This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
American, British, Israeli and Iranian Warships Sailing Towards Confrontation
The U.S. and Israel are conducting their largest-ever joint warfare exercises near Iran. And see this.
England is sending its most advanced ship – the HMS Daring – to the region.
Only days after finishing its last wargames in the Strait of Hormuz, Iran has announced another set of wargames in February.
WHAT COULD GO WRONG?
Looking behind the headlines:
- The people pushing for war against Iran are the same neocons who pushed for war against Iraq. See this and this.
- China and Russia have warned that attacking Iran could lead to World War III.
- War against Iran was planned at least 20 years ago.
- The U.S. has been claiming for more than 30 years that Iran was on the verge of nuclear capability (and the U.S. apparently helped fund the Iranian nuclear program.)
- The sinking of the USS Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, and other justifications for past wars have turned out to be false. Similarly, a number of high-level intelligence officials and politicians have said that the U.S. would fake a provocation and blame it on Iran as a casus belli. For example, Ron Paul has warned of a “Gulf of Tonkin type incident” in Iran, and Pulitzer-prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh says many ideas have been proposed for provoking a war, including building boats that look like Iranian boats, and then putting Navy Seals on them to “start a shoot-up”.
- The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950?s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister. Pulitzer-prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh says that the Bush administration (and especially Dick Cheney) helped to fund terrorist groups within Iran (see confirming articles here and here). And the New York Times, Washington Post and others are reporting, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, former national security adviser Fran Townsend and former Attorney General Michael Mukasey – who all said that the terrorists were going to get us if we didn’t jettison the liberties granted under the Bill of Rights – are now supporting terrorists in Iran.
- Endless war is bankrupting America and harming our national security.
What could possibly go wrong?
»
- advertisements -
Now you're just getting silly.
Of COURSE! those who have been "wronged" are entitled to deal with it in whatever fashion that they see fit. I think, however, that the argument that you're failing to get is that folks in the US need to understand what has occurred in order to not let similar things happen again.
Lumping everyone together is NOT productive.
I'm just not getting what you're trying to achieve here... I state this quite honestly. I think that if you are sincere that you need to adjust how you're trying to communicate.
As if the British (with American help) didn't fuck up Iran enough back in the 50s.
+1 As a Brit I can confirm what a fuck up that was, as well as every war we've slavishly supported since then. Just ONCE, I'd like to see a British prime minister tell the POTUS to fuck off when he tugs on his leash for another war.
It's actually The Federal Reserve Bank and the City of London, and their owned and controlled media empires, pulling all the strings.
Just ONCE, I'd like to see a British prime minister tell the POTUS to fuck off when he tugs on his leash for another war.
Unlikely, as your country is occupied by The Bank of England, a private central bank with the same shareholders as the US Federal Reserve: the Rothschild's, "the House of Windsor" and the Dutch royal family, the core of the masters that tug the leash.
Well, that is a semi-popular theory. Every now and then I come across it and I ignore it. The BOE was nationalised in 1946 by the Clement Atlee government. It is, in effect, owned by the people of Britain. The only weird things about it are:
1) It remains a royal charter company (Well, my old school also had a royal charter from King James I, but that's not unusual for a company founded in 1694). It is meaningless these days, except as a decorative document to hang on the wall to prove that its formation was approved by the monarch at the time.
2) Some of its meetings are protected under the OSA (Official Secrets Act). Again, not unusual for nationalised companies in key areas of defense and economics to hold confidential meetings.
3) The third weird thing has merit for the conspiracy theorists. In 1977, The BOE formed a subsidiary company called Bank of England Nominees Ltd (BOEN) to act as an agent for the BOE. Now this is a private company and nobody seems to know much about it. But I maintain that a subsidiary is controlled by the parent and not the other way round, which means once again that the BOE is state controlled, which means of course that nobody else can own the Bank of England - not the Rothchilds, the Windsors, or the flying Dutch pants. It is not a private company like the Federal Reserve, however much you wish it to be.
Kings of obfuscation since Waterloo.
Professor Carroll Quigley wrote a book on who ruled the the USA and Britain between 1870 and 1960, called Tragedy And Hope: A History Of The World In Our Time.
