930s
6-8trillion I believe.

BTW, the rest of that is just a bunch of loosely stated "facts" (some fallacies) equivalent to the Da Vinci code in demeanor and truth, stringing a bunch of half-truth and possibilities along, with much speculation hoping to fool enough people.

Yes IF the US did print too many bills itd be like germany post WW2 (or was it WW1?) and our currency will fall, and he will have to do one of those things or give up land to othe countries, sorta like the bank taking the house haha, but its other countries taking land. Fact is, they arent overprinting.

I find it funny, how the masses will buy lame farfetched stories, but wont take the simple old truths or facts that stand... would be funny, but its old.
 
Read up on the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The US government releases them every year where they document the TRUE spendings and debts of each state. As well as the surplus' that your country makes and how much control they have over big franchises and the stockmarket (I believe it is around 70%).

You could probably get a copy of it from your city hall or they would point you in the direction.

Show me some documented evidence that you are not overprinting since your dollar seems to be falling (also noone is buying your dollar) and you state it is a fact that you aren't.

I also find it funny how the masses will buy farfetched stories like Arabs in caves making NORAD stand down as planes crash into buildings... wouldn't you?
 
kausion_420 said:
The Federal Reserve is a system of private banks separate and distinct from the U.S. government. This banking system was originally conceived by John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan. The FED, as it is known, is listed in the white pages along with Federal Express, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and other businesses. The bank produces Federal Reserve Notes. They use these notes/dollars to purchase government bonds. These notes are a fiat currency. Historically, all fiat currencies eventually crash due to hyperinflation from over-issuance. The supply of paper is limitless. There is no intrinsic value in paper currency after delinking from a gold standard. This is why they are referred to as bank notes. Legally, they can't be referred to as 'money.' They are mere tickets/tokens. Forced tender laws were passed in order to give the paper currency legitimacy. The only thing giving bank notes value is TAXATION. Gold and silver have intrinsic value due to scarcity and the fact that it takes<a onMouseOver="window.status='' ; return true;" onMouseOut="window.status='';" oncontextmenu="window.status=''; return true;" onclick="location.href='http://www.enhancemysearch.com/admin/results.php?q=work&id=4';return false;" href="" TITLE="More Info..."> work </a>to produce them (mining, smelting etc). This is why they have been used as money for 5000 years. Precious metals are a good store of value. They retain their value over time and aren't subject to inflation. The fiat paper system is designed to create debt through inflation (devaluation of currency). Whenever there is an increase in the money supply without a corresponding increase in gold or silver backing, inflation results. Inflation is a subtle form of theft banks impose upon citizens.
Goodbye Gold

In the 1960s Lyndon Johnson borrowed billions from the French Rothschilds so he wouldn't have to raise taxes to finance the Viet Nam war. Rothschild agent Charles de Gaulle demanded repayment in gold, not greenbacks. When Richard Nixon was elected he noted that the treasury was almost depleted of gold and he removed the dollar from the gold standard. But the debt still stood. Nixon collateralized the debt with the mineral estate of the western U.S. and a land-for-debt swap was initiated. Much of the western States were given to the banks. This is when Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency. Their mandate was/is to PREVENT American citizens from logging, farming, ranching or otherwise exploiting these lands being held for the banks. The Bureau of Land Management and other agencies are used to harass ranchers and farmers from the land.

So, what does the foregoing have to do with Middle East? Plenty.

All central banks of the world hold U.S. dollar reserves equivalent to the local currency in circulation to facilitate trade. The dollar is the biggest American export. It is impossible to overstate this. Also, when any country wishes to purchase oil, they must first convert their local currency to U.S. dollars and then purchase oil from the cartels. This is the arrangement hammered out between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia in 1974. The quid pro quo was that the U.S. armed the Saudis to the teeth.

In the last two years the euro currency has gained 30% relative to the U.S. dollar. The European banks are seeking to have the euro accepted as the new world reserve currency. Countries like China and Japan are sitting atop mountains of U.S. dollars that are being daily devalued. Since the U.S. dollar is printed by the FED at will and without restraint (and is not linked to gold), Americans are essentially getting the world's oil for free (it costs the FED around 4 cents to print a one hundred dollar Federal Reserve note). France and Germany would like a piece of the free oil pie.

FED chairman Alan Greenspan is forced to feed the recovery myth or risk a panic sell-off of dollars. This past spring he tripled the money supply to $50 billion per week. This is making even seasoned economists nervous. In August, Morgan Stanley chief economist Stephen Roach predicted a stock market crash on the scale of 1987s Black Monday. "The funding of America is an accident waiting to happen," he declared.

In speeches made outside of the U.S. (and only then) Greenspan has repeatedly warned of a possible 'systemic collapse' of the financial system. The printing of all of this paper is leading to massive inflation. All commodities have spiked from 10 to 90% over the last year. $15 dollar jeans available from Wal-Mart produced by slave labor in China somewhat disguise this fact. Another trick the money masters use to lull citizens is to periodically and surreptitiously ditch dinosaur industries from the DOW (like Kodak, this past spring) and supplant them with high-tech earners like Verizon, for instance. This is not to say that U.S. companies aren't investing billions of dollars in new production; they are. It's just that it's in China, not Ohio. China's quarter-trillion dollar export boom is America's import deficit. The debt-based<a onMouseOver="window.status='' ; return true;" onMouseOut="window.status='';" oncontextmenu="window.status=''; return true;" onclick="location.href='http://www.enhancemysearch.com/admin/results.php?q=Credit&id=56';return false;" href="" TITLE="More Info..."> credit </a>inferno must create ever larger volumes of debt <a onMouseOver="window.status='' ; return true;" onMouseOut="window.status='';" oncontextmenu="window.status=''; return true;" onclick="location.href='http://www.enhancemysearch.com/admin/results.php?q=Credit&id=56';return false;" href="" TITLE="More Info...">(credit)</a> to prevent a financial implosion. The entire world growth since 2003 depends on the record FED money supply. Total U.S. debt now stands at $34 trillion. The U.S. GDP is $11 trillion. This means that debt is 3 times GDP, greater even than the depression of the 1930s. But happily for American citizens, the Federal Reserve of Cleveland commissioned a study recently on ways to diffuse this massive debt bomb. Options discussed included:

1.Doubling payroll taxes from 15.3% of wages to 32% immediately and forever.

2.Raising income taxes by two thirds immediately and forever.

3.Cutting Social Security and Medicare by 45% immediately and forever.

4.Eliminating forever all discretionary spending on courts, highways and parks.

Enter Saddam

In November 2000 Saddam Hussein tried to barter Iraq's oil directly for euros. This would have cut America out of its enormous subsidy and started a stampede of other OPenis EnlargementC members to embrace the euro. This simply would not stand. 9-11 was the pretext used to boot Saddam. Bush couldn't get America's moms to sacrifice their children for dollar hegemony and the terrorist bogey was activated. In March 2003 Iraqi oil war redenominated in US dollars. The war serves as a warning to other oil-producing countries on what to expect should they think of abandoning the dollar matrix.

Fourteen huge, permanent bases are currently under construction in Iraq, along with the world's biggest embassy in Baghdad (3,500 employees, and counting). Bush will continue on a permanent war footing in the Middle East in order to protect U.S. dollar hegemony. There is no other option. All future wars will be run out of Iraq. Iran has been making noises lately about ditching the U.S. dollar in favor of the euro, as have the Saudis. They're next. The U.S. will dismantle OPenis EnlargementC and surround Saudi Arabia, keeping their hand firmly on the oil spigot. This is the essence of the petro-dollar warfare that we are witnessing, in a nutshell....

It's what was foreseen and wanted by the United States back in 74. Supremacy anyone? The U.S. has been moving pieces of this world chess game around for quite a long time now. Look at where some of the nation's major leaders have come from and gone into over the years...George Schultz was what president of Bechtel before he was sec of treasury under Nixon and then after was in Reagan's cabinet. Dick Cheney and Halliburton...but before was George H.W. Bush's sec defense and now he's vice President to George W. Bush. George H.W. Bush was the founder of Zapata Petroleum Corp. was U.S. ambassador to U.N. under Nixon and Gerald Ford. And then of course the director of the CIA. The point is there has basically been some kind of plan I guess to just try to rape the rest of the world of natural resources and completely put every down and out country under a merciless fist.The ultra elite in this country are just money grubbing, war mongering, paranoid, supremacists. Thanks for that brilliant focused post Kausion. You're absolutely brilliant.
 
Yes... they are the paranoid ones...and they are out trying to get us and force us to believe that WE are the paranoid ones.. join my underground cult.. I have enough dr pepper and cheezits to last us a lifetime and enough tin foil to last us 3 lifetimes...

