Conspiracy theories - What do you make of them ?

List of the most well known Conspiracy's (Thanks to Wiki)

9/11 conspiracy theories, usually relating the September 11, 2001 attacks to US government officials and their plans for expansion of militarism and the police state.

The alleged conspiracy to murder Vince Foster, claimed to involve Bill Clinton.

The "vast, right-wing conspiracy" cited by Hillary Clinton during the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

The alleged conspiracy between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, cited by President Bush and his advisers, principally Paul Wolfowitz, as justification for a preemptive invasion of Iraq.[6] A Washington Post poll published in September of 2003 showed that nearly seventy percent of Americans were convinced that Saddam Hussein was personally responsible for the attacks of September 11, 2001.[7]
 
The New World Order, a conspiracy theory in which a powerful and secretive group plans to or does in fact rule the world through a one-world government.

The alleged conspiracy among oil producing nations to manipulate oil prices.

John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories, claiming the direct involvement of elements within the US government in the assassination. A variation of this theory was privately held in the
Kennedy family, and was first expressed by Robert Kennedy in private.[8][9]
The Robert F. Kennedy assassination, claiming that the alleged assassin was not the lone gunman, and that RFK was killed by members of the Bay of Pigs operation of the CIA.[10] [11]

Jewish or Zionist global domination conspiracy theories, perhaps the oldest common type of conspiracy theories, most notable of which is the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion anti-Semitic conspiracy theory (which is based on a fabricated document[12]).

The alleged conspiracy among stakeholders in the military, industry and congress, cited by President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

The Apollo Moon-Landing Hoax Theory suggests that some or all elements of the Apollo missions were faked by NASA.

The Paul is Dead theory, stating that Paul McCartney of The Beatles died in 1966 and was replaced by a look-alike while clues were hidden in songs and album cover art.

The Seven Day Theory is one question whether he's alive or not since Tupac may have left clues in his songs telling people he's still alive and coming back.

Some of these are false without a shadow of a doubt to me... But others kind of get me thinking, what if...?

With Conspiracy's I tend to look at the actual theory, who would benefit if the theory was true, and the likely hood of the theory being correct... At the same time all these remain Theories and no doubt will, so there is no point in getting over fanatical about them or preaching them as gospel...

For me I truly think this theory from all them is most likely to be true.

The New World Order, a conspiracy theory in which a powerful and secretive group plans to or does in fact rule the world through a one-world government.

MY THEORY

Here's what I think is happening, from various sources, I will use quotes and so fourth to show my line of thinking... I don't think the Conspiracy is how the New World Order Group is though:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Order_%28conspiracy%29 (there are many reason's why I think the Conspiracy as it stands is off the mark), I have my own idea's on the subject:-

1. - Europe
Europe it's becoming more of an Union with open ended boarders for each European country to share a common aim... Not just that, we have change in currency slowly being rolled out, The Euro.  Blair now chairs a very high position in the European commission, he has already stopped the Court of Law from being changed (some thing that got established many years ago)... Holding onto that we may see the Law's in England spread to the European sectors.

2. - The USA
The USA is planning to join Canada and Mexico and they will then become the NAU (North American Union)... There are talks of a Currency change to the Amero... A bill has been drawn up in and should become instated in 2010

3 - Both Union's
Both seem to be going on at the same time and both have very similar flags, both went against the UN and seem to make up their own agenda's in most current events.

American Union


European Union


4 - The Western World
With the European and American Union's being both very strong players if they are to join making a Super Union if you like looking at the maps a massive chunk of the world will be under Western control.

EU Area's


NAU Area's


Who would benefit from these changes ?
The Benefits are obvious, having a large Union of the West will dwarf the East, to the point War may not even be needed, just the threat would be enough for them to lay down arms... Or if it did come to a War, it would be over relatively quickly... Control of the world I think is the main agenda, to make a Super Union.

What's the chance of this Theory becoming real ?
With the Western World being given a very narrow view via the Media of the East... And the opposite being given to the East about the west, it's only going to do one thing, cause friction, so I don't see why people wouldn't back a Union, safety in numbers !!!... And with living costs rising and the confusion over gloabal warming, the average Joe Bloggs in the West would back any thing to make life better here.

What do you think about what I have posted, how right or wrong do you think I am ? - (Please give good answers, rather than "why do you follow such Crap, your a Retard", as if you read, this is my own Theory, based on another not so plausable one)... And to be fair, it's not that far fetched and most of what I have written is already in effect or started to happen.

Please give a good responce - Like why you don't think it will happen, what area's have I got wrong etc.. Or What you think may be true and why you think this Theory of mine could happen etc...

No mention of how the extraterrestrial conspiracies intermingle with the US government?  That seems to be turning a blind eye to, in my opinion, the largest common denominator for lots of the US' conspiracies.  I do like the new world order conspiracy,  but it doesn't sound impossible to me that there is already a large influence from some party that we, the citizens, do not realize is there.  Now before you start saying I am crazy, and a paranoid UFO buff, I'm not talking about an extraterrestrial influence.  Is it so hard to believe that America isn't run so much by G.W, he seems like a figurehead to me, I doubt how much power he actually has over what his country does.

first the moon landings were faked for the one reason how can a flag billow in the wind of their is no wind on the planet?   and secondly the 9/11  was planned by the american goverment for 3 resons

1 a reason to invade iraq

2 too anger the american people into joining the army for revenge

3 a key too all the black gold (oil) george bush could ever want

No mention of how the extraterrestrial conspiracies intermingle with the US government?

Me talking about Secret Goverment shite !!

first the moon landings were faked

Hummm I dunno, here's me talking about my trip to the moon !!


Seriously... Back to ID...

9/11 may have been staged, but I seriously doubt it was... it was too elaborate a hoax to be any thing but an attack... People have shown loads of evidence showing images of the planes before take off and at the point of impact, and yes they do look like different planes... There is loads of evidence to read, and the inquest sucked, and the clean up never really happend at ground zero... All odd things around a very surreal event.  But to question kind of makes me depressed.  May be one day on the death beds of government officials some thing may get said, it may not be as elaborate as the whole thing being staged, but some thing more along the lines of they let it happen.

As for the Alien's... I suppose there could be a chance we are all genetically engineered by Alien's (More plausible than God made us)... So yeah why not... We could have a government run by Aliens LOL

No mention of how the extraterrestrial conspiracies intermingle with the US government?

Me talking about Secret Goverment shite !!

first the moon landings were faked

Hummm I dunno, here's me talking about my trip to the moon !!


Seriously... Back to ID...

9/11 may have been staged, but I seriously doubt it was... it was too elaborate a hoax to be any thing but an attack... People have shown loads of evidence showing images of the planes before take off and at the point of impact, and yes they do look like different planes... There is loads of evidence to read, and the inquest sucked, and the clean up never really happend at ground zero... All odd things around a very surreal event.  But to question kind of makes me depressed.  May be one day on the death beds of government officials some thing may get said, it may not be as elaborate as the whole thing being staged, but some thing more along the lines of they let it happen.

As for the Alien's... I suppose there could be a chance we are all genetically engineered by Alien's (More plausible than God made us)... So yeah why not... We could have a government run by Aliens LOL

i still think 9/11 was staged and it was a great strategic idea although many innocent people died and i hate george bush



but anyway i subscribed to ur channel and sent you a friend invite lol

It's a good thing I have no chance of ever meeting LoS in real life, because he gives me some really fucking homocidal thoughts at times. Like, right now.

Edit: Homicidal!? Fuck!

first the moon landings were faked for the one reason how can a flag billow in the wind of their is no wind on the planet?   and secondly the 9/11  was planned by the american goverment for 3 resons

1 a reason to invade iraq

2 too anger the american people into joining the army for revenge

3 a key too all the black gold (oil) george bush could ever want

Wow, missed this post.
First of all, die.
Secondly, what the fuck?
In conclusion, am I the only one that read "black gold" and thought of negroes with fake gold teeth?

because he gives me some really fucking homicidal thoughts at times. Like, right now

I think you mean homosexual... I get that from time to time... I am straight though, sorry !!!...

But seriously...

Not sure what part of this thread you mean...?

Some times my mind gets me full of rage too... The world is against us and the sky is falling down...LOL

Compare that to the Care-bears... I preffer my mind though !!

but anyway i subscribed to ur channel and sent you a friend invite lol

My first Fan... of sorts... kind of...LOL  Cheers matey !! (I like the Levellers, but that doesn't make me Pro-IRA, Your Video's kind of scared me)

Any ways... Any one got any comments on my Theory in the 1st post ?

first the moon landings were faked for the one reason how can a flag billow in the wind of their is no wind on the planet?   and secondly the 9/11  was planned by the american goverment for 3 resons

1 a reason to invade iraq

2 too anger the american people into joining the army for revenge

3 a key too all the black gold (oil) george bush could ever want

Wow, missed this post.
First of all, die.
Secondly, what the fuck?
In conclusion, am I the only one that read "black gold" and thought of negroes with fake gold teeth?

you seriously have an over active imagination when did i say george bush wanted african men with gold teeth i clearly stated OIL

Black Gold is referring to Oil, as at the moment it's almost expensive as Gold... There is a whole load of stuff on the NET about Oil and it driving nations to War... But then there is a counter Theory stating we are not running out and it was just a media spin to up the oil prices to get more tax off us poor working bods.

With all the Conspiracy Theories Bouncing around, one contradicting the other and every thing we follow is a lie, things can get down right depressing... It's a case of looking at each and taking them apart.

Look as each as a Theory and nothing more... It's not fact and it's not fiction, it's a grey matter a shade between, halves truth's and tin pot claims...

Some one please read my Theory in the opening post... Do you think I am on to some thing or not ?

first the moon landings were faked for the one reason how can a flag billow in the wind of their is no wind on the planet?

