GostHacked

So the video of the jet hitting it is fake? It was released by the pentagon sometime last year. Who knew? That video did not prove either side. It was not clear enough to show a plane hit the Pentagon. There was not enough evidence to show that there was NO plane hitting it. The video is utterly useless for both camps for it does not show anything that has not already been shown before. I want to see the taped from the transportation authorities (hiway cams) the gas station cams that were close by and the hotel cameras must have captured some of the plane ... but we have yet to see ANY SUBSTANTIAL PROOF that a plane hit the Pentagon. If it was a plane, it was NOT a 767 like they claim.

Protect yourself and stand up from the enemies that are foreign AND DOMESTIC. And the rest of that statement is kind of retarded (follow blindly of your 'elected' leader.

I thought this was debunked some time ago. It was an artistic display at a show somewhere. http://www.brandejs.ca/portfolio5/gp01.php explains it all. No need to worry, these are not true biological engineered lifeforms.

Well that is just it is it not? MSM has been dumbed down so much that there is no intelligent REAL reporting. I don't see any MSM reporters getting all bent out of shape when they deliver a story that could really affect them as well. But, it's just business as usual. If you had a televised event of every dead soldier comming home, then you would take notice it on it more. But since you don't see the faces of those soldiers, you are disconnected from that altogether having no real feelings about the event, then switching the channel to watch some dumb celebrity. Same goes with our financial institutions. You hear it all the time that bad things go on in banks, but nothing and no one is held accountable for it. This is the problem with treating the corporation as a 'person' (in the US anyways, not sure about Canada and the rest of the world)

Do you think your hair stylist should pay you because you have to drive to the salon? Incidently, I used to use ATMs all of the time until they started changing those transaction fees. Since then I have refused to use them because the cost is too high to justify the convience. Sometimes I am a bit short of cash but I can live with it. When I do need cash I simply use my debit card at Safeway and ask for extra cash back. Bottom line: ATMs are not an essential service. The only people that pay these fees are people that are not capable of managing money. I don't think I should have to pay more in service charges because other people cannot manage their finances You do realize that the bank or the Safeway you shop at charges a fee for you to withdraw money? Then the bank charges you money for when you go to another ATM. Also I bank with Royal Bank. I get a charge when I want to deposit money through a lice teller person. But no charge on the ATM to deposit stuff. So this is all nickeling and diming me out of money. I get charged a 1.50 when using another ATM other than Royal's, the 3rd party AND Royal with BOTH charge me a 1.50 for these transactions. So how is that fair?

I have a problem with you here on this Kimmy EDIT(actually with everyone and polls), . Polls are useless, I don't post them or link them. Useless. Even Alex Jones's (I must admit I am a fan of Alex Jones) polls are doctored or made in a way to prove whatever the hell you want to prove. Just use the stats you want to use. Just like MSM on their POLL OF THE DAY concerining some dumb thing about a celebrity. Out of the people I know.. and I am going to guess here most of us think that the US government let it happen or took part. I'd say about 60% of my friends think this way. This is all here in Ottawa ON. So yeah this poll proves you wrong, but again polls are useless. You recall the Republican's TV ads about the Congressional Elections? Using a ticking sound and images with sound bites from Osama, and his croonies, ending with an image of a mushroom cloud? Same line of thinking. Everyone does it, but since Alex Jones is a nutcase (right?? RIGHT?) then his stuff is obviously laughable (ever watch Bill O'Rielly?) to the point where it is utter nonesense. I read cnn.com cbc.ca ctv.ca bbc.co.uk infowars.net freepressinternational.com (warning Kimmy this site is way too over the top for you, best off to skip this one) drudgereport.com (much more to list than I can recall at the moment) in paper form Ottawa Citizen Ottawa Sun Metro and 24 (both free mini newspapers) EDIT - I wish there was more variety in MSM news, but there is none. They all rely on Reuters, or AP or other news spin bins. Why not go so some real investigative reporting like they used to. Call out the criminals in our governments and financial institutions and corportations. Hence the reason I seek out the other news. But strange thing is, that Alex Jones and et al posting links from those news agencies of REUTERS, AP, CNN and the like. He for the most part shows the hipocracy of the 4th Branch of Government in the US. Report A, then deny A by saying we said B, but doing C. I've already posted this topic here...... http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=6091

