GazeboflossUK

Ok, Ok.... So I say I'm 100% mentally heathly and I'm even more crazy. And the next post, well....I think what you posted is false and I'm mad.... I'm almost a terrorist. We should leave this here. It's old already.

You are a very silly boy.

It's safe to say that I have no mental issues and am 100% healthy and don't suffer from paranoia. ('I follow facts' should be your signature, once you know what a fact is of course)

As do I

^^ You've just said all that crazy stuff ^^ What?!? I have mental issues!! HAHA, That seriously is amusing. I really wish I could meet you. It would be such an amazing insight to the retarded mind. You can't argue most points and bring up aliens and stuff all the time, when I have never done so. Anyway. I'll say this. You are one dumb American. I think you should say sorry to all the other Americans on here personally for being so, so stupid.... (I'm just off to act like a Monkey for ten minutes.....coz I'm mental!!)

My point is you've got your head in the sand. Anyway, if you think it's a waste of time, get outa here.

Your a joke. and not a funny one.

YOU think it's a waste of time which means absolutely NOTHING.

Shhhush.

They have as much right as everyone else. It's quite brave to come out and speak on such important issues....because, as you've proved - some people don't like to hear it.

Matt Invites Viewing Millions To See Movie http://www.coldplaying.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1762441#post1762441

I was this story's 'tip off' :) Rock Frontman Invites Viewing Millions To See Alex Jones Movie Muse singer scrawls name of Terror Storm on t-shirt, performs headlining show at Reading Festival Paul Joseph Watson | August 27 2006 Critically acclaimed rockers Muse cited Alex Jones' new film as one of their influences as frontman Matt Bellamy scrawled "Terror Storm" on the back of his shirt for the band's Saturday night headline gig at the Reading Festival in the UK. The Reading Festival is famous worldwide amongst music lovers and is regularly screened by the BBC to viewers in the UK. Muse are considered one of the best alternative rock bands in Britain and they have played many large stadiums in the United States, in which their fan base is also large and ever-expanding. Following the performance, Bellamy explained the meaning behind the t-shirt to NME, Britain's top selling music magazine. "Go to Google Video, type in Terror Storm and you'll find a nice little surprise. It will shed some light on world affairs, put it that way. I rather point you in the direction then preach about it myself," said Bellamy. A BBC news report also picked up on the story. "With "terror storm" written on his T-shirt, singer Matthew Bellamy took to a white piano at one point. Afterwards he said they were getting a vibe from the crowd, and in the words of their own song they really seemed invincible." It is very exciting and a boon for the 9/11 Truth Movement to have a major rock band encourage people to watch Terror Storm in front of 80,000 festival goers and millions watching at home on BBC television. The connection between the cultural zeitgeist and the 9/11 truth movement as well as the wider truth movement in general is evergreen and can only help in spreading awareness amongst those who will inherit the battle to preserve all our freedoms - the youth of today. It is our task to nurture that bond and ensure that it isn't just a flash in the pan that gets replaced by the next fad in a couple of years time. Muse should be commended and more people in the public spotlight encouraged to use their soapbox to educate people on the reality of the hidden hand that directs world events from behind closed doors.

Oooooooooh. *hand bags*

It's not those choices. That's what you've been brainwashed with. I can't believe you buy that it is that simple. Support this coming war and contribute to evil.

