| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:33 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| kbo234 wrote: | | He is a brilliant advocate of the 'alternative' view. Could it be that he won't step forward on 9/11 because he calculates that that would mean the end to his media access? |
If that was the case, why doesn't he just keep quiet on the subject instead of inviting discussion on his radio programme so that he can attempt to ridicule 9/11 skeptics.
As repeatedly stated, his only evidence to support the official theory is that he couldn't believe that they could have kept it secret and the Hollywood film United 93.
Those that support the official story are either ignorant or to some degree complicit.
Surely, if he had applied his infamous guile to the subject he would have reached a conclusion not unlike our own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Gobell wrote: | On the one hand we have in Galloway, an outspoken opponent of Bush, Bliar, the War of Terror, who represents a sizeable Muslim political constituency.
He is obviously intelligent, articulate, outspoken, unafraid of upsetting the status quo, yet like so many public figures will not touch issues like 9/11 with a bargepole. |
| and wrote: | | What better vehicle is there for dismantling "Islamophobia" than arguing our case? |
| and wrote: | Of course, there still remains the possibilty of the gatekeeper scenario, one that has a history, especially on the extreme left.
Does that scenario extend to Mr Galloway ? |
As last night's [i]Dispatches stated, 50% of Muslims believe 9/11 was an inside job - so why are they not seizing upon it?
To quote him, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck.
I am still intrigued by George Galloway's response when asked if he was a Freemason, 'Don't be ridiculous, I'm a Roman Catholic'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kbo234
Validated Poster
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I suspect this is true and think less of him for it. The Middle East and the suffering of the Palestinians and Iraqis is his big cause. He is an excellent and, indeed probably, the only propagandist for the anti-Zionists.
He is no fool. he must understand how important 9/11 is to the whole politics of the region since 2001. So, surely he HAS looked at 9/11 evidence very closely indeed. It beggars belief that a man of his persuasion has not....but he is a wily politician. He knows who controls the media and media airtime is the very oxygen he breathes.
I think his anti 9/11 stance is a studied pose. How could it be anything different.
The man wants to be allowed to continue what he is doing. He is also fond of living. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Newspeak International wrote: | | He may be a distraction from 911 issues,but I still maintain he argues very well on the injustices against the people in Lebanon and Gaza. |
Indeed he does.
| ...and then wrote: |
Everyone must be able to see what is going on? |
How is that? Everybody is looking at the Lebannon
| ...and then wrote: | | On the other hand, most may only see what they're told to see I suppose. |
That's it in a nutshell, if you will pardon my soon to be apparent pun. Everybody is looking at the distraction whilst the sleight of hand is juggling the pea, out of sight, between said nutshells. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I really don't know why there is all this energy wasted on whether Galloway is complicit or not.
Simply put, there will not be a programme on the radio,or TV credibly
putting the case for a conspiracy on 911, period.Not in mainstream
media for the masses to peruse over, and to think that it could and would be allowed is just a wet dream for those that think justice will prevail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Flamesong wrote: | | Everybody is looking at the distraction whilst the sleight of hand is juggling the pea, out of sight, between said nutshells. |
I agree again that's why I wrote it.
But, like I say again it is easier to place the collusion of the US, UK and the UN in the continuation of the horror(forgive me) that's going on in Lebanon and Gaza to people, once they have digested that I approach the 911 issues. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is George on the road campaigning somewhere, on holiday, replaced by the cricket temporarily,or just plain old censored?
Does anyone know? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pincher
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Newspeak International wrote: | I really don't know why there is all this energy wasted on whether Galloway is complicit or not.
Simply put, there will not be a programme on the radio,or TV credibly
putting the case for a conspiracy on 911, period.Not in mainstream
media for the masses to peruse over, and to think that it could and would be allowed is just a wet dream for those that think justice will prevail. |
Wrong my friend. Channel 4 aired a documentary on the conspiracy just before the fourth anniversary of 9/11. It was an objective account of the plot and focused heavily on MOSSAD involvement (including eye witness statements of agents standing on the roof of the (front) furniture warehouse staring at the burning towers through binoculars).
C4 were also the only channel to air a documentary on French and Belgian complicity in the Rwanda genocide - 800,000 massacred in six weeks and not a single 'Not In My Namer' on the streets of London.
Now I wonder why that was Newspeak International...
Any ideas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackbear
Validated Poster
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 656
Location: up north
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I presume Pincher you would prefer George and Channel 4 to be discussing Sudan rather than the events in the Middle East.
I wonder why.?
I get the distinct feeling from your posts, that LGF or Harry's Place would suit you more than this site.
