UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN



 Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus > UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 3

1

 

2

 

3

 
Topic: Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus
User: "Dr. Bipolar"
Date: 19 Jan 2007 10:57:01 PM
Object: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.
Want to know what "UFOs" are doing buzzing over Iran, Turkey, and
Russia? And how they may be connected to Bush's rapid naval buildup in
the Persian Gulf region?
I've spent hours trying to get some answers to those questons and have
a real sore ***** and aching fingers after working on a long research
piece at my blog. Make me happy and go there and read it. :))~
It may leave you with a very uncomfortable feeling for the Springtime.
We're heading into more trouble than you can shake ten Tom Delays at.
It's all there for you to read and consider...and be shocked to know
how close we are to all hell descending...I kid you not. Hell
descending...
http://hotroastednewz.blogspot.com/
Dr. Bipolar
.

User: ""

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 30 Jan 2007 10:40:08 PM
God is inside that UFO watching...watching....
.
User: "fuck-a-doodle-loooo"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 04 Feb 2007 04:11:36 AM
some swap gas reflected light from Venus
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 000710-0, 03/02/2007
Tested on: 4/02/2007 9:11:36 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 04 Feb 2007 05:54:01 AM
I don't believe it. You had fart gas ignite at a swap meet and a chick
named Venus shone a light on it? Sounds kinky, but far fetched to me.
"*****-a-doodle-loooo" <*****@a-doodle-loo.net.ooo> wrote in message
news:eq4bgn$kqk$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...

some swap gas reflected light from Venus


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 000710-0, 03/02/2007
Tested on: 4/02/2007 9:11:36 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com



.



User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 19 Jan 2007 11:37:43 PM
Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters
lately as the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in
the Persian Gulf region,

"Region."
A lot of that supposed "buid up" is centered on Solalia,
and the recent U.S. attacks on targets there. The rest
of it was the *Long* overdue deployment of U.S. naval
assets to protect the Strait of Hormuz, which didn't take
place until sometime AFTER Iran threatened to blockade
it in response to sanctions.
Another contributor to any supposed "build up" is north
Korea. You don't want to blockade north Korea's ports
(and deal with north Korea's submarines, aircraft and
missiles), but simply stop them from either exporting
weapons technology, or importing oil.
Not that we are blockading north Korea. We should be,
but the criminal thugs who own China would gladly
slaughter hundreds of millions of their own people in a
nuclear war, in order to protect north Korea.
.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 23 Jan 2007 06:10:59 AM
"JTEM" <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1169271463.209419.281770@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com...


Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters
lately as the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in
the Persian Gulf region,


"Region."

A lot of that supposed "buid up" is centered on Solalia,

There's nothing 'supposed' about increasing one carrier group to two,
adding 2 minesweepers, installing more Patriots...or can't you fucking
count?
Typical of a psychotic -- when confronted with simple direct reality (1 +
1 = 2), he has to subvert it even when there's no rational reason to do
so.
Junior, grow up...
.


User: "Woodswun"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 20 Jan 2007 01:27:53 PM
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.
Woods
.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 20 Jan 2007 06:30:56 PM
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.20.19.27.53.542949@tepidmail.com...

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.


I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.

Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come, and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?
It is the capitalistic aims of the USA and its allies that are stirring
the pot over there, pushing for a confrontation now before Iran has nukes
and is better situated as a major power. That is precisely the reason why
this period is so very dangerous, very risky business for the USA and its
allies. No one can be sure of what Iran will do to retaliate should it be
attacked, or its government, and theocratical backing, be severely
threatened. No one can be sure. The possibilities are many, and nearly all
of them are catastrophic on some level, economically or otherwise.
That region is steaming hot with anger and hatred toward Bush's attack and
occupation -- further added to with the recent new front opened up in
Somalia.
Analysts feel pretty confident Syria will support Iran militarily, and no
one can be sure how this cooperative defense will take shape.
The UFOs, or likely UAV spy drones, have been gathering much detailed
surveillance data for at least two years now...that data is essential in
planning any attack strategy and from what I could research online, the
Bush administration is planning something more than an air attack on nuke
facilities.
The so-called UFOs have been surveilling areas over a wide span of Iran,
not just near the nuke facilities. Before my site was taken down, I ran
across some online info that indicated the US intends to aerially strike
missile batteries all along the Northern Persian Gulf, and go directly
into Tehran, and hit several other cities, as well. When I get the new
blog up, I'll have more on all this...
Docrodile




.
User: "Charly the Bastard"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 22 Jan 2007 07:10:13 AM
Docrodile wrote:

"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.20.19.27.53.542949@tepidmail.com...