Professor Quigley wrote -
The power of the Bank Of England and of its governor was admitted by most qualified observers. In January 1924, Reginald McKenna, who had been Chancellor Of The Exchequer in 1915-1916, as Chairman of the Board of The Midland Bank, told its stockholder:"I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can, and do, create money...And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow in their hands the destiny of the people."
Quigley also wrote -
...the powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole."
From Trillionaires Of The World
http://www.rense.com/general79/tril.htm
[snip]
'Nathan Rothschild said to the Commons Secret Committee on the question early in 1819: "In what line of business are you? - Mostly in the foreign banking line. "Have the goodness to state to the Committee in detail, what you conceive would be the consequence of an obligation imposed upon the Bank [of England, which he owned] to resume cash payments at the expiration of a year from the present time? - I do not think it can be done without very great distress to this country; it would do a great deal of mischief; we may not actually know ourselves what mischief it might cause. "Have the goodness to explain the nature of the mischief, and in what way it would be produced? - Money will be so very scarce, every article in this country will fall to such an enormous extent, that many persons will be ruined."
The director of the Prussian Treasury wrote on a visit to London that Nathan Rothschild had as early as 1817: ".., incredible influence upon all financial affairs here in London. It is widely stated.., that he entirely regulates the rate of exchange in the City. His power as a banker is enormous".
"Give me the control of the credit of a nation, and I care not who makes the laws." The famous boastful statement of Nathaniel Meyer Rothschild, speaking to a group of international bankers, 1912: "The few who could understand the system (cheque, money, credits) will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favours, that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests." The boastful statement by Rothschild Bros. of London.
These people are the top masterminds and conspired for the creation of illegal FEDERAL RESERVE BANK in 1913: Theodore Roosevelt, Paul Warburg - Representative Of Rothschild, Woodrow Wilson - U.S. President Signed FED Into Act, Nelson W. Aldrich - Representative Of Rockefeller, Benjamin Strong - Representative Of Rockefeller, Frank A. Vanderlip - Representative Of Rockefeller, John D. Rockefeller - Rockefeller Himself, Henry Davison - Representative Of J. P. Morgan, Charles Norton - Representative Of J. P. Morgan. '
Did I just stumble into the David Icke fan club?
It's slightly annoying to be falsely accused of obsfucation for posting facts that are widely available, but I get the feeling nothing will convince chaps like you to think otherwise. Talking of obsfucation and diversion, it's rather convenient to externalise your government's faults and blame some shadowy group behind the BOE, isn't it? If that were true, Britain would be a hell of a lot wealthier than it is today, I reckon. I like conspiracy theories as much as the next man, but only ones that make sense.
Anyway, if you really want to know who owns the Bank of England, it is...... a chap named Paul Jenkins, on behalf of the British Government. You might want to email him about your concerns about the Queen and others evading their taxes.
It's slightly annoying to be falsely accused of obsfucation for posting facts that are widely available...
Are you admitting YOU are a member of the Rothschild family? I would think then that you would be committing more efficient, yet more taxing, conspiracies than simple comments like this old chap...LOL
It's like talking to a wall. The Bank of England was nationalized in 1946.
Look, the Queen is obliged to pay income tax on all her estates since 1992. If you have any evidence that she and others are hiding funds in hidden BOEN accounts, then that would be TAX FRAUD, and believe me there are precedents for prosecuting members of the royal family. The anti-monarchists would love to have that information and they would be the first to press the government to release the evidence under the freedom of information act. So instead of talking out of your bottom, why don't you start a web campaign if you are that sure of your theory, or is that just too difficult to do in the confines of your padded cell?
Seriously dude, your rhetoric and polemic is as codified and flimsy as your country’s formal written constitution...Woops...you don’t have one! Just some musty old feudal vestige dressed up with ceremonial obedience to the land’s owner (HRH) which by definition would be the majority shareholder of your ‘nationalized’ central bank.
Why don’t you can the ad hominem attacks, red herring and straw man argument ...WTF did I mention collecting taxes from the monarch?...More importantly why would they pay interest to themselves on ponzi counterfeit they print out of nothing anyways?
Here are some links below to fill in the history you lack. As Winston Churchill said, “History is written by the victors.” He should know, the only thing more powerful than his pen was his eraser.