You will find plenty of fascist nazis there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kbo234
Validated Poster
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pincher wrote: |
Wrong my friend. Channel 4 aired a documentary on the conspiracy just before the fourth anniversary of 9/11. It was an objective account of the plot and focused heavily on MOSSAD involvement |
Yes, the mainstream media will mention the muddy and the oblique, giving 'both sides' the opportunity to comment....this is designed to dissipate the 9/11 truthers message and energy.
There has been NO showing or investigation of the collapse of building 7 for example. Nor a serious discussion about the alarming implications of the fact all three WTC fell at almost free-fall speed. Nor the fact these are the ONLY three steel-framed buildings in history that have totally collapsed due to fires inside the buildings. Nor the molten metal that remained molten in the basements of all three buildings for weeks after the attacks. Nor the lack of evidence and contrary evidence of a 757 impact at the Pentagon. Nor the fact that there is no evidence of arabs on any of the relevant flights. Nor that the 'put option' issue was dismissed by the US government because no arabs had bought them (ha, ha, bloody ha)...etc., etc.
One showing of all this evidence would, unless heavily pre-promoted by the TV channels, have little effect. With Zionist propaganda in our faces 24 hours a day it would take a serious and sustained exposure of the evidence to reach and properly inform the general public.
This is unlikely to happen while the current mob hold the reins of power.
However, on the bright side, 9/11 evidence is exploding through the community being passed on from individual to individual. Once seen, trust in the mainstream media is ABSOLUTELY shattered.....so don't try and paint the picture that channel 4 or anyone else has been somehow 'fair' on the 9/11 issue. They are bent. Full stop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pincher
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackbear wrote: | I presume Pincher you would prefer George and Channel 4 to be discussing Sudan rather than the events in the Middle East.
I wonder why.?
I get the distinct feeling from your posts, that LGF or Harry's Place would suit you more than this site.
You will find plenty of fascist nazis there. |
No, my friend they are all on HERE brainwashed by LaRouchean drivel (the crude 'Money Masters' DVD is just a crude reworking of 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion). They think it's radical, left wing, socialist. No doubt so do you.
Can hardly blame them (or you) - German workers had a bit of difficulty in understanding the difference between Ernst Roehm's Brownshirts and the German Communist Party. Except over one issue - guess what that was Blackbear?
Now you and your mates draw a subtle distinction between anti semitism and anti Zionism. But that's for idealistic middle class types living outside the Middle East. In the region itself (surprise, surprise) it's different...
One of the half truths that was spread about both the Syrian and Iraqi Baath parties (and indeed about other Arab nationalist parties and liberation movements like the PLO) was that they were Socialist. Indeed, Saddam's Baathism was portrayed as run on Soviet lines. Very quietly the prefix 'National' had been dropped...
You see both Syrian and Iraqi Baath parties were formed by the Abwehr, (German Intelligence) in 1941. They were founded as Arab NAZI parties. This spirit is alive and well in the Middle East today. Go to any Arab bookshop - you'd think you were in 30's Nuremburg.
As for your mates in Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas their 'anti Zionism' has an even more interesting pedigree. I'll start you off gently (the whole truth too soon might turn you to drink) http://www.jerusalem-archives.org/period3/3-25.html
Good to see that shallow, ignorant, trendy liberals are just as picky about their causes. European sponsored massacres in Africa are just so retro these days eh Blackbear? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kbo234
Validated Poster
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pincher wrote: | | the crude 'Money Masters' DVD is just a crude reworking of 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion |
Yea, so let's all listen respectfully to your subtle and incisive debunking of our misbegotten delusions.
That is surely what we all need....learned instruction from an impartial adviser like yourself...Yes, I never realised that the Rothschilds are now all but penniless. Sorry, do I exaggerate the information you so helpfully forwarded in your previous post.
And the shareholders of the banks that create our money for us....surely a group of no significance at all. The fact it is impossible to discover the identity of these shareholders....we should not bother our little selves with things that don't concern us.
Before 9/11 I was beside myself at frustration at the way I perceived government to be mindlessly and stupidly manipulating the education system within which I work. After seeing the 9/11 evidence the scales fell from my eyes. The manipulation is not stupid (although those, i.e. a majority, who thoughtlessly accept and implement government directives are not neccesarily too bright), the manipulation is calculated to the nth degree. It is fed to us through government by think-tanks like the Tavistock Institute for Human Relations. The purpose of this Institution can ONLY be to keep society messed up, confused, dysfunctional, unreflective and easily manipulable. Don't tell me any different because I f***ing know.
What is your purpose on this site? To inform, or to mess it up, confuse, create dysfunction etc?