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.


I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.

Woods


Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come, and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be offline
for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the remaining available
reserves, and the profits to the oil companies. The oil itself is deep
underground, safe from radiolocical contamination. When the rad count on the
surface finally does go down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price
that the world has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits
for the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

It is the capitalistic aims of the USA and its allies that are stirring
the pot over there, pushing for a confrontation now before Iran has nukes
and is better situated as a major power. That is precisely the reason why
this period is so very dangerous, very risky business for the USA and its
allies. No one can be sure of what Iran will do to retaliate should it be
attacked, or its government, and theocratical backing, be severely
threatened. No one can be sure. The possibilities are many, and nearly all
of them are catastrophic on some level, economically or otherwise.
That region is steaming hot with anger and hatred toward Bush's attack and
occupation -- further added to with the recent new front opened up in
Somalia.
Analysts feel pretty confident Syria will support Iran militarily, and no
one can be sure how this cooperative defense will take shape.

All that will do is put Syria on the target list. Isaah springs to mind here.

The UFOs, or likely UAV spy drones, have been gathering much detailed
surveillance data for at least two years now...that data is essential in
planning any attack strategy and from what I could research online, the
Bush administration is planning something more than an air attack on nuke
facilities.
The so-called UFOs have been surveilling areas over a wide span of Iran,
not just near the nuke facilities. Before my site was taken down, I ran
across some online info that indicated the US intends to aerially strike
missile batteries all along the Northern Persian Gulf, and go directly
into Tehran, and hit several other cities, as well. When I get the new
blog up, I'll have more on all this...
Docrodile

Kharg Island... the majority of Iran's oil goes through the KI terminal. Put
that out of commission and the money flow stops cold. Hit 'em in the wallet.
Charly
.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 22 Jan 2007 08:27:55 AM
"Charly the *****" <nitecrawler7@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:45B4B7B1.284B39F0@worldnet.att.net...

Docrodile wrote:

"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.20.19.27.53.542949@tepidmail.com...

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the
US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates
has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is
meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be
regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire
region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a
civil
war.


I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop
various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind
of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the
U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.

Woods


Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from
oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and
some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty
that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of
military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is
a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by
Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would
react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come,
and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they
had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?


Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be
offline
for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the remaining
available
reserves, and the profits to the oil companies. The oil itself is deep
underground, safe from radiolocical contamination. When the rad count on
the
surface finally does go down, it can be exploited at the new much higher
price
that the world has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant
profits
for the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Nothing much makes sense to me anymore. As I approach the winter of my
life, I see a species whose meaning and purpose I increasingly question.
And a supposed supreme intelligence that must've had a bad day long ago
when he created it.


It is the capitalistic aims of the USA and its allies that are stirring
the pot over there, pushing for a confrontation now before Iran has
nukes
and is better situated as a major power. That is precisely the reason
why
this period is so very dangerous, very risky business for the USA and
its
allies. No one can be sure of what Iran will do to retaliate should it
be
attacked, or its government, and theocratical backing, be severely
threatened. No one can be sure. The possibilities are many, and nearly
all
of them are catastrophic on some level, economically or otherwise.
That region is steaming hot with anger and hatred toward Bush's attack
and
occupation -- further added to with the recent new front opened up in
Somalia.
Analysts feel pretty confident Syria will support Iran militarily, and
no
one can be sure how this cooperative defense will take shape.


All that will do is put Syria on the target list. Isaah springs to mind
here.

It will, of course, be justification for expanding the war into Syria if
some veteran analysts are correct.