Methinks you’ve been spending too much time in history’s gift shop...Hagiography, old bean!
http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/the-creature-from-jekyll-isla...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_banking_family_of_England
[snip]
During the early part of the 19th century, the Rothschild's London bank took a leading part in managing and financing the subsidies that the British government transferred to its allies during the Napoleonic Wars. Through the creation of a network of agents, couriers and shippers, the bank was able to provide funds to the armies of the Duke of Wellington in Portugal and Spain. In 1818 the Rothschild bank arranged a £5 million loan to the Prussian government and the issuing of bonds for government loans. The providing of other innovative and complex financing for government projects formed a mainstay of the bank's business for the better part of the century. N M Rothschild & Sons financial strength in the City of London became such that by 1825-26, the bank was able to supply enough coin to the Bank of England to enable it to avert a liquidity crisis.
More charity I suspect!
Money Masters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXt1cayx0hs
(Pay particular attention to the Rothchild’s coup from Waterloo...the source of my original comment)
Tally Ho!!
You're not well, are you? This is the 21st century, not the 19th. And too thick to realise that the BOE cannot be owned by private individuals like the queen (Which you asserted in one of your rants above) because it would be tax fraud. Logic obviously is not in your vocab. I feel sorry for you.
Perhaps after they audit the FED they can audit the Queen. Or can you be a loyal subject sheeple and advocate such a stance?
It may be the 21st century but from a mind control perspective you're just another piece of feudal livestock to them mate! Off to your estate now!!
Agreed. How is it that Britain came to be such an obediant lap dog? No sarcasm intended.
Well, some Britons don't see it so, they somehow see the US as the brawny elder cousin (a bit dimwitted...) that helps them to administer the ("soft") second version of the British Empire...
And some say it's not a lap dog, it's that kind of dogs that bad hunters need to know where to shoot.
As someone very familiar with the Bristish Power Structure, I can confirm what a deluded self-righteous twit you are if you think, for one moment, that Perfidious Albion has ever done anything militarily which was not at the behest of the money-powers of The City of London.
In fact, P. Albion - although always well-versed in putting on a splendid show of being obsequious and fawning to the Dumb Yanks - is,in fact, pulling the strings from behind the curtain and - far from being a reluctant participant - is one of the main instigators for war.
Try taking a peek behind that curtain some time.
As ex UK military, I don't think it's quite as black and white as that. My feeling is that sometimes the joint 'kinetic military action' is in furtherance of US interests, sometimes UK interests. Hardly unexpected, given that Wall Street and the City are two sides of the same counterfeit coin. And both have a fistful of puppet strings to pull either side of the pond, whenever it suits them to do it, as we all know.
+1
Well, you ought to know if you have any experience in sig int that we don't have much of a choice. If we (Brits) don't tow the party line, we get cut off from Echelon - the biggest intel network in the world run by Langley. That fear and the modest benefits we get for our export industries, political currency, and defense that comes hand in glove for supporting the US and snatching a few crumbs off their table is the main driver for our slavish stance, imo.
Lets see if we can conciliate US citizens living in the US of A and US citizens living in England.
Quite easy actually, using US citizenism.
All these interventions were done at the expense ***cough, cough, cough*** my bad, at the benefit of the invaded countries, bombed and murdered people.
US citizens from every corner of the world were victims, spilling their blood to spread freedom, truth and justice to ignorant areas.
Rejoice, good US citizens of the world, all united in bettering the future of mankind.
Interesting. I keep repeating that stupid people always externalise their faults, and I keep being proved right. So, you are saying that Britain is behind all the warmongering thats been done by the USA? How the City of London could possibly have benefitted from US wars in: Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, half a dozen South American countries, and all the little outposts of the US empire for the past few decades must be one of those questions that must tax your pointy head. When you figure it out, do let me know - I have no problems with facts and I'll be listening with an open mind.
I guess someone doesn't know the history of Britsh Petroleum. What did that company used to be called?
"In a desert tent outside Colonel Gaddafi's home town of Sirte four years ago, Tony Blair shook hands with the Libyan dictator in a controversial 'blood money' deal which laid the foundations for the release of the Lockerbie bomber.
Also inside the tent was Peter Sutherland, then chairman of BP, who subsequently announced a £545million oil deal."