I registered once to tell someone they're a retard, I guess it's now time to go in a second time and remind people of a little thing called reality.

The flag planted on the moon was suspended on a long, vertical aluminum pole, at the top a horizontal bar helped keep the flag up, else it would fall toward the moon. Now, these pieces are flimsily put together. Go ahead and jab this into the ground. The flag will flap because its absorbing waves from the metal pole and the movement of the horizontal bar. You can reproduce this at home on a day with no wind.

People who think "Oh, the moon landing didn't happen!" all look towards suspicious internal evidence (multiple shadows despite one light source, which has been proven to happen, &c.) Look at external evidence: Russia was spying on us through the entire space race, much as we were spying on them. If we did not land on the moon, they would know and they would be the first to call us out on international media. What a blow that would have been to this country's morale! And the Soviets would have relished such a moment. But they did not. No other nation who would love to see America be knocked down a peg has backed a statement which proposes that it was a farce--only people within the country that conducted the mission.

and secondly the 9/11  was planned by the american goverment for 3 resons

1 a reason to invade iraq

2 too anger the american people into joining the army for revenge

3 a key too all the black gold (oil) george bush could ever want

1. Non sequitur. This implies that there was a relationship between Saddam Hussein and the Taliban, a relationship that has never been accurately proved. Hussein was a despot, but he did not condone terrorism; he terrorized his own people, but looking at Middle Eastern politics, he didn't pay for other terrorists to terrorize others. There is no credible link between the Taliban and the Iraqi government, nor are there any other links that Hussein funded any other terrorist outfit. Were this even remotely true, there would have been doctored reports that stated such things.

Look elsewhere for motivation for going to war with Iraq.

2. If any force threatens this country, people will sign up for the military. This is a natural reaction. There are people who may not agree with the president, but enjoy their way of life to such an extent that they will die to protect it. That's patriotism, not a thought of simple-minded rage. If you want to argue that Afghanistan was needed to give these people a purpose and then dump them in Iraq, you will have to first create a credible link.

3. The presidency nor anyone within the federal government will ever touch a drop of oil. Any attempt to seize or grab oil will result in major repercussions from other Middle Eastern nations. But consider these facts:
- Without a bid being placed, Halliburton was given the contract to assist in the reconstruction of Iraq. The vice-president was the former CEO for Haliburton, so he obviously has ties.
- President Bush is not asking for a repayment to US government for reconstruction, but is asking for an economic pact. That "black gold" is going to feed American industries first. This may mean that gas prices will go down for a while, and the economy may expand, but not for too long. The presidency nor the government is profiting at all from this war.

The industries will, however.

There are plenty of speculations as to why Bush attacked Iraq, none of which have been linked directly to the events of 9/11, but there are no direct reasons. I think part of it was motivated by the fact that we did not catch the bad guy, it's that the bad guy, and our president then proceeded to what he does best: be a bad sequel of his father. Cheney &co. were more than eager to rally support, seeing as they benefit from it (no war has been fought in the modern day without there being an economic overtone). I cannot fathom what makes you think an American organization would, say, crash airplanes into a symbol of American capitalism, kill thousands of Americans, spend thousands of tax-payer dollars in reconstruction, so that we can go to war with another distant country whose politics and alliances are alien and unknown to the former country we just carpet bombed.

If it were staged, an event as shocking but not as lethal would have been orchestrated and given viable link to the Iraqi government, and the Taliban would have not been touched.

Oh you poor bastards.

VOR wins, thread over.

Black Gold is referring to Oil, as at the moment it's almost expensive as Gold... There is a whole load of stuff on the NET about Oil and it driving nations to War... But then there is a counter Theory stating we are not running out and it was just a media spin to up the oil prices to get more tax off us poor working bods.

With all the Conspiracy Theories Bouncing around, one contradicting the other and every thing we follow is a lie, things can get down right depressing... It's a case of looking at each and taking them apart.

Look as each as a Theory and nothing more... It's not fact and it's not fiction, it's a grey matter a shade between, halves truth's and tin pot claims...

Some one please read my Theory in the opening post... Do you think I am on to some thing or not ?

refering too your one world goverment i can never see it happening one reason is when england entered the european union they refused too change to the euro they wanted to retain the pound to hold their empiric power over ireland wales scotland and the faulklands so i see no reason why britain would wanted to merge into some one world goverment

I'm no proponet of one world government, but that is the stupidest argument against its plausibility I have ever heard. Oh, and-

refering too your one world goverment i can never see it happening one reason is when england entered the european union they refused too change to the euro they wanted to retain the pound to hold their empiric power over ireland wales scotland and the faulklands so i see no reason why britain would wanted to merge into some one world goverment

->

Referring to your one world government- I can never see it happening. One reason is when England entered the European Union they refused to change to the Euro; they wanted to retain the pound to hold their imperial power over Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland, and the Falklands, so I see no reason why Britain would want to merge into some one world government.

Also there's a reason that England didn't switch to the Euro- the pound is stronger. It'd be like the US deciding to switch to pesos to foster relations with Mexico.
Yeah.

I'm no proponet of one world government, but that is the stupidest argument against its plausibility I have ever heard. Oh, and-

refering too your one world goverment i can never see it happening one reason is when england entered the european union they refused too change to the euro they wanted to retain the pound to hold their empiric power over ireland wales scotland and the faulklands so i see no reason why britain would wanted to merge into some one world goverment

->

Referring to your one world government- I can never see it happening. One reason is when England entered the European Union they refused to change to the Euro; they wanted to retain the pound to hold their imperial power over Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland, and the Falklands, so I see no reason why Britain would want to merge into some one world government.

Also there's a reason that England didn't switch to the Euro- the pound is stronger. It'd be like the US deciding to switch to pesos to foster relations with Mexico.
Yeah.

no england kept the pound to retain empiric staus if ireland had been aloud have euros england would have lost wealth control of northern ireland leaving sinn fein too clean up in the elections and the same in scotland except with snp and labour with out ireland and scotland under unionist partys england would loose 40 percent of its wealth

I've always had a special hatred for the Irish. You're making it grow.

I've always had a special hatred for the Irish. You're making it grow.

you make me laugh

The European Union had reasons to enter a union, and England had its reasons to keep the pound, but they aren't what you're thinking:
- European nations, especially the smaller ones, are light on resources and require imports to ensure they can continue to manufacture or enjoy a 1st world lifestyle. Entering an economic union meant that the nations now have a stronger economy with a currency that does not fluctuate as often, and if it falls entirely, will mean that a global event has occurred. This is financial security. No one wants another great depression. This also allows an equal sharing between the individual nations of resources; price gouging is discouraged and the nations know they have a neighbor who can help them out. Weak political alliances aren't as strong.
- England's pound is stronger. Accepting the euro won't change a thing, politically. Their monarchs will appear on coinage and bills printed, their commonwealth will still be their commonwealth. Rather, why drop a stronger currency for a weaker one? If the pound falls below the worth of an American dollar and are heading straight to the value of the yen in 1953, they are going to switch. Right now, there's no point in debasing their standard.

The United States won't enter an economic union with economically weaker nations; while Canada possesses a massive amount of natural resources, the land isn't as populated; Mexico is poor because Woodrow Wilson's adaption of Roosevelt's "Big Brother" policy in trying to ensure that American interests are in the minds of our bordering neighbors. Allowing a unified currency would imply that these nations could get richer, become more economically powerful, &c., but the American economy might suffer. When the Articles of Confederation were ratified before the Constitution, each state printed its own money, and was extremely undervalued and was not transferable between states. The Constitution allowed for a unified economy, because it benefited 13 nations of varying wealthiness, not 3 nations, one of which is extremely powerful, one of which is not quite, and one of which is poor.

Besides the issue of oil, America is virtually self sufficient. There is enough land and resources, and the States are free to trade with each other without federal tariffs to foster such an exchange. An economic union would share this resource with our poorest neighbor who will send little back in return (what we could get in return, we already have: cheap labor).

We also opened our boarders for many Europeans to enter and work and the Euro can be used as legal tender in most large shops.

The Euro may not be a currency we adopt for some time as yet... but it could still happen once the economy picks up in Europe and the pound and Euro are equal in strength.

Read this:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/812881.stm

I think Blair's hoping if he tells us it's not a conspiracy enough times we will sollow it !!

Posted by: Seaking  
Insert Quote
Oh you poor bastards.

VOR wins, thread over.

Take your double posting Pokemon loving arse out of ID, or at least out of here... We are trying to have a debate !! (If it's not to your taste and if you have nothing to add, jog on !!)

voice of reason - That has to be one of the best answers in ID I have ever seen... Very well put together, it's mainly about 9/11, and on that score I have stated my stance, the evidence after the events is kind of odd and the prevention that could have taken place as soon as the planes went AWOL to the time the hit was very little, But I still don't think it was a Hoax, it happened, and it was an attack, Bin Larden admitted it...

And I stated my stance on the Oil... it's hard to say how much oil we have left... Especially when we can make it from Human waste, at least that's what I read just a few months back. media weaves an uncertain WEB... I tried not watching the news for 4 months... I felt loads better for it !!

---My Theory---

I don't see England not taking on the Euro is grounds enough to deny the theory I have drawn up, as if we do join the Europen Union there is a good chance parts of Irland and Scotland will too.

Reading this:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/812881.stm Will show Blair is wanting to stamp England over Europe more, I bet he would trade the Pound for the Euro if our Laws would be taken on board by the Union.

And for what you have written about the North American Union I have read much of the same as of late... But then I have read things like this:- http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965

I can't see what America will gain from Mexico... Apart from more troops, open boarders, free movement, more Economic strength...

