GazeboflossUK

That is completely true....but you guys still have decent level.....and yes, the UK really can't get to most of the gas, and the expensive nature of deeper exploration means a impossible business there. Russia has an unthinkable amount of natural gas yet they are a nuclear nation. ...see with Nuclear Engery comes status and it energizes the population of which ever country achieves the task. It's an economic boost - and the west couldn't have that now could they? And with there being no evidence of Iranian nuclear weapons program, why should we have people on our news all day saying "they got nukes! they are making nukes!" without any background to their pathetic yelps?

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah....I've heard this all before. Although last time I heard this it was "Unless we cut to a world population of about 500 Million".

There is an abundance of natural gas in North America and also here in the UK (if we really want to get it)........so why do we have nuclear energy? The U.S has the 11th highest oil reserves in the world and with Canada having the 2nd highest stash North America is loaded with the stuff......so why go over and rape the middle-east? .......and why do oil prices have to change so much in the U.S when they can have access to the 2nd largest amount on the planet?

CIA: No Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program Counterpunch | November 30, 2006 GARY LEUPP According to Seymour Hersh's latest New Yorker shocker, the CIA has found no evidence of a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program. The White House, given a draft assessment in the fall, has been "hostile" to the agency's report. Now why would that be? Why no sighs of relief? Why no, "Thank you guys," and pats on the back for all their careful intelligence work? I think the answer's obvious to anyone who's been paying attention. Dick Cheney and his neocon acolytes who still dominate Middle East policy (David Wurmser, Elliott Abrams, Stephen Hadley, Stephen Cambone, Eric Edelman, Elizabeth Cheney, with Abram Shulsky, David Addington and John Bolton in supporting roles) have a certain view of what constitutes good intelligence. It's at variance with the view more widely held among those of us in what they dismiss as the "reality-based community." That includes many intelligence professionals. My university hosts the Fletcher School of International Law and Diplomacy, a prime CIA recruiting ground. I know from personal exposure that some choosing that career (never at my urging) can be decent, self-respecting, conscientious scholars and researchers. If asked to investigate whether or not a country has a nuclear weapons program, they're likely to interpret the assignment literally and give it their best shot. But this is not the neocon understanding of what intelligence entails. When Dick Cheney says, "Find me evidence," he means, "Validate my project with evidence" He wants talking points to disseminate to the American public via Fox News and the Wall Street Journal editorial page to justify regime change in Iran. He wants an Iranian client-state, bridging "liberated" Afghanistan and Iraq, helping to encircle rising China, decorated with permanent U.S. bases keeping a watchful eye on the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf and Caspian Sea, and friendly with nuclear Israel. Before the Iraq War, Cheney, his deputy "Scooter" Libby and Rumsfeld deputy Paul Wolfowitz all strongly opposed the CIA reports concluding that Saddam Hussein had no important al-Qaeda ties and that Iraq didn't have enough WMDs to threaten anybody. Cheney and Libby repeatedly visited CIA headquarters in person to demand revisions of reports and inclusion of "intelligence" later proven to have come from persons known by the CIA to be unreliable. But dissatisfied with the level of cooperation from the CIA, Cheney with Rumsfeld created the "Office for Special Plans" (headed by Douglas Feith) within the Defense Department to scatter disinformation through the "free" press and then through administration officials appearing on weekend news programs--including the myths of the Niger uranium deal, aluminum tubes as nuclear centrifuges, al-Qaeda training camps in Iraq, etc. So of course the White House---at least if (as I suspect) Cheney retains the upper hand in an apparent power struggle---is going to be hostile to the CIA report, whose existence has likely been leaked by some self-respecting intelligence officers. The administration knows that war critics in Congress might brandish this report to discourage the well-planned attack, calling for negotiations and dialogue with Tehran. Their voice will be all the more convincing if as expected the report of the Iraq Study Group headed by James Baker urges that all Iraq's neighbors be involved in finding a solution to the war in that country. The idea that the CIA would abet such wimps must give the surviving, struggling neocons shitfits. Will the current serve, or will they lose their fortunes? (Hersh writes that the CIA paper has made "planning for an attack on Iranfar more complicated." On the other hand the neocons know that AIPAC is strong, and will passionately argue that opposition to a preemptive attack is appeasement, and Ahmadinejad is Hitler, that Iran wants to "wipe Israel of the map," that Israel's security and U.S. security are the