The UFOs, or likely UAV spy drones, have been gathering much detailed
surveillance data for at least two years now...that data is essential
in
planning any attack strategy and from what I could research online, the
Bush administration is planning something more than an air attack on
nuke
facilities.
The so-called UFOs have been surveilling areas over a wide span of
Iran,
not just near the nuke facilities. Before my site was taken down, I ran
across some online info that indicated the US intends to aerially
strike
missile batteries all along the Northern Persian Gulf, and go directly
into Tehran, and hit several other cities, as well. When I get the new
blog up, I'll have more on all this...
Docrodile


Kharg Island... the majority of Iran's oil goes through the KI terminal.
Put
that out of commission and the money flow stops cold. Hit 'em in the
wallet.

Well, Charly, Iran is no powerhouse, no Nazi Germany equivalent or
anywhere near it, nor even up to Mussolini's Italy...they are clearly
vulnerable, but the disruption of oil makes the West vulnerable, too. It
gets down usually with this species, vying for more power and profit as it
always has and does now, that the short-term downfall is sacrificed to
gain the long-term benefits. And I think that is exactly where we stand
right now...on the edge of looking into a deep shorter-term abyss, but the
elitists (that 5% on the planet with the most influence and investment,
etc.) won't be going down with us. They're already looking over the abyss
to the next profit and power margin they'll garner. It's not their
families that'll die. They're heavily fortified, protected, insured in so
many ways. It's not even the billions they'll temporarily lose in the
short-term downfall they've engineered. They have plenty of reserves to
keep them fat and well fed, as usual.
All we can really do is to prepare, as best we can at this level, for a
mighty plunge starting in a matter of weeks...and all the typical media
and political hysteria accompanying it, distracting, redirecting,
misinforming, exploiting...LOL! And let's not leave out the religious
fanatics...and a renewed sense the apocalypse and Jesus's imminent return
has finally come. Oh man...I'm glad I'm finishing up my existence
here...what an insane asylum.
Docrodile


Charly




.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 22 Jan 2007 01:47:53 PM
Docrodile wrote:

Nothing much makes sense to me anymore. As
I approach the winter of my life, I see a species
whose meaning and purpose I increasingly question.
And a supposed supreme intelligence that must've
had a bad day long ago when he created it.

Oh, someone needs a ::Hug::
Think of kittens & little bunnies. Little fury bunnies. Fluffy
wuffy wittle bunnies -- woo, woo woo!
With their little wittle nosies that go up & down, and their
fuzzy wuzzy taily-boops... Isn't that cute?
.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 22 Jan 2007 10:54:13 PM
"JTEM" <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1169495272.829548.5950@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...


Docrodile wrote:

Nothing much makes sense to me anymore. As
I approach the winter of my life, I see a species
whose meaning and purpose I increasingly question.
And a supposed supreme intelligence that must've
had a bad day long ago when he created it.


Oh, someone needs a ::Hug::

Think of kittens & little bunnies. Little fury bunnies. Fluffy
wuffy wittle bunnies -- woo, woo woo!

With their little wittle nosies that go up & down, and their
fuzzy wuzzy taily-boops... Isn't that cute?

Almost as cute as you hugging the widdle mouse and strokin' the kuddly
keyboardie for over ten delightfully warm and fuzzy useless years making
inane gooey-brained remarks, doodoo-headed arguments, and silly-willy
predictions and gettin' all hotsy and sticky on your widdle sweaty
self...how many little girly-wurly dollie parts have you got scattered
around your widdle wet sandbox now? ;))~
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 22 Jan 2007 11:36:39 PM
Docrodile wrote:

Almost as cute as you hugging the widdle mouse and strokin'
the kuddly keyboardie [...]

Gotta love the irony.
.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 23 Jan 2007 12:35:33 AM
"JTEM" <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1169530599.602721.30900@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...


Docrodile wrote:

Almost as cute as you hugging the widdle mouse and strokin'
the kuddly keyboardie [...]


Gotta love the irony.

I think you meant, gotta LIVE the irony...


.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 23 Jan 2007 12:42:26 AM
Docrodile wrote:

I think

Not very likely.
.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 23 Jan 2007 06:07:07 AM
"JTEM" <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1169534546.140532.67830@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...


Docrodile wrote:

I think


Not very likely.

The only thing's that likely about you is a dead end to your already
futile life...
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 24 Jan 2007 02:12:52 AM
"Docrodile" <swampth...@hellsbayou.com> wrote:

The only thing's that [...]