Gawd, you actually think a politician mispeaking is proof of something? He probably meant to 'brought down' - not 'shot down'. There is misspeaking, then there is blatant lying through the teeth. Did you happen to watch the last article I posted? But, yes you are correct, he could have used the term 'missle' to replace the plane. But why use that term at all? He has been caught in his own lies. Ray McGovern confronted him in that clip. A 25 yr CIA veteran. Chances are McGovern would know a few things that Rumsfeld does not (yeah and vice versa). Wait,,, scrap all that. Tired of even bending to the right a little, hurts my back some. Tired of compromising with people who cannot see what is really is they are seeing. You wanted 'proof', I provided my 'proof', but you easily debunked it. So as of this point I have nothing else on that. Back to the NAU Program already in progress...

Canadian Blue http://www.democrats.com/node/5056 - said plane in Pensylvania was shot downafter an hopur search I have not found the other link yet about the missle. i've seen it Let's not forget this wonderful moment. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDABe8AOuCQ

These 'credits' you speak of. Are they essentially the same as what Kyoto outlines? Buying credits to be allowed to pollute more? Buy those credits from other companies that reach their goals or even reduce the level below what is allowed? I am not understanding how this will reduce the greenhouse gasses. Seems like the levels will be the same, but it is just shifted around to other companies. I'd say be green anyways, no matter what. If you manage to lower your emmissions, then you should be held to those new standards. That seems like the only way to really lower it across the board. Also it would depend on what type of pollution is being emmited by these companies. Company A beat the pollution standard by 20% (let's say sulphur and carbon dioxide) Company B increased it's pollution output by 20% (but it is all carbon dioxide) I know this is a weak example, but it at least points out, that not all pollution is the same. I used to live in Sudbury Ontario, and if you know anything about the city there is plenty of pollution from both mining outfits. Inco and Falconbridge. So there is ALOT of sulphur that is spewed into the air. It has gotten better over the years, but I recall more often than not, the sulphur in the air. Ever breath that shit? I am expecting to develop some wierd desiese that is localized to just Sudburians. I think this is another way of not really reducing it, but shifting it around.

Some of you want to wait for the North American Union to be in place before you make a judgement? Gyuser said Ask those in the European Union and ask them if it all was a good idea. I bet you will get many negative responsed from the general public, but nothing but praise from bankers, finnancial institutions, (the new European Government all controlled by Brussells now) and huge corporations. Like the beginnings of the European Union, it is not government that proposed it. It was private corporations. They influenced governments in Europe into thinking it is a good idea. But for who? You forgot about Poland Mexico. Not so culturaly alike. So that gets kicked to the curb right fast. HTTP://WWW.SPP.GOV is where you need to be at to read about it. (btw anyone a gammer here? play Ghost Recon : Advanced Warfighter - premisis is a prosperity and security agreement between Mexico. US and Canada where you are in Mexico to rescue the VP of the US and stuff because the meeting was interrupted by 'rebels'.. the Canadian Prime Minister is killed in the game!) Now this kind of took place but it was Martin at the time, and we know he is still alive)

Wow. Maybe next you could focus your finely tuned analytical prowess on world hunger. World Hunger? More like a problem with food distrobution (check your local grocery store for world hunger solutions). But alas that is another thread altogether!

Not just the Democrats. You should keep an eye on ALL members of Government. I mean ALL of them.

This proves you are NOT TOTALY FREE. You are a slave to the New World Order. European Union, African Union, North American Union, (soon a pan asian union and South America) The world is getting 'divided' up into 5 regions on the planet, then eventually replaced by a World Government. The UN is a part of that process. Polynewbie is correct in many things he has stated on MLW. I have read it, and seen the progression of all this. Maybe you have not because you are too busy watching the clap trap on TV that they put there to make you not even to want to think about what really is going on. Since the European Union came to Britian, she has lost total control over it's country. All decisions are now made by Brussels. 9/11. Nine, one, one. EMERGENCY!!! That day was a drastic turning point to this New World Order.