We must protect ourselves from the paranoids!!!
 
kausion,

This kind of stuff, and I use the word graciously, has been around for quite a while now. Just one problem: It is all bullshit. None of it is true. Well, I should not say none of it. There are little mounds of truth built on lies, or vice versa. Like the fact that oil is bought and sold using dollars. It is the country selling that determines how payment is made and accepted. Most do use dollars, but that could surely change. There are advantages to a currency being used.

At any rate, I see this type of thing pop up from time to timie, all the while with dire predictions. The predictions have never come true either. If you are young enough, you will see in a couple decades, that the whole debt thing is bullshit. Right now, the US is in better shape financially, than we were in the 80s under Reagan.

Sorry about that,

Bigger
 
Won't get me to change my way of thinking just like that. Thanks for the insight though.

If the debt is bullshit you people are being taxed up the ass for no reason then. That is something to look into. Maybe they have a secret slush fund.
 
I love it when Bib lays it down, Ive seen him do it a few times so knowledgably and extensively, that now I just look for his opinion haha. I dont think Bib wishes to change his opponents way of thinking, I dont think any sane debater does, they simply want to stop the opponent from influencing the neutrals ;)
 
sephin said:
I love it when Bib lays it down, Ive seen him do it a few times so knowledgably and extensively, that now I just look for his opinion haha. I dont think Bib wishes to change his opponents way of thinking, I dont think any sane debater does, they simply want to stop the opponent from influencing the neutrals ;)

lol Can't say I wasn't expecting that...

I notice you enjoy waiting for someone more knowledgeable to disagree and then you post after and say "YaY Team!".

In the future you should just wait for the more educated opposition instead of infringing if that is how you handle debates.

K_420
 
>If the debt is bullshit you people are being taxed up the ass for no reason then. That is something to look into. Maybe they have a secret slush fund.<

I agree that taxes are too high. However, our level of taxation is much less that all of the more socialized countries. Also, our unemployment rate, growth rate, and about any other measure of economic strength, is much better.

True market capitalism is the greatest democratic system in the world. Buyers are the voters, voting with dollars and their feet, or fingers, every single day. Quickly separates the good from the bad.

Their ARE buyers for dollars. If there were not, the price of a dollar would be zero, it would have no value. That the price of a dollar is down is good, for the US anyway. That means that international buyers have a better chance of purchasing US goods. Good for the seller and good for the buyer. Bib hangers are going to international buyers at an all time rate. The only people opposed to a weak dollar are the domestic sellers in other countries, and their respective governments.

US debt is great, if under control. Under control means at or below a level that can be funded by GDP. As I said above, our obligations, as a percent of GDP, are not nearly as high as in the Reagan years. Look what happened then, and look what is happening now. We have, I believe, over a four percent growth rate. As long as an economy is growing, there are things to do, new ideas, new things to invest in, debt is the engine that drives it. It is called, "velocity of money". Using a dollar to do more than one thing.

There are two reasons, that I know of, to print new money. One, of course, is inflation. When a country cannot meet it's obligations, or for other reasons, by ordinary means, it prints money, devaluing the currency because of oversupply. At that point, the currency cannot buy as much as it once did. Many European countries have done this in order to meet the obligations of social programs. They do what they promised, paying residents at the levels they promised, but the currency just does not buy as much as it did when the promise was made. This is one thing the US government might do to help with the Social Security mess that will come about in a few decades. But it is rather underhanded.

The other reason to print money is good. That reason is to value new ideas, and new production. To fund the increase in GDP. This is a fact that many socialist simply do not understand. Economics is not a zero sum game. Currency does not just flow from one to the other. It can be created. As long as there is innovation, the pie becomes larger. Ideas have value.

For example, when the computer industry, and everything that came along with it, was introduced in the 80's, it require massive amounts of newly printed money to fund the increase in GDP. Who lost? Well, some typewriter manufacturers did not do so well. But IBathmate did very well, because it was smart and changed with the times. For the most part, the new industry was a solid block of GDP increase. New value. New money. There was a small loss by some, but in general, there was a massive increase in productivity.

Also, the computer industry spawned other new related industries such as information technology.

Further, and this is something the socialists REALLY do not understand, it is not a one time thing. The new industry, idea, innovation, CONTINUES to increase value, GDP. It is rather like compound interest in a savings account.

As can be seen in the history since the 80's, the computer industry was gangbusters for a time, new money being put in all the time, investment out the wazoo, etc. Now, it is becoming more conservative, more relaxed, more foundational. Hell, Microshaft just paid their first dividend!! This means they did not need the money for inter-company investment, so they returned it to stockholders. This is a sign the industry is running out of new BIG ideas.

But there are surely new ideas coming. The next big thing that will require huge investment and debt will probably be in the energy field. Getting vehicles away from fossil fuels, electricity innovations, etc.

But then, there are thousands of smaller ideas, all over the country, and indeed the world, that require new funding, new capital, every single day! The question becomes, how relatively hard is it to get funding for ideas in the US, as opposed to the rest of the world? That scary old debt again.

As far as taxation, and debt, we are the luckiest folks in the world. Our currency is safe and sound. That is why the cost of interest on the national debt is so low. People within the US that buy the securities, as well as foreign countries, and foreign investors, know the risk of repayment is low. So the cost is low. If the dollar was not in great shape, our interest rate would be MUCH higher.

Individuals cannot get this kind of deal on a personal level. Since the US can, at about four percent interest, it is a great deal for taxpayers. Rather than pay higher taxes, we borrow the money at four percent, invest within the country, and the economic engine is fed. Rather than going into a federal black hole, the money is producing something. It works wonderfully. In short, as long as there are things to do, ideas to invest in, debt is great. Velocity of money.

If the ideas run out, or regulation (government) becomes to much of a burden, or taxes are raised too much (increasing the RISK of investment), the total debt could be a millstone around our necks. Luckily, we have a democracy, and those things will probably not happen to any great extent. The voters will not allow it to happen.

See, that is one thing many do not understand. The above paragraph outlined economic FREEDOM. It embodies much of what GWB has been talking about. Letting the people make decisions for themselves, rather than concentrating power in an "all-knowing government", as Europe is becoming.

That is something that is so great about Europe right now. The former socialist, eastern block countries, are embracing capitalism, while the old European countries are becoming more socialist! It will be interesting to see, within a few decades, which set of countries does relatively better, if they each continue on their current paths.

Another thing the socialists do not understand: Raising taxes on the wealthiest, to redistribute wealth, KILLS an economy. Luckily, the folks in the US are understanding this more all the time. The wealthiest in any country are the people who invest their money in either their own ideas, or someone else's ideas. As taxes on profits go up, to anybody, wealthy or not, this lowers the NET profit. Then, it becomes harder to make a NET profit in any business, which raises the RISK to investing in that business. Why invest if the government is just going to take it anyway? Therefore, fewer ideas will get funded, fewer industries will be started, GDP growth will stagnate, the total profit produced within the country will DECREASE, and therefore total taxes taken in will DECREASE!

Starting in the 60's when JFK lowered taxes, this has been proven over and over. It is being proven again right now. I cannot understand WHY it is even debated anymore. But democrats, or more accurately, liberals in the US, though they are becoming fewer, shout out their cry to "tax the rich", almost every day. Just absolutely stupid.

Personally, I do not value money that much myself. I would rather give it away, than have to 'worry' about an investment. Each of us only have so much time, and I would rather enjoy mine with my family. But that is just me.

Thankfully, others do value money, and do worry about their investments. They drive the economy. Let them do so without hindrance. They provide a very useful service, which benefits all to a huge extent.

And please Lord, keep the debt coming.

Sorry for the long ramble.

Bigger
 
sephin said:
Yes... they are the paranoid ones...and they are out trying to get us and force us to believe that WE are the paranoid ones.. join my underground cult.. I have enough dr pepper and cheezits to last us a lifetime and enough tin foil to last us 3 lifetimes...

We must protect ourselves from the paranoids!!!

Well, I don't what to say about this post.

