This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Political Masters Of Parallel Universes
Submitted by Dmitry Orlov via Club Orlov blog,
Much as we may dislike the fact, the results from quantum physics are unequivocal: parallel universes do exist. Schrödinger's cat is both alive and dead, at the same time, while it exists as a probability distribution, which is resolved into either a live cat or a dead one by the act of opening the box and observing it. But until the observation is made, both parallel universes can be said to exist, and there is no way for us to know which one of them we inhabit.
Quantum effects dominate in the micro realm of subatomic particles. For instance, the laptop on which I am typing this contains millions of transistors which are created by implanting ions into silicon substrates to create patches with built-in electric fields and interconnecting these patches with etched aluminum wiring. Each transistor relies on the phenomenon of quantum tunneling: while in normal physics it is impossible for an electron to find itself on the wrong side of a built-in electric field, in quantum physics the electron is a probability distribution, not a particle, and quantum tunneling works reliably enough to support the entire electronics industry. But if you scale your circuit up, the chance of a pickup truck successfully “tunneling” through a brick wall becomes too minuscule to be of practical interest. It is still possible, but it would take anywhere between right now and several lifetimes of the universe hence to observe that result.
Oddly enough, such quantum effects are quite normal to observe within the political space. Here the physical objects involved are far too large to give rise to the parallel universes of quantum physics, but the narratives they give rise to are not. This is because the narratives are a matter of perception, and there can be historical periods, such as the present one, when the peephole through which the political establishment and the mainstream media allow us to see the world becomes so tiny that it becomes a toss-up as to whether or not any given photon will manage to find its way through it.
Here, reality becomes fractured into parallel universes as soon as we make the realization that we are being lied to. Were there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? No, and the vial of white powder which Colin Powell menacingly held up at the UN was fake. The Iraqi mobile biological weapons factories did not exist. Was Al Qaeda active in Iraq prior to the US invasion? No, we know that it wasn't. These lies are now known to be factual—uncontested, commonplace knowledge. Next: do we make the arbitrary leap of judgment and declare that that's all the lies we will have ever been told, or do we admit the possibility that this is only the tip of an iceberg of lies, that lying is a modus operandi for the operatives behind them? If we do, then, to be conservative, for every official narrative we must construct one or more unofficial but also plausible (and perhaps much more plausible) narratives. Each of them constitutes a parallel universe, and we can't know which of them we inhabit until some happy accident—a leak, an investigation, a damning bit of physical evidence, or an outright admission of complicity or guilt—collapses the probability waveform, destroying all the parallel universes but the real one.
Many people have been conditioned to think that this is the realm of “conspiracy theory.” Unfortunately, the term doesn't apply. First, the existence of a conspiracy has to be accepted as a given: nobody ever perpetrates a heinous act of murder, mayhem and destruction by telegraphing their intentions ahead of time. If they do, the event usually doesn't go off as planned, and in such cases it is usually announced that a conspiracy has been uncovered and a plot thwarted. Thus, the use of the term “conspiracy” is gratuitous; it goes without saying that there always is one. Secondly, the term “theory” is gratuitous as well: a theory is a mental construct designed to account for a given set of observations. But what if all you do is point out the observations (which are in the public domain, there for all to see) and make no effort whatsoever to account for them?
However, there is one theory that accounts for a very large class of such observations, and it is so simple that it is often overlooked. It is this: that the government and the official sources of information are normally lying. We already know that they have lied in the past (Iraqi WMD and al Qaeda in Iraq are two particularly well-known examples, but there are many others). The question then becomes, When did they stop lying (if in fact they did)? Was there a conspiracy to stop lying? There would have to have been one, because we certainly haven't heard any statements made by public officials to the effect that “We will now stop lying.” Or did they spontaneously all stop lying at the same time? The probability of that happening is pretty low; it could, of course happen—any time between right now and several lifetimes of the universe hence. So if you believe that they have indeed stopped lying, then I suppose that makes you a conspiracy theorist par excellence. The conservative assumption is that they are still lying.
There are lots of people who have been working to keep these parallel universes alive in one form or another, by collecting and collating bits of information, by offering partial explanations, by evaluating the official explanations as to their logical consistency. They have been doing this in spite of being ostracized as “conspiracy theorists.” To be fair, they have sometimes been glorified as “truth-seekers” or “truth-tellers” and that must provide an ego boost for some people. But really what they have been doing is generating, and sustaining, alternative narratives and keeping parallel universes alive, so that at some time in the future we will find out which one we have been inhabiting all along.