If this board only allowed actual debates Roph and the mods would have to prune out more than 90% of the threads.

The European Union had reasons to enter a union, and England had its reasons to keep the pound, but they aren't what you're thinking:
- European nations, especially the smaller ones, are light on resources and require imports to ensure they can continue to manufacture or enjoy a 1st world lifestyle. Entering an economic union meant that the nations now have a stronger economy with a currency that does not fluctuate as often, and if it falls entirely, will mean that a global event has occurred. This is financial security. No one wants another great depression. This also allows an equal sharing between the individual nations of resources; price gouging is discouraged and the nations know they have a neighbor who can help them out. Weak political alliances aren't as strong.
- England's pound is stronger. Accepting the euro won't change a thing, politically. Their monarchs will appear on coinage and bills printed, their commonwealth will still be their commonwealth. Rather, why drop a stronger currency for a weaker one? If the pound falls below the worth of an American dollar and are heading straight to the value of the yen in 1953, they are going to switch. Right now, there's no point in debasing their standard.

The United States won't enter an economic union with economically weaker nations; while Canada possesses a massive amount of natural resources, the land isn't as populated; Mexico is poor because Woodrow Wilson's adaption of Roosevelt's "Big Brother" policy in trying to ensure that American interests are in the minds of our bordering neighbors. Allowing a unified currency would imply that these nations could get richer, become more economically powerful, &c., but the American economy might suffer. When the Articles of Confederation were ratified before the Constitution, each state printed its own money, and was extremely undervalued and was not transferable between states. The Constitution allowed for a unified economy, because it benefited 13 nations of varying wealthiness, not 3 nations, one of which is extremely powerful, one of which is not quite, and one of which is poor.

Besides the issue of oil, America is virtually self sufficient. There is enough land and resources, and the States are free to trade with each other without federal tariffs to foster such an exchange. An economic union would share this resource with our poorest neighbor who will send little back in return (what we could get in return, we already have: cheap labor).

is it not  a fact that when southern ireland ie the free state wished to join the EU we were not aloud because britain claiming irish land as britian would be included in the union and de gaul knew that england would keep the pound as a symbol of empiric power





and america could gain more than troops from mexico they could gain infrastructure and wealth

It seems the word Empire is being replaced by Union... If Irland enters the Union I guess your being pulled into the Empire, the IRA has pretty much laid down arms... Pretty soon it will happen, slowly, Irland isn't a major factor, and for the part England can't claim you may find the USA will as they have a very large American Irish community.

The Union's I am talking about Bush and Blair both started in or around 2005... They seek a common goal... Why ?

England opening boarders to Poland and neighbour countries had led to an influx of migrant workers, it's hasn't really strengthen us as most of what they earn they send home.  So at the moment I can see your side of the argument with Mexico... But Blair still went ahead here, there has to be some thing we are missing ?... Ruling the world may be ?

If America wanted to gain troops that badly, they wouldn't annex their volatile next door neighbor- they'd instill a draft sooner than that. Or more actively seek enlisting immigrants, although I'm not sure to what extent this is being done already (although I do know there are ways for foreignors to join the military to make it easier and quicker to acquire citizenship).

It seems the word Empire is being replaced by Union... If Irland enters the Union I guess your being pulled into the Empire, the IRA has pretty much laid down arms... Pretty soon it will happen, slowly, Irland isn't a major factor, and for the part England can't claim you may find the USA will as they have a very large American Irish community.

The Union's I am talking about Bush and Blair both started in or around 2005... They seek a common goal... Why ?

England opening boarders to Poland and neighbour countries had led to an influx of migrant workers, it's hasn't really strengthen us as most of what they earn they send home.  So at the moment I can see your side of the argument with Mexico... But Blair still went ahead here, there has to be some thing we are missing ?... Ruling the world may be ?

i still cant see a world goverment even if leaders make some kind of union what will the people do will all the people just agree and live their lives like normal no i think they will revolt and who says all the countrys are willing for this goverment i cant see north korea joining they are too proud along with most of asia and iran

If America wanted to gain troops that badly, they wouldn't annex their volatile next door neighbor- they'd instill a draft sooner than that. Or more actively seek enlisting immigrants, although I'm not sure to what extent this is being done already (although I do know there are ways for foreignors to join the military to make it easier and quicker to acquire citizenship).

Nice one Seaking you entered the Debate with a pretty good answer.

But like I stated I can't really see why... I mean looking at what's happening here in England with opening our boarders it's doing more harm than good.  It's put a strain on resources like the NHS and the Police and much of what's being earned is being sent back to their home lands.

From previously given link, it's a well worth read, it may make more sense to American's than it does me.

President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.

is it not  a fact that when southern ireland ie the free state wished to join the EU we were not aloud because britain claiming irish land as britian would be included in the union and de gaul knew that england would keep the pound as a symbol of empiric power

It's not a symbol of imperial power, it's a symbol of imperial identity. There's a huge difference.

And isn't it also a fact that the Republic of Ireland was a founding nation in the European Communities in 1973; it was also allowed in the Maastrich Treaty which founded the European Union? If there was a barring, it's not a readily apparent or exactly notable one. Your reality is a much different one than mine, apparently.

and america could gain more than troops from mexico they could gain infrastructure and wealth

You underestimate the patriotism of Americans; non-Americans may serve in the United States' army, but are not allowed in as officers, and the numbers accepted every year are minimal. And why? Foreigners are not Americans, they have citizenships to other countries, which means that they are not wholly patriotic, their identities are still tied to their mother country. Even citizens who join our services, even if they come from a different cultural background (Mexican- or German- or Asian-Americans are Americans by identity when they serve). The power of the American army is not numbers--the Soldiers of the United State are extremely well trained and well armed, possessing a much better intelligence operation than other nations. Numbers are good for land-grabs, but not as important for the wars that have riddled the past two decades.

The cost of repairing the infrastructure that America has damaged in Mexico is not economically feasible: This implies that we are charged with the construction of roads, schools, police forces, provisioning medical and monetary relief with little immediate return--a lot of Mexico is dry desert. Where there is natural resources, it's also on Native American preservations--something which Mexico has gotten in trouble violating before in recent history by the United Nations.

[Edit] Also, almost all Mexicans are mestizos, the children of Spaniards and the natives. Their history, their culture, their rebellion and thoughts go to the history that's tied to their land, not America's. If we were part of a union, defending that union would not be a problem. Simply annexing them and taking them as our own soldiers will still imply that they are fighting for their part of the world, not the part of world that the United States exists in.

voice of reason - It's good having you in here... The link I gave early on http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965 does that hold any truth...?

From here in England it's hard to say for sure, your veiw on Irland is like mine on America, I have an understanding, but not the same one as those that live there... Some times the blindest of people can be those living in the goverened country, like the people in Korea (Under Kim's control)


irish-warrior

i still cant see a world goverment even if leaders make some kind of union what will the people do will all the people just agree and live their lives like normal no i think they will revolt and who says all the countrys are willing for this goverment i cant see north korea joining they are too proud along with most of asia and iran

Look at the Maps in the first post can you see any of the Eastern world area's like Korea on there ?

It's the Western world... (I have an strange feeling that the West wants rid of the East, China being one of those area's as it holds almost 23% of the worlds population and according to big wigs over here our planet is over croweded and we want the population to a 1/2 Billion... I think should this Union happen most 3rd world countries will be put to war against each other or against the Western Union.)

But now I am getting a little Sci-Fi... Ignore most of that. (the Italic area, more of a prediction, with some truth backing it, research 1/2 Billion)

Vor raises valid points, although his bit on foreignors in the Army could be easily misread.

It's the Western world... I have an strange feeling that the West wants rid of the East, China being one of those area's as it holds almost 23% of the worlds population and according to big wigs over here our planet is over croweded and we want the population to a 1/2 Billion... I think should this Union happen most 3rd world countries will be put to war against each other or against the Western Union.

Half a billion people... in the world? When we have like, 6 billion? Yeah, doubt that. And there's also economic and geopolitical factors to take into consideration- many of these Third World nations benefit us more as they are than if their populations were reduced as much as Europe's in the 14c. I'm sure VoR can expand on this, so I'll just let him.

But now I am getting a little Sci-Fi... Ignore most of that.

No. Why post this dumb shit in ID and then say that?

voice of reason - It's good having you in here... The link I gave early on http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965 does that hold any truth...?

I'm glad you're enjoying my company.

I would check what other sites have to say about this report and related reports. Human Events is an extremely conservative publication, and I would suspect that they are looking at it on the wrong light; the reports that the CFR is built on implies an economical union, but rejects outright a political identity--despite that certain thinkers selectively remove those lines in their arguments against a North American Union. It does not want to create a Union in which our own national borders are erased, but foster economic relations between the three nations, much the same that the European Union did not erase national borders or national identities.

Half a billion people... in the world? When we have like, 6 billion? Yeah, doubt that. And there's also economic and geopolitical factors to take into consideration- many of these Third World nations benefit us more as they are than if their populations were reduced as much as Europe's in the 14c. I'm sure VoR can expand on this, so I'll just let him.

The human population on this globe is massive. We have the resources and space, but it's not ecologically viable. Human migration has destroyed plenty of environments without us even being aware of it (forests with undergrowth did not exist in North America because trees were so large that they blocked the sun out from beneath their canopy. These forests were endlessly covered in leaves that were being reabsorbed into the soil as recycle nutrition. When the ships landed at what was to be Jamestown, and they broke open their ballasts, they spilt the dirt onto the ground. This dirt contained earthworms, which thrived on the leaves, destroyed the leaves, malnourished the trees, and allowed underbrush to grow.) As well, our idea of current economy and farming are extremely destructive, creates destructive psychology and behavior, and may result in further ramifications beyond simply having too many of us.