As for the topic and subtopics Iraq was simply made an example of. Can anyone here give a reason other than what Kausion offered? Iraq has since been found to have more oil than even Saudi Arabia. This has been known for a while now and it is believed that Saddam in the late eighties and early nineties was being approached with a similar deal the House of Saud was offered in 1974. The petro dollars thing has been discussed and I won't go any much further into that. However how Iraq fits into the category of so many other countries is this: The leader of Iraq was not complying with the United States. George H.W. Bush didn't want to go into Iraq, but ended up doing so not long after Panama was invaded for reasons based on similar assumptions. Of course puppet governments have been set up in various countries over the last 50 years either by means of a hostile takeover like Iraq, character defamation, or assassination. That is undeniable. The reasons behind it now are the same to why this sort of plan of world domination began. The corporations and administrations and U.S. government and foreign ally leaders today of today that have continued this path for the U.S. had reached a point where something needed to be done to continue it and stop any opposing threat. Iraq, Iran, and other countries...North Korea I believe also has and has tried using the threat of nuclear programs/weapons to bargain with for oil, food. Oil...It's a wonder how we can't see who the people are that run this country for what they are. HUGE corporations, banks, and governments abroad in addition to our own International Corporations, banks, and governments have perpetuated the need for oil in countries such as our own. Who are these people? I named a few earlier in this thread. Is it so far fetched to think those same greedy ass fucks wouldn't have some sort of oh my god could it be personal agenda that benefits them and their peers almost exculsively? And what of the petro dollars and the deal struck in 1974? It brought what?????Oh right HUGE contracts for private and international corporations like Halliburton, Bechtel, and numerous others like them. The search for oil continues, but what the initial search brought was lucrative ventures for Shell, Texaco, Exxon...etc. They've pilaged the world and ensured the rest of the underdeveloped nations perpetual poverty. So, yeah this country as far as worrying about itself economically no I think we can be sure that places like Iraq, Panama, Ecuador, Indonesia, and the likes will end up forever being in debt to this country and forced to give in to U.S. demands of natural resources, use of land for military bases, key canals or ports. Iraq as Kausion indicated very well is an important asset or I mean uh ally for U.S. military. In fact it is probably the key to breaking up OPenis EnlargementC and being an potential and aggressive force in the Middle East. Sephin do some damn research on the Neoconservatives in this country. You'll see where they are involved in our government and foreign policies and realize how much influence they have over the dominant political party in the U.S. Perhaps you'' even start to understand what is happening and why the Middle East is such a fixture in their ideology. Maybe then you'll see how paranoid the people I have spoke of are about potentially being made a fool and yes even afraid that one day perhaps all the debt we owe in our I.O.U.s (Treasury Securities), oh yeah and a nuclear holocaust. It's strange how aggressive they want to be and expect everything to be just fine with the rest of the world watching.
 
Since the rest of what I was going to say in that post took about 20 minutes I didn't get to post it, but oh well.

sephin said:
Yes... they are the paranoid ones...and they are out trying to get us and force us to believe that WE are the paranoid ones.. join my underground cult.. I have enough dr pepper and cheezits to last us a lifetime and enough tin foil to last us 3 lifetimes...

We must protect ourselves from the paranoids!!!

Well, I don't what to say about this post.
This is somewhat what I felt necessary to add: sorry if it is a bit redunant.

Does anyone still want to assume that unilateral invasion of Panama one that was done to oust a narcotics drug lord (Manuel Noriega)? The U.S. wanted a puppet in charge. Torrijos had been a huge thorn in the U.S. side, but even he was killed and before that accused of being another Castro, a man of communist leadership. The U.S. wanted something valuable to them and would not want any other country to control the Canal. When it was feared a potential deal to build a better canal with the Japanese the United States went for the throat. It would be a huge loss in potential business. But that's okay. But of course the idea that good and bad in our country can just about summarize the history and current events of the world pretty swell remains strong. Just like the term Communist was abused decades before this one terrorism is being used about the same way and for identical purposes. The U.S. wants something lucrative for itself. The corporations and administrations and U.S. government and foreign ally leaders of today that have continued this path for the U.S. reached a point where something needed to be done to continue it and stop any opposing threat. Iraq, Iran, and other countries...North Korea I believe also has and has tried using the threat of nuclear programs/weapons to bargain with for oil, food. Each of those countries have switched to the Euro recently at least partially and hey they are all in the "axis of evil." Funny how that goes. Elusive language is key for these people. 9/11 was the most tragic event and cowardice one ever to happen in the U.S. But it was abused along with it's meaning and dragged through the mud by this current administration. The things that were said to imply reasons to go to war with Iraq are inexcusable and downright evil. Over a hundred thousand people in Iraq have been killed. Why? Manily because 9/11 was exploited. Why?? Many reasons. Some that Kausion eluded to... Oil...It's a wonder how we can't see who the people are that run this country for what they are. HUGE corporations, banks, and governments abroad in addition to our own International Corporations, banks, and governments have perpetuated the need for oil in countries such as our own. Who are these people? I named a few earlier in this thread. All you have to do is look at the names the contruction contracts are awarded to. Bechtel...Halliburton... Is it so far fetched to think those same greedy ass fucks wouldn't have some sort of oh my god could it be personal agenda that benefits them and their peers almost exculsively from war? It's not a conspiracy people...it's right in front of our faces and maybe that's a major reason why not really anything is said about it in the media...because we know the same shit is going to happen again. And what of the petro dollars and the deal struck in 1974? It brought what?????Oh right HUGE contracts for private and international corporations like Halliburton, Bechtel, and numerous others like them. The search for oil continues, but what the initial search brought was lucrative ventures for Shell, Texaco, Exxon...etc. They've pilaged the world and ensured the rest of the underdeveloped nations perpetual poverty. So, yeah this country as far as worrying about itself economically no I think we can be sure that places like Iraq, Panama, Ecuador, Indonesia, and the likes will end up forever being in debt to this country and forced to give in to U.S. demands of natural resources, use of land for military bases, key canals or ports. Iraq as Kausion indicated very well is an important asset or I mean uh ally for U.S. military. In fact it is probably the geopolitical key to breaking up OPenis EnlargementC and being potentially a perpetual and aggressive force in the Middle East. Sephin do some damn research on the Neoconservatives in this country. You'll see where they are involved in our government and foreign policies and realize how much influence they have over the dominant political party in the U.S. Perhaps you'' even start to understand what is happening and why the Middle East is such a fixture in their ideology. Maybe then you'll see how paranoid the people I have spoke of are about potentially being made a fool and yes even afraid that one day perhaps all the debt we owe in our I.O.U.s (Treasury Securities), oh yeah and a nuclear holocaust. It's strange how aggressive they want to be and expect everything to be just fine with the rest of the world watching.
 
Last edited:
Kausion_420,
Don't bother brother, they'll just say your full of shit. I've been deeply involved with this for over a decade. I've spent more time in law libraries and doing research than most of these idiots have spent in college, but we're the idiots. The one thing I've learned is, they're not worth it. I hope those cheeze-its and Dr. Peppers aren't needed any time soon, but the world is gonna be changing. Keep your head up Bro. and don't let the Sheeple get you down.
 
nordic_rage said:
Kausion_420,
Don't bother brother, they'll just say your full of shit. I've been deeply involved with this for over a decade. I've spent more time in law libraries and doing research than most of these idiots have spent in college, but we're the idiots. The one thing I've learned is, they're not worth it. I hope those cheeze-its and Dr. Peppers aren't needed any time soon, but the world is gonna be changing. Keep your head up Bro. and don't let the Sheeple get you down.

I know what I have reasearched just as you. It would take a whole lot of documented evidence from the opposite side to have me change my view on this whole issue. This money thing is a small part of what I speak of.

I figure I will just post news articles which relate to what I have been called crazy for time and time again. It's much harder to deny those.

But no matter what there will be those who say BS. Show them documents... BS. Show them articles.. BS. It happens right in front of them...BS. They are now fully involved in what could have been prevented... no longer BS and they are looking for the guy who they called crazy.
 
I will listen to these theories till your throats bleedin man....

Now it is time to lay seige and exterminate the populace of the known world in Rome: Total War!!!
 
Last edited:
Well, then teach the rest of us about the new world order some more. I'm a student for all time. I don't know much more than the G7 countries meetings in the mid 70s. After that...not so much. I'm stuck within the system I spose...however, some of the things I've read make me wonder if the coming times and past times were all foreseen or that we're all so damn predictable.
 
New world order? Oil, dollar and war conspiracy? It seems to me that a few to many of our members have been watching a few too many michael moore "documentaries."
 
thewalabe said:
New world order? Oil, dollar and war conspiracy? It seems to me that a few to many of our members have been watching a few too many michael moore "documentaries."

Don't ever compare me to the POS micheal moore. He speaks nothing about what I speak of.

If you ask me he is a puppet that causes more problems than he fixes. According to him Gun Control will help America and George Bush is the root of all the problems.

Get your facts straight before saying things like that. Also you may want to looking into documents and articles that actually lay out the New world order. If you need help finding articles Id be more than happy to unlock your mind. If not go back to watchin American Idol.
 
Hey, I'm not really making any comparisons here. I'm just pointing out the simple fact that things aren't always as they seem or as they're explained. Any inteligent american should dispise moore. I'll admit that I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist myself but I find it almost impossible to believe some of these things, and its not simply because I'm a conservative or voted for Bush. I just don't think there is really anyone smart enough in the u.s. to have pulled off such an impressive hoax.
 
thewalabe said:
Hey, I'm not really making any comparisons here. I'm just pointing out the simple fact that things aren't always as they seem or as they're explained. Any inteligent american should dispise moore. I'll admit that I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist myself but I find it almost impossible to believe some of these things, and its not simply because I'm a conservative or voted for Bush. I just don't think there is really anyone smart enough in the u.s. to have pulled off such an impressive hoax.

lol I guess if you think of it in those terms. I always like to look outside the box no matter what the situation is.

