Hopefully, I can get this link to work...
Scroll down to find the article...
There are also some valuable links within this article - follow them
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1372.htm
Check this out too !!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100519/ap_on_re_as/as_skorea_ship_sinks;_ylt=Ahud8wHuZMSIyo9T2w_9iaP9xg8F;_ylu=X3oDMTM5MnNzbzF0BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNTE5L2FzX3Nrb3JlYV9zaGlwX3NpbmtzBGNjb2RlA21vc3Rwb3B1bGFyBGNwb3MDNwRwb3MDNwRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3JpZXMEc2xrA3Nrb3JlYXN0b3BkaQ--
sorry about the length just copy and paste...
This information is even more scary the farther I dig on this topic...
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1956/1/
Clayton
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
254 comments:
1 – 200 of 254 Newer› Newest»http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/cops_lose_grip_in_bridge_death_leap_AK3oveb5ukhyJbkQCZBnbL?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=
Our new, great President has brought out the best in people: read some of the comments.
If we South Korea attacks the North kiss our guys goodbye. They will all be killed. We would have to strike first with massive air attack probably tactical nukes as well.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fire sale
Senator Jay Rockefeller promotes “unprecedented information sharing between government and the private sector.”
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s773/text
Who's this conspiracy nut? Oh.
"our nation's security and economic prosperity depend on the security, stability, and integrity of communications and information infrastructure that are largely privately-owned and globally-operated." - John Brennan, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism written March 2, 2009 Senate Bill 773 section 2 paragraph (5)
Okay, so according to this guy, our nation's security and economic prosperity depend upon privately owned foreign companies. Anyone else have a problem with just that right there?
I believe bigdog. He is 100 percent accurate in his analysis. My research confirms his research without any doubt. This rig was not owned by South Korea in any manor nor was it torpedeod.
In fact according to BIGDOG, then verified by me, they signed a new contract in 2005 with this private company to build a new rig.
The article you posted repeats the kremlin article and says it is intended to hurt them economically. Just exactly how? Unless companies cancel contracts and South Korea doesnt receive any taxable revenues from Hyundai, how does it hurt?
Secondly the oil rig isnt called NEW HORIZON. Its called Deepwater Horizon and it wasnt torpedeod. The SK ship was and thats a seperate issue and confirmed by many.
Thirdly. I noticed you were and still are avoiding any debate with bigdog on air...i believe "so whats your point bigdog" comment from you, shows your own lack of rational thought and discourse.
Its sad actually after being shot down on air, you still post your rhetoric about the oil rig. Nope its actually very telling of a persons dishonesty.
Flip
Clayton...you do owe BIGDOG an apology for attacking him personally with that I-saved-his-job BS. Attacking him like that reveals a lack of character. Apologizing would reveal character. I'll leave that up to you.
Since you dont know, BIGDOG is a thorough researcher almost to a fault. Even his honest detractors (which would exclude the gay lovers, Anthony and John) would have to admit that. After listening to the Justice Files for several years and therefore BIGDOG by extension, I know I would call my own opinion into question if he disagreed with me.
In the interest of full disclosure, I do know BIGDOG.
By the way, how to post a link so that it pops up automatically can be found in the "Elements" section of this link.
OH COME ON....We all know if Bush was in office he would be accused of hating OIL, cause its black.
Kanye West
Nutty,
Quit with the projection??.
Your right. Clayton may owe BIGDOG a apology for his statement
about saving his job. But you demand Clayton to do the right thing,then you take a cheapshot at myself and Tony? Gay Lovers??. I mean this is so high school?.
I don't know BIGDOG that well. I met him once at a get together for "The Justice Files and WavestationX". I have read his research about 9-11 and he makes good points about the influences of radical nationalist and it's ties to Islamic extremist. But his info can be one sided. He made the same links to Saddam and tried to tie it to 9-11. (similar to what the last administration tried). He doesn't take into account that the Baath Party was anti-religous.
I do agree with BD about 9-11 conspiracy theories and some of the people that throw it out and about. Gee Nutty, I thought you was a 9-11 truther??. Is someone talking out of one's ASS??.
Quit again with the projection??. Or if your not projecting try to respond in a adult manner and not personal attacks. You can do it.
I miss debating with you on air because you are usualy very knowledgeable. As i have said in the past, i dont mind an informed opinion.
John in that same document/booklet i made and i showed that saddam himself was allowing all of Islams religious leaders access to Iraq during the mid to late 1990's. I do not believe you are accurate in your assumption the leader of the Baath party, Saddam, was anti-religious, his actions proven different. I believe i refered to to its correct title National Islamic Convention, in the booklet i made. The convention took place in Baghdad, repleat with fundamentalists and radical clerics...i.e. AlQaida, Muslim Brotherhood, Muhjedeen and prominent clerics from Iraq,Iran,Saudi and some African nations as well. To say he was not a religious leader before the first gulf war, i would agree with that statement; but after GW1 he may have repented and formed relationships with these radicals who hated the USA.
The Bush administration never tried to tie anything on 9-11 to saddam and neither did myself. Such a claim would be silly. Could you project into the equation saddam somehow funded 9-11 or provided safe haven for those who planned it during the convention of 1996, i believe was the correct year. Knowingly, saddam harboured wanted terrists and played host to training grounds. You could project from that.... i believe saddam could have easily been involved, truelly possible but not verifiable. So i dont stand by that claim but merely pointing out his actions demonstated differently after GW1.
Besides that John, an attempted assassination on one of our presidents is an act of war...PERIOD!!
We have had many conversations about this John and you and Anthony both no i am right on many points. I mean you guys ignored for example; my claim i had evidence that shows how many Democrats (even quoted some in my booklet) say saddam needed to be removed or were worried he was going nuclear well before Bush took office.
You also no i was the only one making it clear i stood solidily on the cease-fire agreement and it being violated for 12 years. Way to long to risk anything on that ruthless sob, including mid east conflict. HUGE american interests reside there...right? Of course.
BIGDOG
Bush Defends Assertions of Iraq-Al Qaeda Relationship
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50679-2004Jun17.html
"Bush, in 2003, said 'the battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001.'"
President Bush repeated his administration's claim that Iraq was in league with al Qaeda under Saddam Hussein's rule
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/15/bush.alqaeda
"In September, after Cheney asserted that Iraq had been "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11," Bush acknowledged there was no evidence that Saddam's government was connected to those attacks."
Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm
Vid - Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11
http://fifcolumn.blogspot.com/2010/05/propaganda-what-is-it-and-where-can-i.html
John,
I apologize for mentioning your loving relationship with Anthony. I'm glad we agree that Clayon should apologize to BD.
could you imagine what would happen to the poor people of a small Euro city that had say a million black Americans dumped on them. It is too horrible to think about.
John: where be my job whity?
You's owe mees i bess a slave youis oppressess me.
where his me hourse, hoopts;
but bess warz them white fermales.
I have been waiting for two days to see Johns reply to bigdog. I have been waiting for him to defend his assertion towards bigdog and i quote: "But his info can be one sided. He made the same links to Saddam and tried to tie it to 9-11. (similar to what the last administration tried). He doesn't take into account that the Baath Party was anti-religous."
Im just saying he nailed you with his response. So there is no more debate? I can see, in light of the last few days,how bigdog can make people feel stupid in their assertions and that pisses people off like Ben and Clayton and MT. No response shows intelectual concedement.
Oh side note. I followed those links Anony...Those that pay attention have already known Bush never tied anything on 9-11 to Saddam.
Flip
I don't know you Flip, but either you are functionally retarded or you think that people here are.
This should clear things up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTpZYH2x9-k
And this:
http://www.espeeches.com/index.php?/george-bush/george-w-bush-address-to-the-nation-from-the-uss-abraham-lincoln-050103.html
"The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on 11 September 2001, and still goes on."
And This:
http://projects.publicintegrity.org/WarCard
"President Bush, for example, made 232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Secretary of State Powell had the second-highest total in the two-year period, with 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed by Wolfowitz (with 85), Rice (with 56), Cheney (with 48), and McClellan (with 14)."
And this:
http://www.alternet.org/story/16274?page=2
"We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.
FACT: No evidence of this has ever been leaked or produced. Colin Powell told the U.N. this alleged training took place in a camp in northern Iraq. To his great embarrassment, the area he indicated was later revealed to be outside Iraq's control and patrolled by Allied war planes."
very powerful stuff, what more do you want? =D
Apparently you are the retarded one. Again nowhere in your links does it show Bush or anyone else linking 9-11 to saddam.
They may have linked AlQaeda to Iraq thru training grounds and harbouring, but not once did Bush say saddam was involved in 9-11. In fact Bush and Cheney made it clear that they couldnt link 9-11 to saddam and were not trying to do so.
As demonstrated in the above link: Vid - Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11
Flip
Oh BTW the next time you refer to me being retarded i hope you have a name i can link you to. For now your foot will suffy instead of mine.
"very powerful stuff, what more do you want? =D"
Flip this is Bens quote from the end of his many suicides (also known as sound bite intelectualism).
If this is Ben. Pay him no attention. Hes not that bright.
BIGDOG
Flip, playing word games just makes us all dumber. If I misunderstood your point then I do apologize.
I'm sure they tried to be careful about their language but the Fact is that they did mislead the American people by connecting the war in Iraq to 911. GWB was a proven chronic liar to the people. And he did purposefully lead the public to believe that 911 and saddam were well connected.
Since Saddam ruled Iraq as the sole dictator, then anything connected to iraq would have to have been connected to saddam(in anybody and everybody's minds for sure). Saddam was Iraq.
I'll explain this statement made by GWB in 2003:
"The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on 11 September 2001, and still goes on."
Every complete sentence contains two parts: a subject and a predicate. The subject is what (or whom) the sentence is about, while the predicate tells something about the subject.
http://www.writingcentre.uottawa.ca/hypergrammar/subjpred.html
To determine the subject of a sentence, first isolate the verb and then make a question by placing "who?" or "what?" before it -- the answer is the subject.
Verb: "is"
The Subject: "The Battle of Iraq"
...the predicate tells something about the subject.
Predicate: "is one victory in a war on terror that began on 11 September 2001, and still goes on."
His 'telling something about the subject'(Iraq war) was the war on terror that began on 911.
This is GWB connecting 911 to Iraq(Saddam). It's right here.
So if you want to be all anal about it, then yes you are most likely correct that bush did not speak the actual words linking saddam and 911. But I think if you ask people if that's what they were led to believe by him at the time then most people would tell you yes for sure.
So is your point that GWB was good at legalese?
By the way, Scrappydoo, I'm not Ben.
To actually believe that "The Bush administration never tried to tie anything on 9-11 to saddam" is just lying to yourself.
http://mediamatters.org/research/200611100005
Anal? excuse me! Yeh just like you dismiss the quotes from both cheney and bush who both said they were not trying to link saddam with 9-11.
Its very simple you are selecting quotes and perjecting your belief into them, knowingly being dishonest in your evaluation. Wich i will demonstrate in a few.
They made it real clear they were not linking 9-11 to Iraq. They even went out of there way on several ocassions to say we are not linking 9-11 to Iraq/saddam. Where are your quotes demonstrating they did, i can show they didnt. Moreover, heres the kicker, demonstrating your dishonesty. You admit they did not say directly, 9-11 was saddams doing. Yet you still fabricate they did. Why? To what end?
The Subject: "The Battle of Iraq"
Equates to saddams removal.
Predicate: "is one victory in a war on terror that began on 11 September 2001, and still goes on."
Indeed it "is one victory" and that one victory, (implying more than one victory coming)was saddams removal.
The rest of the quote still does not imply saddam was involved in 9-11,only marking the date of attack on US soil and that war still goes on. One could insert with accuracy; not conjecture. Afghanistan is that "still goes on" and another victory still to come.
You see Mr.Scrappydoo doo. You're full of shit and not a very honest individual. Without question i can see bigdogs point about you guys being very dishonest and dismissive of valid information just to make it appear you are accurately describing the reality of the issue at hand.
Im am done with your dishonesty.
Flip
"Its very simple you are selecting quotes and 'perjecting' your belief into them."
I meant 'projecting'.
Sorry.