Some people make the mistake of refusing to listen and to explore these parallel universes, because it makes them ill at ease not to know which one they happen to inhabit. But if you accept the extreme likelihood that the official narrative is a bunch of lies concocted to hide the truth, then there is some comfort to be gained in at least knowing something that might not be a lie. Once the initial hesitation is past, it becomes a fun, if somewhat macabre, hobby, because puzzling evidence jumps out at you just about everywhere you care to look.
An important precondition of being able to interpret the result of Schrödinger's thought experiment is being able to figure out what a cat looks like. Here is a specific example. Currently, there are two parallel universes. In one, Russian troops have invaded Ukraine. In the other, Russian troops did not invade Ukraine. What makes this difficult is understanding what is meant by Russian troops. There are Russians in eastern Ukraine. There are troops in eastern Ukraine. A lot of the troops in eastern Ukraine are in fact Russian. But there are no Russian troops in eastern Ukraine. Get it? To qualify as actual Russian troops, they would have to have enlisted in the Russian military, and would have to take their orders through the Russian chain of command. And these ones obviously don't. There is a strong political connection with Russia, but the military one is tenuous. The latest “proof” of Russian invasion, offered by the Ukraine's president Poroshenko in Munich, consists of some Russian internal passports and military service certificates found in eastern Ukraine. Funny thing is, when you are inducted into the Russian military, you have to surrender those civilian documents. Sometimes a perfectly viable, though quite short-lived parallel universe can be concocted by twisting things in small ways.
But most of the time a parallel universe pops into existence when things get twisted in impressively brazen and shameless ways. A lot of people start with 9/11. The twin towers collapsed because they were hit by jet airliners because, you see, kerosene melts steel. Was it special, magic kerosene, and were the buildings were made of special, magic steel? Maybe that's why since then skyscrapers can't be insured against fire any more. Previously it was thought that skyscrapers can't collapse due to fire because they are made of steel, and a hydrocarbon-based fire isn't hot enough to melt it. What fools those civil engineers must have been! Turns out, all you need is some kerosene!
Then the two skyscrapers spontaneously collapsed into their own footprints—all on their own—and so the entire industry of demolition experts (whose job is to mine tall buildings with explosive charges and detonate them under computer control to keep the buildings from toppling over) has since been retired. Skyscrapers are now known to pose a huge fire hazard due to the melty steel of which they are made, and they must all be demolished right away. But don't hire any demolition experts, since we now know that their entire industry was a hoax, because skyscrapers collapse into their own footprints all by themselves. Just take some retired old jets from American Airlines (they have plenty of them) and fly them into the skyscrapers unmanned using remote fly by wire technology.
Another “plane” hit the Pentagon. That plane had no engines, since none were found (but in spite of this it not only flew, but executed a pirouette worthy of a jet fighter). Also, it had no seats (the passengers must have mimed sitting down and buckling up) and no luggage (they must have traveled really light). The perpetrators' identity was found out thanks to a passport found at the World Trade Center site. It was a magic passport; unlike the steel girders of the twin towers, a kerosene fireball could not even singe it.
Fast-forward to the latest staged atrocity: the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris. The perpetrators were clearly well-trained, disciplined commandos, who executed a flawless mission, making it likely that they were special service people of some country or other. But then one of them magically forgot his ID in the getaway car—just like that passport magically found in the wreckage of 9/11. (Do commandos take their civilian IDs with them when they go on a secret mission?) And then the alleged driver of the getaway car surrendered to the police, saying that he has an ironclad alibi. The fact that he surrendered was reported in the media; the reason why he surrendered was not. And then the person charged with conducting the investigation killed himself while working on his report. Did his report agree with the official narrative?
Reminds me of another staged atrocity: the Boston Marathon bombing. The very large number of special ops people milling about the scene before the firecrackers went off has been noted, but clearly they had nothing to do with it—they were just enjoying their day off, all dressed the same. The two patsies who were blamed for it—the Tsarnaev brothers—were well-known to the FBI. After the firecrackers went off, a crew of specialists immediately descended on the scene, with actors posing as victims and fake blood being tossed about. Video evidence shows them taking a long time to stage photo-ops of the supposed atrocity.