Immediate problems are more worse: the Chinese government bought a large amount of money from our reserves; this provides us with an economic lead and removes physical currency money from circulation, increasing the value of the dollar. Were you to destroy this country and its population, you would also destroy the United States' economy, much the same as if they sold it back to us. We're also looking at a large human population. You reduce China and India into barren wastelands, you also remove from existence a cultural presence and history so great that every person will feel its loss; even the smallest populations of people have an impact globally. Genocide is not tolerated.

It's not that these nations are so filled with people, it's that the infrastructure cannot support the current population. There is not enough GDP per capita, there is not enough available work, there is not enough food, and supplying them to the existing population is a strain on the government. Nations cannot expand on any level when they are busy clothing and feeding its populace.

China is doing the right thing by limiting the number of children people can have. The gross disparity between male and female children will also reduce the population in coming generations. But this is a natural solution.

i think this topic has gone a little off course

i think this topic has gone a little off course

Not Really... It's just another Conspiracy Theory, but they are linked to a degree...

Seaking

I didn't say the world should be reduced to a 1/2 Billion... World leaders have:-

Prince Philip, In His Own Words: We Need To 'Cull' The Surplus Population

What he said:-

In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.

Prince Philip, in his Foreward to If I Were an Animal; United Kingdom, Robin Clark Ltd., 1986.

I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated in an animal whose species had been so reduced in numbers than it was in danger of extinction. What would be its feelings toward the human species whose population explosion had denied it somewhere to exist.... I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus.

You do know Prince Phillip funds and has strong ties to most of the GM Food (ADM) shipped around the world ?... Scary !!

Top scientists are saying similar:- http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/030406massculling.htm

Environmental Mentalists are also jumping on the band wagon (No Supprise really):- http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/070507depopulation.htm

Charles Woster - Environmental Defence
Jaques Cousteau
Ted Turner - CNN

Even Bill Clinton, he wants the population to 1 Billion....

But the most worrying is this:- The new World Order Guide stones in Georgia

The new ten commandments:- http://www.radioliberty.com/stones.htm

THE MESSAGE OF THE GEORGIA GUIDESTONES

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely - improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion - faith - tradition - and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth - beauty - love - seeking harmony with the infinite.
10.Be not a cancer on the earth - Leave room for nature - Leave room for nature.

____________________________________

But I can't see this happening... But even still... There are a fair few people raging on about it, so it can't be ignored !!... So I raised it in my debate.

I just want to point that I didn't say that the world isn't overpopulated, but that the number LoS claims "important" people are proposing is much lower than I think is anywhere near reasonable.

Also, it's a general human tendency to reproduce all the more when overpopulation becomes a problem. Why, you ask? So that they can push out rival groups. Germany was overpopulated, but by the time of WWI the government was encouraging a rising birth rate in order to have settlers of the eastern, Slavic lands (those Teutons, always pushing into Poland).

I didn't really read that link about the Georgia Guidestones, but my general impression of it leads me to say, "Lolwut?" Nah, don't worry about that- there's more important things to break a sweat over.

I didn't really read that link about the Georgia Guidestones, but my general impression of it leads me to say, "Lolwut?" Nah, don't worry about that- there's more important things to break a sweat over.

Very true... The person who paid for the stones and had them put up is unknown... And why there ?... Again no real answer... But with so many people of high ranking saying the same thing it makes you wonder just how deep the same notion runs. And to what extent would they go to, to have the population dropped.

It's already been proven that the Antarctic Ice cap's are only 4,000 years old (if that)... I don't think Global Warming is happening, it wouldn't supprise me if the government wasn't warming them up with under ice heaters to cause them to melt... I mean what did they do when Hurricane Katrina was going to hit...? They didn't evacuate, they closed off escape routes and aid routes. let most people die... And then sent in tour buses...

Again another Conspiracy Theory backing another... (again it's a Theory... It could be real, it could be bollox)

Yes, the government has installed heaters in the icecaps in order to... DUDE WE'RE FUCKED AND IT'S THE ELITE THAT'S TRYING TO DOWNSIZE THE GLOBAL POPULATION TO 500 MILLION!!

What I don't get is why people in absolute dire poverty or disease stricken areas reproduce.

I'm not saying they shouldn't have a right or something, what I don't get is how a potential mother and father come to the decision to have a child when they know that child is going to live a horrible life of starvation and disease.

If I were a person over there and in their situation, I can't see myself wanting children.

I think conspiracy theories are dumb.

They can be made up by anybody on no evidence at all.

For example,

Seaking = Voice of Reason

Reasoning:
Their opinions seem to coincide completely, even to the point of Seaking referring to VoR to expand upon his points. As well, aside from a difference in tone (Seaking being aggressive; VoR not so much), the language they use is quite similar syntactically.

Reason why Seaking would create a dupe account:
VoR's first appearance was to call someone a retard, directly after Seaking had said the same twice to this person. Seaking felt he needed some backup and so he made a dupe on a proxy server. Now, to present day. Seaking is staarting to realize that his rather aggressive approach to debating has had little effect on some of the members, most notably landofshadows, who could be said to be completely uneffected by Seaking's approach to the point where you are unable to determine whether los is casually shrugging off these verbal assaults or whether he just doesn't realize that they are verbal assaults. Seaking feels he needs a new approach, but he doesn't wnat to discard his entire forum personality. He's the ID "curmudgeon" (from title). But, he remembers he has a dupe account and so he calls him in to play. This way he is able to approach the subject from both angles without sacrificing his forum identity, as well as team up on opposing arguments.

Reasons why VoR is not a real account:
It is unlikely that he should return to the forum given his stated reason for joining.

There, add that to the list. It has a better chance of being true than anything up there already.  

Seriously though, what's the point of believing in conspiracy theories. Let's say that Seaking is, in fact, VoR. What difference could it possibly make. What are you supposed to do about it. I remember hearing some conspiracy theory about a Philadelphia battleship that could travel through time and all the sailors died, or something along those lines. I don't even start to believe any of all the conspiracy theories I am aware of out there, and even if they were true, there's nothing you can do. It's like looking at the weather channel every day. Unless you're trying to plan an event, it's completely pointless.

I think conspiracy theories are dumb.

Some times, (Very rarely)... A Conspiracy Theory does get proven as truth:- http://dallaspeacecenter.org/node/2086

Yes, the government has installed heaters in the icecaps in order to... DUDE WE'RE FUCKED AND IT'S THE ELITE THAT'S TRYING TO DOWNSIZE THE GLOBAL POPULATION TO 500 MILLION!!

You do know that half the time I am just messing about... Like in the Video's in the first post ?

I have had a fair few Emails from people in the USA asking me more about my time working in Goverment...LMAO

I think conspiracy theories are dumb.

They can be made up by anybody on no evidence at all.

The basis of any conspiracy theory is to ignore any relevant facts, find a source that backs your opinion even though everyone questions and challenges the credibility of the source, and devise arguments which tie loosely relevant artifacts together into one monstrous theory which no sane person would ever listen to.

Check back to my response regarding the faked moon landing. Everyone wants to argue internal evidence: what's going on in the pictures and videos. The people who purport these arguments make no effort to test whether these are naturally possible phenomena. These phenomena have been defended quite well and have been reproduced to such an extent that the opposition's argument holds no water. It is blithely ignored that no other country has opposed that the United States did land on the moon, which would be by far the greatest indication that the nation was successful in attempts.

Seaking = Voice of Reason

Reasoning:
Their opinions seem to coincide completely, even to the point of Seaking referring to VoR to expand upon his points. As well, aside from a difference in tone (Seaking being aggressive; VoR not so much), the language they use is quite similar syntactically.

Reason why Seaking would create a dupe account:
VoR's first appearance was to call someone a retard, directly after Seaking had said the same twice to this person. Seaking felt he needed some backup and so he made a dupe on a proxy server. Now, to present day. Seaking is staarting to realize that his rather aggressive approach to debating has had little effect on some of the members, most notably landofshadows, who could be said to be completely uneffected by Seaking's approach to the point where you are unable to determine whether los is casually shrugging off these verbal assaults or whether he just doesn't realize that they are verbal assaults. Seaking feels he needs a new approach, but he doesn't wnat to discard his entire forum personality. He's the ID "curmudgeon" (from title). But, he remembers he has a dupe account and so he calls him in to play. This way he is able to approach the subject from both angles without sacrificing his forum identity, as well as team up on opposing arguments.

Reasons why VoR is not a real account:
It is unlikely that he should return to the forum given his stated reason for joining.

There, add that to the list. It has a better chance of being true than anything up there already.