Flip
Awhh dont worry about it flip we all make speeling erdors...lol
Im telling you flip these idiots are a waste of time but fun to kick around, intellectually of course...lol
You can clearly see this guy, whomever he is, well hes just not that bright and is very disengenious.
BIGDOG
Flip,
I'm sorry I didn't get back to a response for BD. I tend to have a life and well I get tired of repeating myself.
Bigdog's research tends to be onesided.(I stand by that statement.) He made the same speculations about 9-11, Saddam Hussien,Al Qadea just like neo-cons like Richard Pearle,Victor Davis Hansen,Hoover and Heritage Foundations scholars. Yes there was Democrats that thought that Saddam had WMD's and ties to 9-11 but they were wrong also. I have tried to research a meeting of all the Islamic Organizations and groups in Bagdad in the mid 90's and I found no record of it. Bush and Cheney did try to link 9-11 to Saddam numerous times until Bush had to admit that there was no link at all.
The Baath Party was founded in the late 1930's in Damascus Syria. It only gained power in Syria and Iraq. The Baath was a pro-nationalist,SECULAR,socialist org. To try to say that the Baath had operational links without controls to these islamic jihadist groups who could given enough power take control in Iraq is basically a naive and quite frankly a lack of geo-political knowledge of that region.
I also like to refer to the debriefing of Saddam Hussien by George Piro. Piro did 125 to 130 interviews with Saddam and he learned what made him tick and it provided great intel on the workings of his regime and his thinkings. (Google it or Yahoo it)
Flip, I won't try to insult you or anyone that disagee's with me. I won't question your inteligence or your manhood or your sexaul status. I won't call out your ethnic background and write something that is stupid. I try to keep this intelectual. It's your turn now.
John you said you read my book. Do you still have it?
The convention i spoke of is in the book and referenced in the book with a link provided. Now the question is is that link still open to read. If you need me to i can get a copy from one of my relatives and post that link.
Iraq is still a member of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) beginning in 1976and has played host to its many conferences. Yet im stll not sure if this is the same org i refered to in my booklet, but i will find out.
Just prior to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, Saddam turned to religion perhaps to bolster his government (for example, adding the words "God is Great" in Arabic to the flag, and referring to God in his speeches). After Saddam lost the Gulf War, he identified more closely with Islam by hosting international conferences and broadcasting Islamic sermons on national radio. In 1994, Saddam began his "Faith Campaign" in which he began to build mosques, changed laws to outlaw public drinking, required Baathist officials to attend prayers and held Quran reciting competitions.
Heres a link to help you visualise saddams "FAITH CAMPAIGN". Scroll down because there are many links from NPR,AP,UPI.
Sounds to me saddam made a fundamental change in his religious manorisms.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-19193823.html
Dont forget to scroll down and see the many links.
BIGDOG
Ok John i read up on Piro and his interview on 60 minutes. He interrogated Saddam during his trial/capture.
At the moment i dont think Piro held saddams feet to the fire. Saddams obvious bantering towards Piro doesnt match his actions and saddams change of heart towards Islam during the mid to late 1990's.
As i stated in my previous post: "To say he was not a religious leader before the first gulf war, i would agree with that statement; but after GW1 he may have repented and formed relationships with these radicals who hated the USA."
BTW im getting a copy of my homework to verify my claims of the conference issue and who i got it from. For the life of me i cant find my own damned copy...lol
BIGDOG
One more time:
bush = liar
http://projects.publicintegrity.org/WarCard
"President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."
"They estimate that there were at least 392,976 excess deaths - those that would not have occurred, had there been no war - in Iraq since 2003, and possibly as many as 942,636. The research confirmed the results of the same group's 2004 study."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10276-enormous-death-toll-of-iraq-invasion-revealed.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17055943
The Kucinich Impeachment Speech and the 35 Articles in Full
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2008/06/kucinich_impeac.php
http://chun.afterdowningstreet.org/amomentoftruth.pdf
http://thinkprogress.org/iraq-timeline
How to create an Angry American
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ
Flip, Im am done with your games. NO part of the battle of Iraq began on September, 11 2001. The bush admin did eventually admit that Iraq was not involved with the events on that day but not until after the fighting began and war was pretty much won. It is a fact that the American people were misled into supporting the slaughter and takeover of people who had done US no wrong. I don't put my words out there with the intent to lie and decieve like some, I call it how I see it.
I know that there's plenty of folks out there like you and Scrappybigdogdoo, who when the death and destruction began on March 19, 2003, probably went and ate chicken at KFC like it was no big deal. 'The ends justify the means', you tell yourselves while licking your greese-soaked fingers and crackin raghead jokes. The "ends" are to keep US safe, so the means are justified right? Not once letting a doubt enter your minds about the legitimacy of those ends, just trusting in the proven chronic liars in charge to handle things, supporting and defending their actions. What if the "ends" in this case were fabricated? Then they wouldn't be justified, oh shit. So you keep on defending 'your guys', denying your guilt, venting your crushing inner anguish on those who oppose the world of mass-murder and mass-manipulation that is the lies you live by. Lying, playing games with serious issues, twisting words, dislike of the weak, and finding pleasure in hurting others are not good signs. You waste your wit and cunning in a futile attempt to protect yourselves from a lie TOO BIG to fail, cowering away from the truth that is the blood on your hands.
I've heard it said that "people will believe a lie because they want it to be true or because they're afraid it might be true". Which best describes your reaction to the 935 lies told by the bush admin in the 2 years after 911? There was a lot of fear going around at the time and that triggered a violent reaction in lots of people. When you do realize that you got played, and you will, I hope that you take a close look at some of those lies and what they cost people. I'm certainly not the epitomy of morality but I do have a conscience. Can you imagine what well over 300-Thousand corpses would look like?
Check out these perjections, then maybe you'll get the picture:
http://projects.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/Images/Charts/WarCardChart.jpg
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/uploads/muslim_bodies-iraq_may_28__2003.jpg
http://scrapetv.com/News/News Pages/Everyone Else/images-2/abu-ghraib-torture.jpg
http://inplacenews.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/photo1aa.jpg
http://zembla.cementhorizon.com/archives/ghraib-saycheese.jpg
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/02/15/abugraib1_gallery__470x375,0.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eOZ1WyZBiE
"Each snowflake in an avalanche pleads not guilty." Stanislaw J. Lec Polish writer (1909 - 1966)
There is a way out. You can face your pain and start tearing down the lies that imprison you, you're not as stuck as you think, it's really not too late to do the right thing and be a snowflake in an honorable fight.
OMG did you see the outfit that Saddam wore to the Oscar's? It was just dreadful. You know I heard he was having an affair with Osama, but I'm not one to gossip, so you didn't hear that from me.
"Flip, Im am done with your games."
What game? or games? are you referring to? This is about your dishonesty that i clearly pointed out.
I wont address your other rhetoric until you show me where Bush or Cheney said Iraq had something to do with 9-11 or admit you lied..... until then you are correct, we are done. BTW that happened for me my last post, just to be clear.
Flip
I'm not being dishonest, and if I'm "perjecting" then 70% of americans "perjected" the same damn thing.
I've told you, shown you, explained in detail to you, and referred you to many other sources where you will find evidence that the bush admin repeatedly linked iraq with 911. If you choose not to read it, there is nothing I can do about that. You didn't clearly point out a damn thing. You tried to twist my words and the words of your ex-pres.
"Bush led people to believe that Iraq was involved with 9/11 by repeatedly linking them in his speeches. This was so effective that at one point 70% of Americans actually believed Saddam was behind 9/11. Bush has since admitted that this was not true." - http://www.impeachbush.tv/args/iraqlies.html
The above link is a list of at least 8 statements made by bush where he tied iraq to 911.
Your statement, Flip:
"Those that pay attention have already known Bush never tied anything on 9-11 to Saddam."
Well, Flip, there is a mountain of evidence that suggests otherwise so either you are lying or you were misinformed. There is more than enough information in the links that I've provided to get you started in your research about this subject.
You claim me to be a liar about something that is widely known and generally accepted among a significant number of americans. You have to realize that it's possible I actually believe what I say and that demonstrates dishonesty on your part for repeatedly accusing me of lying.
Your games right now are lying and anality.
Learn or teach, what's the point of lying here?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWjqEgDymus
I dont blame flip for ignoring you from now on. You are not that smart and you obviously dont read the shit you post. It seems like it fits. but you are argueing without any scrutiny. After carefull scrutiny of your posted links lets examine your ignorance and laxidasical method of study.
For example;
Link you posted>"Lie #2 - Iraq and 9/11 - Bush led people to believe that Iraq was involved with 9/11 by repeatedly linking them in his speeches. This was so effective that at one point 70% of Americans actually believed Saddam was behind 9/11. Bush has since admitted that this was not true."
This is from your posted link and shows another link to where it supposedly says bush linked 9-11 to saddam.
>link withi<"9/11 by repeatedly linking them in his speeches."
Wich led to this link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3119676.stm
Every quote in there does not tie Iraq to 9-11. PERIOD.
After more digging i found this. If you would have dug further you would have realised your error.
September 21, 2001: President Bush Told of No Connection between Iraq and 9/11.
"During President Bush’s presidential daily briefing (PDB), Bush is informed that the US intelligence community has found no evidence linking Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq to the 9/11 attacks, nor any evidence of links between Hussein and al-Qaeda."
ref>http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?specific_allegations=pragueConnection&timeline=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq
Noting that 10 days after 9-11 The administration was informed there were no ties. Before this PDB was written, there was NO polling data done. The polling data came out sometime in September 2003. The evidence shows and your lacking quotes to make your case, proves you are revising history. Anyone playing games here? it is you.
The actual evidence is not lining up with your arguement. You are contorting everything without a timeline to consider and shows your inability to reason. In other words you are reconstructing history for your own arguement and so are the links you provided, that is considered revisionist history.
So this is what im hearing from you cross-examined by facts within history.
The Bush administration went on a 10 day propaganda campaign to tie 9-11 to Iraq. Duely noting the timeline given. All to mislead the American people to go to war with Iraq, your arguement is solely based upon polling data from september of 2003 that somehow confirms your arguement.
WOW whata strrrrrrrretch!!!
So lets go with it.
Now the question still remains put to you by flip and now by myself.
Withn that 10 day perimeter, hell i'll give you till september 2003 polling data. Please provide quotes showing Bush and Cheney saying there was a direct connection to 9-11 and Iraq.
You call this being anal, well its not to far from your brains now is it. So pull your head out of your own arse and provide real evidence and not some revised history-blah-de-blah and polling data as your evidence.
BIGDOG
Chew on this: What the democrats said in the run up to the war in iraq.
Link> http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/bushlied.htm
"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998-Truth!
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State University by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001Truth!
The only letter with this quote from December 5, 2001 that we could find did not include the participation of Senator Bob Graham, but it was signed nine other senators including Democrat Joe Lieberman.
It urged President Bush to take quicker action against Iraq.
You say bush lied. What about Democrats, senators during the late 90's up to Bush in office?
Check out the link provided and tell me that all these senators lied about saddams WMD or their programs. I mean if Bush lied didnt the 1990's Congress lie too?
Hmmmm....remember scrutiny and historical documented quotes are what im asking you for and we are not getting.
BIGDOG
Bigdog, This isn't my first rodeo, I did plenty of digging on this subject years ago. I'm not going to go line by line with you because you'll just ignore what you don't want to see anyway. Just because you accuse me of shit does not make it true. I don't claim to be "that smart" but I do happen to be correct in this case. And I don't doubt that there were some war-monger democrats.
You tell me that "Every quote in there does not tie Iraq to 9-11. PERIOD."
"We will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who've had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." - Dick, September 2003
He says that iraq is the heart of the base of the terrorists who had us under assault on 9/11.
Direct Iraq/911 Link .
"Before September 11, 2001, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents and lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons, and other plans - this time armed by Saddam Hussein." - Bush, January 2003
He says that before 9/11 many thought saddam could be contained. Then he asks US to imagine that the 19 hijackers from September 11th are armed by saddam hussein.
Direct Saddam/911 Links .
Here is Mr. Kucinich to read some historical documented quotes for you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9rbZanHRbM
http://www.c-span.org/executive/transcript.asp?cat=current&code=bush_admin&year=2003
Links how to:
http://www.w3schools.com/html/html_links.asp
Anything else I can help you with, sir?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPAJvaIFia0
In retrospect you are more like a rodeo clown. Heres the full context instead of a few cherry picked lines.