The ensuing media campaign with “Boston Strong” stickers was identical to the “Je suis Carlie” campaign following the Charlie Hebdo event. And as with the Charlie Hebdo event, there was a concerted effort to kill the alleged perpetrators before they could answer any questions in ways that might contradict the official story. In the case of the Tsarnaev brothers, the attempt to kill the younger one failed. The boat in which he was hiding, scared and unarmed, was riddled with bullets, and after he surrendered an unexplained emergency tracheotomy was performed on him, but he is still alive, and defiant of the efforts to frame him.
But the most interesting part came after the event, when Boston was placed under military occupation, with residents forced to stay inside their houses for fear of being machine-gunned down by troops rumbling down the streets in APCs, supposedly in pursuit of a couple of kids. The real rationale for the event was to impose martial law on Boston (the cradle of the American Revolution) on Patriot's Day (which commemorates a signal event that started it). If you read into these events just a little bit, you just might come to the conclusion that the US is no longer a constitutional democracy but a military dictatorship and a police state ruled by an oligarchy that likes to stage gruesome special events to show just how far above the law it really is.
Or take the Malaysian Airlines MH-17 shoot-down over Eastern Ukraine last year. Again, the media campaign was clearly set up before the event. The clairvoyant western observers know who to blame: it was the “Russian-backed rebels” and they used a weapons system provided by Russia. This was repeated endlessly, using a technique used in advertising: “proof by repetition.” Never mind that the rebels had no ability to shoot down that airliner. But the truth has been slowly dribbling out. Flight MH-17 was shot down by a Ukrainian jet fighter from Dnepropetrovsk using an air-to-air missile. (The rebels had no aircraft; why was it armed with one?) The name of the pilot is now known. The person who identified him is in Russia, in witness protection. Russian investigators are pursuing leads, and there is a good chance that we will eventually find out who issued the criminal orders.
I could keep going in this vein for a really long time, piling bits of puzzling evidence upon other bits of puzzling evidence. But the whole point of this exercise is to try to get across to you of one very simple, basic point: if you insist on ignoring all the obvious lies you've been told for years and years and dismiss everything but the official narrative as a “conspiracy theory,” then that makes you something of a mind control victim. And I don't want you to be a victim.
One last thing: if you find yourself living in a Schrödinger box, do what you can to avoid ending up dead. I'll leave it up to you to work out out the details of that, but the hint is simple: your likelihood of ending up dead is higher if you believe in lies. Don't be a dead cat
»
- 7784 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
This is one of the funniest and most incisive blogs I have seen in a long time!
So Elizabeth Skin Walker Police Warren isn't as hot as we thought?
Having studied Abraham-Hicks, The Secret, and much else for years it all ties into this article, and seems to point to the simple truth as this - wether you see a live kitty or a dead one really is simply your choice of what you envision prior. The book 'Right to Be Rich' by William Wallace a Christian Socialist taught the secret as such envision the reality you desire no matter what the physical presents and Creation will warp to make that reality real. A psychological experiment of having people sit and imagine playing basketball had them improve on par with those who physically practised!! Think about that a minute..
Yeah, let me just sit here and imagine myself getting fat backside airs, and my airs will improve... (not! purely envisioned skills =/= hard earned muscle memory)
I do agree that visualization, or the act of envisioning a reality in order to realize it, does help realize it. It's how we acheive things, by visualizing ("fantasizing") the outcomes we desire to be 'reality'. Actions, however, are required to turn thoughts into events.
Sk8boarder is correct. Attainment of enlightenment depends on three factors: Will, Compassion, and Skillful Means.
Visualisation, which would be a poor substitute for true Will, which also predicates action.
(to author of article, not to TP)
PLEASE, do not cause me further physical pain by attempting to cast social phenomena into an explanation using physics. You have no idea how much of an idiot it makes you out to be.
PLEASE shut up ! He's actually correct in his comparisons. Of course, you have to know some physics to realize that...
Using Physics to explain Philosophy is..........well....................
Like the science of Economics.
Verbal concepts to explain mathematics to the layman may contain allegory to contain the concept, but one can never be confused for the other.
Except by the confused.
(to Automatic Choke)
PLEASE read the definition of Literary Allegory.
If that does not clear things up, please understand the following:
Orwell's "Animal Farm" was not about Animals.
Golding's "Lord of the Flies" wasn't a pre-TV attempt at writing the mini series "Lost"
"The Wizard of Oz" wasn't about Ruby slippers (actually they were silver, and quite allegorical to the Eastern Oligarcy's banking system at the time)
THAT HELP AT ALL???