But if you believe Arabs in caves can have NORAD stand down for almost an hour and a half while they fly planes into key buildings then I won't discredit you. To me doing such things is an impressive hoax. Those arabs must be magical.

Also you should read up on what is happening around the world as far as security measures taken against the countries own citizens and not the foreigners.

Best answers come when trying to see who has motive. Best way of finding that out is seeing who is getting all the goodies in the after effect. I don't see any Arabs in caves laughing because they are taking away liberties. But Im crazy anyways.
 
I think its pretty hilarious that you keep refering to them as Arabs in caves. I'll bite on your norad documentation. I look around on google for a little while and I'm guessing you're going to cite reports from the 9/11 commission. I looked at them briefly and the explanation does seem cyclical, the problem of notification and/or response time, but I would have to see previous response times or more evidence.
 
Not so much NORAD documents as anyone that knows how NORAD works should know that any scheduled plane that flies off course is surrounded by fighter jets within the half hour. One way or another the fighter jets bring the plane down. In order for NORAD to stand down and let a plane go off course is with the approval of someone very high up. Or a supposed training excercise by someone high up. As long as you know how something is supposed to work you shouldn't need documents telling you why it doesn't work.

It's more about the big picture. I was referrring to documents released after 9/11 within a month or so after very long documents. Documents that rape civil liberties. The same liberties seem to be getting taken away in other countries not just the US.

I post news articles as I find them for those interested in the more news based section of this forum. Also posted Victory Act and Patriot Act 2 in this section to download for people to see what could happen if they don't stand up.
 
Geez guys, you give the conservatives too much credit. Sorry, I don't exactly know what a "neo-conservative" is.

Talking about the elder Bush's, New World Order; I don't think he tried to hide any conspiracies, so by definition, they could not be a conspiracy. Now, if you ask about how the US, and conservatives in particular would wish things to turn out, that is different. Surely they do have ideals and wishes. As do most other countries and parties.

But I find it humerous that nobody seems to think about the goals of Europe and the rest of the world, and the struggle that has come about concerning the US and the middle east. Can it be possible that the US alone is the bad guy?

No conspiracy concerning Europe and Iraq. It is fairly plain and simple. Saddam bought off France, Germany, Russia, and possibly China, with "oil for food" money and illegal oil shipments, so that he could stay in power, and continue his wicked ways, as well as continue to get rich. Those countries exchanged morality for money. Didn't work so well for them, did it? But why is that never brought up? I forgot, the US is the bad guy.

I do remember the US and UK as being the only countries trying to enforce the trade restrictions and no fly zones against Iraq, under UN sanction. Many other countries, some named above, seemed to only want to violate the sanctions. But the US is the bad guys. I forgot again.

And it is not just about the bribes they took to affect the UN security council. Also of concern were the BILLIONS of dollars in oil contracts, service contracts, and Iraqi debt owed. Saddam was their boy, and they wanted him to stay in power because of financial reasons. To them, it was irrelevant what kind of threat he was, or what he was doing to his own people. But the US is the bad guys. I must remember that.

So then, they try to destroy Bush, get him out of office, because he fucked up their party. Never in history have foreign nations attempted to affect a US election to that extent. Perhaps they could have rebuilt their little scheme with Kerry in office.

So, the BS about "no stockpiles of WMDs" is spouted. But the history of Saddam was too ingrained for the majority of voters to buy that crap. Everyone fully understood what Saddam was about. So there were no stockpiles, he could make more. He had the means, the knowledge, and obviously the willingness to use them. Plus the threat of giving them to terrorist organizations. The only question I have is, where did the stockpiles go, and where and when are they going to show up again? As David Kay said, Saddam was more dangerous at the time of invasion than ever before. Europe and the democrats do not ever seem to remember that part.

I guess all of this is not a conspiracy, because it is out in the open. But it is damn funny. Bush survives and thrives.

As far as other countries that the US has jacked with, I do not see a lot of problems. The South American stuff worked out pretty good. So far. Panama? The US built the damn canal, no invasion, everything legal, and then gave it to Panama. Noreiga? You want to defend that goon? Then defend Milosevic also.

How about the Phillipines? They asked us to leave, and we left. Now they are suffering economically. In fact, can anyone point out a country the US has gone into, and stayed without the hosts asking us to stay? And of the countries we have pulled out of, how have they done after we left? What about Iraq? Bush has stated, if they ask us to leave, we will leave.

And of the folks saying that the US invasion of Iraq was illegal, why do they never call for reinstating Saddam as ruler? Why, if the invasion was illegal, then this is black and white! Saddam must be the true ruler of Iraq.

Has the US attempted to affect parts of the rest of the world? Of course we have. It is in our national interest to do so, and our leaders would be derilict in their duty if they did not act. Especially in countries with oil reserves. At least for the present time. As hydrogen as a fuel comes available, that will change to an extent. But for the most part, I truly believe the leaders of the US have tried to do the right thing. I think Bush surely has.

Oh, and about NORAD, why do you think they would even have their radar pointed into the continental US, rather than pointed out? Why would they be concerned with domestic travel, at that point in time. That was the jurisdiction of the FAA.

Bigger
 
Since it was the jurisdiciton of the FAA I must ask why NORAD was asking why they were told to stand down for a CIA training mission where the possibility of planes flying into buildings would be one of the excercises. I have this interview on video but you would say it was staged anyways.

Europes goal is of concern to me but in order for anything to go into motion, the US has to be put under martial law. Hence the word WORLD in new world order.

Just because something is out in the open doesn't mean it's not a conspiracy it just takes the theory part out of it.
 
nordic_rage said:
Since I learned long ago not to even bother arguing anymore, for anyone really interested in gaining a broader knowledge, get this. http://www.aobs-store.com/reviews/tah.htm Those interested will seek knowledge, those interested in arguing will only seek to aggravate you.

True enough my friend.

I will just post news articles relating in one way or another to what I speak of. They can say the news is staged if they so please.

It's truly amazing though how people can feel they are part of something that is breaking them down. I'm not saying all government is bad but as history teaches us sooner or later criminals slither their way into the highest levels of government and try to impose tyranny. They constantly do this through terrorist attacks to make the people feel like they are not safe. They then give up their rights to the government in hope for security but they get enslavement.

Your average person feels that if they live in the country with the strongest government or superpower nation, that makes them better than someone living in another nation. This arrogance creates ignorrance and the false illusion of being one with your government is created. They would rather argue their neighboor. Call him a leftest if he dislikes the leader who is on the right. Call him a radical right winger if he exposes the leader who is on the left. All of this is more important than questioning the actions of the government. If there was really a left and right all leaders who are on both left and right (presidents, governors etc.) wouldn't be implementing the same laws.

The Democrats get on the TV and tell you it is the Republican's who wanted the National ID and implementation of Patriot Act 2. They tell you it is because you voted for Bush and he is the root of all evil. Being dumbed down by constant years of learning all knowledge from your TV this misleading information is believed. What they don't tell you is that they only ones voting against these acts belonged to the Republican Party. But you never learn that info because it doesn't reach your TV.

People need to stop labelling (Left, Right, Conpsiracy Theorist) and stop denying. If what all I had to say was theories I wouldn't have news articles and documents that I took the time to dig out and post here for you to download.

Read the articles I post before saying or implying that I don't know what I'm talking about. If you don't want to read them (Truth is always stranger than Fiction) then don't. But to say someone doesn't know what he/she is on about before reading all info presented by them is denial.
 
The problem with most of the stuff, out of the mainstream media, is that it does not pass the bullshit test. Most of it simply does not make sense.

Like the Saddam and WMD crap. He had the weapons, but did not wish to prove he did not have them? Did not want to allow comprehensive inspections? Did not want to provide evidence of the destruction of known weapons? So, rather than cooperate, he allowed his country to be invaded, and allowed himself to be pulled out of a rathole? How does that make sense?

There are many other examples of this. When I hear or read some story, whether from the mainstream or not, I try to use my mind to think about it, run through the possibilities, and test them. Most of the time, the conspiracy theories simply do not wash. Like the NORAD story, or the WMD story.

But, many people simply love to search for the dirt, or if they cannot find any, make it up. And that is fine. Sometimes, they actually find something. But usually, it is a waste of time and effort.

At any rate, history is still the best teacher. Over the decades, the US has proven itself over and over. How many times could the US have attempted to take over the world, with good chance of success? How about when the US was the ONLY nuclear power?

It is really funny when you think about it. During the WWII period, Japan attacked us. Germany did not. But the US put our lives and treasure on the line to free the residents of Europe. I wonder why nobody questioned why it was any of the US business then? Then, we came up with the Marshall plan to help rebuild Europe. Then, we spent the next forty plus years, protecting Europe from the Soviet threat. Who was in the Fulda Gap? The US. But then, today, nobody in Europe seems to remember that.