*Yawn*
You've really given up. You've taken to projecting your own
anguish on me.
.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 24 Jan 2007 05:07:42 AM
"JTEM" <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1169626372.598927.254230@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...



"Docrodile" <swampth...@hellsbayou.com> wrote:

The only thing's that [...]


*Yawn*

You've really given up. You've taken to projecting your own
anguish on me.

How trite -- 'projecting' -- a tired ol' pop psych term that's commonly
used by the user when they're in self-denial, and being defensive.
*YAWN* *SIGH*
Jeez...you're soooooo boring.
Here's a robot you can have a meaningful conversation with. He's so much
like you.
http://www.sensationbot.com/wrapper.html?uncensored+5120da16ca7cce47bb73f0a761be6e66
LOL! $-)~


.


User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 23 Jan 2007 06:17:20 AM
"Docrodile" <swampthing@hellsbayou.com> wrote in message
news:ep4tpd$om1$1@aioe.org...


"JTEM" <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1169534546.140532.67830@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...


Docrodile wrote:

I think


Not very likely.

The only thing's that likely about you is a dead end to your already
futile life...

Or the only life that's left in your dead end is your futile life...LOL!
.








User: "Woodswun"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 22 Jan 2007 04:41:03 PM
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:10:13 +0000, Charly the ***** wrote:

Docrodile wrote:

"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.20.19.27.53.542949@tepidmail.com...

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.


I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.

Woods


Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come, and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?


Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be offline
for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the remaining available
reserves, and the profits to the oil companies. The oil itself is deep
underground, safe from radiolocical contamination. When the rad count on the
surface finally does go down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price
that the world has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits
for the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more cost
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which may end
up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that requires
some forethought, foreign territory to the current Administration ...
All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that there's
never quite enough to bring prices back down.
Woods
.
User: "Charly the Bastard"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 22 Jan 2007 05:48:28 PM
Woodswun wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:10:13 +0000, Charly the ***** wrote:

Docrodile wrote:

"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.20.19.27.53.542949@tepidmail.com...

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.


I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.

Woods


Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come, and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?


Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be offline
for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the remaining available
reserves, and the profits to the oil companies. The oil itself is deep
underground, safe from radiolocical contamination. When the rad count on the
surface finally does go down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price
that the world has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits
for the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.


Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more cost
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which may end
up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that requires
some forethought, foreign territory to the current Administration ...

All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that there's
never quite enough to bring prices back down.

Woods

Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a Corporate, they're
the ones who really run the world. They, the Corporates, don't have to worry about
re-election every two, four, or six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic
opinion polls, They have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market
will bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply. Money is the
only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they implement. You notice
that the oil companies aren't building new refineries to increase the supply side of
the equation, because there's more money in keeping the supply short and the price
high than there is in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more
'product' to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas guzzling SUVs,
becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles than small ones. Big cars,
small cars, the number of parts is almost the same per unit, Labor is the same per
unit for assembly. Which one will bring in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that
get 12 miles per gallon and need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get
built? It's economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here, just
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.
Charly.
.
User: "Perseid"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 23 Jan 2007 02:04:39 AM
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the *****
<nitecrawler7@worldnet.att.net> Spat the Words

Woodswun wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:10:13 +0000, Charly the ***** wrote:

Docrodile wrote:

"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.20.19.27.53.542949@tepidmail.com...

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as
the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf
region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense
Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval deployment of two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security of
that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.


I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop
various mosques from sending people over to help their fellow
shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S. because
catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over people/supplies to
catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.

Woods


Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over
Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and
profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years,
which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA. America
sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in fact, before the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted as a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet,
today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over
the political administration, which is a democracy -- but can be
overruled by Musharoff at any time. Pakistan is working closely with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are many
indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely
it's building an empire of great influence in the region for years
to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone.
Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or
Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten screwing up the region
for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?


Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be
offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the
remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil companies.
The oil itself is deep underground, safe from radiolocical
contamination. When the rad count on the surface finally does go
down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price that the world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits for
the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.


Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more cost
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which may
end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...

All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.

Woods


Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four, or
six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls, They
have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market will
bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply.
Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they
implement.

There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.

You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because there's
more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there is
in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more 'product'
to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles than
small ones.

But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.

Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will bring
in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon and
need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here, just
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.