The only problem with Orlov's article is that the author forgot the truly dismal level of education in contemporary America. When you're bringing quantum physics metaphors to a population which cannot understand basic mathematical concepts (like compound interest, or exponential functions), the message is wasted...
The multiple universe theory is nonsensical as it violates the non-cummutation principle that has been observed consistently.
Either way, this is a funny article. The writer deserves a pay raise.
Exactly. Quantum conectivity prevents the many universe theory from being true. The number of possible universes going forward is very limited. Possibly equal to one.
I believe it should be multiple dimensions, not universes. And you don't understand math/physics/quantum chemistry if you don't understand that concept.
A universe is a 4 dimensional object in mathematics.
People who believe in alternate universes are indulging in wishful thinking.
They would like to believe that there is another universe where they have a job, they don't live in their parents basement, and they get laid at least once in their lives.
I would disagree on principle:
For every yes in your life, what happened to the no?
For every no in your life, what happened to the yes?
For every lack of a decision, what happened then?
Perhaps that is but another extension of Schrodinger's Cat.
Yep, they tell us that there are at least two universes going forward: a Republican one and a Democratic one....
she is....and isn't. it depends on the amount of alcohol consumed.
but either way you'll be sorry the next morning.
They are not PARALLEL universes, they are ALTERNATE universes. The issue (for humanity) is the INTERSECTION with the EVIL twin, and 2 distinct universes occupying the same and space. Perhaps someone who studied physics as more than a prerequisite for something else could better explain.
I'm making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do... www.globe-report.com
Red Meat, come and get it!!!!
I guess I'm stuck in the parallel universe where this article is a bunch of stupid shit........
Easy to spot. Just answer, in your parallel universe, does Israel have a right to exist?
This article is fail. I always carry my ID on my ghost op's. ;)
Orlov has been on fire lately. I know he's living on a sail boat currently. Hope he'll stay safe.
He should get the hell out of the USA and join Pepe and Tony Cartalucci in East Asia.
In the alternative universe Hillary is smart, cool, and super hottt.
I'd settle for a universe where she isn't an insane, theiving, lying gash.
FVCKING FANTASTIC post. This is something everyone's gotta read.
There is NO proof of parallel universes. It's just a mass of mathematical philosophical musings which can not be proven or disproven.
Explain quantum mechanical tunneling. Or how the electronics in your cell phone work.
They exist.
...transistors exist?
Not really. It's just engineering grandstanding... iPhone 6 runs on tiny vacuum tubes, actually...
theres a lot of work to be done to solidify the theories, but quatum teleportation exists.
I worked on an STM (scanning tunneling microscope) project.
one nanosecond somethings here....then it just appears over there.
"Political Masters Of Parallel Universes"
In ALL universes they are thieves, and murderers.
The banksters need to repay us.
And "String Theory" it what one needs to see Zion in all the universes.
whats the probability that a probablistic model will converge on reality? forty freakin 2... really i pray i just don't get it and that I actually can beam over to another planet without evil. watch the hand
I always hear the smear of conspiracy theorist, but what I never hear is,"Ok, let's take the time to examine your contradictory assertion using a disinterested third party to really examine what you have to say."
I never hear anyone say, "Let's examine all possible evidence."
Also, regarding the Boston Marathon. The Boston Fire and Police had practiced the identical scenario in February that occurred on the day of the bombing. They were also scheduled to run the scenario in May I believe. I thought it was awfully considerate of the "terrorist" to follow the exact script of the planned exercises. Doesn't anyone wonder how within hours of these false flags that the police and military know exactly who was involved and where all the additional bombs were placed? Damn fine police work I say.
How does this affect our relationship with Kanye West?
Is he the guy married to Kim Kardashian's ass?
Himself first.
Wall Street's quanta are broken and cannot be fixed. Therefore, the cat is dead and so is civilization becase the false narritive has been extended for far too long since Lehman's Chapter 11 September 18th 2008. Even Greenspan has come out of the woodwork to say the EU is finished. What more does anybody want?
I don't care what you say. You're not going to pull a fast one on me.
So, if parallel universes exist and we live in an Omniverse of 10E500 universes, then maybe Jesus's return got delayed because he came back to another Earth? He needed a better Galactic Garman, I supposed. ;-) ;-)
You'd have to ask the String Theory specialists or Sci-Fi/Trekkie experts, but it seems like a difficult thing to do, to travel forward and backward in time, without ending up in another universe. That would reconcile the classic "Grandfather Paradox": It doesn't matter that you killed your grandfather, because you've done it in another universe.