Why Bush will Choose War Against Iran RAY CLOSE Former CIA analyst | August 26 2006 Like many people, I find it extremely difficult to believe that President Bush could actually do anything so crazy as to launch a military attack against Iran, and that even if he wanted to, the Congress, the Pentagon, and the American public would ever countenance such action. But I remember in the spring of 2002 writing a "Dear Friends" memo just like this one predicting that the apparent intentions of the Bush Administration to invade Iraq would certainly turn out to be nothing but a bluff, and supporting that assertion by listing all the reasons why actually doing so would lead to utter disaster. Many of my friends told me at the time that I was missing the point --- regime change was DEFINITELY going to happen, and I was exaggerating the downside consequences. The problem is that today the downside risks of attacking Iran seem even more horrendous ---- and yet? (As George Will said last Sunday to George Stephanopoulos -- "When was the last time this president ever worried about getting approval in advance from the Congress or the public?") It makes me nervous when my president truly believes he is carrying out the will of God. (comment: which is all a fraud - the will of Molech, yes) So this is why I reluctantly believe today that Bush will indeed launch an attack on Iran before the expiration of his term of office: 1. As expected, Iran has offered to enter negotiations, but has rejected the precondition that they discontinue uranium enrichment. Iran will continue to stall indefinitely in the expectation that the U.S. cannot summon the international political and economic clout to damage Iran to any critical degree in the near future. Meanwhile, Iran remains totally and sincerely convinced (with ample justification) that the U.S. is committed to overthrowing the Teheran regime on the tactical level, and waging a broader war against Islam on the strategic level. Rightly or wrongly, Iranian leaders interpret Israeli-US joint collaboration in Lebanon as the final proof of both suspicions. Nothing will shake that conviction. We can huff and puff, but the reality is that we will not succeed in either persuading or intimidating the Iranian leadership into doing what we want them to do. This is the nub of the problem in Washington: none of the principal decision-makers --- Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld or Rice --- (even Rice!) --- understands and accepts this simple reality, and so all the expectations and calculations that go into the formation of U.S. policy start from a faulty premise. 2. The U.S. will fail to get the UNSC to establish (and then enforce) a regimen of sanctions that Washington considers tough enough --- despite the unanimous concern of the larger powers, including China and Russia, that a nuclear Iran would be undesirable. The Bush Administration will fulminate about weakness of resolve and false friendship of its "allies", but this will only exacerbate the divisions and further expose the enfeebled state of American political and moral leadership and the deterioration of its international credibility. Iran will watch this soap opera, smiling like a Cheshire cat. 3. Whatever sanctions are eventually applied will have zero chance of persuading Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions; most certain is the fact that Iran will continue its development program without any slowdown until it has passed the US-Israel "red line" of possessing the necessary raw material to produce a nuclear bomb whenever it chooses to do so. (As we all know, possession of an operational bomb may be as much as a decade or more in the future, but the "red line" of achieving all the necessary technology, equipment and ingredients could be crossed MUCH sooner than that --- and almost certainly before Bush leaves office in January 2009.) 4. So this is the calculus facing Bush: a. He has vowed that he will not leave office without first ensuring that Iran cannot become a nuclear power. He has probably given the leaders of Israel a similar promise --- privately and perhaps explicitly. That means that he is effectively committed to attack Iran militarily before January 2009 if all other means of accomplishing the objective fail --- which they will. He believes deeply that Iran poses an existential threat to our ally Israel and an extremely dangerous threat to the American people, as well. Bush also believes that Iran is determined to sabotage American hopes of establishing a "new Middle East" ---- by covert support of anti-American terrorist elements such as Hizballah and Hamas --- backed up by the added power implicit in its eventual possession of nuclear weapons. Given Bush's overarching dedication to "winning the Global War on Terrorism", the neutralization of Iran has become a sine qua non, equal if not higher on his list of priorities than "victory" in Iraq --- another impossibility that he is stubbornly unwilling to recognize, even privately --- much less acknowledge publicly. b. Bush presently intends (with little faith or sincerity) to exhaust all opportunities to achieve his objectives by diplomatic means or through economic sanctions. Failing those, he will attempt to achieve his purposes by intimidation --- by raising the threat of military attack. This will only stimulate more internal support for the regime inside Iran and more international opposition to U.S. policies, especially in the Muslim world. Without question, moreover, an escalating danger of US-Iranian military confrontation will greatly intensify internal and regional opposition to US objectives in Iraq. (Note: A mystifying disconnect in logic persists on this point in Bush's mind.) c. The best hope for avoidance of war with Iran (the catastrophic consequences of which are too numerous and wide-ranging even to catalog) will be opposition to the idea from the U.S. military and from American politicians of both parties who have an appreciation of the weakened state of U.S. defense forces. I am told, on the other hand, that Bush has been persuaded by some military advisers that STRATCOM (Strategic Air Command) has a workable plan for a comprehensive attack to be launched almost simultaneously against 1500 targets in Iran that will effectively prevent any Iranian retaliation, and will obviate the need for a major ground operation or post-conflict occupation. (The logic of this strategy apparently depends on the hope that destruction of Iran's nuclear potential and its conventional military capabilities in a spectacular display of shock and awe will trigger an internal revolt against the present government, with moderate pro-western elements standing ready to seize power in the name of freedom and democracy. This must be another fantasy dreamed up in the twisted minds of people like Michael Ledeen and other neocon illusionists.) 5. I believe that Iran wants very much to be accepted as a respected member of the community of prosperous and influential modern states. And an Iran that was indeed a trustworthy member of that community would be an enormous benefit to America and to the world. That should be the objective of American policy, therefore --- accommodating and eventually modifying the legitimate national aspirations of a self-interested and pragmatic Iran --- not launching a potentially catastrophic preemptive war against a potentially powerful and influential Muslim nation of seventy million people. Coaxing Iran down a path leading toward successful achievement of international respectability and acceptance is the single most important "carrot" that we have to offer the Iranian leadership today. The potential value of that positive incentive has been completely squandered, however, by the pointless hostility and belligerence of American "diplomatic" language --- starting with the "axis of evil" and proceeding downhill from there to the most recent offer of patently unacceptable ultimatums. This has greatly diminished our own bargaining power while making the job of arriving at a reasonable accommodation with Iran infinitely more difficult in every way. 6. In order of importance, however, the attraction from Iran's perspective of moving toward desired international acceptance and respectability is completely overshadowed by two other dominant factors at this time: the need to reinforce and preserve Iran's national pride (recently enhanced by the apparent success of its Hizballah surrogate in Lebanon) , and its conviction that the United States is an implacable enemy whose aggressive bullying must be resisted at all costs. 7. Adding up all those factors, it seems clear to me that Bush has laid out the following course for American policy, adding up to a Catch-22 from which I see no escape: a. Continuing futile efforts to achieve Iranian capitulation through weak and ineffective economic sanctions, to the accompaniment of counterproductive vituperation and bombast; b. Quickly followed by a period of rapidly escalating threats of military action, during which international and domestic opposition to American policy will increase dramatically, making Bush's choices increasingly more painful and difficult in every respect; c. A judgment by Bush that the immediate risks and costs of preemptive military action against Iran are, in the final analysis, less formidable than the risks and costs of tolerating Iranian nuclear possession --- and the personal and national humiliation that would result from passive acceptance of that outcome. d. Sometime before the end of his term, a massive air military attack on a wide range of carefully selected targets in Iran, in partnership with Israel, and against the advice of many of his advisers --- justified by the conviction that a nuclear Iran would pose an intolerable threat to American national security, firm in his faith that God agrees with him on that point, and certain that history will eventually recognize and properly appreciate his courageous and visionary leadership. Ray Close was a top CIA analyst in the Near East Division