Great argument. However, I wish to provide you with some counter proof:

[18:23:27] <Seaking`> http://rmrk.net/index.php/topic,19067.msg239600/boardseen.html#new
[18:23:31] <Seaking`> This is for neek.
[18:23:55] <@neek> "Remember, this is a demonstration. If you're seriously wanting to throw your coworkers into a blender, get help. (They're heavy.)"
[18:24:28] <Seaking`> Yeah, wouldn't want to get a hernia.
[18:24:59] * Ayyub (chatzilla@c0907fe7.tx.res.14056255.com.hmsk) Quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
[18:26:54] <Seaking`> http://www.qwantz.com/fanart/Communism!.png
[18:27:58] <@neek> I want to be able to say, "SICKLE AND HAMMER IN PINK STAR"
[18:29:01] * huwami-feng (kimana@5f335d63.tcsn.de83b96b.net.hmsk) Quit (Remote host closed the connection)
[18:29:45] <@neek> the... the... Amero?
[18:30:48] <@neek> Ow.
[18:30:51] <@neek> that hurt my head.
[18:31:00] <Seaking`> sry
[18:31:11] <Seaking`> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amero
[18:31:23] <@neek> "How is the flag waving in space?" WELL SHITHEAD, IT'S IT ON AN UPSIDE DOWN SHAPED L MADE OF LIGHT ALUMINIUM. JAM THAT INTO THE EARTH AND SEE IF YOU GET THE FLAG TO WOBBLE A BIT, FUCKTARD.
[18:32:16] <Seaking`> "There are many lower levels of currency cooperation that have occurred in the Americas. A number of states – such as Argentina, Brazil and Canada – have at times tied their currency to the United States dollar, and in 2000, Ecuador adopted the U.S. dollar as its sole currency. In much of Central America and the Caribbean the U.S. dollar is already a de facto secondary currency.
[18:32:18] <Seaking`> It serves as parallel legal tender in both Panama (since independence in 1903) and El Salvador (since 2001), and unofficially in Cuba where the convertible peso is currently pegged at 1 peso equals US$1.08 (previously, it was until 24 March 2005, 1 peso = US$1 ). Some pundits thus argue that currency union is all but inevitable, whether it is desired or not."
[18:33:10] <@neek> It's a stupid name.
[18:33:17] * Hokulani (ryohale@86ca759a.dsl.frs2ca.3e6fd2e2.net.hmsk) Quit
[18:34:21] <Seaking`> "Amero" sounds like a Kia model.
[18:34:24] <Seaking`> Or Suzuki.
[18:34:30] <@neek> I'm going to reply to that post.
[18:34:40] <Seaking`> :DD

Your evidence and analysis and your thought processes are a lot better than most people who coin or believe conspiracy theories. However, I am the sort that did join at one point to call some retarded, when it was linked, I just couldn't pass it up.

Seriously though, what's the point of believing in conspiracy theories. Let's say that Seaking is, in fact, VoR. What difference could it possibly make. What are you supposed to do about it. I remember hearing some conspiracy theory about a Philadelphia battleship that could travel through time and all the sailors died, or something along those lines. I don't even start to believe any of all the conspiracy theories I am aware of out there, and even if they were true, there's nothing you can do. It's like looking at the weather channel every day. Unless you're trying to plan an event, it's completely pointless.

I'm glad that rather than addressing the theories put forth in this thread, you have addressed the issues of conspiracy theories themselves. And these words are quite true: if the Freemasons had a hand in the founding of ANY modern nation, what difference does it make in my life?

To be honest, my Theory in actual sense isn't really a Conspiracy more of an evaluation of current events and looking at a possible outcome of many... The only Conspiracy my Theory intails is the agenda of the union, is it for the better good or to knock the People of the East off the Global Map...?

My Opinion is there is more to this Union, as why join a Union if it doesn't better your country...?

Our Prisions in England are so over crowded we are now releasing criminals...

Some thing doesn't make sense, and my theory kind of makes sense out of it... I suppose there are other out comes other than world domination, and my over active imagination could be getting the better of me... If I was to apply the same to my RPG it would be Wicked !!!

I would say I am sane... But ask a scizophenic they would answer the same.

You have also claimed to be intelligent.
Also, I'm glad you realize you have an overactive imagination. Now relegate that shit to your RPGs and whatever else, eh? This isn't the place to throw up your retarded ideas and then say "OH I'M JUST KIDDING! MY IMAGINATION'S OVERACTIVE SOMETIMES" when noone sides with you or you're too nervous to fully admit believing that.

LOL... I don't know what to think... Reread my first post...

I have not claimed to be speaking truth... an opinion changes, a theory can be proven or disprove... I don't feel saddened if my theory is disproved in fact I welcome it.

And when did I claim to be intelligent...?

You can't really measure intelligence without a bench mark... What is intelligent in your opinion ? and I will asses my self to your bench mark...

But you knocking me suggests you feel more intelligent than me... May be you are... Would I care...? No...

What I would say is those that turn to attacking or verbal abuse is they have no real mind to express them selves... Calling me a Retard, just makes me view you as one.

Everything I have said is true and you know it.

Also by "intelligent" I mean not only capable of higher thought processes but also knowing how to differentiate between "utter, baseless bullshit" and "things that at least may be true, and have at least SOME supporting evidence and plausibility". I don't even mind if you get a bit confused somewhere in between every now and then, but come on! Conspiracy theories!? (I could cite worse, but that's irrelevant to the discussion at hand).

Everything I have said is true and you know it.

What have you said...?

You have also claimed to be intelligent.

- No I Have not.

I'm glad you realize you have an overactive imagination.

- I admitted that, tell me some ting I don't know.

Now relegate that shit to your RPGs and whatever else, eh?

- That was my own suggestion, again ??

This isn't the place to throw up your retarded ideas

- In your opinion they are retarded... Is freedom of speech free in your part of the world ?

but that's irrelevant to the discussion at hand

- That you deem retarded but still comment in.

---Back to Topic---

Does any one have a Conspiracy theory they want to discuss...?

If not... I would like to debate another...

Are Alien's amongst us...?

Is their technology fueling our leaps and bounds into this new millennium ?

Are Rods of this world...?

My thoughts.

Technology is coming on so fast, most things I would govern top notch are being given to charity before I get to own one... For us to go from the Atari 2600 in the 80's to the PS3 now it's amazing... Unconceivable back then in the 80's... Could it be that our advancements came from a downed UFO or Alien technology...?

I doubt it... But why is Area 51 so heavily guarded... Not sure... Why do many x-workers claim to have seen some Alien tech within the confinds...? Attention and money may be...

There are sightings world over... But do they hold any weight...?

I think there is Alien life, but to the question have we been effected by it remains a mystry to me, but an interesting one.

Everything I have said is true and you know it.

What have you said...?

You have also claimed to be intelligent.

- No I Have not.

I'm glad you realize you have an overactive imagination.

- I admitted that, tell me some ting I don't know.

Now relegate that shit to your RPGs and whatever else, eh?

- That was my own suggestion, again ??

This isn't the place to throw up your retarded ideas

- In your opinion they are retarded... Is freedom of speech free in your part of the world ?

but that's irrelevant to the discussion at hand

- That you deem retarded but still comment in.

---Back to Topic---

Does any one have a Conspiracy theory they want to discuss...?

If not... I would like to debate another...

Are Alien's amongst us...?

Is their technology fueling our leaps and bounds into this new millennium ?

Are Rods of this world...?

My thoughts.

Technology is coming on so fast, most things I would govern top notch are being given to charity before I get to own one... For us to go from the Atari 2600 in the 80's to the PS3 now it's amazing... Unconceivable back then in the 80's... Could it be that our advancements came from a downed UFO or Alien technology...?

I doubt it... But why is Area 51 so heavily guarded... Not sure... Why do many x-workers claim to have seen some Alien tech within the confinds...? Attention and money may be...

There are sightings world over... But do they hold any weight...?

I think there is Alien life, but to the question have we been effected by it remains a mystry to me, but an interesting one.

heres one is hitler dead?


Since his supposed death on April 30, 1945, many trees have fallen to create articles and books concerning: is Hitler dead; how did he die; is he alive, and so on. Although he would be EXTREMELY old if still alive today, hiding in a well guarded mansion in Argentina, enough lies and contradictions have been put forth concerning the death of Hitler and Eva Braun, and the disposal of their bodies, that speculation about how and if Hitler died persist to this day.

HOW HITLER DIED

    Some of the theories/ variations include:

    1. He ate poison and shot himself at the same time.
    2. He ate poison, but didn't shoot himself.
    3. He shot himself, but didn't take poison.
    4. One of Hitler's supposed "doubles" was killed, creating the illusion Hitler was dead, allowing the "real" Adolf Hitler to escape.
    5. Somebody else killed Hitler.

Here's what I found in 5 mins of looking:-

The fact that Hitler died in his bunker is almost certain, despite the lack of provable physical evidence to this effect. It is also quite likely that Hitler did not die by his own hand. There is reason to believe that Hitler, unable to bring himself to commit suicide, and with the Russians almost at the door, was killed, possibly by his butler Linge, in order that the remaining bunker residents might attempt to escape from the advancing Russians.

I also found reference to most other methods suggested by your self...

It's a good question...

If I was Hitler, and saw my fellow country men loosing a war and dieing at my commands, I don't think I could live with myself... I think I would have gone out fighting rather than take my own life or ask some one else to take it for me...

Hitler had a great mind, and love of his country and men... to take his own life in my opinion would not have been his way.

For that reason I think he may have been shot in the face or blown to bits in a hail of gun fire and fury (Hence why he was not found)... or at least that's what I would like to imagine.  I think the image of him being a coward is some thing drawn into the history pages by his enemy.

Here's what I found in 5 mins of looking:-

The fact that Hitler died in his bunker is almost certain, despite the lack of provable physical evidence to this effect. It is also quite likely that Hitler did not die by his own hand. There is reason to believe that Hitler, unable to bring himself to commit suicide, and with the Russians almost at the door, was killed, possibly by his butler Linge, in order that the remaining bunker residents might attempt to escape from the advancing Russians.

I also found reference to most other methods suggested by your self...

It's a good question...

If I was Hitler, and saw my fellow country men loosing a war and dieing at my commands, I don't think I could live with myself... I think I would have gone out fighting rather than take my own life or ask some one else to take it for me...

Hitler had a great mind, and love of his country and men... to take his own life in my opinion would not have been his way.

For that reason I think he may have been shot in the face or blown to bits in a hail of gun fire and fury (Hence why he was not found)... or at least that's what I would like to imagine.  I think the image of him being a coward is some thing drawn into the history pages by his enemy.

so what your saying is that hitlers last moments of life  were used as propaganda to show the nazis as some kind of cowards? it makes sense even though he could have fought it out to the end if i was him i would have went down all guns blazing

That was my own suggestion, again ??