"The Saudi contract called al-Yamamah – which means "the dove" – was Britain's largest-ever arms agreement, and the source of intense scrutiny and controversy ever since it was signed in the mid-1980s.Today – after years of denying claims of corruption and bribes – the company finally admitted that the deal was mired in wrongdoing.
The US department of justice today filed a telling indictment to which BAE has agreed to plead guilty."
We can't all beat up on the Falkands, chippy.
The entire Lockerbie tragedy was a setup from the beginning.
Lots of questions persist:
http://terrorism.about.com/od/originshistory/p/PanAmBombing.htm
But, clearly, it's been a continuation of "blood for oil."
Disgusting isn't it? I think it's great that these vermin are getting what they deserve.... But don't crow too loud. We've already indicted BAE for the same offences for years:
Tony Blair Pressed on BAE Bribes 2006
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6193703.stm
Judge Astonished by BAE corruption denials 2010
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/21/bae-fined-illicit-payments-middleman
So, when can we expect Dick Cheney, Halliburton, et al to be indicted? Oh yes, that would be never.
there are so many of these creeps operating under the US umbrella that have broken so many laws and apparently gotten away with it... its clear to many of us that the rule of law scarely applies at that level. but the crimes to which you refer have been lost upon many, perhaps because of the impact of the larger disruption - the loss of our sacred rule of law.
more interesting to me is just how many people are clearly aware of the wrongs - only to be matched with almost brazen defiance. the divide in the social contract in the US has not been so wide since the US War Between the States.
i agree anyway, indictments all around. who's going to indict?
reading some of your other posts in this thread, it seems like you really want to see britannia as outside the scrum of evil events blamed on the US. i would in contrast suggest that we are all subject to the whims of internationalists, who use as a shield the commonly understood notions of 'nation' when it suits them.
britain and the US have been equally misused. maybe *right now* its convenient to use the US's wealth and might openly, but make no mistake, those same internationalists are as much quietly ensconced under the protection of the nation of britain in practice of their misdeeds.
forgive me, but your arguments remind me of the rationalizations i hear from germans as they wrestle with their own collective guilt for their crimes in WWII. one notable difference is that in the current EU crisis, germans seem to be somewhat at odds with the Eurocrat / minor internationalists, while britain observes quietly from the stands as the fix plays out.
arguments about the bank of england and the rothchilds are a straw man. undoubtedly the r's and the like are actors in all this, why quibble about what particular lever they see fit to use for their crimes?
of more interest to me and many here is - just how far integrated are those internationalists in the britain's national power structure now? i believe, and if you're honest you'll admit, that the US and britain have much in common in that. the infestation is deep and pervasive. if you and other brits cannot admit that, how can the light of day be shown on their crimes?
+1 (Can't thumb you up for some reason)
I'm pretty old in comparison to most people here, and over the years I've worked for multinationals - both British and American in a number of places as a young man. There's little to fault your post, except that from my personal experiences, there is a gulf of difference between some British companies and most American companies. In my biased opinion, we have the conscience to admit wrongdoing, whereas the Americans constantly make up reasons to divert attention away from theirs. Constantly, incessantly, and they are allowed to get away with it. It grates to see criminals point the finger of blame at others while thumbing their noses at the rule of law with the support and adoration of their own people. We don't have that here.
Are the internationlists so ingrained and integrated into our nation? I don't know, but it seems likely given our relationship with each other. You can be sure that when they do show themselves here, they are prosecuted and condemned instead of rewarded and lauded.
and i bet the most grating comment you'll hear from americans is 'my country, right or wrong'.
i do appreciate your perspective, and respect your admission of bias, but realize that there are many americans on this board and elsewhere trying to get to the often uncomfortable truth. i am one, and have many friends that have awakened in that way. we try to get the message out to anyone that will listen. sometimes we get sidetracked while peeling the onion, but not many in my experience start on this only to ossify into one particular conclusion. i have been astounded by the degree of openmindedness and willingness to revise perspectives among my peers.
that said, i grew up during vietnam, and saw for myself just how well that era was used to apply the 'patriotic' litmus test. another phrase from that era 'america - love it or leave it'. the hippies liked the 'us vs. them' model, and anyone who disavowed hippy life had to see themselves in the patriotic half of the dielectic. that dynamic is something we still battle, where people are deeply afraid to criticise power for fear of being labeled as 'unpatriotic' or now even 'terrorist'.