I think I've got a fair idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pincher
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Tell me your problem sonny - dysfunctional family, bereavement, head trauma, personality disorder, (inherited or acquired) E numbers or BO?
You're angry with your own private past not the public present... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leiff
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 509
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pincher
Why would it be so bad for a nation to create its own money rather than allowing a private bank like the Bank of England to do so? After all the government can issue bonds so why not currency as well? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kbo234
Validated Poster
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pincher wrote: | Tell me your problem sonny - dysfunctional family, bereavement, head trauma, personality disorder, (inherited or acquired) E numbers or BO?
You're angry with your own private past not the public present... |
You sound a little angry yourself.
But, ignoring that, allow me to gracefully defer to your superior knowledge, understanding, emotional maturity and the power of your profound and absolutely accurate psychological insights. You should be running the country. Maybe you already are.
I'm sure most will agree that you are absolutly right about everything.
However, to estimate the Rothschild's wealth by projecting numbers based on a figure guessed at in the 1800's and 'inflation' is a fraudulent approach and you know it.
The whole point about fractional reserve banking is that the lender can lend many times his actual wealth per year and charge interest above the rate of inflation on the loan. So if a banker lends 10 times his actual wealth and charges interest on his loans at 10% he has doubled his money in one year.
Now there have almost certainly been years when banking insiders have more than doubled their money. The year of the Wall Street Crash for instance. This collapse was knowingly precipitated by bankers who sold dear, bought back cheap and multiplied their real assets hugely. This was a legal scam. Fractional Reserve banking is a criminal enterprise. Period. There was a time when the Christian Churches condemned this kind of lending as immoral. It was a serious sin known as usury.
More than the money issue in itself, the objectionable thing is the way it grants to the lender a power over the borrower. If the lender were a government then there is some chance that, by the democratic process, the lender might be benign in intent. The banking cartels are anything but.
It was with good reason that Christ drove the moneychangers from the temple.
So keep your hair on little chap, or the information you proffer will not be taken seriously. We are used to abuse and disinfo on this site.
Some of us might be slow-witted but we are not stupid. When 9/11 chickens come home to roost people will, hopefully, see the moneylenders for what they are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pincher
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leiff wrote: | Pincher
Why would it be so bad for a nation to create its own money rather than allowing a private bank like the Bank of England to do so? After all the government can issue bonds so why not currency as well? |
The Bank of England was nationalised in 1946. It could be argued that the Bank's commercial status ceased as early as 1844 with the granting of its Royal Charter under which it could issue currency to the value of its own capital and gold reserves. I wouldn't get too obsessed with monetary issue as the cause of the worlds woes - it is a complete red herring.
I'd be interested to know where you received the impression that the BOE was still a private bank. Not that wretched DVD was it? LaRouche himself has a habit of lagging behind with his information (particularly with regards to the UK). As recently as 2003 he suggested that British Rail and British Steel were both 'bankrupt.'
Both had been privatised for 10 and 15 years respectively and had been renamed and, at least in the case of Corus (the old British Steel), were solvent.
Lyndon will be telling us he hates the Queen for her dictatorial rule over the American people next. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kbo234
Validated Poster
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Bank of England only creates 3% of the UK's money. The other 97% is created by HSBC, Lloyds, etc.
The US national debt currently stands at $ 8.5 Trillion. This is owed to international banks but is only a fraction of the money created for the US by the Federal Reserve. It isn't as if these bankers had to be in possession of all these trillions of dollars to lend in the first place (although they are definitely worth dozens, if not hundreds, of trillions). They are allowed to just create it out of nothing and then charge us all for the privelege. What a scam.
If you have a mortgage these people own your house. Our forefathers built the UK but the bankers get to own nearly everything! This is an intolerable situation when you realise what is going on.
With the kind of wealth these forces possess they get to choose who owns what. Notice how the biggest political issue in our lives, money creation, is never discussed in the media ? It is a 'done deal'.
Notice the news blackout on 9/11 ?
Notice the promotion of artists who come up with great ideas like the "Piss Christ" or Tracy Emin's public exposition of her sex life ?
Notice the interminable attacks on Christianity? Notice the disintegration of the family that has taken place over the last few decades. Yes, people enjoy being corrupted but the owners of the mainstream media DECIDE what values and attitudes will and will not be promoted. I see an agenda being promoted here. Others might just see it as giving people what they want.
Look at the trailer for Aaron Russo's film 'America: Freedom to Fascism'.
There are not many serious social developements happen by accident. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pincher
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So if a banker lends 10 times his actual wealth and charges interest on his loans at 10% he has doubled his money in one year.
kbo234, not only do you lack a basic understanding of economics, financial services and business practices you are also illogical, irrational and unreasonable.