There's that smell again. This so-called "evidence" of yours is pointless. Causes more arguments and less action. I hate it.

I don't care. This topic has a bad smell.

Yeah, check it out. Fluoride is actually pretty bad.....increasing numbers of people (doctors) have identified fluoride as a health concern, and more US jurisdictions are fighting fluoridation of water..... We have Fluride in the water here.....and I try not to drink it.... It's long been said that it's good and has been just accepted......when in fact it probably should be avoided. Lot's of people don't even realise this as it's what they have been taught......even doctors. Just like they are now saying that Mercury is good for your brain, I mean what the fuck?!? It's in vaccines you know.......here's a news report saying Mercury is good.... VIDEO: News Report about how good Mercury is for you (madness) That's why autism is rising in kids after vaccines then?? What lies, it's a horrible poison. Mercury = Brain Damage

It's the state of play these days.....everything is ridiculous.

I guess she didn't want to leave her kitten in Iran to face the bombing alone.

I don't mind that^ but just saying "sorry but the facts speak for themselve, no such thing as palestinians." isn't helping...... The fact is that there ARE Palestinians in the world and the situation there is bad enough without this sort of writing by "Larry Miller". They are something I don't want to support and I'd rarther help this situation than have people make it worse.......just like I don't want to support the people who say that they don't recognise Jews........because after all they DO exist in our world today and the vast majority of both sides want peace. How do you think they feel when people go around saying "your people don't exist".....it's just unnesseseraly fueling an already raging fire.

This thread needs to be killed. Now.