same, and that whatever the cost the U.S. MUST prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. They know that even many now favoring a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq won't stand in the way of an Iran attack because they're intimidated by such reasoning. Few politicians may care to argue back, but they could say, "The historical analogy is ridiculous. Do you even know what Ahmadinejad's constitutional powers are, in relation to military affairs, foreign policy, and the Iranian nuclear program? Don't you think the administration's exaggerating the Iranian threat, like it did the threat from Iraq? Why did State Department Sean McCormack jump last May to validate a totally false and almost immediately discredited report that the Iranian parliament was planning to badge Jews? Are you aware that the IAEA headed by one of the UN's most respected officials, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mohamed ElBaradei, has repeatedly reported there is no evidence the Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program? Just as our own CIA has done, for godssakes? Did you know that Iran has never once in modern history attacked another country? By the way, what is Israel doing to encourage friendly relations with Iran, and with its Arab neighbors? Would complete withdrawal from the West Bank and Syria's Golan Heights in accordance with numerous UN resolutions help?" ) I wonder if Dubya's actually "hostile" to the CIA report. Could be that he hasn't read it, or has had it summarized for him by a hostile Cheney, who'll be telling him that the CIA is dominated by liberals who just don't want to see the evidence and interpret it so cautiously that they're risking our security. But his dad's telling him (through James Baker and Brent Snowcroft) to back off a bit on Iran, having screwed up so bad in Iraq, and to actually sit down and talk to the Iranians about settling down that Mesopotamian mess. He's perhaps been urging his boy not to snap at the CIA because those guys are there to HELP him, after all, as they along with the generals gently suggest that he cool his jets. And meanwhile the neocons, his rock of support, whose words must genuinely hurt, declare him a failure. Key neocons (including Bill Kristol) turned on Rumsfeld long ago, damning his inclination to use too little force and firepower. But now some neocons out of power (including Perle, "axis of evil" speechwriter Frum, and "Cakewalk" Adelman) are on the president's own case; having once delighted in his receptivity to their plans (born out his natural callousness and desire to one-up his war criminal pop), they now blame him for not wisely executing the colonization-of-Iraq project. But notice that the neocons out of power and inclined to comment aren't turning on Cheney, from his undisclosed location long serving as the real power behind the throne. Hersh reports that the White House (Cheney) insisted before the midterm elections that even if the Democrats took both houses U.S. policy towards Iran wouldn't change. But, a former senior intelligence officer told Hersh, "[t]hey're afraid that Congress is going to vote a binding resolution to stop a hit on Iran, à la Nicaragua in the Contra war." Cheney and his neocons are surely working closely with Lantos and Lieberman and other warmonger Democrats to achieve the overthrow of the Iranian government before Bush leaves office. The "Office of Special Plans" has been revived in the same Pentagon offices as the "Office of Iranian Affairs," headed by the Leo Strauss scholar Abram Shulsky and reporting to the vice-president's daughter Elizabeth Cheney. It will take more than a classified CIA report to stop the train, but the train does appear to be slowing down. Despite war preparations, the contradictions within the Bush regime and in the power elite in general suggest that rather than expanding the criminal war, those bearing top command responsibility might just have to back off. Their credibility with the people has hit rock-bottom; the mainstream press is no longer so cooperative; traditional power centers have become alarmed at the influence acquired by the neocon cabal, the Israel lobby and Christian fundamentalist PACs. The regimes targeted for change in Damascus and Tehran are working with a somewhat independent-minded (if still U.S.-dependent) Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The announcement of a summit between Syrian, Iraqi and Iranian leaders in Tehran may have taken Bush by surprise; the meeting in Amman with al-Maliki right afterwards, requiring Bush to fly down from the NATO conference in Riga, looks as though it was hastily called. Meanwhile, according to reports, Baker's Iraq Study Group will suggest that U.S. diplomats sit down and talk with Iraq's neighbors about ending the violence in the invaded country. Will not even the most mule-headed Democrat in the Democrat-led legislature now have to pause before recommending or approving further aggression against those nations bordering Iraq? Perhaps Bush and Cheney have already given them their cue. "If we don't attack Iran," they say, "the Israelis might, and we'd understand that." And the Democrats can, after expressing any personal opinions they may have on Iran-Israel issues, add, "Anyway it's not the U.S.'s business to go attacking a country that even the CIA says poses no threat to us."