VICE PRES. CHENEY:Tim, we can do what we have to do to prevail in this conflict. Failure’s not an option. And go back again and think about what’s involved here. This is not just about Iraq or just about the difficulties we might encounter in any one part of the country in terms of restoring security and stability. This is about a continuing operation on the war on terror. And it’s very, very important we get it right. If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. They understand what’s at stake here. That’s one of the reasons they’re putting up as much of a struggle as they have, is because they know if we succeed here, that that’s going to strike a major blow at their capabilities.
MR. RUSSERT: So the resistance in Iraq is coming from those who were responsible for 9/11?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I was careful not to say that. With respect to 9/11, 9/11, as I said at the beginning of the show, changed everything. And one of the things it changed is we recognized that time was not on our side, that in this part of the world, in particular, given the problems we’ve encountered in Afghanistan, which forced us to go in and take action there, as well as in Iraq, that we, in fact, had to move on it. The relevance for 9/11 is that what 9/11 marked was the beginning of a struggle in which the terrorists come at us and strike us here on our home territory. And it’s a global operation. It doesn’t know national boundaries or national borders. And the commitment of the United States going into Afghanistan and take down the Taliban and stand up a new government, to go into Iraq and take down the Saddam Hussein regime and stand up a new government is a vital part of our long-term strategy to win the war on terror.
In this interview and the printed/documented evidence of the interview PROVES YOU ARE LAZY in examining the things people print. The transcript is available for you to read and you havent done it. Yet you rely on someone elses garbage as fact instead of seeking it out on your own to determine proper context and whatnot.
BIGDOG
In this same interview Cheney discussed the perceived notion that Iraq was linked to 9-11 by the public.
MR. RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think it’s not surprising that people make that connection.
MR. RUSSERT: But is there a connection?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: We don’t know. You and I talked about this two years ago. I can remember you asking me this question just a few days after the original attack. At the time I said no, we didn’t have any evidence of that. Subsequent to that, we’ve learned a couple of things. We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization.
We know, for example, in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of ’93. And we’ve learned subsequent to that, since we went into Baghdad and got into the intelligence files, that this individual probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven.
Now, is there a connection between the Iraqi government and the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93? We know, as I say, that one of the perpetrators of that act did, in fact, receive support from the Iraqi government after the fact. With respect to 9/11, of course, we’ve had the story that’s been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we’ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know.
MR. RUSSERT: We could establish a direct link between the hijackers of September 11 and Saudi Arabia.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: We know that many of the attackers were Saudi. There was also an Egyptian in the bunch. It doesn’t mean those governments had anything to do with that attack. That’s a different proposition than saying the Iraqi government and the Iraqi intelligent service has a relationship with al-Qaeda that developed throughout the decade of the ’90s. That was clearly official policy.
Like i said Rodeo Clown you are not that smart.
The second quote about "Imagine if" blah blah blah. Still shows no credibility in your interpretation of some direct link.
BIGDOG
Nice job bigdog. I just dont have the patience with dishonest people.
He still has yet to produce any qualified quotes as to establish a direct link to Iraq. What i think was genious about your post was you used his cherry picked quote against him and proving Cheney went out of his way to say there wasnt any link.
I read the entire transcript, i havent seen it before. Cheney did in fact say there was no direct link to 9-11 and iraq, in that interview. You are absolutely correct in your analysis and to no avail of my own, i appreciate your cander and forthright knowledge of this issue.
Flip
BTW hows the golf game?
Hey flip thanks for asking. The Golf game is undergoing some minor swing changes? You play?
BTW dont let that rodeo clown bother you. I'll put it this way. "Like fish in a barrel."
BIGDOG
Good to see Mike is updating the blog again.
I think Bigdog is wrong about Bush saying there were no ties between Al Aqeada and Saddam. However I do enjoy his takes on calling out the conspiracy theories. It seems like the conspiracy theorist don't want to debate him or when they do the goalpost seem to move.
Bill
The only question is: Why did the majority of Americans believe there was a connection?
Ummm bill.
The difference is that AQ is not Iraq. It is possible AQ had ties to Iraq, in 1993 WTC attack one terrorist went back to Iraq his safe haven. Not so sure tho about 2001, harboring a few AQ members doesnt make Iraq involved in 9-11. Its possible but i havent seen anything to prove Iraq was involved. However to say there was a connection of AQ to Iraq therefore Iraq had direct ties to 9-11 is false or one big leap in reasoning. Therefore its not true PERIOD!!! Until evidence is produced to prove otherwise Iraq is not involved 9-11.
Just like rodeo clown, he still has yet to produce direct quotes stating Iraq was involved in 9-11. He is still tryng to make a leap in logic.Hes gone as far as using the word from Bush "Imagine" as if to say its factual. Imagaination isnt factual its truely his own ignorance that has poisened his reasonig. I even posted the excerpt of Cheneys discussion using his own link to show rodeo clowns ineptitudes and comprehension problems and the poll 'as to' why Americans think Saddam was involved in 9-11. You see this no comments about the 'as to' poll expalined by Cheney himself, instead of rectifying clowns lie as to why Americans feel that way. He then obfuscates his wrong doing by asking moral incompassing questions....Truelly laughable....LMAO!!!
You see Bill once these guys get hammered they then regurgetate, proclaimate, masterbate, of moral granduer; as if to say i would kill anyone at the behest of my president or to even question me on it. Isnt it funny how you nail these lil fuckers to the wall with there own shitty reasoning and misrepresentations of fact and they quickly advert to basically questioning your moral character.
When that happens i know ive got them beat.
BIGDOG way up in rodeo clowns guts.
I will answer your quetions rodeo clown, but not right now.
I've invented a new word to describe that last post: Moironic.
While John attempts "to keep this intellectual," I guess I should at least point out to him how the word, intellectual, is spelled. See, John, I didnt mention your homosexual relationship with Anthony once.
If there was no connection between 9/11 and iraq then why were the two constantly associated by the bush admin?
Iraq was not associated with 9-11 by anyone in the Bush administration. Again they went out of there way to say such. You assume because they mention AQ and Iraq as two seperate entities in the same parargraph; well it does not automatically set a collaborating relationship with 9-11 between the two.If so id like to see the evidence. So for shits and grins you produce this evidence and i might change my mind on what the Bush admin said. I made it real clear that 10 days after 9-11 the Bush admin knew saddam wasnt involved in 9-11 despite the Atta claims by the chzechs. Yet another convenient fact you left unturned/considered.
You cant produce any quotes directing the above relationship. As much Bullshit as you spew you still ignore "where is your evidence?" and more than myself recognises your failure in doing so.
Im done with your first q&a.
"When the takeover of iraq first started, did you believe that it was happening because of something to do with 9/11?"
Maybe this shows your age, but NO...HELL NO!! Im much older than you if this question has any merit. So let me educate you. We kicked saddams ass in 1991 and there was something called a cease fire that was sign by him. He constantly violated that cease fire agreement and after twelve years of such, he had to go.
Text of President Bush's 2003 State of the Union Address
Jan. 28, 2003
Twelve years ago, Saddam Hussein faced the prospect of being the last casualty in a war he had started and lost. To spare himself, he agreed to disarm of all weapons of mass destruction.
For the next 12 years, he systematically violated that agreement. He pursued chemical, biological and nuclear weapons even while inspectors were in his country.
Nothing to date has restrained him from his pursuit of these weapons: not economic sanctions, not isolation from the civilized world, not even cruise missile strikes on his military facilities.
Almost three months ago, the United Nations Security Council gave Saddam Hussein his final chance to disarm. He has shown instead utter contempt for the United Nations and for the opinion of the world. "Final Chance Resolution" so coined to be.
Once again. I show you concrete evidence of my conclusions and you have yet to produse ONE fact tieing 9-11 to Iraq.
BIGDOG
More Moironicisms fer ye.
"If there was no connection between 9/11 and iraq then why were the two constantly associated by the bush admin?"
I believe cheney gave a reasonable explaination on that. Oh and another fine example of this enemy of ours named saddam, came in the 1998 movie Armegedon. When the asteroids began pelting our earth one taxi cap driver said "Its saddam paying us back" or something like that. Wich can easily give many people the impression saddam would attack us. Oh! i know, but your explaination is much more convincing...Pffffft.
"If the US decided to make war with yet another nation that has not harmed or posed a threat to US, do you think that 9/11 should be used by the admin frequently to describe that war?"
Circular in logic and does not take into account the threat posed by saddams constant violations was that exact posed threat. Also doesnt take into account Iraq was never tied to 9-11 by anyone.
Still waiting for your evidence that shows Iraq involvement with 9-11.
I do have one question for you.
If the democrats all throught the 1990's said saddam had to go, had WMD and was in constant violation of the C-Fire. Why is it you said they may have been war mongering but by your account Bush lied? How is it the 1990's congress didnt lie but bush did?
Your quote: "I don't doubt that there were some war-monger democrats."
So 1990's congress lied, Bush followed the lie, and people died?
Does that some it up fer ye?? Rodeo Clown?? Im about to formaly name you, Ass clown.
BIGDOG busting that sphinctor ring once again.
Nutty,
Again with the projection. See this is really so juvenile on your part to take a shot at me and Tony.
I wonder what your trying to hide Nutty?. I have tried to keep my post on MJ's Blog at least on a civil tone. I try to keep it at a
INTELLECTUAL area. You don't want to play in that area Nutty, but your not the only one. It seems you
have a lot of company. Keep basking
in your ignorance and maybe before it's to late you might learn something.
Biggy,
Your whole argument is "well they said they didn't do it" and I presented to you overwhelming evidence, gathered by people much smarter than you and myself, that proves they did do it, repeatedly, repeatedly.
Perhaps the 1990s congress did lie but and you are proven to lie and mislead too and I was a kid back then, Oldschool, and it's pretty off-topic as far as our current discourse goes anyway.
First question, you lied and exaggerated in your answer.
You lied because the bushies constantly associated iraq with 911 and I've presented more than enough evidence here to prove this.
You deliberately exaggerated when you said the 'two entities mentioned in the same paragraph doesn't prove anything' thing because in the evidence that I presented it was in the same sentences not paragraphs.
Second question,
You just spout the same lines of bullshit that bush did and your 'concrete evidence' is crushed to dust by this:
Final report: Iraq had no WMDs
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-10-06-wmd_x.htm
And since when is anything that bush said considered 'concrete evidence' anyway?
If you had read this whole one-thousand page report that is available to you then you would know that there were no wmds in iraq and that PROVES YOU ARE LAZY in examining the things people print. You should have gone over to iraq after the gulf war and seen the wmds yourself instead of 'relying on someone elses garbage as fact instead of seeking it out on your own to determine proper context and whatnot' before making conspiratorial claims that they still had wmds. [see how lame your game is?]
Third question, you gave some movie example, so whenever something bad happened, you say people would just assume it was saddam. And that's supposed to be your answer.
Fourth question, you didn't answer but I do see how it could be construed as a loaded question. You were arguing that the bushies didn't try to tie 911 to iraq then you try to change up to this:
"Still waiting for your evidence that shows Iraq involvement with 9-11."
You're waiting for evidence from me that shows that iraq was involved in 911? Talk about goalpost changing, damn. I never claimed that, sir.
http://projects.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/Default.aspx?src=project_home&context=key_false_statements&id=946
For example, on September 25, 2002, in response to a reporter's question, President Bush said: "Al Qaeda hides, Saddam doesn't, but the danger is, is that they work in concert. The danger is, is that Al Qaeda becomes an extension of Saddam's madness and his hatred and his capacity to extend weapons of mass destruction around the world."
One more time, sir,
President Bush said: "Al Qaeda hides, Saddam doesn't, but the danger is, is that they work in concert.
The 9/11 Commission Report found that while there may have been meetings in 1999 between Iraqi officials and Osama Bin Ladin or his aides, it had seen no evidence that the contacts "ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship." It added: "Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with Al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
"Isnt it funny how you nail these lil fuckers to the wall with there own shitty reasoning and misrepresentations of fact and they quickly advert to basically questioning your moral character."