i deeply believe in the intent of our founders, after spending most of my life ignorant of their intentions, or the context of their times, or even their wise appraisal of human nature. i don't want to make the mistake of equating nationalism with the eternal idea of liberty, but the us constitution is the best basis i have to see that idea enacted in a just and rational world.
i can't ask you to forgive americans in general - but i will ask you to consider that many many of us are approaching open defiance of the powers who commit crimes in our name. the criminals to whom you refer have done far worse than point the finger of blame elsewhere - they are not us and they are not you. but they are the pretended leaders of both you and me.
in point of contrast, criminals of this ilk do not show themselves. they can only be exposed, by tearing back the curtain of power with which they surround themselves. tear it back - and then prosecute and convict, both here and there!
and be well yourself.
Only one word comes to mind to describe your post: Superb. If there were more like you, and I have noticed a distinct difference over the years especially with supporters of Dr.Paul, the world would be a better place.
See you on another thread, and be well also. Warm regards.
And Enron once was running amok in the UK.
As Major General Smedley Butler said, "War Is A Racket."
Nothing like the power of the State Mafia PLUS Big corporations.
It's not going to turn out well when the drug of choice -oil- runs out.
re So, you are saying that Britain is behind all the warmongering thats been done by the USA
Hahaha!!! Nice try! But, as you know very well, I never said that.
Your disingenuous reply, though, is only to be expected... since Shock & Denial (and, in your case, Obfuscation) is the first stage of the recovery process ;)
"that Perfidious Albionhas ever done anything militarily which was not at the behest of the money-powers of The City of London."
My reply was "disingenuous"? What else does your own post mean?
That's another thing about stupid people - they don't read their own posts.
the money powers of the City of London are the ones who FINANCE WARS for the OIL under all that SAND.
there's plenty of evidence there, if you care to look.
don't get all bent because those venal bastards took up residence in Britian - Britian has nurtured central banking and Zionism since the start - too bad if you dislike that fact.
I don't have ANY problems with criticism that stem from fact. The City of London is guilty of heinous crimes against people all over the world during the days of empire. It did indeed nurture central banking AND possibly even zionism. That is incontrovertible. But all the twaddle about the BOE acting as a private bank for the Rothchilds NOW when it was nationalized in 1946 is just beyond stupid.
We have bastards like Barclays, Coutts, and Lloyds who we know to be less than honest in their dealings, & you won't find any Brit speaking up for them. But what I dislike, what I object to, is American cunts who instead of seeing what their corporatists are doing, are too busy making up bullshit to blame others for their crimes, diverting attention away from themselves. Who has the empire? Who benefits from it? Whose currency is called the petrodollar and the reserve currency of the world? Who has the largest share in the SDR (IMF)?. Who is the constant warmonger? There's only one answer to all of them. Too bad if you dislike that fact.
don't make the mistake of assuming that me or anyone else here is blind to the crimes of empire.
also don't make the mistake of assuming that national borders define the empire's central arena.
there's plenty of blame to go around, but citizens intent on the common good that have not yet awakened to the simple facts bear little of the blame - not non, but little.
it takes guts to turn off the idot box and defy a long life of propaganda spoon feeding, and some just ain't ready.
i'm tired of pretending perfidious albion is a blessing to the world - they invented the great game, perfected it on Scotland and Ireland, and then taught the rest of the world those creepy little tricks. time they were held to account. i'll forgive britian when it atones for its original sin.
That's fair enough. No Brit I know denies the crimes of historical empire. This entire article and thread though, which you guys have hijacked to post copious amounts on the 17th,18th,and 19th centuries is about TODAY, and the crimes of 21st century. Let me know if you have any contemporary criticisms, otherwise, thanks for the history lesson.
for Christ's sake!
look at london - its wired to the teeth after the fashion of Orwell. their excuse was the IRA. you can't sneeze there without being under surveillance. that form of security is slowly taking over the free world, again based on the threat of a nebulous, ill defined but omnipresent terrorism.
admittedly in its current incarnation its not open warfare, but it is a clear declaration of absolute distrust and exercise of power by the elites over the plebes. wars against an external enemy are so 20th century. now its emmanuel goldstein 24/7, and God help us if we get in the way of the 'benign' powers telling us how to crawl through their well boxed world for our own 'good'.
the tactics have changed, but the intent is the same - subjugation.