There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car companies
can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are a perfect
example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've just wasted
all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's economics 101.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.


Charly.



.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 23 Jan 2007 06:30:44 AM
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns98C1AF6880D5rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the *****
<nitecrawler7@worldnet.att.net> Spat the Words

Woodswun wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:10:13 +0000, Charly the ***** wrote:

Docrodile wrote:

"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.20.19.27.53.542949@tepidmail.com...

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as
the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf
region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense
Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval deployment of
two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any
Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security of
that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled
in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.


I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop
various mosques from sending people over to help their fellow
shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S. because
catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over people/supplies to
catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.

Woods


Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over
Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and
profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years,
which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was
essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA. America
sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in fact, before
the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted as
a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet,
today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over
the political administration, which is a democracy -- but can be
overruled by Musharoff at any time. Pakistan is working closely
with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are many
indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely
it's building an empire of great influence in the region for years
to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone.
Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or
Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten screwing up the region
for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?


Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be
offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the
remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil companies.
The oil itself is deep underground, safe from radiolocical
contamination. When the rad count on the surface finally does go
down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price that the
world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits for
the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.


Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more cost
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which may
end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...

All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.

Woods


Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four, or
six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls, They
have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market will
bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply.


Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they
implement.


There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.


You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because there's
more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there is
in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more 'product'
to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are
dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles
than
small ones.


But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.


Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will bring
in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon and
need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here, just
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.


There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car companies
can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are a perfect
example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've just wasted
all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's economics 101.

You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.

Whether there's a conspiracy or a PLAN or not, the end result is the
same -- we get screwed at this level. What does it matter? If we knew
there was collusion going on, what the hell are we to do with it? We're
dependent on corporate services and products for our everyday existence.
Unless you're a real indie trooper and want to trail blaze away from the
corporate tit, you and most all of us 'consumers' out here are trapped in
a life made for us, but not by us. We went along with all the conveniences
and accepted the power structure that rules over us. Even our democracy is
basically a sham now, controlled by corporate monied influences...which,
again, has been caused by our complacency. The corporate world provides
lots of distractions -- get interested in Bowflexing your asses off, diet,
buy new things, get narcissistic, hedonistic, materialistic as hell --
that burn up much of our time and energy, and they'd like to keep it that
way...and apparently so would most of us. Where is the resistance, the
risk taking to throw it off and go another direction, radically? Dont'
see it out there!
And you know why, I do, all of us do...and it's damned hard to face up to
it and ourselves. We live in a virtual self-imposed hive-like prison,
ruled over a relatively small group of elitists, but followed sheepishly
by most of the herd.
Face it, Charly and Perseid...we're living under another form of tyranny
as humanity has all of its recorded history, and this one, though, could
be changed if it weren't for all that risk that needs to be taken...all
that discomfort...all that fear of what may happen if we stopped sucking
on the BIG TIT everyday.
Docrodile ;)~


Charly.




.
User: "Perseid Rocks"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 23 Jan 2007 07:12:15 AM
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"
<swampthing@hellsbayou.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns98C1AF6880D5rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the *****
<nitecrawler7@worldnet.att.net> Spat the Words

Woodswun wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:10:13 +0000, Charly the ***** wrote:

Docrodile wrote:

"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.20.19.27.53.542949@tepidmail.com...

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as
the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf
region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense
Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval deployment of
two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any
Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security

of

that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled
in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.


I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop
various mosques from sending people over to help their fellow
shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S. because
catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over people/supplies

to

catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.

Woods


Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over
Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and
profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many

years,

which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was
essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA. America
sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in fact, before
the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted as
a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet,
today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over
the political administration, which is a democracy -- but can be
overruled by Musharoff at any time. Pakistan is working closely
with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are many
indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely
it's building an empire of great influence in the region for years
to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone.
Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or
Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten screwing up the

region

for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?


Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be
offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the
remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil companies.
The oil itself is deep underground, safe from radiolocical
contamination. When the rad count on the surface finally does go
down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price that the
world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits for
the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.


Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more

cost

effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which

may

end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...

All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.

Woods


Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four, or
six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls, They
have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market will
bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply.


Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they
implement.


There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.


You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because

there's

more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there

is

in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more 'product'
to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are
dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles
than
small ones.