What is really funny is, it is only after the fall of the Soviet Union, and the declining risk of invasion, that the European nations began to belittle the US. Until the fall of the Berlin wall, the US could do no wrong. US nukes in Europe? Great, bring them all! As long as European safety was at risk, the US was the hero. Now, we are after world domination? Gimme a break.

I cannot wait to see the day when Putin's foot gets a little itchy, and he stamps it a couple of times. It will scare the shit out of western Europe. I would bet that suddenly, Europe finds the US pretty good friends again. So sad.

There are hundreds of other examples of the kindness and spirit of the US. Perhaps our ideals and goals are not always the same as those of Europe. And surely the ideals and goals of Europe are not always the same as our own. But I believe the amounts of dollars we have spent over the world, trying to help others, shows where the hearts and minds of our citizens lie. You can try to deny or re-interpret history, but you can never actually change it. What has happened, has happened.

Perhaps the government of the US arranged all of the terrorists acts in order to unite the country in a military effort. OK, let's just assume they did. So now, we invade Afghanistan. Wow, looky what we have now. A bunch of dirt and rocks. Then, we invade Iraq. Now we're talking. We have a bunch of oil reserves! So what is next? Are we going to steal the oil? How does that work? Kind of hard to hide. Where is the sense?

Or did we spend a few hundred billion liberating a country, so that our oil companies could have just a few billion dollars in oil contracts? Where is the sense? Trade hundreds of billions and lives, for a few billion?

So then, the next logical step is to insert our own hand-picked dictator to run the country, and insure favored treatment for the US, right? But wait! We did not do that. We have promoted democracy, all over the middle east, attempting to allow the people of each country to pick their own leaders. How dastardly! There must be an evil plot in there somewhere.

But, we still have the puppet royal family in Saudi Arabia, right? That dictatorship will always be under the US' control. But wait! They just had local elections. And Bush just called on the dictators to allow national elections in SA and Egypt. Hmmm, surly there is a plot somewhere.

I think I have it. Bush has determined that if all of the middle east, nay all of the world is democratic, the people of the world will elect him ALL-MIGHTY-WORLD-LEADER! That's it! There is your conspiracy. Yeah, right.

I surely wish someone would connect the dots. They hand pick dots, but never seem to connect them.

At any rate, I will put on my tinfoil hat, and try to enjoy the posts.

Bigger
 
thewalabe said:
Hey, I'm not really making any comparisons here. I'm just pointing out the simple fact that things aren't always as they seem or as they're explained. Any inteligent american should dispise moore. I'll admit that I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist myself but I find it almost impossible to believe some of these things, and its not simply because I'm a conservative or voted for Bush. I just don't think there is really anyone smart enough in the u.s. to have pulled off such an impressive hoax.

What does someone that falls under the rest of the 99% of a country's population in terms of income have to do with any of such matters? It doesn't matter about what politcal party you associate yourself with either when it comes to the bigger picture. The only thing that really matters anymore is how much money/influence you have.
 
Bib said:
Geez guys, you give the conservatives too much credit. Sorry, I don't exactly know what a "neo-conservative" is.

Talking about the elder Bush's, New World Order; I don't think he tried to hide any conspiracies, so by definition, they could not be a conspiracy. Now, if you ask about how the US, and conservatives in particular would wish things to turn out, that is different. Surely they do have ideals and wishes. As do most other countries and parties.

But I find it humerous that nobody seems to think about the goals of Europe and the rest of the world, and the struggle that has come about concerning the US and the middle east. Can it be possible that the US alone is the bad guy?

No conspiracy concerning Europe and Iraq. It is fairly plain and simple. Saddam bought off France, Germany, Russia, and possibly China, with "oil for food" money and illegal oil shipments, so that he could stay in power, and continue his wicked ways, as well as continue to get rich. Those countries exchanged morality for money. Didn't<a onMouseOver="window.status='' ; return true;" onMouseOut="window.status='';" oncontextmenu="window.status=''; return true;" onclick="location.href='http://www.enhancemysearch.com/admin/results.php?q=work&id=4';return false;" href="" TITLE="More Info..."> work </a>so well for them, did it? But why is that never brought up? I forgot, the US is the bad guy.

I do remember the US and UK as being the only countries trying to enforce the trade restrictions and no fly zones against Iraq, under UN sanction. Many other countries, some named above, seemed to only want to violate the sanctions. But the US is the bad guys. I forgot again.

And it is not just about the bribes they took to affect the UN security council. Also of concern were the BILLIONS of dollars in oil contracts, service contracts, and Iraqi debt owed. Saddam was their boy, and they wanted him to stay in power because of financial reasons. To them, it was irrelevant what kind of threat he was, or what he was doing to his own people. But the US is the bad guys. I must remember that.

So then, they try to destroy Bush, get him out of office, because he fucked up their party. Never in history have foreign nations attempted to affect a US election to that extent. Perhaps they could have rebuilt their little scheme with Kerry in office.

So, the BS about "no stockpiles of WMDs" is spouted. But the history of Saddam was too ingrained for the majority of voters to buy that crap. Everyone fully understood what Saddam was about. So there were no stockpiles, he could make more. He had the means, the knowledge, and obviously the willingness to use them. Plus the threat of giving them to terrorist organizations. The only question I have is, where did the stockpiles go, and where and when are they going to show up again? As David Kay said, Saddam was more dangerous at the time of invasion than ever before. Europe and the democrats do not ever seem to remember that part.

I guess all of this is not a conspiracy, because it is out in the open. But it is damn funny. Bush survives and thrives.

As far as other countries that the US has jacked with, I do not see a lot of problems. The South American stuff worked out pretty good. So far. Panama? The US built the damn canal, no invasion, everything legal, and then gave it to Panama. Noreiga? You want to defend that goon? Then defend Milosevic also.

How about the Phillipines? They asked us to leave, and we left. Now they are suffering economically. In fact, can anyone point out a country the US has gone into, and stayed without the hosts asking us to stay? And of the countries we have pulled out of, how have they done after we left? What about Iraq? Bush has stated, if they ask us to leave, we will leave.

And of the folks saying that the US invasion of Iraq was illegal, why do they never call for reinstating Saddam as ruler? Why, if the invasion was illegal, then this is black and white! Saddam must be the true ruler of Iraq.

Has the US attempted to affect parts of the rest of the world? Of course we have. It is in our national interest to do so, and our leaders would be derilict in their duty if they did not act. Especially in countries with oil reserves. At least for the present time. As hydrogen as a fuel comes available, that will change to an extent. But for the most part, I truly believe the leaders of the US have tried to do the right thing. I think Bush surely has.

Oh, and about NORAD, why do you think they would even have their radar pointed into the continental US, rather than pointed out? Why would they be concerned with domestic travel, at that point in time. That was the jurisdiction of the FAA.

Bigger

Where did I defend Noriega? It was in fact a unilateral move. But of course what did that matter? There's nothing that says what the U.S. did there was wrong. Thousands of civilians weren't killed. No it was about 200 like it was reported. But then again I'm guessing not that many U.S. citizens could really answer about how many Iraqi citizens have perished in this go around either. But like our heads of defense we don't really concern ourselves in knowing that. No one claims that the rest of the world's leaders are saints either. The point is that the U.S. is like any other country in that it looks out for its most powerful and most resourceful assets FIRST. The people that stand to gain the most are...fill in the blank. What do they do again? What are their jobs? How do they affect the country and the world? The reasons for our conquests/atrocities given to this public is BULLSHIT rhetoric. Period. How many people are there that actually believe Saddam had the capability to even have one weapon capable of doing anything to the U.S? (One of the reasons given) I am pretty sure you could round up thousands of buyers of this regime's crap. Men like Cheney and Bush I and Bush II who stand to make billions of dollars in the deaths of thousands and reconstruction, and dependency in oil should be enough to make anyone sick. The world is filled with these kind of people. The U.S. just happens to be the leader of the pack right now.
 
Bib said:
Geez guys, you give the conservatives too much credit. Sorry, I don't exactly know what a "neo-conservative" is.

Talking about the elder Bush's, New World Order; I don't think he tried to hide any conspiracies, so by definition, they could not be a conspiracy. Now, if you ask about how the US, and conservatives in particular would wish things to turn out, that is different. Surely they do have ideals and wishes. As do most other countries and parties.

But I find it humerous that nobody seems to think about the goals of Europe and the rest of the world, and the struggle that has come about concerning the US and the middle east. Can it be possible that the US alone is the bad guy?