Are you suggesting the Americans are nothing but Good? Try something a little meatier. It seems like no country is 'good' anymore. But there are a varying degrees of badness across the board. And the top 5 would be (im my personal view and in no particular order then) US, China, Maybe I should move to Sweden or Switzerland. Nice neutral countries. I think they got it right.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/oba...assa/index.html Looks like none of it was actually true. I wonder who in their 'right' mind would conjure up these lies. Since Obama was born in another country, is there even a chance he can be President? I thought since Ahnold does not have a chance untill the rules/qualifications change for becomming president, Obama is in the same position. They can be state heads, congress/house reps, but not the President, for the fact they were not born in the US. Is Arnold a naturalized American? If Obama gets the Presidential nod, and Arnold does not, that just does not make sense to me. Maybe someone can enlighten me on this situation. Has anyone even considered it?

Part of the problem is that the Western Corpoorations have moved their manufacturing processes over to China for it is cheaper for them to make our cheap crap. Most of your computer stuff comes from China, so it is not hard to surmise that China will eventually get better weapons for the military due to this. I am sure China was just not looking at an economic advantage, but also a technological one. The US simply wants to deny anyone to space and the strategic importance that is space. HERE COMES A CHALLENGER !!! I can hear the rhetoric now against China. ohhh bad China.

Not sure how it plays out here in Canada, but in the US, it seems there is no law that requires you to pay taxes. There is a clip on CNN's website today. (only video, no text link) go and see it. So maybe we should actually look into this and see if we are legaly obligated to pay taxes (Canada and the US) Ok we are forced to pay taxes. What if there is no law about paying taxes? Then everyone sent to jail on tax evasion would have been wrong. I have not done my taxes in the last 3 years, lazy more than anything. I know if I owed the government they would be on my ass in a hurry. But since the last 3 years I know I would have gotten money back, I have not been bothered. Does that not sound strange to you?

Black Dog Don't forget -unpatriotic -shortsighted -blind -with us, or against us, We were told to -have patience -look at the long term -stay the course -i am the decider And now your US civil liberties are being eroded away, day by day. I can go on and on. I can elaborate further on this if anyone wants to. I should provide links, but people hate it when the same monkey feces they threw around, gets tossed BACK in their faces.

Congratulations. One of those sentences has correct grammer and syntax. Oops, no, it's the question at the end. Could you take some lessons either in Canadian or in English? In Canadian OR in English?? This makes as much sense to me as Polynewbie's post to you. This bothers me quite a bit. Pick on the grammer and syntax instead of the meat of the post. How about Polynewbie learn English... or perhands Canadian English. Cheney/Oil/Haliburton/Blackwater/big banks/military industrial complex. I think this is what he was getting at. Everyone in those companies high up are making a KILLING off the 'war on terror'. How many more billions need to be spent on the 'war on terror'. Or the better question is, where is the money comming from to pay for this new 'war on terror'. It seems like the US is borowing against 2 future generations. The reason I think countries are getting together is to fight this new imperialism. The US has been at this for the last 40 years. Venezuela is considered BAD in the US's eye. Pesky Venezuelans actually voted Hugo Chavez into office. Go figure. Those 'idiots' know nothing now right? Same with Iran? Iran has seen the US try to change it. Ousting the Sha (sp) back in the late 70's. Failed embassy rescue. Ect. All the countries that seem to be getting together on the same page are those that the US has pissed off, and they will not stand for it anymore. I am happy this is happening. Wilber Sometimes you have to work with what you got. And they are making the best of it with what they have. Also by that statement, you can say Agree to thwart 'terrorist states' my ass, more live filling their own pockets. All they need is oil, and without invading, there will be no revenues. Iran and Venezuela are offering something other than what the US provides. Can you force countries to deal with only the US or only Iran? Nope.