But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.


Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will

bring

in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon and
need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here,

just

'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.


There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car companies
can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are a perfect
example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've just wasted
all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's economics 101.

You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.


Whether there's a conspiracy or a PLAN or not, the end result is the
same -- we get screwed at this level. What does it matter? If we knew
there was collusion going on, what the hell are we to do with it? We're
dependent on corporate services and products for our everyday existence.
Unless you're a real indie trooper and want to trail blaze away from the
corporate tit, you and most all of us 'consumers' out here are trapped

in

a life made for us, but not by us. We went along with all the

conveniences

and accepted the power structure that rules over us. Even our democracy

is

basically a sham now, controlled by corporate monied influences...which,
again, has been caused by our complacency. The corporate world provides
lots of distractions -- get interested in Bowflexing your asses off,

diet,

buy new things, get narcissistic, hedonistic, materialistic as hell --
that burn up much of our time and energy, and they'd like to keep it

that

way...and apparently so would most of us. Where is the resistance, the
risk taking to throw it off and go another direction, radically? Dont'
see it out there!
And you know why, I do, all of us do...and it's damned hard to face up

to

it and ourselves. We live in a virtual self-imposed hive-like prison,
ruled over a relatively small group of elitists, but followed sheepishly
by most of the herd.
Face it, Charly and Perseid...we're living under another form of tyranny
as humanity has all of its recorded history, and this one, though, could
be changed if it weren't for all that risk that needs to be taken...all
that discomfort...all that fear of what may happen if we stopped sucking
on the BIG TIT everyday.

I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).
We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.
The people have all the control over the Corporate BigWigs since
by simply DENYING our attention to certain things we can make
them dance around like leap-frogs. It's quite satisfying actually,
knowing that my own subtle actions every day causes the corporate
bunny-hoppers to scramble about madly trying to figure out just
what the hell went wrong.

Docrodile ;)~


Charly.






.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 23 Jan 2007 08:33:32 AM
"Perseid Rocks" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns98C13F1D36540rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"
<swampthing@hellsbayou.com> Spat the Words


"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns98C1AF6880D5rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the *****
<nitecrawler7@worldnet.att.net> Spat the Words

Woodswun wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:10:13 +0000, Charly the ***** wrote:

Docrodile wrote:

"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.20.19.27.53.542949@tepidmail.com...

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:57:01 -0800, Dr. Bipolar wrote:

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately
as
the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf
region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense
Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval deployment of
two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any
Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security

of

that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled
in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.


I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to
stop
various mosques from sending people over to help their fellow
shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S. because
catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over people/supplies

to

catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.

Woods


Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over
Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and
profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many

years,

which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was
essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA. America
sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in fact, before
the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted
as
a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation.
Yet,
today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over
the political administration, which is a democracy -- but can be
overruled by Musharoff at any time. Pakistan is working closely
with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are many
indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely
it's building an empire of great influence in the region for
years
to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone.
Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or
Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten screwing up the

region

for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?


Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will
be
offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the
remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil
companies.
The oil itself is deep underground, safe from radiolocical
contamination. When the rad count on the surface finally does go
down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price that the
world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits for
the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.


Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more

cost

effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which

may

end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...

All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.

Woods


Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four, or
six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls, They
have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market will
bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply.


Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they
implement.


There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.


You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because

there's

more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there

is

in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more
'product'
to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are
dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles
than
small ones.


But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.


Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will

bring

in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon and
need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here,

just

'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.


There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car
companies
can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are a perfect
example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've just wasted
all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's economics 101.

You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.


Whether there's a conspiracy or a PLAN or not, the end result is the
same -- we get screwed at this level. What does it matter? If we knew
there was collusion going on, what the hell are we to do with it? We're
dependent on corporate services and products for our everyday
existence.
Unless you're a real indie trooper and want to trail blaze away from
the
corporate tit, you and most all of us 'consumers' out here are trapped

in

a life made for us, but not by us. We went along with all the

conveniences

and accepted the power structure that rules over us. Even our democracy

is

basically a sham now, controlled by corporate monied
influences...which,
again, has been caused by our complacency. The corporate world provides
lots of distractions -- get interested in Bowflexing your asses off,