How does a banker lend '10 times his own wealth?' Think about it for a moment. Still struggling? Let's burn off your red mist so you can actually see the problem. If I have only £1 to my name how do I lend you 10?
The banker too has to borrow - from the markets and from his depositers and he has to pay interest to both. He makes his money on 'the turn' - the difference on the interest he pays and the rate he charges (normally in the low, single digits).
The ever present risk of loan default and deposit withdrawal also has to be factored in. No banker could double his fortune in one year on commercial lending as you naively suggest. The vast bulk of the Rothschild fortune was not built this way. 'Fractional reserve banking' is largely an irrelevance to dupe the ignorant and the impressionable.
PS I am interested in your later claim that 97% of money is 'created' by high street banks like HSBC and Lloyds. What EXACTLY do you mean by this statement?
PPS Can you stop ranting like a demented ayatollah? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kbo234
Validated Poster
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pincher wrote: |
PPS Can you stop ranting like a demented ayatollah? |
OK |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kbo234
Validated Poster
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leiff
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 509
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pincher
Thankfully I'm not an economist and probably do spend far too much time hanging around 'conspiracy' web sites, but the question remains valid.
Do you think it is a bad idea for a nation to produce all of its own currency?
P.S.
This question has nothing to do with LaRouche! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackbear
Validated Poster
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 656
Location: up north
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:22 pm Post subject: Economics |
|
|
Many years ago X bought a safe. A pirate friend was soon going off on his travels bringing democracy to the world. He had quite a stash of gold at home. X suggested for a small fee he would look after it for him. Z, the pirate. thought good idea. This happy arrangement continued for a while.
One day X had an idea. I've got loads of gold and Z only pops in once in the blue moon when he needs a few coins, and since people know of my safe, and not forgetting the dangers of been mugged, ....... why not a simple promise to pay, on paper. Gosh, I will even pay Z to look after his gold.
The dust gathers on the gold, I need a bigger safe. But the printing presses of this Goldsmith spring into action.
Reserve ratio for banks today, is probably a few %, the controls are the economic climate and interest rate.
But who creates the billions of credit to the government through the sales of "gilts", ..........no prizes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pincher
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leiff wrote: | Pincher
Thankfully I'm not an economist and probably do spend far too much time hanging around 'conspiracy' web sites, but the question remains valid.
Do you think it is a bad idea for a nation to produce all of its own currency?
P.S.
This question has nothing to do with LaRouche! |
To be quite frank I've never considered this a serious matter as I've always assumed that national central banks enjoy a monopoly on money supply (I accept that there may well be exceptions to this rule).
Nobody has ever argued that the nationalization of the Bank of England was the key to economic recovery after WWII. However, it could be said that it was emblematic of a rigid economic doctrine that nationalized 50% of the economy (and regulated much else besides) that led to the stagnation and decline of the '60's and '70's.
If you were a conspiracist you couldn't argue that the former communist countries had anything but 100% control over the money supply. In the old USSR they had a fixed rate of exhcange of one rouble to the £. Once they deregulated and decided to float the rouble everyone could see what it was really worth - practically nothing.
In my view all this hogwash about money supply is just a recycling of ancient myths designed to put your money into the pockets of sensationalist authors (and DVD producers) and your pin numbers into the log books of cult leaders.
Guess who I mean by that... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skeptic
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
I managed to get on Galloway's radio show on Sunday
He only gave me a brief amount of time, but I managed to get a few points re: CNN poll, Morgan Reynolds and Able Danger...I mumbled a bit, but nevermind...here's the mp3:
http://www.speedyshare.com/496910368.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roger the Horse
Moderate Poster
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 159
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Skeptic wrote: | I managed to get on Galloway's radio show on Sunday
He only gave me a brief amount of time, but I managed to get a few points re: CNN poll, Morgan Reynolds and Able Danger...I mumbled a bit, but nevermind...here's the mp3:
http://www.speedyshare.com/496910368.html |
Nice one Skeptic. Still baffles me how someone as apparently on the ball about so many issues can then say something like I believe that planes bought down those towers but appears to ignore WTC 7!
_________________
Only sheep need a leader. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I heard you sunday Skeptic and you didn't come across as a loon,and got your few points aired for quite a large audience to hear 
I was surprised he let you have as long as that tbh, as ever the official line rules on 11/9. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UnKnownDemon
New Poster
Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 5
Location: Shropshire, England
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Some people are willfully ignorant so I suspect he is simply in denial. It's a shame, if he spoke as passionality on 9/11 as he did in that interview it would be another helping hand to spread the subject matter of 9/11 to a wider audience.
_________________
People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.
- Benjamin Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