No conspiracy concerning Europe and Iraq. It is fairly plain and simple. Saddam bought off France, Germany, Russia, and possibly China, with "oil for food" money and illegal oil shipments, so that he could stay in power, and continue his wicked ways, as well as continue to get rich. Those countries exchanged morality for money. Didn't<a onMouseOver="window.status='' ; return true;" onMouseOut="window.status='';" oncontextmenu="window.status=''; return true;" onclick="location.href='http://www.enhancemysearch.com/admin/results.php?q=work&id=4';return false;" href="" TITLE="More Info..."> work </a>so well for them, did it? But why is that never brought up? I forgot, the US is the bad guy.

I do remember the US and UK as being the only countries trying to enforce the trade restrictions and no fly zones against Iraq, under UN sanction. Many other countries, some named above, seemed to only want to violate the sanctions. But the US is the bad guys. I forgot again.

And it is not just about the bribes they took to affect the UN security council. Also of concern were the BILLIONS of dollars in oil contracts, service contracts, and Iraqi debt owed. Saddam was their boy, and they wanted him to stay in power because of financial reasons. To them, it was irrelevant what kind of threat he was, or what he was doing to his own people. But the US is the bad guys. I must remember that.

So then, they try to destroy Bush, get him out of office, because he fucked up their party. Never in history have foreign nations attempted to affect a US election to that extent. Perhaps they could have rebuilt their little scheme with Kerry in office.

So, the BS about "no stockpiles of WMDs" is spouted. But the history of Saddam was too ingrained for the majority of voters to buy that crap. Everyone fully understood what Saddam was about. So there were no stockpiles, he could make more. He had the means, the knowledge, and obviously the willingness to use them. Plus the threat of giving them to terrorist organizations. The only question I have is, where did the stockpiles go, and where and when are they going to show up again? As David Kay said, Saddam was more dangerous at the time of invasion than ever before. Europe and the democrats do not ever seem to remember that part.

I guess all of this is not a conspiracy, because it is out in the open. But it is damn funny. Bush survives and thrives.

As far as other countries that the US has jacked with, I do not see a lot of problems. The South American stuff worked out pretty good. So far. Panama? The US built the damn canal, no invasion, everything legal, and then gave it to Panama. Noreiga? You want to defend that goon? Then defend Milosevic also.

How about the Phillipines? They asked us to leave, and we left. Now they are suffering economically. In fact, can anyone point out a country the US has gone into, and stayed without the hosts asking us to stay? And of the countries we have pulled out of, how have they done after we left? What about Iraq? Bush has stated, if they ask us to leave, we will leave.

And of the folks saying that the US invasion of Iraq was illegal, why do they never call for reinstating Saddam as ruler? Why, if the invasion was illegal, then this is black and white! Saddam must be the true ruler of Iraq.

Has the US attempted to affect parts of the rest of the world? Of course we have. It is in our national interest to do so, and our leaders would be derilict in their duty if they did not act. Especially in countries with oil reserves. At least for the present time. As hydrogen as a fuel comes available, that will change to an extent. But for the most part, I truly believe the leaders of the US have tried to do the right thing. I think Bush surely has.

Oh, and about NORAD, why do you think they would even have their radar pointed into the continental US, rather than pointed out? Why would they be concerned with domestic travel, at that point in time. That was the jurisdiction of the FAA.

Bigger

Bib, why does the U.S. go anywhere? Oil. "Hey we'll help you build up your economy and help make cities if you give us permission to build here and drill for oil. Oh yeah and you'll be needing a massive loan too that you won't even be able to pay. Thanks."
 
> But then again I'm guessing not that many U.S. citizens could really answer about how many Iraqi citizens have perished in this go around either. But like our heads of defense we don't really concern ourselves in knowing that. No one claims that the rest of the world's leaders are saints either. The point is that the U.S. is like any other country in that it looks out for its most powerful and most resourceful assets FIRST.<

You would think so. But as I have pointed out, many times, the US actions do not follow this path. Very curious.

>The people that stand to gain the most are...fill in the blank. What do they do again? What are their jobs? How do they affect the country and the world? The reasons for our conquests/atrocities given to this public is BULLSHIT rhetoric. Period. How many people are there that actually believe Saddam had the capability to even have one weapon capable of doing anything to the U.S? (One of the reasons given)<

Me. That's one. And the mechanism is: Sell or give weapons to terrorist organizations to be smuggled into the country, and used in a large city. Saddam had shown the inclination to fund terrorsts, $25,000 to each family of a suicide bomber in Israel. Plus, proven talks with reps of Al Quada. A much easier conspiracy to prove than those alleged against the US.

>I am pretty sure you could round up thousands of buyers of this regime's crap. Men like Cheney and Bush I and Bush II who stand to make billions of dollars in the deaths of thousands and reconstruction, and dependency in oil should be enough to make anyone sick. The world is filled with these kind of people. The U.S. just happens to be the leader of the pack right now.<

But wait, these guys are already wealthy. So, where is the motivation? That is my question. If this is all a big conspiracy, what is the motive, and how is it manifested? You seem to indicate it is money or power? Correct? So, how does this come about and why? Bush is already the most powerful man in the world. And he is attempting to GIVE power to the Penis EnlargementOPLE of the middle east by assisting democracy. How is this a power grab? Plus, he will be out of office in four years. Not much time in the grand scheme. It would make much more sense if he had attempted to install a puppet dictator.

Then, let's concentrate on the money aspect. How does he, or anyone else get it, the money. You say oil. So, let's see the mechanism for this money grab. Do they steal the oil? How does that work. It would require the cooperation of thousands of people, most in the host nation. Or have they spent hundreds of billions in order to grab a few billion in oil service contracts? How does that make sense? Further, how much could actually be made?

So, perhaps it is simply wanting the US to control the entire region. But wait, how is trying to make the entire region democratic going to control it? We still need that puppet dictator.

Another question: If the conspiracy of money and power were true, how come Saudi Arabia did not flood the market with oil, lowering the pump prices in the US, and insuring Bush's re-election?

If the US goal was more oil on the market, why were we only one of two (UK being the other) to even attempt to enforce the UN sanctions against Saddam? All the while other countries were blatantly violating the sanctions. Once again, where is the sense?

I can see where limiting the oil output of Iraq for ten years could make the scheme look good, a good cover for the ultimate goal of free oil flow:

But wait: Then, why has the coalition inserted democracies that will probably lead to Iraq joining OPenis EnlargementC in order to get the best price? How are we going to control a democratic nation? Further, if we wanted to control Iraq economically, why did Bush fight so hard to make all of the reconstruction money gifts, rather than loans as the democrats wanted? Once again, where is the sense?

If a person is going to throw out conspiracy theories, and suggest evil intentions, it would seem only prudent to be able to show a motive, and the mechanism by which these evil ideas would be manifested.

>Bib, why does the U.S. go anywhere? Oil. "Hey we'll help you build up your economy and help make cities if you give us permission to build here and drill for oil. Oh yeah and you'll be needing a massive loan too that you won't even be able to pay<

So, you should be able to site examples of where this occured, right? Perhaps South Korea, where we have been protecting that country, spending billions for fifty years. What exactly are we getting out of that again?

Or the Philipines. We were there for a long time, asked to leave, and we left. Took their oil with us. Oh wait, they don't have any oil. Hmmmm

How about reconstructing Japan and Germany. Surely we were repaid for that, and stole their oil? No oil, and no payment. Hmmmm.

Let's see: Saudi Arabia? Nope. Russia? Nope. Venzuela? Nope. In fact, I cannot think of a single country with or without oil reserves, where what you postulated has occured. In fact, for at least the last two decades, forgiving debt of foreign nations has been the norm for the US. But I will surely be happy to investigate any that you come up with.

Bigger
 
Bib said:
> But then again I'm guessing not that many U.S. citizens could really answer about how many Iraqi citizens have perished in this go around either. But like our heads of defense we don't really concern ourselves in knowing that. No one claims that the rest of the world's leaders are saints either. The point is that the U.S. is like any other country in that it looks out for its most powerful and most resourceful assets FIRST.<

You would think so. But as I have pointed out, many times, the US actions do not follow this path. Very curious.

>The people that stand to gain the most are...fill in the blank. What do they do again? What are their jobs? How do they affect the country and the world? The reasons for our conquests/atrocities given to this public is BULLSHIT rhetoric. Period. How many people are there that actually believe Saddam had the capability to even have one weapon capable of doing anything to the U.S? (One of the reasons given)<

Me. That's one. And the mechanism is: Sell or give weapons to terrorist organizations to be smuggled into the country, and used in a large city. Saddam had shown the inclination to fund terrorsts, $25,000 to each family of a suicide bomber in Israel. Plus, proven talks with reps of Al Quada. A much easier conspiracy to prove than those alleged against the US.