-Oh yeah, the murder of innocent people and the sacrifice of our own, based on lies, has nothing to do with morality. And when you called me a lazy stupid liar, that wasn't questioning my moral character at all.
Lil fuckers like these:
"George Bush refuses to come clean about the ways he misled our country into war," Kerry spokesman David Wade added.
"In short, we invaded a country, thousands of people have died, and Iraq never posed a grave or growing danger," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.
I think rodeo clowns are pretty badass actually but I think Matador would be more appropriate to call me in this case. Also, I'm flattered by all the gay sexual innuendo Scrappydogdoo, but I'm just not interested sorry.
Your issue distortion may fool some but I ain't the one
Your shit is dated, hated, regurgitated, over-rated, and your ego's inflated
Your style has been weighed and played and the shit you say is found lacking and gay
Your game is tired, expired, uninspired and proves you a liar.
R.I.P.
BIGDOG'S STALE GAME
"Collapsed in on itself under the weight of it's own smoldering transparent bullshit."
? - 2010
We are told that AQ is responsible for 9/11 and that iraq works in concert with AQ, not a big leap, more like a slide right in.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/85406/inuyasha-the-backlash-wave-tetsusaiga’s-ultimate-technique
ROFLMFAO!!! Man are all you guys seeing this ass clown backtrack...im having such a great time hammering this no named piece of work....lol
**Ass Clown posted: "You're waiting for evidence from me that shows that iraq was involved in 911? Talk about goalpost changing, damn. I never claimed that, sir."
Yes i am waiting but lets examine what you have said too.
Ass Clown posted several posts earlier: "Fact is that they did mislead the American people by connecting the war in Iraq to 911. GWB was a proven chronic liar to the people. And he did purposefully lead the public to believe that 911 and saddam were well connected."** also this: **Direct Iraq/911 Link** and this **Direct Saddam/911 Links**.
Yes, you did say they were well connected, and **Direct Iraq/911 Link**. Saying someone is well connected means what? ** Direct Saddam/911 Links**....e.g.
You are saying Iraq was well connected/involved. You just dont know the exact connection, nor does anyone, if any.
The movie comment only demonstrates that media/movies does or can have an impact on people especially since we fucked his ass up in 1991 and they, the movie makers, thought saddam was an obvious enemy of the US.I knew you wouldnt get the...ummmm connection to the sway of public opinion, as one example.
You need to stop connecting Iraq to 9-11 because even the 9-11 commision report said there was NO connection in the attack on 9-11 to Iraq. Secondly you still have yet to produce evidence stating that Iraq and 9-11 are well connected, or had direct links. Noone ever made this claim including the dems. Oh thats right im being ANAL about what you said and what they said and wasnt said.
Last time, where is your evidence that shows Bush or Cheney said Saddam was "well connected" to the events via AQ on 9-11 or how did you put it again?**Direct Saddam/911 Links**.
Hindsights 20/20 eh? Your quote from Jay R: "In short, we invaded a country, thousands of people have died, and Iraq never posed a grave or growing danger," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.
My quote from the same guy:
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Rockefeller's statements were a part of the debate over using force against Saddam Hussein.
You used Kerrys aide ill use Kerry himself.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002-Truth!
Senator Kerry's comments were made to the Senate as part of the same debate over the resolution to use force against Saddam Hussein.
That quote answers your "posed threat" scenario.
You cant keep up with your own bullshit. I stand solidly and more informed than you will ever be on this issue. My game is simple to discredit you with your own Bullshit.
I have produced more facts in this debate that back up my claims vs yours. Meanwhile you continuely havent shown anyone saying what you said. (Noted by **)
BTW you havent presented anything of merit backing your claim or claims **. I rest my case.
BIGDOG so far up in them guts, ass clown can taste it!!
I said that the bush admin made those 911-iraq links you dipshit and you said they didn't, now you change the story that it's me **claiming those 911-iraq links. Who do you think you're fooling?
Yeah you better rest your case, HA HA HA!
And Kerry's a dipshit too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaysTVcounI
See what i mean bigdog. This guy is dishonest. In fact i would say he is a mealy-mouthed liberal. I knew it from the beginning and thats why i backed out of the debate. You knew it too, so why take him to the tool shed? Actually i know why, im just being rhetorical.
He did say Bush said it, we all know he didnt and Mr. Anony also said saddam had ties, well connected, direct links to 9-11 and we all know Anony did say those things about those quotes that never stated what he said they stated. Its simple bigdog. You won this debate hands down. If he would have only produced the the quotes that said the things he said about Bush and Co. Then i might have learned something. Instead,tooting my own horn, we get nothing more out of him than a mealy-mouthed, boldfaced liar.
Oh and bigdog. I do play golf but i dont get out very much.
Flip
Oh and Anony you owe me a new shirt. After reading your denials about what you said, i spewed coffee all over my nice shirt.
You are a lying, scheming piece of shit, flip!
How dare you call me dishonest when you perpetuate the lies that get people killed.
You are twisting words, I NEVER CONNECTED SADDAM TO 911, MY CLAIM IS AND HAS BEEN THAT YOUR BUSHIES REPEATEDLY MADE THAT LINK and I proved that they did! You don't know when to quit do ya?
I produced a ton of quotes that proved exactly what I claimed.
Your games are stupid and I don't think that anyone here is dumb enough to fall for them.
Is this really how you have fun?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGjxiJOye3Y
I cant argue with that Flip. A mealy-mouthed ass clown. They are the worse.
Still no quotes of the BUSHIES saying Saddam was well connected to 9-11. Still no quotes about Saddams Direct link to 9-11.
Lots of innuendos and no actual facts and when pressed to produce that evidence we get..."well if your gonna be anal about it". Admission of error....but we are anal? Yeh i would say kicking this clowns ass was more than fun. It was worth exposing him for who he is.
I perpetrate the truth, about your lies and, it kills you....yeh thats about right.
BTW you got powned!!
BIGDOG....reaming ass clown so hard its like throwing a hotdog down a hallway at this point. Yepp im bored of you.
BYE BYE ASS CLOWN!!!
"Keep basking in your ignorance and maybe before it's to late you might learn something." - John
When I think of ignorance, not knowing the difference between "to" and "too" comes to mind. Allow me to teach by example. After a rough night of anal sex between Anthony and his bitch, John's ass hurt too much to go to work.
Dam bigdog just got pwned again! Lolomassoff!
You said: "Still no quotes of the BUSHIES saying Saddam was well connected to 9-11"
I have provided more than enough quotes to this effect. Some can be found here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3119676.stm
Pres Bush said :"The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on 11 September 2001, and still goes on."
You still keep trying to drag this is there: You said: "Still no quotes about Saddams Direct link to 9-11"
Again Again Again Again Again: I did NOT say or even imply this statement of yours.
I was just starting to feel bad for you too. But then you continue to blur the issue and again accuse me of lying.
You said: "BTW you got powned!!"
Dude, you can't even spell "pwned"
HAHAHA!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pwn
You know, Lassie, you're kind of making your guys look bad, like a pack of liars.
And hey Flop, you're still a lying, manipulating, fuckwad!
HAHAHA!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CYwNWHZuT0
Kansas City’s Bannister Federal Complex passes more pollution tests
http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2010/06/07/daily26.html
DAAAAAM! Bigdog and Flip got
PWNED
like a gnome
witha icecream cone
in the anal zone
when his mommas home
havin sex over the phone
cuz shes been alone
since the age of stone
her face is like Tom jones
with too many male hormones...
dig
Last post you can have the last word if you like.
Oh look more mealy-mouthed bullshit and back pedalling.Common practice amongst liars and liberals.
Still know quotes showing they said saddam was "well connected" to 9-11.
This is your verbage not Bushs. You still have yet to post a quote that shows Bushies said saddam was "well connected" to 9-11...e.g.
Ass Clown posted several posts earlier: "Fact is that they did mislead the American people by connecting the war in Iraq to 911. GWB was a proven chronic liar to the people. And he did purposefully lead the public to believe that 911 and saddam were well connected."** also this: **Direct Iraq/911 Link** and this **Direct Saddam/911 Links**.
I posted what you said they said but never said, about 9-11 and saddam.These are your words not Bushs and now you backpedal.
powned in the gaming world means you arent good enough to deserve a pwned.I thought you would know that. This teaser runs amuk in Battlefield and MAG.
BIGDOG powning Ass Clown.....HAHAHAHAHA!!
This is pretty good stuff.
You got Spike and his little tag along pup from the Bugs Bunny cartoons vs. Anonymous pseudo-poets and historians. It's like listening to Glenn Beck's dreams... probably.
I'm not really into the gaming world, Bigdog, but have you seen this yet?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_MqZn7E-mk
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/37/75748022_e50b3f578a_m.jpg
I would like to change the subject up a bit. If you guys don't mind?.
I heard on the last show that Mike was wondering "Where are all the statesman?." I hear this a lot so I will take a shot at MJ's question.
The statesman maybe out in about in this era. But usaully they aren't thought as statesmen/man in the times they live in. That is reserved after they are gone awhile or fade into history. We tend to reflect on what we think who the statesmen are when I guess we agree with them. Some of you find comfort in the "founding fathers" because they are long gone and it's real safe to take a quote they made about goverment to justify a opinion you have about why our goverment is broken.
Did you know George Washington left office with a low approval rating because of the fact he didn't want to aid France in its war with England?. Did you all know that Washington put down a rebellion in western PA. over taxes on whiskey to pay for the war for independence?. Did you know that John Addams signed "The Alien and Sedition act" to stop free speech and opposing views?.
History will judge our current political leaders better but I tend to be a lot more cautious who I label a statesmen.
Many people may define a statesmen differently. I would consider my definition to be very accurate but may not be accurate to others.
I would define a statesmen as; a political leader whose wisdom, integrity and public defence of thier states constitution, federal inclusive, garnering great respect by thier constituents for their noticeable role in limited government.
BIGDOG
http://www.ttb.gov/public_info/special_feature.shtml
"In addition to revenue and social manipulation, Hamilton had a third reason to favor a whisky tax: It could be a means of augmenting Federal power. According to Hamilton’s recent biographer, Ron Chernow, “Hamilton confessed to Washington an ulterior political motive for this liquor tax: he wanted to lay ‘hold of so valuable a resource of revenue before it was generally preoccupied by the state governments.’ … [H]e wanted to starve the states of revenue and shore up the federal government."
"Hamilton was indeed a singular character of acute understanding, disinterested, honest, and honorable in all private transactions, amiable in society, and duly valuing virtue in private life—yet so bewitched and perverted by the British example as to be under thorough conviction that corruption was essential to the government of a nation." - Thomas Jefferson
"In a 1789 letter to James Madison, Jefferson stated his famous dictum “that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living.” He meant that future generations have a right to receive the benefits of the earth without impairment and, consequently, no generation has a right to impair the benefits to be transmitted to the next one. As an application of this dictum, Jefferson concluded that debt, and particularly the National debt, should impose no obligation for more than 19 years. He believed any part of the debt that remained unpaid after that time should be extinguished—so future generations could inherit the Nation’s assets debt free. If this theory had prevailed, it would have drastically reduced the market value of Government securities, enabling the Government to pay off the debt without resorting to internal taxes, such as the whisky tax. To Hamilton and his Federalist party, Jefferson’s theory was reprehensible and inconsistent with the Constitution’s disapproval of laws “impairing the obligation of contracts.[16]"
"[16] U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 10, first paragraph. As a prohibition, this clause applies only to the States; but it may be taken as a guide for the Federal Government."
http://fifcolumn.blogspot.com/2010/06/world-government-bandwagon-has-loose.html
Alexander Hamilton had a lot of control over George Washington in matter's of state and finances for the country. John Addams had issues with his influence over the President and spar with him when he became the 2nd POTUS.
My point was that our founders wasn't popular in the times they live in and that the idea so-called limited goverment they had very diffrent ideals on how limited the federal goverment should be.
With the Louisiana purchace, Thomas Jefferson increased the size of the federal goverment. When states were admitted to the union the size of the federal goverment increased. The growing technology and needs for civil reform increased the size of the federal goverment.
We fall in love with the founding fathers but some of us don't realize that they dealt with a very diffrent society then what we have today. They didn't think the republic would get bigger. They didn't envision a massive armed forces,FBI,CIA,WWI and WWII.