diet,

buy new things, get narcissistic, hedonistic, materialistic as hell --
that burn up much of our time and energy, and they'd like to keep it

that

way...and apparently so would most of us. Where is the resistance, the
risk taking to throw it off and go another direction, radically? Dont'
see it out there!
And you know why, I do, all of us do...and it's damned hard to face up

to

it and ourselves. We live in a virtual self-imposed hive-like prison,
ruled over a relatively small group of elitists, but followed
sheepishly
by most of the herd.
Face it, Charly and Perseid...we're living under another form of
tyranny
as humanity has all of its recorded history, and this one, though,
could
be changed if it weren't for all that risk that needs to be taken...all
that discomfort...all that fear of what may happen if we stopped
sucking
on the BIG TIT everyday.


I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).

It all distills down into dependence on someone to live our lives. We can
give up being dependent on someone, but who survives as an island? How
many can you count that you know who do? Realistically, we all depend on
someone to do something for us, or provide a product...yeah, we COULD
produce everything ourselves, each and every one of us, independently of
each other, but that isn't going to be our reality, nor has it been since
civilization dawned. Let's look at the hard reality of our lives. We are
trapped by powers that we don't want to risk throwing off, and content
(with antidepressants, toys, narcissism, et al) to keep going in this
direction, this pathway that's been made for us, and accepted by us. We
didn't make the pathway. Greedy powerful people were allowed to construct
the paradigm we complacently accepted.


We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.

Yeah, Perseid, you're right We CAN and DO, to some limited degree, control
the products and services we use. But, then, realistically, how many
people are going to do this? Enough that the entire structure is no longer
one of co-dependence, and we just begin to be our own manufacturers of
things we need, service we need? Again, it's a nice utopian-esque
thought, but it falls to the wayside in the harsh reality that most folks
out there ain't gonna 'cut the mustard' and take off into a wholly radical
DIY direction...sure, they'll dibble-dabble, experiment with
independence...but, when, for example (of so many), you need electricity,
are you gonna generate your own? You can get some like-minded folks
together, and start up a windwill generator, and hook your homes up, but
then you run into...the...BIG TIT people, don't ya? And if your indie
project gets too large, the BIG TIT folks get tougher as they lose profits
and control of a market. Then, let's say, you succeed, and you get your
indie electric grid spread over a large area...will the abuses
(monopolization, greed, etc.) set in on the people who've organized this
new system? Yes, likely, because what I'm really trying to underscore is
that basic human nature naturally gravitates toward controlling others,
dominating others, getting selfish and self-centered, getting corrupted in
some manner that defeats the original fresh, new concept. That's what
happened to our democracy here...and it happens repeatedly through history
when attempts are made to defeat one power structure of tyranny ...
another one eventually creeps into replace it.


The people have all the control over the Corporate BigWigs since
by simply DENYING our attention to certain things we can make
them dance around like leap-frogs. It's quite satisfying actually,
knowing that my own subtle actions every day causes the corporate
bunny-hoppers to scramble about madly trying to figure out just
what the hell went wrong.

No, Perseid, that's what you want to believe because it makes you feel
you're not complacent, or trapped, or beholden to others in a hard
co-dependency for services and products. It sounds liberating, but are you
gonna step out of this structure of corporate-controlled lifestyles and
blaze your trail? And will that trail end up corrupted, self-defeated? I
think so. I've talked just like you so many times, thought those thoughts,
and thrown 'em around to people...it makes me feel I'm a rebel, that I'm
not caught up in this controlling corporate world, and then...as my life
ebbs away now from numerous health problems...I'm having to face what kind
of life I've had...and why we go through it to the end the way we do. The
bunny-hoppers...LOL! Yeah, we like to call 'em names and stick our bare
asses out at 'em, flip 'em the bird, and spit on their influences, their
lies, their schemes, their greed...but we are not angels devoid of serious
problems in our own behaviors, are we? One of the worst is getting pissed
at something we know doesn't do us any good, but are unable to risk the
scary ***** to move away from it and stand alone against all that comes
down on us for doing so. Even when we stand together, defiant, and I've
certainly been in many protests to know the community feeling -- still, we
find that our basic nature of protecting ourselves from harm often
overrides our idealism. It's a bad feeling to admit it, but at this late
stage of my life, I've nothing much left to lose now by facing up to
things that I think I always knew were disquieting facts....and yet unable
to admit I've been hypocritical, as is everyone to some degree, and not
taken the trail blazing path I could have...as we all can, of
course...but, I reiterate, that the risks are far too great, too scary,
too damaging for the great majority (and I'm talking 95%) to take. And
then there's that basic human nature that has ultimately corrupted the
trails of the trailblazers...as our founding fathers were, IMO -- and had
their trails lead to the shitty, subservient, codependent, lying, greedy,
power-mad mess we're in right now. I really feel we can't have anything
resembling our utopian, or altruistic dreams but for a very short time,
and then it drifts into what we see historically, and what we live in now.
Jeezuz..I wish I could keep thinking 'something' magnificently radical
will change in our human nature, but I'm resigned to accepting the hard
fact we're now as we've always been, and we're just as likely to stay that
way.
Docrodile :)~