Well, I don't actually think it's as simple as just turning off the Interent but more a suggestion that the internet wouldn't be able to function as it is today. Under new ideas that have been in progress for years now, big business that rely on the Internet will be able to continue but a completely new system of file transfer protocol will be used - with older ones being completely blocked. This is due to a switch to a whole new network and is being called for by many people. It's all dressed up though. Claims are being made that the new system will be faster and safer but it's all about limited user freedom because only certain types of encripted video and auido will be allowed to exist. With applications and a licence needed to even make a site of your own. The application for a site would need a description of content and this would be under review as new rules/laws would stop anything deemd "hate speech" - 99% of what I write is probably considered "hate speech" which is where the big problems begin... It's pretty much a Chinese Internet system for the world......it's a horrible idea but I think we need to be at least aware that there are people out there trying to make this happen.

Now this is a petition... http://www.oism.org/pproject/

RIAA wants the Internet shut down Interesting argument of the day By Nick Farrell: Wednesday 29 November 2006, 08:38 ONE OF THE lawyers involved in defending cases bought against people by the RIAA claims that if the music industry wins a crucial case, the Internet will have to be switched off. Speaking on the DefectiveByDesign anti-DRM campaign site, Ray Beckerman said the case of Electro vs. Barker has become very important for the web's future. Barker was being defended by Beckerman who made a motion to dismiss the case because the RIAA had forgot to provide any acts or dates or times of copyright infringement as the law normally requires. The RIAA argued that by merely making files available on the Internet Barker was making a copyright infringement. Beckerman said that it was a shocking argument because if it were accepted by the court it would probably shut down the entire Internet. If you send any file on the Net the RIAA will be allowed to suspect that you are in breach of copyright. What was more disturbing is that the RIAA called up its mates in Washington to back it up. Apparently the United States Government has put in motions supporting the RIAA. Article url - http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36027 If their crazy reasoning is accepted then this will criminalize making any files available on the world wide web.....which is obviously a bit stupid....but it's pretty much how the RIAA work.... "They have an investigator pretend to be a user of KAZAA or one of the other similar file-sharing networks. He finds a shared files folder that has a goodly number of copyrighted songs in it. He has no idea whether those song files were obtained legally, whether though payed downloads, or through making personal copies from one's own CD for backup purposes, or whether anything illegal was ever done with those files, whether anyone ever copied one. And what he does: he takes a screen shot of this shared files folders (He of course does not see the folders, he merely sees the text in the metadata) and decides that this is a big shared file folder. ...Then through some secret process which he will not share with us and has tried to conceal from the courts, he then associates it with a dynamic ip address. And then, after he has what he believes is the correct dynamic ip address, for the date and time at which he made that screen shot, he then brings a proceeding to get the name and address of the subscriber who paid for the internet access, which of course would tell us nothing. But once he gets that information he then sues the person." -Ray Beckerman Screwing up the entire Internet seems a highly unlikely move in that it would probably derail the world economy and put thousands of huge transnational corporations out of business. An outcome more likely to happen if this ruling is accepted is that it would further pave the way for government regulation and tracking of the Internet, namely "Internet 2," a completely controlled, surveilled and autocratic cyber police state similar to the Chinese model, whereby website owners have to obtain government permission to run a blog, be approved by a biometric thumb scan just to turn their computer on, and immediately get their Internet access shut off if they misbehave. This case is another attack arm of forces in government and the corporate structure that seek to suffocate the last outpost of true freedom of speech and dissent and it must be countered at all costs.