Ok, it must be late, and what to I know about physics.
"Ok, it must be late, and what to I know about physics."
More than this author, I'll bet.
Things get a bit more interesting if there is only one universe. In that case, everything must be self-consistent, so you can't kill your grandfather. Something will stop you if you try. Maybe a meteor will kill you first, or you will kill your grandfather's lost twin (there's always a nonzero chance he had one). You can't change something that is certain about the past because that would make the universe inconsistent. OTOH, you can participate in the past by "changing" things that are uncertain. You don't need to worry about stepping on a butterfly. Physics references: Bill+Ted, Twelve Monkeys, The Philadelphia Experiment.
Now take it one step deeper, and you can change ANYTHING about the past, present, or future that is uncertain. You simply resolve to force a time paradox unless the wave function collapses in your favor, i.e. "I want Russia to reveal the truth about 9/11 tomorrow or I'll go back in time and kill my grandfather". If getting 9/11 truth is the "path of least resistence" to stopping you, then its uncertainty is likely to be resolved in your favor. Full-on quantum reality control, bitchez! Of course, you also increase your chance of being hit by a meteor, so don't push your luck. There is no such thing as a free lunch.
Emperor Palpatine aside, I think precog is generally associated with the forces of Light. Just as well, since it comes with a badass hidden superpower.
'
'
'
Never forget seeing the Pentagon hole and saying to my then girlfriend…
"Where are the wings? You know, like when Wile E. Coyote goes through a wall?"
Where was all the rubble from buildings a thousand feet tall?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7uIDAbMCz4
•?•
V-V
Serious test of your hypothesis here:
You can do this for yourself. Your conclusions should be your own.
Go to your local big box home store.
Pick up a cinder block.
Take it home.
Hold it over your head.
Drop it with force onto the concrete.
After it shatters, try and put it back together.
Note that no many how many pieces you gather, you cannot reassemble the cinder block. There will be pieces missing.
Where did all the missing pieces go?
They went the same place as the wreckage to the towers... It turned into dust and blew away.
Next up... what happened to the wings?
You can try this experiment at home.
Get an empty aluminum soda can.
Use a nail to poke some holes around the top edge of the can - so air can enter the can by multiple routes.
Fill the can with gasoline, or some other petroleum, until it almost leaks out the holes.
Place the can in a fire-safe place, by surrounding it with bricks and/or dirt.
Light the gasoline on fire.
Wait for all the gasoline to be burned up.
Go look for your can.
Where did it go?
Same place as the wings did. It will be an aluminum collored stain on the brick if it is visible at all, plus an irregular mass of liquidated alluminum.
I am sorry but this does not even come close to moving me toward accepting the official narrative.
"One last thing: if you find yourself living in a Schrödinger box, do what you can to avoid ending up dead. I'll leave it up to you to work out out the details of that, but the hint is simple: your likelihood of ending up dead is higher if you believe in lies. Don't be a dead cat"
"Hi, I'm a cool-cat Rob Lowe, and I read Zerohedge"
"Hi. I'm a dead-cat Rob Lowe, and I watch the MSM on cable"
"Zerohedge brings me that latest in key world events, markets and finance. It's cool, and it's free."
"Don't be like the dead-cat me. Read Zerohedge"
p.s. In reference to the author's comment on "theories": as I posted* some weeks ago...
I ask that people learn the subtle but important differences between concepts like Hypothesis, Postulate, Theorem, Principle, Rule, Theory, and Law. Unfortunately all too many people are either too ignorant or too lazy, and use the term "Theory" for almost everything.
That would be like calling everyone in the military a "General". If it helps, think of a Hypothesis or Postulate as Privates, who (if tested and proven worthy) might promoted to officer rank of Lieutenant, Captain, Major, Colonel or General. So it is with the above terms.
* Tue, 01/20/2015 - 12:37 | 5684423 new noben
Stop with all the logic.
It is a central plank of Neuro-Linguistic-Programming that people respond more to emotive language than to logic. The vast, vast majority of people simply are not analytical.
"Each transistor relies on the phenomenon of quantum tunneling: while in normal physics it is impossible for an electron to find itself on the wrong side of a built-in electric field, in quantum physics the electron is a probability distribution, not a particle, and quantum tunneling works reliably enough to support the entire electronics industry."