Yet you deemed it necessary to bring up your opinion and then hide behind that shit, like I said earlier.

In your opinion they are retarded... Is freedom of speech free in your part of the world ?

I hate when people say that, what, next you're going to say I'm the next Hitler (and by extension the Antichrist).

That you deem retarded but still comment in.

Your reactions are so lol.

Technology is coming on so fast, most things I would govern top notch are being given to charity before I get to own one... For us to go from the Atari 2600 in the 80's to the PS3 now it's amazing... Unconceivable back then in the 80's... Could it be that our advancements came from a downed UFO or Alien technology...?

We call this "future shock".

I doubt it... But why is Area 51 so heavily guarded... Not sure... Why do many x-workers claim to have seen some Alien tech within the confinds...? Attention and money may be...

Or maybe it's because Area 51 has sensitive aircraft and other technological developments? Why do people think the government would only guard such secrets if they involved aliens or international Jewish conspiracies? Go with Occam's razor here- it's much more plausible that the government is simply developing/testing new technology there and it's not as if they want to publicize that.

I think there is Alien life, but to the question have we been effected by it remains a mystry to me, but an interesting one.

Personally, I doubt there's sentinent alien life, and if there is, they likely aren't advanced enough to visit Earth.

heres one is hitler dead?

Sadly. 88!

Since his supposed death on April 30, 1945, many trees have fallen to create articles and books concerning: is Hitler dead; how did he die; is he alive, and so on. Although he would be EXTREMELY old if still alive today, hiding in a well guarded mansion in Argentina, enough lies and contradictions have been put forth concerning the death of Hitler and Eva Braun, and the disposal of their bodies, that speculation about how and if Hitler died persist to this day.

Well, he was born in 1885. Also, although several Nazi officials escaped Nazi Germany in its final days it's fairly certain that Hitler was not amongst them. It's one thing for Priebke or even Eichmann to drive the streets of Buenos Aires or wherever, but Hitler? No. Also, you must remember he wasn't exceptionally mentally stable- especially towards the end. He wasn't the kind to flee death, I think, nor the kind to want to be the Soviet's prisoner. By this time, he felt he had no reason to live- his Aryan dream had died and his people had betrayed him. I'd probably commit suicide, too.

Eva Braun was one messed up bitch, but I know less about her (naturally). I assume she died before Hitler, but of course I have no way of knowing this.

Also, I don't think the Nazis could've been portrayed as cowards very easily (although I have heard Hitler being called cowardly, only by idiots). The Germans were good fighters, and they didn't give up easily- in the end they had lost well over 5 million soldiers (and I don't know how many civilians) and had sent divisions filled up with teenagers and grandfathers to defend the Vaterland; and of course the Hitler Youth, &c. And of course, there are stories about one or two German soldiers shooting at Allied tanks after being separated from their squad (possibly by being the last survivors) and the such.

so what your saying is that Hitlers last moments of life  were used as propaganda to show the Nazis as some kind of cowards? it makes sense even though he could have fought it out to the end if i was him i would have went down all guns blazing

For his enemies to have illustrated him as going out in a blaze of fury German's would have seen him as a Hero to a degree, he would have earned some respect in a death like that...

Some times clarity or further option can be found by simply placing your self there... Ask the question to any one, they would all answer, I would go down fighting... A Captain of a ship sinks with it...

History is painted out as the heads of state feel fit... We get a watered down version of events.

Not saying my opinion is truth... it's just liner thinking.

I wonder why LoS hasn't responded to me yet

so what your saying is that Hitlers last moments of life  were used as propaganda to show the Nazis as some kind of cowards? it makes sense even though he could have fought it out to the end if i was him i would have went down all guns blazing

For his enemies to have illustrated him as going out in a blaze of fury German's would have seen him as a Hero to a degree, he would have earned some respect in a death like that...

Some times clarity or further option can be found by simply placing your self there... Ask the question to any one, they would all answer, I would go down fighting... A Captain of a ship sinks with it...

History is painted out as the heads of state feel fit... We get a watered down version of events.

Not saying my opinion is truth... it's just liner thinking.

i think we can both agree history is written by the winner

Not if the winner's illiterate (no, really).

I wonder why LoS hasn't responded to me yet

I also find your comments fairly LOL...

I guess we are on different wave length's...

I mean this comment:-

I hate when people say that, what, next you're going to say I'm the next Hitler (and by extension the Antichrist).

Hitler to me was a man with a vision with the guts to attempt to do some thing he felt passionally about, even though it was wrong, his reasoning and writtings almost gets you to see things from his perspective, some thing you have not done in any of your posts, you raise some interesting debate, but at the same time tend to answer with abrupt attacks with no real cause or backing like a playground kid... I wouldn't liken you to the Antichrist, the Antichrist is supposedly a fallen angel, and that would have placed you closer to God than most could dream of.

If I was to liken you to any one it would be any teenager who hasn't lived yet, me when I was 14 may be.

It's like this comment:-

Not if the winner's illiterate (no, really).

An attempt at being funny...? I don't see it that way... The winners always write history as they see it, I wonder how the war on terror will be written up in Iraq and the USA and how different the two will be ?

irish-warrior - Is a pretty good debater... So are you Seaking... When your not trying to score a point from me... Debating isn't about winning its about sharing idea's and opinions...

I welcome change of my line of thinking... to be unwavering makes you narrow minded.

So I take this oppertunity if for what ever reason I have offened you to say sorry... in a hope that you will debate rather than confront in agression.

If you want to continue trying to score points off me, carry on... it's not bothering me, it's just causing a mini argueement between you and yourself in every thread.

Hitler to me was a man with a vision with the guts to attempt to do some thing he felt passionally about, even though it was wrong, his reasoning and writtings almost gets you to see things from his perspective, some thing you have not done in any of your posts, you raise some interesting debate, but at the same time tend to answer with abrupt attacks with no real cause or backing like a playground kid... I wouldn't liken you to the Antichrist, the Antichrist is supposedly a fallen angel, and that would have placed you closer to God than most could dream of.

I was referring to how many people believed that Hitler was the Antichrist (man, the Allied propagandists must've loved that!)

If I was to liken you to any one it would be any teenager who hasn't lived yet, me when I was 14 may be.

I can only imagine how retarded you were at that age.

An attempt at being funny...? I don't see it that way... The winners always write history as they see it, I wonder how the war on terror will be written up in Iraq and the USA and how different the two will be ?

Wh..what?
No, it's not an attempt at being funny. The Mongols, Hyksos (although I guess these were losers in the end), and some other winners didn't write their own histories- they were illiterate.

irish-warrior - Is a pretty good debater... So are you Seaking... When your not trying to score a point from me... Debating isn't about winning its about sharing idea's and opinions...

No, he isn't.

I welcome change of my line of thinking... to be unwavering makes you narrow minded.

I'm far from unwavering, I simply am far from convinced by anything in this thread and many related threads because the arguments and viewpoints I attack so much are generally absolutely baseless and so out-there that I have no idea where anyone could've gotten those ideas, much less believed them and felt confident enough to bring them up in an "intelligent debate" forum.

So I take this oppertunity if for what ever reason I have offened you to say sorry... in a hope that you will debate rather than confront in agression.

Have I not? Even within the past hour?

Hitler to me was a man with a vision with the guts to attempt to do some thing he felt passionally about, even though it was wrong, his reasoning and writtings almost gets you to see things from his perspective, some thing you have not done in any of your posts, you raise some interesting debate, but at the same time tend to answer with abrupt attacks with no real cause or backing like a playground kid... I wouldn't liken you to the Antichrist, the Antichrist is supposedly a fallen angel, and that would have placed you closer to God than most could dream of.

I was referring to how many people believed that Hitler was the Antichrist (man, the Allied propagandists must've loved that!)

If I was to liken you to any one it would be any teenager who hasn't lived yet, me when I was 14 may be.

I can only imagine how retarded you were at that age.

An attempt at being funny...? I don't see it that way... The winners always write history as they see it, I wonder how the war on terror will be written up in Iraq and the USA and how different the two will be ?

Wh..what?
No, it's not an attempt at being funny. The Mongols, Hyksos (although I guess these were losers in the end), and some other winners didn't write their own histories- they were illiterate.

irish-warrior - Is a pretty good debater... So are you Seaking... When your not trying to score a point from me... Debating isn't about winning its about sharing idea's and opinions...

No, he isn't.

I welcome change of my line of thinking... to be unwavering makes you narrow minded.

I'm far from unwavering, I simply am far from convinced by anything in this thread and many related threads because the arguments and viewpoints I attack so much are generally absolutely baseless and so out-there that I have no idea where anyone could've gotten those ideas, much less believed them and felt confident enough to bring them up in an "intelligent debate" forum.

So I take this oppertunity if for what ever reason I have offened you to say sorry... in a hope that you will debate rather than confront in agression.

Have I not? Even within the past hour?

what is your problem with me? do u have some kind of sad chip on your shoulder? or do u like the attention?

Have I not? Even within the past hour?

You have called me a retard 3 times in the last hour... I think the one above was the 3rd... :-

I can only imagine how retarded you were at that age.

Called IW a troll and insulted his Mum...

I'm far from unwavering, I simply am far from convinced by anything in this thread and many related threads because the arguments and viewpoints I attack so much are generally absolutely baseless and so out-there that I have no idea where anyone could've gotten those ideas, much less believed them and felt confident enough to bring them up in an "intelligent debate" forum.

One word:- theories

Not reality... OK... U N D E R S T A N D....

I thought a thread that would be pretty much open ended... would be a great debate... I enjoyed the Hitler debate, you raised some interesting points so did IW I mean he started it.

