Yes, America has sucked!

[Juan_Bottom]

joecoolfrog,

Syria is on the English "Shopping List" today, friend. That's not one of the ones that happened a hundred years ago. And we are ignoring the Syrians today that were kicked out of Isreal, when she was formed. Because I don't even want to try tying that one into economics.

[Snorri1234]

When I think of conspiracies, I think of South Park and that episode where the government is leading conspiracy-thinkers on to make them think they're all-powerfull.

Also, Juan, I think it's rather silly to point out DM has missed the Euro-thing as he lives in the country that rejected it. I know that an "amero" could easily sneak up on the states, but at the same time I think that if it's like the euro it will be way better. The Euro is strong, stronger than most other currencies it replaced, and it has boosted the economy. (It did make everything more expensive, but that's because the government is compromised of dicks who rather eat a baby than give us money back.)

Basically, f*ck the amero as it won't really change much for the worse.

[Juan_Bottom]

I do believe that an Amero could only strengthen OUR economy, but I think it would hurt the Canadian and Mexican's monitary standard. And no I don't care if it does. What really concerns me is the Idea of three governments coming together in the name of economic safety. I don't want to triple the size of a government that has already failed me. And I definitly won't let it happen on their terms. Otherwise, I too would welcome a change.

[Snorri1234]

And since you brought up 911, I can't believe that you honestly think that terrorists brought the towers down. That's just bad science, so yeah, you're dumb.

But the alternative is also fucking dumb. It says you guys elected some guys who are so evil that they had no problem with massacring thousands of people to get some oil. It's linking all the events that happened since into one theory, while it could also be explained by incompotence coupled with brilliance. What if Bush/Cheney thought it was a good idea to abuse the fear of terror to go into some daft war? Why not suscribe to the theory that they just took advantage of circumstances instead of immediately claiming that they caused those circumstances?

Why is the idea that terrorists attacked you so silly? I remember a newstory from my country a few weeks back where a bunch of people managed to sneak a bomb into our biggest and well protected flight-center, and that's after 9/11. Why is it so hard to imagine some guys without explosives sneaking onto planes and causing a massive attack which we had never seen before (and therefore also weren't prepared for it)?

And no, when the leaders of North America begin openly discussing it, it stops being a "wildly implausable theory," doesn't it? A fact which has escaped you in your zeal for being dumb.

The theory which DM is talking about is the theory that the Amero is inevitable and also a conspiracy. He is not saying that the Amero doesn't stand a chance, he's saying that assumption that the amero will be inevitable is bad.
It might come, it might not come, but it's rather paranoid to assume it will come.

And is it just me, or do you NOT HAVE TO vote Republican or Democrat? wouldn't that be a good way to make your vote count? Maybe that 15% could get together with that 50%(the part that isn't felons) and vote for Mickey Mouse?

Well, is Mickey Mouse on the ballot? Governments are always having the power, it's just that with some creative thinking you can insure that they work against eachother instead of working against the people. They're not there to lead the country, they are there to (in a creative way) insure noone gets any absolute power.

[Snorri1234]

I do believe that an Amero could only strengthen OUR economy, but I think it would hurt the Canadian and Mexican's monitary standard. And no I don't care if it does. What really concerns me is the Idea of three governments coming together in the name of economic safety. I don't want to triple the size of a government that has already failed me. And I definitly won't let it happen on their terms. Otherwise, I too would welcome a change.

Yeah, I understand your concern. I don't like the way the european countries are forming a international government either, but I realise the only way to do something about it is infiltrating in that same government. You have to fight the system from the inside as always, because the outside way will never work.

The fact is that we're pretty much powerless unless someone with real balls stands up.

[Dancing Mustard]

you didn't argue with any facts, just concepts. Facts like Vicente Fox saying that NAFTA members have had a plan to introduce a new monitary system for years.

Oh yeah, I remember... all those 'facts' that you couldn't provide links to.
All those 'facts' that don't actually exist, and which I don't have to disprove, because currently they're nothing more than wild speculation and flagrant misrepresentation of otherwise innocent statments.

By the way, I have it on good authority that the Gingerbread man says the Amero isn't happening. Stop arguing with concepts, and start refuting 'facts' like that.

So yeah.......? And I never said it would be against the peoples will.

So this isn't a problem then? Right?

if you think that an Amero couldn't sneak up on you, that's because the lesson of the Euro has escaped you.

Oh hi there, you must be one of those American chappies who thinks they know more about how things were in Europe than the people who were actually living there.

Euros didn't sneak up. Euros were big news (mainstream and other) for a long time, referendums happened, summits happened, people in the know publicly talked about it. Then the country I live in quite rightly opted out, because our economy was not in synch with the rest of the nations signing up.
So yes, I have learnt the lessons of the Euro; that lesson being that new currency is serious business, and it doesn't just get sneaked into the back door via some shonky website and under the cloak of absolute media silence.