And what kind of case was brought against Saddam Hussein of Iraq? And how much of that 'case' is actually left. Most of it was debunked and considered fake and useless information. But Iraq was still invaded with faulity intelligence. Well maybe not faulty, but definately hand picked to prove a point. And now you will see more rhetoric on Iran than you did with Iraq. Hell, Bush already started LAST year with the push for Iran buy just mentioning them all the time in any speech. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/13/Bus...o.ap/index.html If you don't like my plan, then tell me your plan. <------ This is your CIC people. Evan at this point, he will not listen to others. Just his appointed people and close allies in the government. And you know that 20,000 more troops just bring the troop level in Iraq up to the level they were a couple years ago. Which was lover than the initial invasion force. PATCH work indeed. Another failed attempt. Eat my words, if I am wrong and this sovled things. I WILL EAT MY WORDS. Really I will. I will print this post off, EAT IT, record it, and upload it for all to see. But if I am right, will you eat YOUR words???

Remember that next time you go fill up your car at the petrol station.

Racial slurs ain't cool. Whatever your opinions, surely you can voice them without invoking race. I did not see it as a racial slur, but more of a hit on the ignorant. He would have spelled it out if he wanted to but using an asterix clearly shows he had something else in mind. He is saying, since they are BLACK or MUSLIM or whatever .. clearly not a WASP (I actually got called that on a tech call once, then I asked what the hell it meant, to which the caller replies White Anglo Saxon Prodistant....) people will not care about it at all. THAT is what he is saying. I am amazed that people just read what is up there without actually reading the thread and how his contextual reply is not a racial slur. And those warlords/al-qaeda/terrorists that the US was after? They did not get a SINGLE one of them. Not one. What a freaking waste of resources.

blackasshit??? Don't get yourself banned for that remark. It is a test for you. To see if you can find it yourself. And since you easily did, others can do the same to educate themselves on the topic. People need to know this skill. The skill of informing themselves and not letting the media and the government shove lies down your throat. Go with what YOU see out there. When Bush llies about things and then lies about the lies, and yet you STILL swallow every little bit of it, you need to give your head a shake. Or maybe head to the bathroom to purge yourself. Something satisfying in looking and searching for answers. Something that only you can do for yourself. Don't expect the: and I will use Black Dog's: claptrap media to do it for you. When is the last time you saw real news and real reporters. Investigative reporting. Not some 'talking points memo' slantspin on daily events. http://www.greenleft.org.au/2002/506/27605\ From this article I looked for the LA Times artile. Found it archived here. http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2000/msg00776.html Fringe claims indeed. OH and hypocracy. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...ticle328703.ece White Phosphourus used in Iraq BY the US military.

Let's show some of this. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html Let me point it out. Degraded meaning, NOT as effective, if effective at all. But if you read on you get... OH really? Not useable? Some threat. But then after a while when this proved to be a dead end, Bush just said that the WMDs were not really the point anyways. And it's not like the US did not themselves use WMDs in Iraq. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4417024.stm http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...ticle328703.ece

I'm not asking whether Bush should be impeached, but whether it's feasible. Feasible in what way? Money to investigate? Can't get people to testify. There is more evidence here than a smoking cigar. And judging by how things are going? I'd say that is more evidence than what is needed. Yes it is feasible. Just remember what Clinton was impeached for, and you should be shaking your head in disbelief that Bush has not had a serious attempt on him to bring him down. Not sure how that would have manifested. Also if Bush had a trial for impeachment, many many behind the scenes people would be testifying. That could get ugly. That is not favoured by the current Administration. Saddam was not a imminent direct threat to the US. Saddam was NOT working with Al-Qeada. Saddam could not get a WMD program off the ground after the first Gulf War. Saddam did not get yellowcake from Africa. 10 years of sanctions. Two no fly zones. However Saddam used chemical weapons on the Kurds that the US gave them during then 80s. Saddam was a close ally of the US in the 80s (Remember the Shah of Iran and the stand off?) Saddam was not a threat. The war was illegal, Bush (and now I will say Cheney) should be impeached.