Sorry, but this is just wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling
ApplicationsTunnelling occurs with barriers of thickness around 1-3 nm and smaller,[12] but is the cause of some important macroscopic physical phenomena. For instance, tunnelling is a source of current leakage in very-large-scale integration (VLSI) electronics and results in the substantial power drain and heating effects that plague high-speed and mobile technology; it is considered the lower limit on how small computer chips can be made.[13]
In short, a transistor is an electrical device. Make them too small, and they won't work properly because tunneling interferes with their operation. Far cry from being the basis on which they operate.
"But until the observation is made, both parallel universes can be said to exist, and there is no way for us to know which one of them we inhabit."
Sure, you can say that, but it doesn't make it so. Far better to reflect on the fact that this was a thought experiment intended to illustrate the problem of observation on the micro-scale (collapse of the wave function). In OUR world, the cat is always in one of two states. The fact that we don't know which one merely implies that we haven't looked yet - not that parallel universes are generated by our lack of knowledge. Even if they were, we'd have no way of knowing it, so what difference would it make?
Non sunt multiplicanda entia sine necessitate, bitchez.
Might also want to add that even Einstein backed off in his later years from a central point of Relativity - that the observer creates the reality, rather than interprets it.
All I know is that my radar was ON with the Newtown Shooting and Boston Bombings.
Those and what I saw immediately really rattled me. I dithered between 'fuck me!' and 'those poor people'.
I now accept that EVERYTHING we're told by the news, government, and any 'authority' is complete and utter horse shit.
The Malaysian planes going down were viewed as 'Meh'.
But I'm fully aware that our war criminal government has absolutely no problem with killing hundreds of innocent civilians on a whim.
As one who's already had a chat with NSAGuy and FBIGuy...I figure I may be the cause of hundreds of others deaths one day...and I regret that.
Inviting them back to the house for more coffee and chat are ya?
Sorry, my unnessary snarkiness.
The reality of enforcing pure, free speech.
"if you insist on ignoring all the obvious lies you've been told for years and years and dismiss everything but the official narrative as a “conspiracy theory,” then that makes you something of a mind control victim. And I don't want you to be a victim."
It's not the official lies that are most dangerous, it's the willingness to take your own beliefs so seriously that you'll accept the obvious lies that support them, regardless of their source. That's the worst kind of mind control, because you're doing it to yourself.
Skilled Tavistock posters can turn you inside out & upside down. Why are you so dangerous to yourself? Just fucking with you. No harm intended. But, we are trained. Winks.
Psychoanalytical theory is gated under a onion ring of conspiracy theories. Don't work up tears when cutting the onion. Its fraud in plane daylight. SEC is getting rabbit holed from the new gay marriage laws under SOTUS. How many will be dragged or drugged behind a Chevy Volt? Between a scale or 1 to 10, ten highest in fear; how do you rate economy?
Obama has killed all coke plants [electric means coal via Electric cars development]. Are you going to buy a 6.2L SUV or a Hybrid POS that you have to plug into your home? Using taxpayer monies to fund costs? Remember you are the taxpayer.
Obama To States: Shut Down Coal Plants Or Else
How will the electric cars survive? You just don’t buy one. Even if the Government gives it to you for free. Nothing in life is free. Especially coal driven cars that require to meet MPG Copenhagen carbon emission tax standards. Fuck off Obama!
No cigarettes, no mobile phone, no fucking pimping tank to pledge extra Natgas pressure. Boom
Natural Gas-Powered Car Explodes on Russian Highway
If you want to have fun watching the natgas weather channel. US Natural Gas Weather Forecast
http://www.natgasweather.com/
I expect more , for twenty bucks a month.
http://www.wunderground.com/
At no cost to the user.
(I am trying to get the free word out of my vocabulary.)
100% pure propaganda shit from a 100% pure Russian propagandist asshole.
Dmitri,
Tell it to all the Russian mothers whose conscripted sons were returned to them in bags as a startlingly large series of 'training accidents'.
Strange that you admit that governments lie but seem not to apply the same logic to ALL GOVERNMENTS.
At best, anything a government says should be construed as a description of what that government WISHES were true.
At worst what the government says is a deliberate deception for the purpose of committing a crime.
Decide for yourself how often the best case occurs with any particular government vs the worst case.
But it should not be lost on you, Dmitri, that when a government speaks the ONLY THING you can be ABSOLUTELY SURE OF...is that they are not describing the all the facts they know with accuracy.
Can you provide some evidence of your statement? I think your point is valid- all governments lie but in order for me to believe this statement and make the jump to the conclusion that Russian troops are fighting and dying in Ukraine I need more than this.