"Folks, We Are Being Set Up Again!" Iran's Nuclear "Threat" By JUAN COLE 08/25/06 "Counterpunch" -- -- Here is what the professionals are saying about the Republican-dominated Subcommittee on Intelligence Policy report on Iran that slams US intelligence professionals for poor intelligence on Iran: The report demonstrates that these Republicans have poor intelligence . . . on Iran. What follows is summaries of things I've seen from other experts but I can't identify them without permission.. First of all, former CIA professionals Larry Johnson and Jim Marcinkowski point out that the Republicans have a lot of damn gall. It was high members of this Republican administration who leaked to the Iranians and the whole world the name of Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA operative who spent her professional career combatting the proliferation of WMD and was, at the time she was betrayed by Traitor Rove and his merry band, working on Iran. Had it not been for these Republican figures, none of whom has yet been punished in any way for endangering US national security, we might know more about Iran. It is being said that the staffer who headed the report is Frederick Fleitz, who was a special assistant to John Bolton when Bolton was undersecretary of state for proliferation issues. Fleitz was sent to the unemployment line when Condi wisely exiled Bolton to the United Nations, where there is a long history of ill-tempered despots who like to bang their shoes on the podium. So this report is the long arm of Bolton popping up in Congress. It is Neoconservative propaganda. I repeat what I have said before, which is that John Bolton is just an ill-tempered lawyer who has no special expertise in nuclear issues or in Iran, and aside from an ability to scare the bejesus out of young gofers who bring him coffee and to thunderously denounce on cue any world leader on whom he is sicced, he has no particular qualifications for his job. Nor do the Republican congressmen know anything special about Iran's nuclear energy program. They certainly know much less than the CIA agents who work on it full time, some of whom know Persian and have actually done . . . intelligence work. We are beset by instant experts on contemporary Iran, like the medievalist Bernard Lewis, who wrongly predicted that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would attack Israel on August 22, based on Lewis's weird interpretation of his alleged millenarian beliefs. Once the Neoconservatives went so far as actually to make fun of reality in the hearing of a reporter, their game was up. Pete Hoekstra, who is the chair of this committee, has a long history of saying things that are disconnected from reality. Like when he made a big deal about some old shells with mustard gas found in Iraq left over from the 1980s Iran-Iraq War, and claimed that these were the fabled and long-sought Iraqi WMD over which 2600 of our service people are six feet under and another 8000 in wheelchairs. Nope. Bolton at one point was exercised about an imaginary Cuban biological weapons program, which even his own staffers wouldn't support him on, and at one point he was alleging that Iranian mullahs were sneaking into Havana to help with it. This congressional report is full of the same sort of wild fantasies. On page 9, the report alleges that "Iran is currently enriching uranium to weapons grade using a 164-machine centrifuge cascade at this facility in Natanz." This is an outright lie. Enriching to weapons grade would require at least 80% enrichment. Iran claims . . . 2.5 per cent. See how that isn't the same thing? See how you can't blow up anything with 2.5 percent? The claim is not only flat wrong, but it is misleading in another way. You need 16,000 centrifuges, hooked up so that they cascade, to make enough enriched uranium for a bomb in any realistic time fame, even if you know how to get the 80 percent! Iran has . . . 164. See how that isn't the same? The report cites the International Atomic Energy Agency only when it is critical of Iran. It does not tell us what the IAEA actually has found. By the way, here is what IAEA head Mohamed Elbaradei said in early March, 2003, about Iraq: 'After three months of intrusive inspections, we have to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons programme in Iraq.' At the same time, Republicans like Donald Rumsfeld were saying he knew exactly where Iraq's WMD was! Elbaradei was right then, and Fleitz was wrong. Can't get fooled again. And here is what the IAEA said about Iran just last January: "Iran has continued to facilitate access under its Safeguards Agreement as requested by the Agency, and to act as if the Additional Protocol is in force, including by providing in a timely manner the requisite declarations and access to locations." Last April Elbaradei complained about the hype around Iran's nuclear research, and said that there is no imminent threat from Iran. The only thing that the IAEA knows for sure is that Iran has a peaceful nuclear energy research program. Such a program is not the same as a weapons program, and it is perfectly legal under the Nonproliferation Treaty, which Iran, unlike Israel, has actually signed. The report allegedly vastly exaggerates the range of Iran's missiles and also exaggerates the number of its longer-range ones, and seems to think that Iran already has the Shahab-4, which it does not. It also doesn't seem to realize that Iran can't send missiles on other countries without receiving them back. Israel has more and longer-range missiles than Iran, and can quickly equip them with real nuclear warheads, not the imaginary variety in Fleitz's fevered brain. Folks, we are being set up again. Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute.

Yeah, I had seen this. Oh boy.....another one. :rolleyes:

Hey, I don't need an apology.... I'm just posting what I believe to be true here. : Anyway....I was talking to someone online who said that a family known to them had their land taken to make way for the Trans-Texas Corridor ('''TTC'''). I actually pointed out what the land seizure was for....she just said it was for a highway. (which it kinda is) She said that they waited for the Government to come are take the property and land as they refused to give it up. It cost them thousands and thousands in a legal fight if I remember and that they were made to pay for the cost of the seizure!!!!. She said it was written about on here http://corridornews.blogspot.com/2005/07/did-those-people-ask-to-have-their.html but I couldn't find it.... Anyway, I thought it was interesting.......in a horrid way.