Thought this could go in this area too... RIAA wants the Internet shut down Interesting argument of the day By Nick Farrell: Wednesday 29 November 2006, 08:38 ONE OF THE lawyers involved in defending cases bought against people by the RIAA claims that if the music industry wins a crucial case, the Internet will have to be switched off. Speaking on the DefectiveByDesign anti-DRM campaign site, Ray Beckerman said the case of Electro vs. Barker has become very important for the web's future. Barker was being defended by Beckerman who made a motion to dismiss the case because the RIAA had forgot to provide any acts or dates or times of copyright infringement as the law normally requires. The RIAA argued that by merely making files available on the Internet Barker was making a copyright infringement. Beckerman said that it was a shocking argument because if it were accepted by the court it would probably shut down the entire Internet. If you send any file on the Net the RIAA will be allowed to suspect that you are in breach of copyright. What was more disturbing is that the RIAA called up its mates in Washington to back it up. Apparently the United States Government has put in motions supporting the RIAA. Article url - http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36027 If their crazy reasoning is accepted then this will criminalize making any files available on the world wide web.....which is obviously a bit stupid....but it's pretty much how the RIAA work.... "They have an investigator pretend to be a user of KAZAA or one of the other similar file-sharing networks. He finds a shared files folder that has a goodly number of copyrighted songs in it. He has no idea whether those song files were obtained legally, whether though payed downloads, or through making personal copies from one's own CD for backup purposes, or whether anything illegal was ever done with those files, whether anyone ever copied one. And what he does: he takes a screen shot of this shared files folders (He of course does not see the folders, he merely sees the text in the metadata) and decides that this is a big shared file folder. ...Then through some secret process which he will not share with us and has tried to conceal from the courts, he then associates it with a dynamic ip address. And then, after he has what he believes is the correct dynamic ip address, for the date and time at which he made that screen shot, he then brings a proceeding to get the name and address of the subscriber who paid for the internet access, which of course would tell us nothing. But once he gets that information he then sues the person." -Ray Beckerman Screwing up the entire Internet seems a highly unlikely move in that it would probably derail the world economy and put thousands of huge transnational corporations out of business. An outcome more likely to happen if this ruling is accepted is that it would further pave the way for government regulation and tracking of the Internet, namely "Internet 2," a completely controlled, surveilled and autocratic cyber police state similar to the Chinese model, whereby website owners have to obtain government permission to run a blog, be approved by a biometric thumb scan just to turn their computer on, and immediately get their Internet access shut off if they misbehave. This case is another attack arm of forces in government and the corporate structure that seek to suffocate the last outpost of true freedom of speech and dissent and it must be countered at all costs.

Football....no question. Hate the way top flight football is at times though. It's all money, diving, crying, more money, more diving around and some more crying on top of that. But I do like quite alot of other sports. .....Badminton & Squash are also great, to play anyway.

Your right. I think Bush and his pals should be locked up in a cell for the rest of their lives for what they have done......yet I think global warming is a scam.....and there's many, many more people who have this view.