New topic


the Devil's Triangle

    During the past century more than 50 ships and 20 aircraft sailed into oblivion in the area known as the Devil's Triangle, Bermuda Triangle, Hoodoo Sea, or a host of other names.

    Exactly what happened to the ships and aircraft is not known. Most disappeared without a trace. Few distress calls and little, if any, debris signaled their disappearance.

    Size of the triangle is dictated by whoever happens to be writing about it, and consequently what ships and the number lost depends largely on which article you read.

    Vincent Gaddis, credited with putting the triangle "on the map" in a 1964 Argosy feature, described the triangle as extending from Florida to Bermuda, southwest to Puerto Rico and back to Florida through the Bahamas. Another author puts the apexes of the triangle somewhere in Virginia, on the western coast of Bermuda and around Cuba, Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico. Sizes of the areas described ranged from 500,000 to 1.5 million square miles.

    Whatever the size or shape, there supposedly is some inexplicable force within it that causes ships and planes to vanish.


what is really happening?

You have called me a retard 3 times in the last hour... I think the one above was the 3rd... :-

I said nice things too. Or at least I did if replying to you like a not-idiot counts as nice. Cuz you actually aren't always retarded! Mostly just in threads like this or about ghosts.

Called IW a troll and insulted his Mum...

Wrong. I asked if he was a troll, it's a perfectly legitimate question; and I didn't insult his mum. It's perfectly fine if a woman wants to have her drink, but if she does it whilst pregnant she's bound to fuck him up.

One word:- theories

Theories require plausbility and evidence also. It's what distinguishes hypotheses and theories from ideas.

I thought a thread that would be pretty much open ended... would be a great debate... I enjoyed the Hitler debate, you raised some interesting points so did IW I mean he started it.

I seemed to have ended that discussion right off that bat.

Also, Bermuda's Triangle (that's what us civilized Americans call it) isn't a conspiracy theory and also wasn't that disproven already :/

Seaking   - What Conspiracy Theory, if any, do think holds a little interest ?

Your great at trying to disprove things... I want to see how good you are at trying to push an idea...

I see lots of people on here rather than using their own idea's just quoting others and going by and swallowing what's taught from text books... Some times things are not black and white... It only takes a few what ifs then you have a Conspiracy theory.

Like the Death of Princess Diana... or Bruce Lee not being in his grave...

It just takes the seed of distrust and boom...

There has to be some thing you distrust, or feel to be false in documented history ?

New topic


the Devil's Triangle

    During the past century more than 50 ships and 20 aircraft sailed into oblivion in the area known as the Devil's Triangle, Bermuda Triangle, Hoodoo Sea, or a host of other names.

    Exactly what happened to the ships and aircraft is not known. Most disappeared without a trace. Few distress calls and little, if any, debris signaled their disappearance.

    Size of the triangle is dictated by whoever happens to be writing about it, and consequently what ships and the number lost depends largely on which article you read.

[...]

what is really happening?

I managed to catch the clock at 10:23 all the time on accident. It's not really. I have a friend who's birthday is October 23, so I think of the date whenever I see the time. I've managed to filter out all the other times I check the time, and continue to build a pattern. I'm not being lucky nor am I being psychic: My brain's just filtering out irrelevant information. There's no pattern, it's built on probability: I have a 1/12 chance of it being 10th o'clock, and I have a 1/60th chance that it'll be the 23rd minute. If I check the clock at random intervals, such as once every 2-3 minutes, I still have a great chance of seeing 10:23 during that hour.

People who believe in the Bermuda Triangle are doing the same. They're ignoring all the other boats sinking, all the other planes crashing, and they blithely ignore the frequency of traffic in that area compared to other parts. They only focus on what happens in the Bermuda triangle because their minds are developing a pattern, one that doesn't tangibly exist.

Now that's a strong argument. I wish I could see more of that in here.

I have no conspiracy theories I have any interest in.

stupid

It's already been proven that the Antarctic Ice cap's are only 4,000 years old (if that)...

especially this

OK Sorry 400 bc the Anartic had no Ice plain:- http://rmrk.net/index.php/topic,18868.0.html

This chart is signed by Piri Reis, an admiral of the Turkish navy in 1513.
His high rank granted him access to the royal library of Constantinopel. In his notes he explains that he drew this chart using ancient charts he found in the library dating from 400 BC and before.
His chart shows the westcoast of Africa, the northern coast of Antarctica and the east coast of south America.

Only 4% of Antarctica is Rock, the rest is Ice:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctica

Here's a statement that shows large portions can melt and refreeze in the space of a year:-

As in the Arctic regions, there have been effects on Antarctica attributed to global warming. In 2005, a mass of ice comparable in size to the U.S. state of California briefly melted and refroze. This may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 41 degrees Fahrenheit (5 Celsius). The U.S. space agency NASA reports this as being the most significant Antarctic melting in the past 30 years.[41]

The Bronze Age lasted a very long time and during the bronze age for 40 years the temperature of the planet was MUCH (Lows of 41 degree's) hotter than it is today... From the Piri Reis Map towards the end of this hot period the Antartic Ice was not mapped...

So let me rephrase myself the Ice cap's as we Know them are 4,000 years old if that...

Should the amount of Ice that's there now remelt (100%) the sea level will rise by 200 feet approx.  The Sea level wont remain at that level, the Ice Caps will reform... If people lived without hinder in the Bronze age I would imagine those same area's will be unaffected when the Melt happens again... We had a mini Ice age not too long ago in history... It's cycles, we can't stop it from happening, and that's why I think Global warming is a Conspiracy Theory.

I might be wrong... I am no scientist, all I have done is read evidence and looked at maps... So If I am wrong it's not being stupid it's misinterpretation.

especially that too

Can you explain why ?...

Unless I am shown other wise I will continue to make my self looks stupid... HELP !!!

Watch the video in this thread provided by Silverline:- http://rmrk.net/index.php/topic,18351.0.html

JFK was assassinated for planning to tell the American public about what he saw at Area51, CIA, not a lone nut gunman.

JFK was assassinated for planning to tell the American public about what he saw at Area51

What documentation/links do you have to support this theory ?

Oh, I thought ID was not ID anymore, I thought it was just pointless arguing.

OK Sorry 400 bc the Anartic had no Ice plain:- http://rmrk.net/index.php/topic,18868.0.html

This chart is signed by Piri Reis, an admiral of the Turkish navy in 1513.
His high rank granted him access to the royal library of Constantinopel. In his notes he explains that he drew this chart using ancient charts he found in the library dating from 400 BC and before.
His chart shows the westcoast of Africa, the northern coast of Antarctica and the east coast of south America.

[...]

I might be wrong... I am no scientist, all I have done is read evidence and looked at maps... So If I am wrong it's not being stupid it's misinterpretation.

It's a stupid misinterpretation.

Actual people who do exist who hold credible degrees and do thinking note thus: There are errors on the map. Specifically that there are many rivers that have been reduplicated and that the Caribbean is rotated 90 degrees. Hapgood argues that Piri Reis was compiling from multiple maps, some of which may have been drawn on a polar projection, or perhaps that he compiled some components on a different compass on the same map--something of an overlay, which was not uncommon for maps to have during that time.

This does not consist of a credible statement that Antarctica lacked ice 4,000 years ago. A map that was drawn from multiple sources, which may in itself have been drawn from multiple sources, is bound to have errors. Manuscripts have the same problem, and it is certainly probable that you can trace back the source of errors by comparing the errors, we have no other copies to compare in this instance.

The only credible evidence we have is empirical evidence: geography. If we can extract a mummified body from the frozen wastes of Antarctica and carbon date it, and it's a tropical creature, and it's 4 000 years +/- 1 000 years, then I might start to believe it. But we haven't. What we have found are dinosaur bones.

Secondly, the ice age argument: 6% (which does not sound like an accurate figure but a number pulled out of a hat) of Antarctica is above-sea level rock. If all the ice melted, did not displace a single ounce, and the weight of the ice being lifted out did not cause the plate to rise up (as the plate is weighed down by the ice), then that would still hold true. Fun fact: If the northern pole melts completely, then no water would get displaced. Ice displaces its own volume in water when placed in water. Problem: The planet is symmetrical with points on which the planet rotates: If it gets warmer on one pole, the other pole will get warmer too. The north pole warming is a good indication the south pole may warm up too. If the ice melts in Antarctica, the weight will relieve the pressure, the landmass may then end up displacing a LOT of water.

Oh, I thought ID was not ID anymore, I thought it was just pointless arguing.

As long as I've been here it has been like this. I also think it's incredibly lol that you say this, and that now the forum is called "Elitist Debate". The wit never ends!

It's a stupid misinterpretation.

I guess you read the reply from the team of Scientists that studied the map then...?

C. It is our opinion that the accuracy of the cartographic features shown in the Oronteus Fineaus [sic] Map ( AD 1530 ) suggests, beyond a doubt, that it also was compiled from accurate source maps of Antarctica, but in this case of the entire continent. Close examination has proved the original source maps must have been compiled at a time when the land mass and inland waterways of the continent were relatively free of ice. This conclusion is further supported by a comparison of the Oronteus Finneaus [sic] Map with the results obtained by International Geophysical Year teams in their measurements of the subglacial topography. The comparison also suggests that the original source maps ( compiled in remote antiquity ) were prepared when Antarctica was presumably free of ice. The Cordiform projection used by Oronteus Fineaus [sic] suggests the use of advanced mathematics. Further, the shape given to the Antarctic continent suggests the possibility, if not the probability, that the original source maps were compiled on a stereographic or gnomonic type of projection ( involving the use of spherical trigonometry ).