Pfft. Slave owners.
They were probably slave-owners and drunks and indian-butchers but they were also smart and determined to design a system to help keep US free after living under british oppression and overthrowing it. I don't put those dudes up on a pedestal but they were in it to win it and they created one of the best systems of government ever IMO. Listening to what they had to say is just a good idea if you want freedom.
The founding fathers knew that it wasn't about them.
I'm quite sure that the "founding fathers" knew that the republic would get bigger. Also they must have envisioned a massive armed forces because standing armies was very much a concern for many of them.
"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. . . .Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." - Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, Signer of the Declaration of Independence, VP of the United States 1813-1814, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment, I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789
http://www.barefootsworld.net/article2.html
"A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people. - James Madison
Standing armies:
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0612d.asp
Cool stuff I found:
"On every question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322.
http://www.constitution.org/cons/quotes01.txt
"The most essential danger from the present System arises, [in my] opinion, from its tendency to a Consolidated government, instead of a Union of Confederated States" - Richard Henry Lee to Patrick Henry, 14 September 1789
http://www.constitution.org/mil/militia_debate_1789.htm
02.09.2008 "Mayor Carty Finkbeiner on Friday ordered some 200 members of Company A, 1st Battalion, 24th Marines from Grand Rapids, Michigan, out of Toledo just before the unit was supposed to start a weekend of urban warfare training downtown."
"Police issued a press release earlier in the week saying the Marines would be wearing green camouflage uniforms, operate military vehicles, carry rifles, perform foot patrols, and fire blank ammunition during the exercise."
http://www.toledoonthemove.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=94192
"In early 2006 Congress passed bill H.R.5122 granting the President the right to commandeer Federal and State National Guard Troops for use against citizens. The bill is entitled the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007"
http://libertyforlife.com/law/posse_comitatus_destroyed.htm
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-5122&tab=summary
The interwebs are a-buzz with Rubicon news. AMC’s new drama is described as a conspiracy thriller.
The show’s tagline is “Not every conspiracy is a theory.”
Full first episode:
http://www.bscreview.com/2010/06/watch-amcs-rubicon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBxepLmBspo
http://fifcolumn.blogspot.com/2010/06/someone-who-isnt-little-paranoid-hasnt.html
http://www.kcfreepress.com/news/2010/jun/17/funkhouser-gets-personal-state-city-speech/
I'm glad to see a lot of you guys reading quotes from the founding fathers about how they thought the federal goverment should work.
I agree also that they setup one of the great systems of goverment ever. But I again say that they had a diffrent ideas of limited goverment. (Even amoung Federalist and Democrat-Republicans of that era).
If so called limited goverment conservatives are consistent about the beliefs they have then we need to get rid of (Dept. of education,Social Security,Food and Drug Administration,Medicare,NSA,CIA,FBIHUD,NASA any program by the FED that has been devised.)
I don't believe in the concept of limited goverment. I think a lot of the issues we have the last 25 years has been a lack of federal goverment being involved to protect citizens from corporations.
John
P.S.
Let's be civil and adult in responding back to my post. No name calling,bad language.
As far as excess agencies go, it's too late to just get rid of them but slowly weening off I think would be a great idea.
The bigger a government gets (city, county, state, federal) the more corrupt and totalitarian it tends to get.
Corporations and government are constantly in bed together and they are the two biggest players right now, I think to give either one a big advantage over the other means the people would get butt-rammed even harder.
I think we the citizens need to learn to protect ourselves from government and corporations. We can starve the corporations by boycott and rein in the government by getting involved. I think the people need to step into a third branch of society roll and start running those machines instead of continuing to let them run us.
*role
To John:
All of the institutions you have mentioned have become part of the social and political landscape of the country. The "founding fathers" surely had a sense of the immorality of slave owning and at the same time for example Jefferson played with the idea of man being a rational entity capable of reason. But maybe the rules of society and the strong restraints of economic growth were far too powerful to expose to such hipocricy. Now some of those entities are necessary and not enough in my opinion but also a self-inflicted complacency and boredom if not regulated by a people that is well read and utilitarian in some form. The world is going to turn to shit and the few who are pointing it out are ignored because they are not appealing to our deep inbeded passions but are straightforward in their analysis. The world reached its peak 10000 years ago now we are riding the wave down.
Oz.
"Gee, lets just blow the world up then and let the cockroaches take a shot at it next!"
Sorry Oz, I don't buy what your trying to sell about it all just unraveling so its all not worth it.
The United States still can lead and is still a great country. We have had bad spells before in the history of this country and we tend to do the right thing down the road. Our problem is a lack of a informed citzens who should get out and vote in all elections local,state and federal and get involve in the communites they live in to make that city or area better. Quit listening to moronic talk show host like Glen Beck,Rush Limbaugh,Alex Jones who don't really have your best interest in mind. ("Oh God I just took a shot at Alex Jones on this blog. Damn I'm going to HELLLLL!!")
It's easy in this blog to rip at our elective officials of both parties. (I get mad at them also.)
But we must hold the goverment and big corporations accountable when things like the BP oil spill happend or going to war in Iraq on just real faulty information.
Oz, I do agree with you on the lack of smarts of people in this country. You have morons defending BP over the fact that they shouldn't be held accountable for the biggest ecological disasters in the history of this world. (See any rightwing talk radio asshole starting with Rush Limbaugh).
John
P.S.
I know I just violated a rule I set of not calling someone names but I think we all can agree that Rush Limbaugh is well a "ASSHOLE".
And I went to the trouble of saying "butt-rammed" instead of "ass-rammed" you dirty hypocrite ;)
http://politicsoffthegrid.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/rush-limbaugh-parody_thumb1.jpg
I guess there was a republican that apologized to bp ceo tony hayward for putting twenty billion up. John,my point, I don't think I can articulate it well, is that the US is a great country, it has done amazing things with industry and the arts, medicine and so forth, but it has nothing to brag about in the social front, it has left it far behind. Consummerism is rampant, happiness for the average american is a department store equipped with all new toys and the money to spend. Psychologists have been used for decades to define our deep passions and phobias and to mapulate our behaviors to their advantage. Nothing is real. The layers of separation between an informed citizen and a burocratic state is impossible to cross and a waste of time. The first thing we need to do is to let go of money or profit, i don't know how. Pax americana was the invisible boot on the throat of many nations and still is and it makes me sick when people say we must keep the american way of life but that has two meaning to the us citizen and to the third world citizen. Social critics and psychoanalysts agree that with the advancement of civilization, cruelty and dehumanisation rise proportionately. Terrance mckenna once said "Our ability to destroy ourselves is the mirror image of our ability to save ourselves, and what is lacking is the clear vision of what should be done". I'm in that camp. Oz.
Oz,
I know things are bad but they're not as gloomy as all that.
"Social critics and psychoanalysts agree that with the advancement of civilization, cruelty and dehumanisation rise proportionately."
Do you know where I can find more information about the psychoanalysts who subscribe to this idea please?
John, I agree with almost everything you just said.
http://fifcolumn.blogspot.com/2010/06/kill-buzz-save-life.html
I don't have the book in front of me but a major one is Erich Fromm and his book "The anatomy of human destruction" where he argues that hunter gatherers were the affluent society and proposes that neither instinct nor enviroment create the cruelty associated with modern man but society itself. Enviroment and society might be close to each other but there are some distinctions between the too. Oz.
Just like how we've domesticated rats and dogs and goats and cows and shit, they get dumber and have all sorts of health issues- we've domesticated ourselves. We literally are sheeple. Genetically, we're domesticated. It's hopeless, Oz.
Uh, I didn't write the last comment. Oz.
That's really uncool, especially since I already wrote you a response. I guess I'll post it anyway.
I haven't checked out Erich Fromm yet but I get that. I think the main problem is that we mostly have society instead of societies.
Humans are not just animals. We are social creatures and we thrive in groups but we also have the unique ability to knowingly harm and destroy ourselves and each other without physical cause. I think this generally happens when we lose connection within groups like when a group gets too big and one person has little to no knowledge or understanding of who others are and their affects the group. When we try to create these mega-communities we tend to lose cohesion and the structure doesn't work as well and tends to become destructive. Groups like the C0uncil on For3ign Rel8tions try to fake cohesion by making laws to connect the whole world and so as the fake cohesion grows our natural cohesion decays. In a small, remote, isolated, village somewhere, the people there would likely have a very good understanding of each other and their roles(a firmer empathic connection) and live in much better balance with nature and each other than a large group would. Just look how disconnected many people are online. The WWW is replete with people saying the most horrible shit to each other, cause they are strangers to each other's ways. Humans bond best over the fundamentals like sharing a meal, obtaining and maintaining food, clothing, shelter, clean water, and helping each other. But when rice comes from one village and meat from another and grain from another and cloth from another and so on, we tend to lose cohesion. I think that villages might trade with each other and still keep cohesion with their own village as long as the village elders or whoever were wise enough not to let their village become dependent on the others for the fundamentals. They would understand well the whos' and hows of their own and those around them's survival. Like right now, I understand that a lot of my food is grown/raised by some company, processed by some company, packaged by some company, shipped by some company, sold to me by some company, most of us don't understand the hows who's or even the whats and wheres of our food, clothing, shelter, and water. Our natural survival bonds have decayed in our connected on paper but disconnected in reality groups.
We're not screwed yet, we just need to highly localize our necessities and generally localize our fundamentals and cut way down on gov and corporate influences over our lives. Sounds simple but I know it's not these days. I've started growing a little food and I plan to start buying some from kcfoodcircle when I can afford it. I buy local stuff when I can and I quit watching a television(too much tv causes fake cohesion) and I'd like to see more rooftop gardens on businesses. We're not domesticated, we can still learn and grow and change. It's not hopeless, Oz, we CAN still pull out of this, well at least some will.
Community gardens blossom - ReutersVideo
http://www.kcfoodcircle.org
http://www.kccg.org
I wasn't trying to post as Oz but to Oz. It's nice to have hope, Bruce, but I think your first mistake is thinking we are different than animals. Like "people" and "animals" are 2 different things. Domesticated beasts get fat, dumb, hypersexual, and immature... that's "people" and they're not getting better but worse.
oh
Wild beasts get sick, hyperaggressive, and die young, that's some people too but that's gotten better overall. I know that we can have our cake and eat it too, I've seen it too many times.
I would say that's your mistake in thinking that people are no different than animals but either way, to say that things are hopeless at this point is just quitter bullshit because there is hope all around us. Could you imagine what huge localized agricultural revolutions could do for us? Like our survival not being dependent on anyone or anything outside like a 10 mile radius and our basic stuff we don't need but we use all the time from within a hundred miles or so. That's some freedom yo! It would have to be based on attitude though and not law. Like we teach kids to wash their hands for health, we'd have to teach them to be locally sustainable for health as well.
And perhaps basic gardening should be taught in elementary schools. Every class has a garden and every year they grow more difficult crops. That'd be cool.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarian_society
And the kids could prepare a big feast for the whole community at harvest time. Freakin sweet!
http://www.hulu.com/watch/138202/jamie-olivers-food-revolution-test-moment
good tune
why local
With generous trading terms provided by the Soviet bloc, Cuba was able to sell its sugar at five times the world price and in return buy cheap petroleum and agrochemicals. Ten million tons of sugar was the dream from the 60's through 70's. Orchards and mixed use land was lost to the singular demands of the sugar harvest. The island became dependent on imports for a high percentage of its staple foods. 100% of its wheat, 50% of its rice, and up to 90% of its beans: as much as 57% of all calories consumed. The agro-industry also relied largely on imports.
The collapse of the Soviet bloc threw Cuba's whole economic system into crisis.
Within a year the country had lost over 80% of its foreign trade. Factories closed or reduced production through lack of raw materials and resources, sugar and other agricultural production was cut for the same reason. Hunger returned to the island.
Cuban farming's previous dependency on mechanisation, artificial fertilisers and insecticides meant that the soils were in poor condition having been sterilised by agrochemical inputs and salinised by excessive irrigation.
Pushed by the loss of imported agrochemicals and pulled by a growing awareness of environmental damage caused by intensive agricultural techniques, the Cuban government looked to sustainable, organic methods of cultivation to resuscitate and develop domestic food production and make better use of the country's resources. A few agricultural scientists had long advocated sustainable methods, and it is to these people that the government turned for advice.