Ok, I now consider your words on this to be an attempted wind-up...it has to be....ok, I get it. BUT, if any of the following happened at your school then, and only then, I can understand your viewpoint..... !!!!!!!CAUTION GRAPHIC IMAGES OF ABUSE AND INHUMAN BEHAVIOUR!!!!!!! Here's a list of admitted, confirmed activities: And remember, this is just what the military could confirm as having happened: a. (S) Punching, slapping, and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet; b. (S) Videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees; c. (S) Forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing; d. (S) Forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time; e. (S) Forcing naked male detainees to wear women's underwear; f. (S) Forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped; g. (S) Arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them; h. (S) Positioning a naked detainee on a MRE Box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture; i. (S) Writing "I am a Rapest" (sic) on the leg of a detainee alleged to have forcibly raped a 15-year old fellow detainee, and then photographing him naked; j. (S) Placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee's neck and having a female Soldier pose for a picture; k. (S) A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee; l. (S) Using military working dogs (without muzzles) to intimidate and frighten detainees, and in at least one case biting and severely injuring a detainee; m. (S) Taking photographs of dead Iraqi detainees. a. (U) Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; b. (U) Threatening detainees with a charged 9mm pistol; c. (U) Pouring cold water on naked detainees; d. (U) Beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; e. (U) Threatening male detainees with rape; f. (U) Allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; g. (U) Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick. h. (U) Using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee. BUT THIS HAPPENS AT YOUR SCHOOL EVERY DAY DOESN'T IT? AND YOU THINK IT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED AT MINE? I know you obviously were just being stupid about this from the start, right?

"New York City Cops, New York City Cops....." Horrible event.

Yes, it's true that we are in a 10 year cycle of increased activitiy. Notice that last year, when there were many large and devastating storms, 'Global Warming' was overly presented to everyone as a huge and imminent threat to all life, using the storms as evidence that 'it's just going to get worse'. Now, this year..we hear what?...nada. Don't get me wrong....I would actually like to have more enviromental and "human friendly" fuels used as it's an obvious health benefit to everyone.....however, the current scam of Global Warming is getting irritating. We have Climate Change and they aint anything we can do about that specific eventuality. It's alot to do with he Solar Cycle of The Sun.

I think we better end it there, before you saying something even more ridiculous. ---END---

Your right, worse things than men being forced to be naked DO happen....BUT more than that happened there..... AND just because worse things happen doesn't mean it should be tolerated or make it right does it. OR the fact that it was pretty much led from the top.

Yeah, yeah......great.

:) I'm a bit late too.....thanks to everyone. Vi, cheers..;)

Rumsfeld okayed abuses says former U.S. general Reuters Saturday, November 25, 2006 Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld authorized the mistreatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, the prison's former U.S. commander said in an interview on Saturday. Former U.S. Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski told Spain's El Pais newspaper she had seen a letter apparently signed by Rumsfeld which allowed civilian contractors to use techniques such as sleep deprivation during interrogation. Karpinski, who ran the prison until early 2004, said she saw a memorandum signed by Rumsfeld detailing the use of harsh interrogation methods. "The handwritten signature was above his printed name and in the same handwriting in the margin was written: "Make sure this is accomplished"," she told Saturday's El Pais. "The methods consisted of making prisoners stand for long periods, sleep deprivation ... playing music at full volume, having to sit in uncomfortably ... Rumsfeld authorized these specific techniques." The Geneva Convention says prisoners of war should suffer "no physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion" to secure information. "Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind," the document states. A spokesman for the Pentagon declined to comment on Karpinski's accusations, while U.S. army in Iraq could not immediately be reached for comment. Karpinski was withdrawn from Iraq in early 2004, shortly after photographs showing American troops abusing detainees at the prison were flashed around the world. She was subsequently removed from active duty and then demoted to the rank of colonel on unrelated charges. Karpinski insists she knew nothing about the abuse of prisoners until she saw the photos, as interrogation was carried out in a prison wing run by U.S. military intelligence. Rumsfeld also authorized the army to break the Geneva Conventions by not registering all prisoners, Karpinski said, explaining how she raised the case of one unregistered inmate with an aide to former U.S. commander Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez. "We received a message from the Pentagon, from the Defense Secretary, ordering us to hold the prisoner without registering him. I now know this happened on various occasions." Karpinski said last week she was ready to testify against Rumsfeld, if a suit filed by civil rights groups in Germany over Abu Ghraib led to a full investigation. President Bush announced Rumsfeld's resignation after Democrats wrested power from the Republicans in midterm elections earlier this month, partly due to public criticism over the Iraq war.