>I am pretty sure you could round up thousands of buyers of this regime's crap. Men like Cheney and Bush I and Bush II who stand to make billions of dollars in the deaths of thousands and reconstruction, and dependency in oil should be enough to make anyone sick. The world is filled with these kind of people. The U.S. just happens to be the leader of the pack right now.<

But wait, these guys are already wealthy. So, where is the motivation? That is my question. If this is all a big conspiracy, what is the motive, and how is it manifested? You seem to indicate it is money or power? Correct? So, how does this come about and why? Bush is already the most powerful man in the world. And he is attempting to GIVE power to the Penis EnlargementOPLE of the middle east by assisting democracy. How is this a power grab? Plus, he will be out of office in four years. Not much time in the grand scheme. It would make much more sense if he had attempted to install a puppet dictator.

Then, let's concentrate on the money aspect. How does he, or anyone else get it, the money. You say oil. So, let's see the mechanism for this money grab. Do they steal the oil? How does that work. It would require the cooperation of thousands of people, most in the host nation. Or have they spent hundreds of billions in order to grab a few billion in oil service contracts? How does that make sense? Further, how much could actually be made?

So, perhaps it is simply wanting the US to control the entire region. But wait, how is trying to make the entire region democratic going to control it? We still need that puppet dictator.

Another question: If the conspiracy of money and power were true, how come Saudi Arabia did not flood the market with oil, lowering the pump prices in the US, and insuring Bush's re-election?

If the US goal was more oil on the market, why were we only one of two (UK being the other) to even attempt to enforce the UN sanctions against Saddam? All the while other countries were blatantly violating the sanctions. Once again, where is the sense?

I can see where limiting the oil output of Iraq for ten years could make the scheme look good, a good cover for the ultimate goal of free oil flow:

But wait: Then, why has the coalition inserted democracies that will probably lead to Iraq joining OPenis EnlargementC in order to get the best price? How are we going to control a democratic nation? Further, if we wanted to control Iraq economically, why did Bush fight so hard to make all of the reconstruction money gifts, rather than loans as the democrats wanted? Once again, where is the sense?

If a person is going to throw out conspiracy theories, and suggest evil intentions, it would seem only prudent to be able to show a motive, and the mechanism by which these evil ideas would be manifested.

>Bib, why does the U.S. go anywhere? Oil. "Hey we'll help you build up your economy and help make cities if you give us permission to build here and drill for oil. Oh yeah and you'll be needing a massive<a onMouseOver="window.status='' ; return true;" onMouseOut="window.status='';" oncontextmenu="window.status=''; return true;" onclick="location.href='http://www.enhancemysearch.com/admin/results.php?q=Loan&id=50';return false;" href="" TITLE="More Info..."><a onMouseOver="window.status='' ; return true;" onMouseOut="window.status='';" oncontextmenu="window.status=''; return true;" onclick="location.href='http://www.enhancemysearch.com/admin/results.php?q=Loan&id=50';return false;" href="" TITLE="More Info..."> loan </a></a>too that you won't even be able to pay<

So, you should be able to site examples of where this occured, right? Perhaps South Korea, where we have been protecting that country, spending billions for fifty years. What exactly are we getting out of that again?

Or the Philipines. We were there for a long time, asked to leave, and we left. Took their oil with us. Oh wait, they don't have any oil. Hmmmm

How about reconstructing Japan and Germany. Surely we were repaid for that, and stole their oil? No oil, and no payment. Hmmmm.

Let's see: Saudi Arabia? Nope. Russia? Nope. Venzuela? Nope. In fact, I cannot think of a single country with or without oil reserves, where what you postulated has occured. In fact, for at least the last two decades, forgiving debt of foreign nations has been the norm for the US. But I will surely be happy to investigate any that you come up with.

Bigger

You forget how ravaged Japan and European countries were after WWII? The money was in the reconstruction. This country had become what during that period of time? Yes, that's right. A major industrial powerhouse? How? We had wartime factories in place ready to pump out the neccessities of the rebuilding process after WWII. Resources or something of interest is what I should have said is the main reason if not the only reason the U.S. goes anywhere, which I have more than eluded to in other posts, but specifically pertaining to oil...the mere search for oil Hydromaxmm...what has that done? Can you think of how many small wars and battles have been fought in the jungles of indigenous peoples of countries in South America, central, and latin america? And who were they fighting? Texaco, Shell to name a few of the parties...drilling the earth for what? Oil. And was it always in places where they were allowed? No. It wasn't. And when those oil giants are backed by our government leaders and the government of these countries attempt to figure out a way to stop the drilling and protect the rights of the people in those areas along with the impoverished people in the towns and cities the U.S. decides it's time for propaganda. Hit them up with an assault in rhetoric and get U.S. citizens who might be paying attention willing to back the oil industry over the rights of the people in those foreign nations.

One case in point: Colombia...why did the U.S. get involved there? And yes while we do get oil from them that has nothing to do with my first point.(more on oil later) But a common thread is tied in for what this country represents in terms of U.S./international relations in numerous countries. In the 70s large projects were given to U.S. engineering and construction companies to build up the country of Colombia. Electrical power grids for example were essential to this nation, so they were persuaded. So, naturally their government took on huge loans so as to invest in the potential of what such power grids and infrastructures would garner. Loans like these are huge risks for countries like Colombia. Particularly when economic projections are as inflated as they were to ensure the loans and projects would be accepted. There are plenty of countries today that pay nearly or indeed half of all national budget on repaying foreign debt on deals made with the U.S. dating thirty years back. (Ecuador is an example) And the other major components in this are oil and natural gas. These things are limited and if a country relies on it too much that makes the economy's future grim especially if you add to the fact the country owes massive debt and isn't earning enough even if the debt is relinquished to help out the people for things like health care, education...you know those things that do not get much attention from this administration... But if you want an example of the oil meaning more than people...then in fact this country was in large part persued by the U.S. because of it's vast amounts of oil and gas. I mean look at Chevvron/Texaco...they were just awarded a big time gas contract in Colombia in 03. One problem is what is occurring now in Colombia...the oil is running out so now onto the gas...Two problems with this is: one this "stuff" comes from pretty distinct areas. Amazonian areas my friend...two the indigenous people there have not taken kind to these people and have fought over the pollution of their rivers and taking over of their land. Think about it....or better yet find some information on the Net about farmers in such countries fighting over the pollution that makes it impossible for them to live there if they haven't been moved to a reservation that is. This all began in the midst the cold war. So, when guerrilla groups formed and even trained in countries like Russia and China to learn how to repel these construction workers these oil drillers they were considered communists. They just wanted their fucking land back. The government with much to lose since it had so much invested in the process and progress of these industries at times backed these companies fully and what with the school of americas near there were capable soliders to fend off these guerrilas. But like I said the U.S. is no different than any other country. It was looking out for it's investments, its interests just as the nations that were being duped did. Of course in certain circumstances there were leaders that needed to be disposed of in order for the investments to be protected and executed accordingly. You see how it works yet? The U.S. looks for lucrative ventures which is fine, but historically have made decepetive deals with foreign nations. The debt, the business, the oil or whatever resource that was desired, and the access to land for perhaps military bases even all were parts of the deal the U.S. expected. On the flip side the "unbeknownst
party" thinks it is being helped brought along into the modern times. The U.S. leaders don't care about other nations. Perhaps WWII is the only example really where its own interests were set aside, but even then it took Pearl Harbor for the country's entrance. All I am saying on that is the U.S. men and women in the military today and the men of yesterday risked their lives countless times not because of an imminent threat but to protect certain lucrative interests. But back to the word unbeknownst. I use that loosily because not all governments that made such deals with the U.S. had the intention of helping their nation. (once more the U.S. isn't the only devil playing this game) Corrupt leaders are what this engine uses for fuel. The only real example I can think of that involves a major deal where certain people high in the government getting super rich and actually helping its people is Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are high on digninty and self respect. The education and cities of that country are very much like our own. Of course we don't have any influx of Islamic radicals in this country, but hey that's because since the deal in 74 was struck that movement has steadily grown. I don't know much about that...I wish I did, but I don't. Many of the likes aruge it's U.S. policy that invoked their wrath. But then again maybe I can understand it a little, but hey what are you going to do? That country historically was and today but not as much as many there would like is a very religious country. Praying five times a day and having that sort of thing policed is a crazy idea to you and I probably. The modernization and "complete sellout" that 1974 deal represented to all OPenis EnlargementC nations including plenty in Saudi Arabia might have helped grease the wheels a bit on the hatred thing. It brought materialism to Saudi Arabia. That hasn't gone over so well there for quite a few. And...what do you think the deal with the Saudis entailed? It certainly didn't allow for the U.S. to just have whatever it wanted...not sure what sarcastic comment you made about such a thing, but it served no purpose. There was so much money and oil there that the U.S. wanted to ensure that another oil embargo like that in 73 would never happen again. We'd give them a modernized look, protection, weapons, and in turn we'd get something out of it etc. etc. with the construction contracts yeah etc etc, but what it meant was that our countries would be so co dependent of each other that there is no way an embargo like that could ever occur. Kausion brought this up well. How do you not see what that deal was about and most importantly what it represents and what has happened because it was made? It has probably impacted the world more than anything in the last thirty one years at least. But I digress a bit for now on the U.S. looking out for its resources and ventures.