Now these are Scientists not some Internet Forum dude with an self proclaimed name... To say my interpretation is a stupid one Is fairly unfair (Many people have studied the maps in question and they all came to the same conclusion), the people who made those maps knew the sea's and they happend to be their at that given time, I would rather follow what they have drawn and what scientists and map specialists are saying, unless you find evidence showing the opposite from equally acclaimed specialists... Ponds Freeze in cold conditions, they then unfreeze when its warms up... What if every 4,000 years or so the world does that... just like our seasons do... Our green house gases only count for 2% of those damaging the Ozone and causing Global warming... The Globe is getting warmer, but I say its down to natural events.  For example the mini ice age, when the Theme's in London froze...

JFK was assassinated for planning to tell the American public about what he saw at Area51, CIA, not a lone nut gunman.

JFK assasination theorys

1. JFK was killed by an angry member of the disbanded KKK

2.Lee Harvey Oswald killed John f Kennedy

3.The mafia killed JFK

4.The KGB killed JFK

5."JFK was trying to kill Castro castro struck first"

6.Isrealis killed JFK for his sympathy with Arabs, and use of former nazis in the american rocket program

It's a stupid misinterpretation.

I guess you read the reply from the team of Scientists that studied the map then...?

I did, and I did a little bit of research behind that "team of Scientists."

1). Captain Lorenzo W.Burroughs was a cartographer for the USAF. He was by no means a "scientist." Him and his team came to an unusual conclusion in 1964 which ended up in Charles Hapgood's book, "Maps of Ancient Sea Kings," a book which is used to argue for an ancient maritime empire, i.e. Atlantis. Hapgood notes the compilation techniques of these maps, how they are taken from different sources, translated free-handedly from different projections, use alternate compasses, and contain errors. Weirdly enough, however, Hapgood was not trying to argue global warming or ice caps in his book. He was trying to find where Atlantis was.

2). The sources of the map are never called into question in any argument I have found. Which is unusual, when a medieval manuscript contains unusual discrepancies, scholarly bodies tend to compare the manuscript with another, its source, &c. The map, according to Piri, was drawn from 8 Ptolomeic Maps, an Arabic map of India, and 4 Portuguese maps, and a map by Christopher Columbus, among others. That leaves 5 maps unaccounted for. Of course, it doesn't matter: Antarctica being represented on the map is a controversial issue; there is no agreement in the scholarly community on whether or not it is Antarctica being on the map. We lack the source maps, their sources or credibilities. We also know of of mistakes that early cartographers have made.

Of course, scholarly methods, analytical deduction, comparative historics--none of these have a place in conspiracy theories. Because these are all logical ways of filtering incorrect conclusions which are based on hunches. Lord knows we don't want silly things like facts to get in the way of truth.

Modern scholars see the southern landmass to be the southern portion of South America, the islands near the Falkland islands. Internal evidence suggests it. The skewing may have been from the awareness of a southern landmass that was never accurately mapped or a bad translation from a polar projection map.

3). No credible scientist has ever made the argument that you're making now. People, who are not scientists, who have analyzed the map 40 years ago have made an assumption and did believe that the map accurately represents Antarctica. This view is not held today. Only amateurs and people with "ideas" about "truth" argue that this map is 100% representational of the world in the 16th century and use fringe evidence which lies outside of the accepted field of scholarly studies and geographical facts.

The CIA were involved in the JFK hit, that is a dominant theory.

The CIA were involved in the JFK hit, that is a dominant theory.

there was no once off JFK hit it was a campaign thats lasted months it  took 3 parts he was nearly killed twice by the same assasions when he visited ireland and foreign police forces arent allowed arms in the republic so that rules out the CIA

No, that just states that the CIA were breaking laws.

The NAU union would be terrible.
It would ruin the USA, Canada and Mexico...Mexico is till third world in some parts, and the currency is so different in all three of tne countries, it would set the balance of the continent off.
If it does happen, thank god non of the Central American countries would be involved, that would really ruin it.

"Some parts"?

Yeah, the parts with people in them.

The NAU union would be terrible.

Much like the EU... but it still has its strong points.

Somehow I imagine the NAU would be a bit different than the EU.
...and pointless.

It's about numbers and safety within those numbers, if we unify the West, taking the East will be much easier... At least that's what I think the hidden agenda is.

It's about numbers and safety within those numbers, if we unify the West, taking the East will be much easier... At least that's what I think the hidden agenda is.

Yeah, it's not like annexing a third world nation with all sorts of problems would hurt the United States in any way. "Strength in numbers" is a maxim more nations should adopt - just look at China and India. Clearly the only way up for a nation in the new millenium is to have a large, uneducated population which is always precariously close to the edge of famine.

It's about numbers and safety within those numbers, if we unify the West, taking the East will be much easier... At least that's what I think the hidden agenda is.

Yeah, it's not like annexing a third world nation with all sorts of problems would hurt the United States in any way. "Strength in numbers" is a maxim more nations should adopt - just look at China and India. Clearly the only way up for a nation in the new millenium is to have a large, uneducated population which is always precariously close to the edge of famine.

What we really need is quality over quantity. Sure we may have lots of people but most of them are totally worthless and would die over night if they had to live outside. What we need is rigorous eugenics with long term vision while the Chinese shore up their numbers of worthless peasents and get the pasifying crowd revolts they are constructing for themselves.

I get nervous how you guys are so obsessive over eugenics.

What we really need is quality over quantity. Sure we may have lots of people but most of them are totally worthless and would die over night if they had to live outside. What we need is rigorous eugenics with long term vision while the Chinese shore up their numbers of worthless peasants and get the pacifying crowd revolts they are constructing for themselves.

(typos fixed!)

Eugenics is not the answer. Humans contain such little genetic variation compared to other animals. The development rate of humans is too long, it takes six years after birth of a human child to be at the same age of development as most other newborn animals, approximately thirteen to sixteen years on average after birth to become capable of reproduction, and are not truly adults until about 20 or 22 years after birth. This also denies one of the most basic facts of humans: intelligence. It means that the only way to succeed is superior genetics, which isn't the case. Superior genetics is a fallacy. They can fail, the brain can develop poorly--and a worthless brain harbors a worthless body (and let me tell you, I've met some worthless bodies). Genetic diseases and most other diseases are mutable. You may be able to weed the lot out, but most bacteria and viruses will adapt to new conditions.

The intellectual flexibility of humans is what makes nations conquer other nations. Nations succeed because they possess resources and knowledge to use, greater transmission of information, and so on. The people in those nations that succeed desire an explanation for their power. It sounds better when they say it was predetermined: God/Allah/Flying Spaghetti Monster favors us, we are led by the descendant of the sun god, we have superior genetics.

Do you know why the US military is one of the best in the world? It's not genetic screening and gene therapy and eugenics at play. It's hardcore training. While the best equipment and technology is available, so is the training to use it. The same goes for the Israeli Air Force, one of the best trained air forces in the world; their pilots are hands-down better than American pilots.

The cost is also a terrible price to pay. You limit population growth to an extreme. The cost also, for research of genetics and disposal of "genetically inferior specimens", is outsanding. It's just damn cheaper to just to education them then work is to they pop out of the vagoo doing calculus. You also pay a humanitarian price. People, no matter how much propaganda is given to them, may and will ultimately reject it.

It would save us money when we eliminate the retarded, chronically ill, chronically criminal, and parasitic to not have the great burden of carrying worthless people. It won't be so alldominating as the anti propaganda tells. In any case, once the obvious human waste has been removed people may take a greater interest in improving themselves when there is the possibility they could be found unfit and die if they are lazy and weak (nature used to do this for us, but now greater technology means we have to look after the quallity of our own populations) more people prove themselves to not be weeds then there is less weeding that has to be done. Quality improves all around and those things you pointed out makes nations great can be done more and more efficiently without the riff raff gumming up the works.

As for the idea that there is little genetic variation between humans, this is true. However, compare a Nordic or a Japanese to an aboriginal and an autistic. Not much of a difference genetically, but the effects of just those small differences make a huge difference.

Aboriginals are inferior? Also, I have numerous autistic (or at least "autistic") acquaintances who contribute quite a bit to society.
Also lol @ picking Nordic and Japanese as examples.

I don't like Japanese myself, but fetishistic and degenerate as they are, they rank higher than whites on that IQ scale. Blah... Yes, aboriginals are more of "niggers" than the true africans, or african americans in every sense of the word, pretty sick really. For autistics, I have an autistic cousin and he's fine. I'm not saying they're bad people, but do you really want them, or him, to vote your next leader in? Not if you want to survive.

Well, humans are basically conspiracy loving creatures. We all love scandals, don't we?

I don't like Japanese myself, but fetishistic and degenerate as they are, they rank higher than whites on that IQ scale. Blah... Yes, aboriginals are more of "niggers" than the true africans, or african americans in every sense of the word, pretty sick really. For autistics, I have an autistic cousin and he's fine. I'm not saying they're bad people, but do you really want them, or him, to vote your next leader in? Not if you want to survive.

I guess you do have a point there.

Here watch this... It's about the changes occuring in Europe and England:- http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/020507Face.htm

IM A RAGING HOMOSEXUAL

Dunno if this has been linked already, but:

http://www.carpenoctem.tv/cons/

Found this pretty useful.

The CSA is still alive and well, just waiting for someone like Clinton to be elected so she won't stop the secession.
www.confederatestatesofamerica.org

*ahem* Illuminati *cough*

Sorry to re-dig this topic up, but it seems that this is all happening now.

http://uk.youtube.com/2012TNWO

Sorry to re-dig this topic up, but it seems that this is all happening now.

http://uk.youtube.com/2012TNWO

I like conspiracy theories, but that video was the absolute most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. Why not just become a Scientologist while you're at it? People are so fucking lame sometimes.

Yeah the History one does seem odd... It's the Disclosure of the Flag that looks real:- http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-tEDwlQxUBQ