Large tracts of land were switched from export-oriented cash crops to food crops. Government incentives encouraged people in large urban centres to move back to work on the land. Oxen were reared in large numbers to replace tractors for ploughing and transporting crops. Organic methods such as integrated pest management, crop rotation, composting and soil conservation were implemented. Research institutes were set up to develop more sophisticated techniques such as worm composting, soil inoculants and biopesticides. Over 200 biopesticides production centres were set up, run by university graduates, children of the local farmers.
The three types of garden supported were known as huertos, organoponicos and autoconsumos
This all created, almost overnight, a new urban gardening culture. By the mid 1990's there were over 28,000 huertos in Havana city province, run by 50-100,000 individuals.
By 1996 bylaws in Havana allowed only organic methods of food production. In 1990 the city produced a negligible amount of food. It now produces a substantial percentage of its population's needs.
Now they have a community centre with a permanent exhibition of over 160 home preserved products, where they run food conserving courses, and teach school children about food growing and use. They have regular radio and TV shows and go all over the city and neighbouring provinces running workshops and discussions. They have helped set up gardens at schools, daycentres and nurseries.
A major ecological initiative of the moment is the plan to plant two million trees in the city over the next five years. This will include two hundred thousand fruit and nut trees. Vilda and Pepe are working with a group at the Havana Botanic Gardens propagating and distributing food bearing trees in their municipality.
http://www.cosg.org.uk/greencuba.htm
"In Escape from Freedom, he found favor with the lack of individual freedom, rigid structure, and obligations required on the members of medieval society:"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Fromm
Good posts, I enjoy actually having a dialogue. Here are some quotes:
"As the generations pass they grow worse. A time will come when they have grown so wicked that they will worship power; might will be right to them and reverence for the good will cease to be. At last, when no man is angry any more at wrong doing or feels shame in the presence of the miserable, Zeus will destroy them too. And yet even then something might be done, if only the common people would rise and put down the rulers that oppress them"-Greek myth.-----"When I look at history, I am a pessimist...but when I look at prehistory, I am an optimist". J. C. Smuts.
To B. I think you have just described civilization in your post about the lack of cohesion in larger groups but I feel where you are coming from. We hurt ourselves because we are scared about the mystery of life, we cannot cope and we try to explain everything with our jargon. Men have turn to power and the mind to explain it all and turn their back on creativity and the earth-the Mother. People have turn the tribe into nations for a security trade off but now it is hard to be autonomous without being tethered by an imperial power's sphere of influence, say like the US, so that is probably why Cuba turn that route for survival and the status quo, it is hard to control a hungry crowd.
Gentlemen, it is a mind fuck. Oz.
In response to escape from freedom I would argue that man or woman was less conflicted in that society structure in comparison to the modern times. Then the subject was born into a system that had a role for him and maybe a mediocre harmony though not a sane one. Today those feudal systems are more subliminal and we give our freedoms more willingly and claim to be free. If anyone is interested check this mind opener from erich fromm: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPw5prYLc5w
Oz & whomever else,
Interesting quotes, it's nice to hear from a thinker. Very interesting interview. I'm with Mike Wallace, Fromm's solutions sound nice and if everybody fit in his box then perhaps they could work but they just don't fit humanity. A tree that does not bend with the wind will likely be broken by it. Much of his diagnosis I think is spot on though. That's wild too I think because if a similar interview aired today, people would likely call Fromm and Wallace nutjobs. A lot of people really don't want to admit or even think about where we're at or where we could be headed.
I watched more than I cared to of this but he does make some really interesting predictions, I still don't feel the need to read his book though.
Aldous Huxley interviewed by Mike Wallace
Some thoughts I decided to share:
Perhaps civilization needs to be just a bit less civil then.
I agree that many people have turned their backs on what is natural like creativity and the earth. There are a good number of people that are not fearful about the mysteries of life. Many people accept the mystery for what it is and embrace it. No one person can know everything so to accept that there are some things that we are ignorant about is to embrace creativity, truth, and the ability to always learn more. I don't mean that people shouldn't try to figure out mysteries in life and of it, I just think that some mysteries will always be beyond our limited comprehension, to believe otherwise is to have a bit of a god-complex.
Sometimes control is in the eye of the beholder.
I don't know if you've ever had a cat but we can learn something important from cats. If you tell a cat to come to you or get off the table or whatever, it might listen to you and it might not. It can clearly understand that you want it to come to you evident by the fact that it's done it many times before but it only comes if it feels like it at the time. So who is really in control there? Neither. A mindfuck is only as powerful as the mindfuckee lets it be. If you have a firm grasp on who you are and what you really want then you may still be misled at times but more often than not you can stay on your own path and sometimes even throw a wrench in the mindfuck gears. Influences are everywhere, at some point you've gotta say fuck what their motives might be and ask yourself what your own motives are, then do what you feel is right regardless of whomever might be trying to play you. If you were cuban and the gov said "grow lots of organic food right now you little bitches" that's when you have to make a decision to either grow organic food or don't or do something different altogether. Who's trying to run game on you and what game are they trying to run should be considered of course but that can't be the whole basis of your decision. Think it through and what's going to be best for you, your family, and community in the long and short terms needs to be priority in this decision. If you decide that growing lots of organic food will be beneficial then fuck what the gov says, do it anyway but for the right reasons, to do otherwise is to enslave yourself. I stopped living in fear of "they" a while back. "They" are probably just a bunch of inbred, spoiled, rich, well-educated, owl-worshiping, douchebags anyway. I tend to worry more about "our" own ignorance than "their" arrogance.
2 Minutes In Wonderland
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtbXJWBf-Oo
I love the inteligent postings on the blog now. See when we act like adults and respect eash others views then we can have good back and forth postings.
It seems to me that who has the power is us. We give power to the elites. We let them control our thoughts,views and emotions. The biggest responsibility we have is to be involved in the process in small or large ways in our communitites.
John
B, Aldous Huxley was able to trace a path for society that is almost prophetic. I enjoy those smoky interviews of old. Seems to me 1958 was an interesting time in the US, the advent of psychology applied to elections, the threat of the cold war and nuclear holocaust, the John Birch society was bubbling up, and a lifestyle shift in consummerism as obsolescence began to rule the market. John, more often than not in a discussion one or both parties will have their minds made up and not actually absorb the information. It is useless and you find it all over the am dial mostly but everyone does it. I look forward to be proven wrong for that only enriches one in their pursuit, or you get stagnation. Oz.
KC Police To Crack Down On Jaywalking:
http://www.kctv5.com/video/24052672/index.html
I thought this might be a joke at first but no. I sure don't remember voting for anything like this. Do we have too many police officers with nothing better to do or what? Who makes all these totalitarian policies anyway?
The SWAT team raided that home in Columbia, MO a few months ago knowing full well that his family was there on nothing but tips from paid informants(yeah right) that he was a drug dealer. They kicked in the door, screaming and pointing machine guns at everybody, shot his dogs(one died) ransacked the place, arrested him before they even found anything and what they did find was nothing but some pipes and a little bit of weed.
http://drop.io/columbiamopdshootdogs
I mean seriously, come on, enough is enough of that kinda shit right?
The Militarization of Our Police:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INdcaeeb3ws
Video of the raid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbwSwvUaRqc
Hey Oz, I'd bet that you've probably seen Century of the self, is there a good book or preferably a video that you might know of for additional info on that subject?
Just thinkin. Human overpopulation is not a real problem. This planet is 2/3rds water. I have read and heard and thought about a lot of this stuff at many different times and from many different places, so I can't really take concept credit but this should help keep humanity afloat until we can find another life-bearing planet to colonize and the means to get there:
Let your over-population worries melt away with a new Agrarian Oceanic Habitat or A.O.H.
Components: Enormous stainless-steel platform boat. A few cargo boats. Stainless steel platform add-on tracts, soil, and tech ferryed from mainland for growing population. Each add-on tract can float independently and is capable of disconnecting and reconnecting to the island where and as needed/desired.
The Agrarian Oceanic Habitat utilizes ocean water desalinazation, wind, solar, and tidal power, farming of sea vegetation, and a natural landscape created through blending of soil from the ocean floor with depleted mainland topsoil to create an agrarian island paradise. With exception of add-on platfoms and tech, this moderately self-sustaining floating island could produce much more crops than the population would need and so would likely have plenty of trading options in this ever growing world of ours. Within a decade or so, the A.O.H. should grow to a Class 2 AOH which would include it's own ore processing, platform manufacturing, and various tech manufacturing. After another decade or so, the AOH should be converted to Class 3. The Class 3 AOH will have facilities specifically aimed at creating/maintaining a new, fully functional, Class 1 AOH neighbor within a decade. Island growth and development should not get too far ahead or behind schedule. Some people will come and go but there should always be people living on the new Class 1 who have actually helped build Classes 1, 2, and 3 AOHs' before. After the new Class 1 is finished, the Class 3 should be converted to a Class 4 in another decade or so. The Class 4 will have motors, rotors, and a tall mountain wave-block on one side as well as bio-diesel processing capability.
Agrarian Oceanic Habitat living isn't for everyone of course but there are plenty of people who would gladly live/work there and enjoy the lifestyle and freedoms that island living can provide. The platform landmass must continue to grow and develop at a sufficent rate to properly function so residents age 20-60 would be required to put in no more or less than 10 good hours each week in manufacturing/maintenence/processing/platform building/etc as well as growing and/or raising themselves a fairly equal portion of the community's consumption and trade needs on their own tract. These are the only rent/taxes that should ever be imposed in these island communities. The primary export of all Classes of AOHs' is organic non-genetically-modified plant life. The Classes 1 and 2 should export a fair amount of energy and the Class 4 should be capable of storing a good amount of energy.
I'm aware of it but not seen the whole thing. Well, I pick things here and there, I know kkfi programs sometimes reference authors that I look up for more info. A book I picked up at a yard sale. The hidden persuaders by Vance Packard----What makes us buy, believe, even vote, the way we do? This book answers hundreds of eye-opening questions with facts that show how advertising men are using our hidden urges and frustrations to sell everything from gasoline to politicians.-----
Anything by Aldous Huxley, Brave new world revisited. Erich Fromm, I found in a thriftstore. His study on anthropology and paleolithic era. Excerpt---" Among hunters the bear was often addressed as granfather or looked upon as an ancestor. When killed apologies were offered, before eaten, a sacred meal took place with the bear as a an honored guest, and finally ceremonial burial. Evidence shows they had an affectionate feeling or even guilt for the killed" Contrast that to the industrialized slaughter of our food today---A researcher was handed a piece of meat by an eskimo hunter, he thanked him, an old man corrected him. "You must not thank for your meat: it is your right to get parts. In this country nobody wishes to be dependent on others. There is nobody who gives or gets gifts, for thereby you become dependent. With gifts you make slaves just as with whips you make dogs"--- "With the new changes in production, one of the most decisive changes in the history of man took place. It was discovered that man could be used as an economic instrument, that he could be exploited, that he could be made a slave.". http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/JACBrown.htm. The video that I mentioned to you is fascinating to me, others are http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Knu4ujA1rfU, and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBJKCz6Xhzs, this are more spiritual. Hopefully this is helpful let me know what you think or give me some suggestions as well. Oz.
The video here reminds me of a puppet show:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-fg-global-finance-20100628,0,2836520.story
Thanks a ton for the recommendations Oz.
That was some good stuff from David Icke. I'm not with his new agey stuff though, I just can't get down with his "thoughts create reality" stuff because experience has shown me that actions create reality. I'm not knocking the power of thought and prayer but without action, a thought is just a thought.
I think that's where a lot of churchy people lose me too. They obviously understand the importance of actions because they help all kinds of people and do good things like projects, mission trips, etc, but most of the individuals seem to think that God will just take care of governmental stuff. For Christians I think it's likely a Book of Romans thing, but since We the People are supposed to be the rulers in this system and not kings, I just don't think that applies to our system of government. I think there are lots of good people of many different religions out there who don't feel like it's their place to take action to change policies or they think they can't for whatever reasons. Many just hope/pray for the best, which is great because I think we need all the positivity we can get but we also need action.