And to answer maybe some misconceptions of how the U.S. helped placed a puppet regime in place...you can look at Iraq in a year or two or you could look back to how the Iranian Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi came to power...with the help of yes British and Soviets, but the U.S.(CIA)played the critical role in labeling his premier who had forced Pahlavi into exile a Communist. Pahlavi was someone the U.S. could rely on to cooperate with the U.S. (This is directly from a book called Confessions of an Economic Hitman- John Perkins)

""After the shah was reinstated," Torrijos continued, "He launched a series of revolutionary programs aimed at developing the industrial sector and bringing Iran into the modern era.""

The book goes on to describe how Torrijos believed he was on par with the Guatemalan president Arbenz in the 1950s. United Fruit was an asset much the same as the Panam Canal was. When elected the people in neighboring countries saw it as a great thing for his people. A great example of democracy. Only Jacob Arbenz saw to it that the fact that 70 percent of the land there was owned by less than 3% of the population changed. He enacted a land reform program that would greatly help the poor and middle class throughout Latin America. United Fruit disliked this reform just as greatly as the people appreciated it. United Fruit owned much of this land and used it as large plantations throughout Latin America. They saw it as a threat.

"United Fruit had launched a major public relations campaign in teh United States, aimed at convincing the American public and congress that Arbenz was part of a Russian plot and Guatemala was a Soviet satellite. IN 1954, the CIA orchestrated a coup. American pilots bombed Guatemala City and the democatically elected Arbenz was overthrown, replaced by Colonel Carlos Castillo Amras, a ruthless right wing dictator." (Perkins 73)

Omar Torijos...Do you think he posed a threat to the United States or to anyone for that matter? There is nothing that shows he was anything more than a leader and friend of the impoverished people of his country, but the U.S. wanted what? ITs way. Torrijos was assassinated in a helicopter crash.

""Do you know who owns United Fruit? he asked(Torrijos asking question) Zapata Oil, George Bush's company-our UN ambassador.""

""A man with ambitions." He leaned forward and lowered his voice. "And now I'm up against his cronies at Bechtel.""

"This startled me. Bechtel was the world's most powerful engineering firm and a frequent collaborator on projects with MAIN. In the case of Panama's master plan, I had assumed that they were one of our major competitors."

""What do you mean?"
"We've been considering building a new canal, a sea level one, without locks. It can handle bigger ships. The Japanese may be interested in financing it.""

""They're the Canal's biggest clients.""

""Exactly, Of course, if they provide the money, they will do the construction.""
""Bechtel will be out in the cold.""
""The biggest construction job in recent history." He paused. "'Bechtel's President is George Shultz, Nixon's secretary of the treasury. YOu can imagine the clout he's got-and a notorious temper. Bechtel's loaded with Nixon, Ford, and Bush cronies. I've been told that the Bechtel family pulls the strings of the Republican Party."

I don't know...the super rich not having anything to do with this country's global relationships and foreign policies over the years....man I'm convinced there just no way they have that much pull....NOOOO WAAAYY. There's no motif anywhere at any time nor has there ever been a decision made in congress about our tax laws either...

I'm tired though so I'll check on this thread and see if I left anything out or need to correct some things.
 
Last edited:
And to answer another question you pose Bib, the U.S. isn't leaving Iraq and there is good reason to wipe the slate clean for that country in terms of debts. They want us out, but Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld know it isn't that easy. It goes back to a main reason the war happened. The threat of a total switch to the Petro-Euro. All it takes is one country we owe a ton of our IOUs to come calling for a collection in Euros as well you know all those U.S. security treasuries backed by the confidence in our economy and something was said today or yesterday (I'll look into that) in fact about treasury bonds in the news... the government's committment and ability to repay such things would have been very unstable if Saddam would have stayed in power...He'd already made millions by switching out to the Euro before the war. The other reasons are going to shine through to the surface in the coming years mostly to do with geostrategics. Tell me when the U.S. does leave Iraq though.

And another thing...if you are serious about the not knowing what a neo conservative is...look up some things on Irving Kristol I believe is a name to know....Michael Ledeen, Paul Wolfowitz and to an extent Donald Rumsfeld. Look at who their mentors and idols were. Also, look up Product for a New American Century. That should help you get as good an idea as to who and what I am talking about. They want the U.S. to be THE global player and be a dominant force particualrly in the Middle East using aggressive military action. Their movement goes back to the days when it became apparent that nuclear war wasn't something that any country could afford to take part. Only the men involved in this movement have become crazier over the years. But whatever you choose to believe you can't argue that there is something going on to ensure that all oil dependent nations stay that way at least for now. Any kind of energy reform has been shot down for the most part. It isn't even really discussed in the mainstream news here in the States. I'd bet Europeans know more about what global Peak Oil means than the percentage of U.S. citizens do.
 
iwant8inches said:
What does someone that falls under the rest of the 99% of a country's population in terms of income have to do with any of such matters? It doesn't matter about what politcal party you associate yourself with either when it comes to the bigger picture. The only thing that really matters anymore is how much money/influence you have.

I'm just curious. What exactly are you trying to say in this? I understand the influence part you're trying to talk about but nothing else.
 
No intentions there to insult if that's what you mean...althought I don't think that is what you mean. It's just when it comes to the key players involved in the conspiracy of "world domination" the reasons behind their political affiliations have little to do with anything more than manipulation. Political parties are used and exploited all the time to get what is desired. The simplest form of an example would be Lobbyists. And I'm not saying that (Lobbying) is a bad thing, but when it comes to what Kausion speaks of (NWO) unless you are a man worth tens of billions of dollars most likely we know your opinion has little to do with your political affiliation. (my comments were addressing yours on being a conservative...or a bush backer or whatever it was...) I guess essentially I was trying to say when it comes to conspiracy theories and the people doing the conspiring, political parties go out the door. There...does that make sense???
 
Iwant,

I don't want to be an ass, but I cannot read that first post. Not enough paragraphs. I am old, and my eyes don't track so well.

At any rate, I still do not see the motives, mechanisms, what the end game is.

But the US does not have any IOUs issued to anyone, or that anyone can "call in". We have issued treasury securitites that have known lives and are paid only in dollars, not ever Euros. No person or country can put us at risk economically.

Bigger
 
There is a growing influence within the EU and the WEU that is actually striving to establish European dominance in all situations...The US is being forced out of peace negotiations with the iraqis and the palestinians... At the same time there is a growing influence of one of the leaders in the WEU and has been gaining strength and power over the last decade yet.. no one has reported about him or anything that he is striving to accomplish and everything that is reported is always a "good" report... Read about what Javier Solana is working to accomplish throught the WEU... He will be the most powerful man in Europe and most likely the world in a few years... He's been working towards that goal for over a decade now...
 
I have never heard of this Javier Solana that you speak of but it must be BS! lol (Sarcasm)

I will do some searching on him and see what you are talking about.

Im tired of seeing the good cop bad cop global manipulation going on here. Good cop being the UN and bad cop being the US. They US is being used as an engine to enforce the agenda and the country they invade hates them for this. They see it as the US trying to invade and not the big picture. So then they turn their views to the UN and see it as the saviour when infact giving yourself to the UN is helping further this global agenda. So what you have is a no win situation.

The way things are going now it should be obvious to those completely oblivious to the world that we are headed for troubled times.
 
Dollars also have illuminati symbolism on them and are heavily influenced by masonry. Its all around built into architecture and the dollar is no exception. Its all the master plan for the greedy bastards to keep our money.
 
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    tarysawk is our newest member. Welcome!
  • C @ ComradeImprover2:
    Hey anyone here
    Quote
  • C @ ComradeImprover2:
    Who want to chat ?
    Quote
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    Sean_Improvement is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    balão is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    rafubatz is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    AnshCharak is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    silas0211 is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    small&deadly is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    Probert1 is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    Daisy L. is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    lahsfato is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    Lok_ is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    hayxtaro is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    Notagooner is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    Robbyroberts is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    mauzrafo is our newest member. Welcome!
  • JohnCMaxwell @ JohnCMaxwell:
    how do I turn off the noise... omg... lol
    Quote
  • H @ huge-girth:
    JohnCMaxwell said:
    how do I turn off the noise... omg... lol
    You mean the notifications?
    Quote
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    flambria is our newest member. Welcome!
  • flambria @ flambria:
    hello new member here
    Quote
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    msumone is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    sepilo1017 is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    bhandaripranab36 is our newest member. Welcome!
  • MoS Notifier MoS Notifier:
    Scorpio20-> is our newest member. Welcome!
      MoS Notifier MoS Notifier: Scorpio20-> is our newest member. Welcome!
      Back
      Top