Docrodile ;)~


Charly.







.
User: "Perseid Rocks"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 25 Jan 2007 04:00:14 AM
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"
<swampthing@hellsbayou.com> Spat the Words

I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).


It all distills down into dependence on someone to live our lives. We

can

give up being dependent on someone, but who survives as an island? How
many can you count that you know who do? Realistically, we all depend on
someone to do something for us, or provide a product...yeah, we COULD
produce everything ourselves, each and every one of us, independently of
each other, but that isn't going to be our reality, nor has it been

since

civilization dawned. Let's look at the hard reality of our lives. We are
trapped by powers that we don't want to risk throwing off, and content
(with antidepressants, toys, narcissism, et al)

You don't have to live with daily doses of non-prescription drugs.
You don't have to watch tv ads. You don't have to buy toys which
feed your ego. In short, if you feel trapped by this socio-economic
structure, it's because you've allowed yourself to becomed trapped
by it.
Try going for a hike in the mountains every other day. Read a
good book, learn a new language, expand your mind and horizon.
Break out of the entrapment. Take control.

to keep going in this
direction, this pathway that's been made for us, and accepted by us. We
didn't make the pathway. Greedy powerful people were allowed to

construct

the paradigm we complacently accepted.

I'm ok with some company making something that I can buy
which makes my life easier. Personally, I feel more entrapped
by daily chores than anything else.


We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.


Yeah, Perseid, you're right We CAN and DO, to some limited degree,

control

the products and services we use. But, then, realistically, how many
people are going to do this? Enough that the entire structure is no

longer

one of co-dependence, and we just begin to be our own manufacturers of
things we need, service we need?

Again, I have no complaints about some company making a profit
by making something useful that I might want to buy.

Again, it's a nice utopian-esque thought

.
User: "Docrodile"

Title: Re: UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN 25 Jan 2007 07:29:26 AM
"Perseid Rocks" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns98C31E8F39B43rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"
<swampthing@hellsbayou.com> Spat the Words

I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).


It all distills down into dependence on someone to live our lives. We

can

give up being dependent on someone, but who survives as an island? How
many can you count that you know who do? Realistically, we all depend
on
someone to do something for us, or provide a product...yeah, we COULD
produce everything ourselves, each and every one of us, independently
of
each other, but that isn't going to be our reality, nor has it been

since

civilization dawned. Let's look at the hard reality of our lives. We
are
trapped by powers that we don't want to risk throwing off, and content
(with antidepressants, toys, narcissism, et al)


You don't have to live with daily doses of non-prescription drugs.
You don't have to watch tv ads. You don't have to buy toys which
feed your ego. In short, if you feel trapped by this socio-economic
structure, it's because you've allowed yourself to becomed trapped
by it.

Try going for a hike in the mountains every other day. Read a
good book, learn a new language, expand your mind and horizon.
Break out of the entrapment. Take control.

Sounds like a speech to the Sierra Club... LOL! (I think you forget my age
and I'm well educated, and have experienced many things.)
When you get your backpack on, where did you get it from? Water bottle?
Clothes? Shoes? Underwear? Toothpaste and brush? Munchies? If you get a
headache, where did the aspirin or acetaminophen (etc) come from?
Transportation to the starting point for the 'breakaway freedom hike' --
where did the transporatatio