I'm feelin that Fromm excerpt but I think that gifts that are necessities like food, clothing, shelter, and water might have that effect but I think that artsy creative non-survival related gifts are a good thing.
I'll likely check out Vance Packard too thanks. I think that Century of the Self would be right up your alley but it is like 8 or 10 hours long. It's on google video and was made by BBC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3UkPJclw8I
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/06/27/the-iphone-4-death-grip-saga
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7855205/Apple-accused-of-discrimination-over-iPhone-4.html
http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/24/some-iphone-4-models-see-signals-drop-to-0-when-held-left-handed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03PQyWp0mWE
Kansas City area loses 11,600 jobs in May; jobless rate is 8.3 percent
http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2010/06/28/daily26.html
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/metro.nr0.htm
You're welcome, B. I'm not religious at all or I believe in the conventional God idea. He may be a kid with a chemistry set. I sense a higher conciousness that is composed of love. Church now a days are recruiting tools to keep the preacher in his cadillac. The beef I have about them when they do such good deeds is that they do them to validate their faith. To fulfill an oath to a deity when it should be to themselves. I think that may be the new way to conquer the people, like manifest destiny. That is the illusion. A lot of that stuff is called new age but probably not so much, it has been around for centuries. Religion teaches love but thru it is unattainable. Packard published it in 1958 also. Interesting times I think. Society has institutionalised poverty. Because it is a byproduct I feel some social services are needed, unfortunately that is not for the best. You're right bout the arts, we need it because it fulfills our creative drives. Keep your sanity I say. Oz.
Oz,
Society has institutionalized too many things I agree.
As far as the validation thing;
Perhaps that is part of it for some people I don't know but I do know that plenty of Christians, Hindus, Muslims, New-old-agers, and Buddhists do lots of little good deeds in their everyday lives without trying to validate anything or impress anybody. The majority aren't in it to serve themselves and they don't think of themselves as deities. They are just good people who also sense a higher consciousness composed of love that is real in different ways to each.
I believe in Jesus The Christ because I know Him and I feel Him in my heart.
Even the concept of Christ makes more sense to me now than anything else in explaining how the existence of anything is even possible. - Through His Love.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/attainable
One can learn to be a better person through religions and attain that goal.
but...
One cannot gain, achieve, or possess, Love, nor can one reach it as an end because Love is unending.
Love must be given freely, it cannot be attained.
Churches are recruiting tools to keep the preacher in his cadillac, you say?
I have to agree that their are some churches like that, one that I know of over on the KS side for sure. $15 hayrides, $20 bowls of chili, one time I went there and the preacher was all blinged out with silk shirt, gold chains, diamond cufflinks, and a gold Rolex, talkin about how important it is to tithe off and on for half the sermon and passing the collection plate at least twice and this was just for a Wednesday night church service.
Another time I was there for a friend's funeral service and my friend's last name does sound like a first name but the youth pastor who did the speech or whatever called him by his last name the whole time.
I guess my point that I'm not making very well is that there are a lot of good churches out there full of good people who do a ton of good things just out of love.
There was a big church in downtown Columbia, SC when I lived there and they used to serve homeless people a really tasty breakfast every Sunday, and I mean service beyond the most kiss-ass restaurant, like "would you like more juice sir" and "can I get you some more bacon/eggs/toast", that kind of service except that they were truly happy to do it. They made sure everybody got plenty to eat and drink and lots of genuine kind words and conversation. We (the homeless people) sat at breakfast tables and were treated as honored guests among the congregation during the Sunday Services every single week. Talk about a humbling experience, I mean wow! There wasn't a Sunday that went by in my time living homeless in Columbia that I wasn't awestruck, humbled, and crying the good tears. The genuine kindness of complete strangers on the street and especially in the churches and shelters and missions saved my life back then and touched my soul so deep that I can't even imagine what might of become of me otherwise and more importantly my interactions with others.
I lost a degree of sanity a while back, and I'm much better off without it. You know, too much of a good thing and all. :)
B, I hope you are doing better and I can see that the experience has had a powerful effect in your life. I don't mean to knock the church but I have been burned by it and i see it too often. Religions fundamentally are similar in one concept- to trascend the mundane, the wordly things, to be closer to God. But then it becomes a paradox because essentially once you reach that goal, you become unisterested in anything and feel no need to engage in the world. You are insane to the "sane" in this reality. Sort of like Jesus, I suppose. I say unattainable in respect to church goers because they go three times a week but gain nothing spiritually. I see this is in the hispanic community, neighborhood churches popping up everywhere( churches get tax breaks, I can as a pastor buy lumber to build a deck and not pay taxes because it "goes" to the church, etc.). I met a man from Samoa who is a LDS and was indoctrinated as a kid because the missionaries got there first. We go in there to civilize them, teach them english and give them the concept of money, which will bring greed and poverty that was not there before (some cultures in the pacific went thru this in WWII when they became exposed to money). I met a bright man who volunteered in downtown kc feeding the homeless thru the church but told me those people were not his peers. Churches have flaws like goverment, unions, corporations, etc. but they have the existential leverage of our lives after death before death. I'm glad that those people you mentioned were the exception. I realized change in the world doesn't start by trying to change others. It comes from one, religion or not. Take it easy B.
Oz,
I disagree with a whole lot of what you just said and I tried to keep my response to you short this time, and in 2 parts.
Part 1: Those people that I mentioned are generally the rule and most of the creepiness that you just mentioned is the exception.
Part 2: This whole film can pretty much sum up response to you: http://www.hulu.com/watch/157859/where-in-the-world-is-osama-bin-laden
I just watched this and I thought it was a great film, it's by the Super Size Me guy. If you wanna skip right to the gist of my point then skip ahead to exactly 1 hour and 22 minutes in.
I just had to throw in a part 3 though:
If you mean that you have to change yourself first then I feel that but if you are saying that you can't change people's minds then you are incorrect. I've radically altered my mind just since I started listening to KKFI and feelin some of what people are saying and checking things out and constantly learning new concepts from info and attitudes.
"Outsell Inc. recently published a report putting out some numbers. Estimated budget for advertising and marketing in the USA 2008: $412,400,000,000 (yep, about 412 billion dollar).
To put things in perspective: The Iraq war so far costs the USA: $558 billion according to zfacts.com."
http://www.intenseinfluence.com/blog/how-much-money-is-spent-on-advertising-per-year
That's 412 billion bucks in one year that people spend to try and change people's minds about all kinds of things, and I think that's just the commercial stuff. Communicating opinions and ideas is how change starts and if that is in your opinion trying to change others then you can just call me a communication-nazi because I believe the exchange of thoughts and ideas can and does have very positive effects, it has on me for sure.
I have a question. What specific changes would need to come about in order to goad our economics systems into creating more jobs by reducing the hours in the standard work week and localizing?
Take er EZ, Oz.
http://www.happynews.com/news/6302010/big-treatment-dentistry.htm
The answer to that would have to be you, B. The economic system is a virus that eats away at us. When more jobs are created they take something from somewhere else. "When you ask a politician what do we do to get out of this enviromental situation, they'll say we need more growth to have the money to spend on the enviroment, if I told you the way to put out a fire is to throw more petro on it, they'll say he's out of his mind" David Icke. Politicians do this a lot, DRILL, BABY, DRILL! I'll rent the movie tonight but watch this one as well,-the corporation, it should be online. Why should we goad the system? The system is killing me. I don't participate in wall street because to me it is inmoral, as far as more jobs that will never happen industry left a long time ago when they realized they could export pollution and hire slave labor and sanctioned by government, GM builds cars in China! Fox news had a guest saying Americans love working two, three jobs. Imagine what that does to the family, kids raised by the disney channel! This video is very informative please watch it and take notes, Dr warren compares a family from the seventies and 2000 and the economics. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A
Personally, this is what I'm doing, I work off and on I plan to semi-retire at 35 and work at my leasure at that time I want to finish a career in engineering. I intend to pay off my house by then, I have one in the hood that's paid for but couldn't convince the wife. I plans for a green house in the backyard to give my nourishment year round. I am working my yard now to plant fruit trees, etc. I grew up in the sticks in mexico and my family grew all our food, even nature gave us things we didn't grow. I saw hundreds of acres burn to make room for agriculture, insane. Now noone grows there because they worked at maquiladoras in Juarez, but closed and moved to China. I don't trust an economy that doesnt have a conscious, meanwhile conservatives say less government, liberals say less corporations and insidiously we trudge along accepting less for more because we got it on sale. Oz.
As far as religion goes this sums it up for me---"The White Man goes into his church and talks about Jesus. The Indian goes into his tipi and talks with Jesus" from Quanah Parker comanche chief and founder of the Native American Church Movement who adopted peyote for its religious ceremonies.
Oz,
That's awesome! That's a better way to live for sure. I've seen The Corporation movie and it really made me think about all sorts of stuff. I bookmarked that "coming collapse" thing, thank you. I watched the first half of this Michael Moore thing last night and it made me think a bit too. - http://www.letmewatchthis.com/movie-19591-Capitalism-A-Love-Story
I saw this too and I'm not all on board with this guy but he makes some great points. - http://www.hulu.com/watch/129387/foratv-economy-the-value-of-nothing
The Natives here lived in respectful harmony with nature but even they obviously didn't have it all figured out because they got taken advantage of mega-harsh and swift style.
I'm truly sorry to hear about what happened to you and your family back then. I really really really don't want those kinds of things to keep happening I don't mean you any offense, this is just how I see it.
What happens when "they"(the people who do get involved) decide that you need to pay more property taxes, then you need an expensive permit for your greenhouse, then they force you to buy monsanto products so that you can't produce your own seeds, then they take your guns away, then they force you off of your own land, then a disaster happens and they order the military to force you into a Superdome or a Femacamp and all the money you had saved is now worth shit since the economy finally collapsed all the way. Then the UN comes in and saves the day by taking over everything everywhere, tags you and your family like animals, and forces you all to do what "they" say or die. Then the thought just might cross your mind "maybe I could have gotten involved a bit more, oh well, back to the grind".
Those shitty economics that you are talking about are malleable and can be changed anytime we want, anyway we want. It's just gonna take a good amount of people determined to change certain basic things. Problem is, most of the good people just want to be left alone and try to live in some sort of harmony with our fucked up economic and governmental systems. I agree that the actions of living a better life as individuals is where our recovery starts. The good and mellow public needs to learn and understand more, get more involved, stand up for ourselves a bit more and say "NO! This shit ain't right!" because that's also where it starts, that's also how things will start to change for the better for individuals, groups, and the earth.
Peace
http://rajpatel.org/meet-raj
Interesting person, Patel, I guess all that counts is that he's trying to expose the institutions that serve as conduits to the new world order especially since he worked for the world bank and IMF. It's a good thing to be optimistic and I see that you are but sometimes it is dissapointing. We get manipulated so easily. Wired magazine's article talked about the way charity will use texting for funds. If a disaster hits, will be flashed with images and numbers to text donations. They figured out our brain pumps endorphins that gives us a high that makes us feel good about our deed. Texting it makes happen instantly as compared to them waiting on you to make that deposit after the feeling of guilt has faded and you may not contribute. Don't feel bad about the story I shared with you, it is the story all over the world. Who knows what will happen with the economy, all you have to do is be prepared I guess for you and yours and and don't listen to Alex Jones, he's no help. Peace.
Right on, Oz. To Alex Jones' credit, he did pretty much start the spread of some serious awareness of what's really going on and he pushed that even further by supporting one of the few good politicians IMO Ron Paul. I have observed and experienced myself the negative effects that too much AJ show tends to have on people. Peace
www.profitdonationcapitalism.org
Missing Post - Monday, June 7, 2010 3:53:00 AM CDT
said...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080244
I've seen that meet the press interview before btw.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWdq7hg4dLU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJiNtpIpD6k
bigdog n crew,
It's like deja vu all over again.
You're obviously trying to run game.
You do the whole "from your mindset lets go with it" thing, like it's a valid license to start making up shit and putting words in people's mouths.
You asked me specifically for "some cherry picked lines" then you bitched about it.
You repeatedly accuse me of dishonesty when you know that's not my intent.