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever." George Orwell (ironically, a british socialist cassandra)
i could go on, but you're clearly reasonable and i have no desire to grind you with rhetoric. if you were to advocate change, where you are might be a very good place to start.
US citizens speaking one to another.
A bit of hyperbole claiming that Britain is behind all the warring done by the US.
But still it was said that Britain was behind a bunch of US led wars.
So we have here two US citizens propagandists enabling each other by not subtlety distorting their speech.
Of course, in a vague attempt to try and dismiss that US citizens are all the same, no matter where they are.
its rather simply really, governments are infiltrated and coopted.... governments are merely a facade used by the those with the real power to further the agenda. The U.S. government and the British government are controlled by the same groups, groups that own/control all major corporations, banks and central banks. its time to look beyond the surface of things and look at where the power is exercised.
Correct.
what kills me is that we are under banners of revolution... when thats not really the case its more like civil war
.
NATO STYLE
Send the brits in first.
The rothschild's will insist upon it.
You must be referring to the US habit of:
1.When we want to obfuscate and pretend that America is just part of a grand coalition, we talk about "Allied Forces"
2.When we "Lead from behind" as in Libya where NATO forces did the heavy lifting (It was French and British air support that won the war), we can always ignore that after the event and talk about "The US victory in Libya". The US population is too stupid in general to understand anyway. This really endears you to your "Allies" in a few still friendly countries and explains why the US is so loved in the rest of the world, which accounts for 96% of the world's population.
I'm afraid that the rest of the world (Those not invited to the "World Series") do actually see through American duplicity, even if your own population only care about "Dancing with the stars" under the NDAA (National Dancing Accreditation Academy)
I'm afraid that the rest of the world (Those not invited to the "World Series") do actually see through American duplicity, even if your own population only care about "Dancing with the stars" under the NDAA (National Dancing Accreditation Academy)
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
US citizens keep partying as it was 1776.
But all their tales are now overused.
By US standards, negroes are the least intelligent.
But even negroes no longer believe US citizenism mantra and see through US citizen duplicity.
(Which also tells about US citizens intelligence as they are no longer able to bamboozle the stupidest possible human beings)
When you can no longer bamboozle people and still wish to coerce them, which US citizens want, there is no other path that violence.
US citizens have built a world of quasi certainty. Expect more violence.
"When you can no longer bamboozle people and still wish to coerce them, which US citizens want, there is no other path that violence."
Yes. Most don't see the violence because it's exported. That said, violence is perpetrated all over the planet, by ALL govts and most religions. Humans are, after all, humans; and, resources ARE necessary.
All fires eventually go out. Pointing at the obvious, that there's a fire, is, IMHO, silly. Again, just what are YOU doing about it?
Here's an idea: Ann Barnhardt @ http://barnhardt.biz/ , who closed down her futures brokerage because she refuses to function in a lawless and corrupt financial environement, has now declared (interview with Pollock) that she will no longer feed the Beast, no longer pay taxes. Her address is right on her site. When the regime enforcers arrive to do a Randy Weaver on her, I plan on being nearby. Perhaps other Patriots will be there as well. Meanwhile, invest in lead.
If America can't "bamboozle Black people" anymre, why are they voting Obama, again? Food stamps have not increased in value, only in participation. Black U/E is skyhigh. Obama won't even go near a Black neighborhood.
“Naturally the common people don’t want war. But after all, it is the
leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it’s always a
simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy or a
fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
for exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every
country.”
--- Hermann Goering, Hitler’s Reich Marshall, at the Nuremberg
Trials after World War II.
Man is still a savage. He just smells and dresses better now. Aliens know better than to contact us.
US citizens do want wars. They thrive of it.
In the US, the private sector derives its money from the public sector, which includes military warfare.
Private sector is leeching off the public sector.
Just on this site, how many US citizens kick start their adult life by joining the military, to get free healthcare, free tuition, veteran status (id est a certainty of job when back to home) and the joy of shooting easy enemies?
Reality is what it is.
AnAnonymous. Please don't forget that the "US citizens who kick start their adult life by joining the military" begin by risking their lives so pinheads like you can blow it out your ass in relative peace. Clearly, you aren't American. Aren't there soldiers in your country?
USMC Dad