Hey, I read that earlier when looking through netscape. Anyway, it's was a pretty good read, even if I already have a good idea about this false-flag event. Oddly enough his administration (well, probably more like just JFK himself & and the joint chief of staff at the time) was against state-sponsored, false flag terrorism like Operation Northwoods (US National Securtiy Archive link here) but was a victim of it himself.....right under his own nose. I thought about posting this.....but couldn't remember if I had a similar thread from a while ago.

Damn. I have been reading loads about KBR/Halliburton recently. It's all really too disgusting to comprehend at times. I can't say I'm suprised at all though. Watching footage of the truck divers who are being led into such danger is also very disturbing.

Yeah, I know, I was shocked to find out it's true. I was browsing the news channels on TV and I noticed the FOX News Channel were running a bit (only about 20-25 seconds) of the video we've all seen. So, I thought I might as well see how Hannity & Colmes dealt with the story and heard Sean Hannity say "UCLA policy means that the guy was well within his rights to use the taser". I watched the rest of the segment, it was rubbish though....too short and Hannity was basically talking over a guy they had as a guest. But, anyway....I'm digressing.........I then had a look elsewhere and it appears the 50,000 volt electric Taser can be used on a Passive Resister by UCLA Campus Officers.

It's that easy isn't it.

Well, yes and sadly Fahrenheit 9/11 barely scratches the surface.

Firefighter Describes "Molten Metal" at Ground Zero, like a "Foundry" Video of New York firefighter describing seeing molten "steel" flowing at ground zero after 9/11 has emerged. He states that it was like a 'foundry' or "lava in a volcano"........... This is an extremely important piece of footage because it really highlights the fact that something other than jet fuel fires, or in the case of building 7, office material fires, was responsible for the collapse of the buildings. There are actaully lots of accounts alleging that rescue workers encountered molten steel. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3060923273573302287&sourceid=docidfeed&hl=en The firefighter in this video specifically says the steel was flowing. Molten steel was found “three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed [from WTCs 1 & 2],” Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland is on record as saying. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously in the late afternoon. What caused the steel to melt? How did it stay molten for weeks after the collapses? How did fires in the WTC wreckage manage to burn for more than three months? Molten metal found in the basement of the WTC suggests that the commonly used explosive thermite may be responsible for the collapse. The use of thermite and thermate is also common in military circles. Thermite devices can be set off at will using thermite electrical matches commonly used for controlled demolitions. There's also evidence of the dark grey thermite residue on recovered steel columns from the towers. Also, when cutting through super strength steel beams diagonal 'shaped charges' are used to slice them and cause the section above to literally slide off. Evidence of this type of cutting can also be seen at ground zero. ^^^ Angled "shaped charge" on a steel beam. Also seen at the site in New York... Thermite contains its own supply of oxygen, and does not require any external source such as air. Consequently, it cannot be smothered and may ignite in any environment, given sufficient initial heat. It will burn just as well while underwater, for example, and cannot even be extinguished with water, as water sprayed on a thermite reaction will instantly be boiled into steam. In August 2006 the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) responded to questions of controlled demolition and thermite use by dismissing all the evidence outright in two incredible sentences. Firstly in response to the thermite theory: "Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions." NIST also contend that the suggestion is irrelevant because they had already ruled out controlled demolition. Secondly on the molten metal: "The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing." Oh OK, forget it then shall we? Also, Now N.I.S.T say that they now could not rule out bombs in the buildings. Which was a real suprise admission.