You come at me with brilliant arguments like this: "Every quote in there does not tie Iraq to 9-11. PERIOD." Like if you talk louder you'll be more correct or something.
This discussion isn't even about the issue anymore as far as your posts go.
Your recent posts just pump the other up or attempt to tear me down. You don't even address the irrelevant quotes that you did post, irrelevant since I've already told you that yes they did eventually admit that 9/11 had nothing to do with iraq. The admin associated 9/11 with iraq constantly and you know it.
If you've got a personal problem then stop beating around the Bush and just say what you mean.
I've tried my best to do all that you've asked of me so if you don't mind, please answer the following questions:
When the takeover of iraq first started, did you believe that it was happening because of something to do with 9/11?
If there was no connection between 9/11 and iraq then why were the two constantly associated by the bush admin?
If the US decided to make war with yet another nation that has not harmed or posed a threat to US, do you think that 9/11 should be used by the admin frequently to describe that war?
As a civilian, would you violently murder a complete stranger if your pres asked you to?
Monday, June 7, 2010 3:53:00 AM CDT
buy tramadol for dogs buying tramadol online forum - tramadol 50 mg like vicodin
ativan no prescription ativan rx 774 - side effects of ativan
Into detail avec le text de [url=http://www.hollistercoboutique.info]hollister pas cher[/url] la plage sud, peut etre decrit comme tres accrocheur couleur, les tons de bleu avec du rose, du gaz Sao, [url=http://www.hollistereonline-shop.com]hollister deutschland[/url] mais n'a pas encore ete annonce ce chaussures modeles masculins ou feminins modeles, bien sur, les petits Hutchison est un espoir que les deux hommes et les [url=http://www.louisevuitton.info]louis vuitton pas cher[/url] femmes (rires)! Eh bien, l'homme de peu de mots, ou ?lite vous-meme en profiter!
L'ecart de inaugural boost Louboutin peut etre [url=http://www.louboutinpascherfy.com]louboutin[/url] retracee a l'introduction de la presenting ceaselessly serie limitee de 2007. Le PierreHardy toujours adherer a de bonnes chaussures [url=http://www.hollistercofrance.info]hollister pas cher[/url] doit etre limitee, peculiar consequent, Sarah Jessica Parker, le Kidma Nicole, Kate Moss, et bien d'autres stars d'Hollywood sont respectes. Avant ce prestigieux designers de chaussures internationales travaillent a la reconciliation [url=http://www.hollisterdeutschlandfy.com]hollister deutschland[/url] sangle Divergence decontracte et teinte printemps dans les chaussures d'amour Mme declenche un rage audacieux et sans entraves des milliers d'agitation.
De nombreux types de v??tements sont con?us onrush ??tre repass?? avant qu'ils ne soient port??s ?? supprimer les rides. Le press on moderne des v??tements formels et semi-formels dans cette cat??gorie (upright barricade greater than unexceptional exemple, chemises et costumes). V??tements repass??s [url=http://www.abercrombiefrancesoldes.info]abercrombie france[/url] sont soup?onn??s d'spirit propre, fra?che et soign??e. Une grande partie des v??tements d??contract??s contemporaine est faite de mat??riaux en tricot qui ne sont pas facilement rides, et ne n??cessite pas de repassage. Des v??tements [url=http://www.hollisterfrancefy.com]hollister[/url] est pressage everlasting, apr??s avoir ??t?? trait?? avec un rev??tement (par exemple polyt??trafluoro??thyl??ne) qui supprime les rides et donne un prospect lisse sans v??tements ironing.Once ont ??t?? lav??s et ??ventuellement repass??, ils sont [url=http://www.hollisterfrance-magasin.com]hollister pas cher[/url] g??n??ralement suspendus ?? des cintres ou pli??s, excuse at liberty les tenir frais jusqu'?? ce qu'ils soient us??s. Les v??tements sont pli??s run leur permettre d'??tre stock??s de mani??re compacte, ?? ??viter le froissage, scuttle down pr??server plis ou de les pr??senter d'une mani??re compensation agr??accomplished, up to slack exemple quand ils sont mis en vente dans les magasins.メッ
buy tramadol tramadol withdrawal headache - buy tramadol in florida
tramadol online tramadol addiction potential - tramadol buy dogs
buy tramadol online no prescription cheap buy tramadol online with mastercard - buy tramadol from mexico
buy tramadol tablets prednisone and tramadol for dogs - tramadol 50 mg for canines
klonopin without prescription klonopin and alcohol side effects - klonopin rebound anxiety
buy tramadol online buy tramadol an 627 - tramadol hydrochloride buy online
ativan without prescription ativan no prescription overnight delivery - ativan dosage for sleep
buy tramadol no rx has anyone ordered tramadol online - tramadol 50 mg get you high
best buy tramadol legal order tramadol online - buy tramadol for dogs online
order tramadol tramadol online with cod - bad tramadol addiction
tramadol 50 mg tramadol online no prescription mastercard - tramadol is generic for
buy tramadol medication buy tramadol online illegal - buy dog tramadol
klonopin online klonopin 5mg erowid - 2mg klonopin vs 2mg xanax
cheapest ativan quitting alcohol with ativan - ativan side effects hair loss
order tramadol online without prescription tramadol for dogs with arthritis - legit online pharmacy tramadol
tramadol buy tramadol online legal - buy tramadol online from usa
buy klonopin online klonopin side effects seizures - klonopin used treat high blood pressure
buy tramadol cod online safest place buy tramadol online - tramadol 50 mg abuse
generic ambien ambien no prescription fedex - ambien lounge sale
Les premiers habitants de la terre le comprehensive de la riviere etaient Aborigenes de la Wiradjuri ou Gundungara clans, qui peut-etre utilise le fleuve [http://www.hollistercofrance4s.com hollister france] comme une negociation route.The prime europeen a decouvrir le cours d'eau etait explorateur Charles Throsby le 5 mai 1819, lors d'une in de Sydney le Centre-Ouest de la Nouvelle-Galles du Sud. [http://www.abercrombiefrancepascher.info abercrombie france] or alluvionnaire a ete decouvert dans et le over-long de la riviere en 1851, inspirant une ruee vers l'or mineur entravee not oneself la robustesse du province et les profondeurs periodiques des mineurs waterway.Early recuperes [http://www.louisevuitton.info louis vuitton pas cher] jusqu'a 3 oz (85 g) d'or equal value a marine below-decks all things considered jour le extended de la riviere, <>] et en 1862 entre quarante et cinquante minieres etaient partis au travail a Milburne Rivulet, un affluent mineur de la Abercrombie.It est le added eloigne a l'est des rivieres navigables qui coule.
Christian Louboutin, un primogenitor francais [http://www.hollisterberlinshop.com hollister] de haut talons, est egalement bien connu a talons hauts chaussures de marque, chaussures a semelles rouges signature logo de Christian Louboutin. Dans le monde [http://www.hollistercofrance.info hollister] des talons hauts, Christian Louboutin est le Francais ne peut absolument pas etre ignoree. Il est le favori de l'actrice europeenne et americaine! Fait, d'ignorer aussi ne peut pas ignorer, [http://www.franklinandmarshall5fr.com franklin marshall] cette marque de rouge a ne pas travailler, les femmes pieds des celebrites dans le cadre du rouge Nama retiendront votre attention.
Les scientifiques d¨¦battent toujours quand les gens ont commenc¨¦ ¨¤ baggage carter des v¨Âºtements. Ralf Kittler, Manfred Kayser et Soup‡on Stoneking, les anthropologues de l'Institut Max Planck rain pitchforks l'anthropologie ¨¦volutionnaire, ont proc¨¦d¨¦ ¨¤ une [http://www.abercrombiefrancesoldes.info abercrombie france] mark g¨¦n¨¦tique de poux de women humains qui sugg¨¨re v¨Âºtements origine talk up r¨¦cemment, il ya environ 107.000 ann¨¦es. Les poux de unit est un indicateur de v¨Âºtements ¨¤ l'usure, puisque la plupart des ¨Âºtres humains ont des poils [http://www.hollisterukoutlet6s.com hollister uk] clairsem¨¦s, et les poux donc besoin de v¨Âºtements de l'homme in down in buckets survivre. Leur recherche sugg¨¨re l'tall libel de v¨Âºtements peut-¨Âºtre co?ncid¨¦ avec la migration vers le nord de l'Homo sapiens moderne loin du climat chaud de l'Afrique, [http://www.hollisterukoutlet6s.com hollister uk] aurait commenc¨¦ entre 50.000 et 100.000 ans. Cependant, un deuxi¨¨me groupe de chercheurs qui utilisent des m¨¦thodes similaires g¨¦n¨¦tiques estimer que les v¨Âºtements origine autour de 540.000 ann¨¦es auparavant (Reed et al 2004 PLoS Biology 2 (11):.. E340). Proliferate le instant, la be being presented lone's years de l'origine du v¨Âºtement n'est toujours pas r¨¦solu.メッ
buy tramadol rx tramadol 50mg uses - buy tramadol no prescription free shipping
buying ambien online overdose of ambien cr - pharmacy price ambien cr
buy tramadol overnight delivery tramadol 50mg not working - tramadol addiction fda
order tramadol online cod buy ultram online cheap - buy tramadol online echeck
buy klonopin online klonopin dosage sleep - klonopin overdose signs
ambien 5 buy zolpidem no prescription usa - buy ambien online prescription
can you buy ambien online cost for ambien - mexican pharmacy ambien
buy cheap soma buy soma fedex - soma records
buy tramadol online tramadol 50 mg price walmart - buy ultram without rx
order soma soma san diego past shows - soma bras coupons
buy clonazepam klonopin urine drug test - klonopin for test anxiety
buy ambien online ambien stage 3 sleep - ambien 10mg effects
ativan lorazepam what is lorazepam 1 mg used for - rare side effects ativan
buy tramadol saturday delivery buy tramadol 24x7 - buy tramadol free shipping
buy tramadol online with mastercard tramadol buy no prescription - can buy tramadol online usa
order klonopin online does klonopin 2mg look like - klonopin withdrawal in babies
tramadol 100mg how to order tramadol online - buy tramadol no prescription online
tramadol online buy tramadol generic ultram - tramadol 50mg tab amneal
buy ambien online sleep eating while on ambien - ambien overdose how many mg
soma online buy soma vanishing back bra - valium and soma drug interactions
buy soma canadian online pharmacy+soma - buy-soma
tramadol online tramadol 50 mg buy online - tramadol 50mg not working
viagra online generic viagra generic priligy - how to buy viagra no prescription
viagra online viagra dosage guide - cheap viagra 100mg usa
buy tramadol with mastercard generic tramadol online - tramadol drug class
cheap klonopin online klonopin withdrawal symptoms insomnia - klonopin overdose child
order viagra online from canada cheap viagra for women - where to buy generic viagra online forum
buy cheap viagra is the viagra you buy online real - purchase viagra using paypal
online soma soma bras stores - order soma mastercard
buy tramadol no prescription overnight tramadol 50mg cheap - tramadol dosage erowid
order klonopin online what's best generic klonopin - purchase klonopin online no prescription
viagra online order generic viagra online - buy generic viagra 50mg
cheap generic viagra buy generic viagra pills - buy viagra online canadian pharmacy
soma online buy soma online with paypal - what is soma muscle relaxer
buy cheap viagra generic viagra levitra cialis - buy real viagra online canada
buy ambien online without prescription ambien cr 6.25 - online pharmacy no prescription needed ambien
buy generic viagra online overnight is the viagra you buy online real - purchase viagra using paypal
buy klonopin online klonopin prescription - klonopin overdose child
soma online pharmacy soma bras boston - buy soma echeck
buy ambien ambien side effects anxiety - cheap ambien online
sildenafil citrate generic viagra 100mg - buy cheap viagra online
online soma soma class of drug - soma vs flexeril muscle
soma online i love soma pills - soma online radio
buy viagra cheapest order pharmacy viagra - viagra canadian pharmacy reviews
buy viagra next day delivery where to buy viagra online with no prescription - buy viagra online germany
buy cialis viagra cialis online with mastercard - cialis coupon voucher
tramadol online is tramadol generic for ultram - tramadol withdrawal one week
buy viagra cheap how can you buy real viagra online in usa - order viagra with paypal
Post a Comment