You also spoke of the 'new world order' which I said nothing about. That is not a theory I even subscribe too.

See... you are a teeny bit more rational than the rest of your comrades.

And since you brought up 911, I can't believe that you honestly think that terrorists brought the towers down. That's just bad science, so yeah, you're dumb.

No. I'm not.

I realise that it's easy to take some of the half-complete pictures of facts that the conspiracy nuts have put together, and draw the wrong conclusions re: pancaking and steel-melting etc, and conclude that it was scientifically impossible for what happened to happen. But if you actually trawl through the genuine experts opinions and look at all the rest of the information that the youtube scaremongers conveniently miss-out, then you'll realise that it was entirely possible for the towers to fall in the way they did.

So yeah. You just have a short attention span, and a remarkable willingness to believe lies that purport to be dispelling lies. In other words, no you're dumb.

when the leaders of North America begin openly discussing it, it stops being a "wildly implausable theory," doesn't it?

In this case yes... what with them being the people with the power to actually put it into place. If officials were openly confirming this, then it wouldn't be implausible. Given that nobody but angry conspiracy gobbling internet bloggers are talking about it, then it's still implausible speculation.

And is it just me, or do you NOT HAVE TO vote Republican or Democrat? wouldn't that be a good way to make your vote count? Maybe that 15% could get together with that 50%(the part that isn't felons) and vote for Mickey Mouse?

Don't come whinging to me about the deficiencies of your electoral system, that's not what we're here to debate, and it's something I don't greatly care about... I was just pointing out the flaws in your original argument, not making some comment on your (essentialy) two-party sytem.

And you brought up aliens, I'm no Alien nutjob.

What are you even talking about? I didn't talk about them at all...

Look, here's a figure who is no doubt familiar to you, who agrees with me:




PS. Could you quit with the childish "you're dumb" shit. This is allegedly a serious debate, and acting like an infant isn't going to help you win it. Thanks.

[Juan_Bottom]

I gots to say that I think the explination of 911 IS the fucking dumb explination(bad science). I never try to tie the events after 911 to the conspiracy. Thats where the facts end, and speculation begins. But I would never believe that a bunch of guys in a cave could do a job that the most powerful military in the world could not. And let us never forget that our government ADMITS that they blew up the battleship MAINE to get the public on board for a war with Spain. They ADMIT that they blew up our own patrol boat to go to war with North Vietnam. I think that this is just an expansion of that way of thinking. And in a recent letter to the president of IRAN, GARY HART(secretary of the Dept. of Homeland Security) said that our government will stage another terrorist attack to get the public on board to bomb IRAN.

This is all just an argument for the possibility of a staged attack though.

And you're right, the Amero is not inevitable. The fact that we are talking about it proves it. But its NOT speculative to say that there are plans to introduce one.

[Dancing Mustard]

I gots to say that I think the explination of 911 IS the fucking dumb explination(bad science).

Good for you... we'll chat about it another time.
Suffice to say that I'm fairly sure you're wrong, and that 'bad science' is just another annoying catchy-moniker that means nothing.

There's some fascinating threads in this forum on the issue if you feel like having a search btw.

let us never forget that our government ADMITS that they blew up the battleship MAINE to get the public on board for a war with Spain. They ADMIT that they blew up our own patrol boat to go to war with North Vietnam. I think that this is just an expansion of that way of thinking.

Past events, all worrying stuff, but they don't actually prove anything in the instant case.

Anyway, this is one for another thread...

And in a recent letter to the president of IRAN, GARY HART(secretary of the Dept. of Homeland Security) said that our government will stage another terrorist attack to get the public on board to bomb IRAN.

Stated it will, or speculated it might be possible? Again, no links from you to put these staggering claims in context. But as I say, this is one best saved for another rainy day.

And you're right, the Amero is not inevitable. The fact that we are talking about it proves it. But its NOT speculative to say that there are plans to introduce one.

I'd agree if you amended that to say "it's not speculative to say that people have considered and debated the merits of introducing them". The idea that there are "plans to introduce" them is still far too strong a notion to draw from the facts which are actually available; sure there might be people who'd like to introduce them, and people who have debated doing such a thing... but a concrete plan drawn up for it all, I'm afraid that's just a bit too far.

[Juan_Bottom]

Would you listen to Vicente Fox saying that there has been a plan to introduce A single monitary unit for North America? You asked for someone High up and in the know. Go listen and listen to his interview on Larry King. I keep pointing you back.

And I'm shocked to hear you say that you looked at the facts and don't believe that my government took down the towers. More CNN? Even my governments 911 commission report stated that the collapse was unlikely. I don't know; Given all the first of 911, that makes sense right? It was the first time in history that steel buildings ever collapse with "fire" as the official explanation (three times), and it was the first time a plane has ever vaporized (happened twice). I believe that it was also the first time in history that a world bank came up missing $20 billion in gold, melted away in a fire. And lets not forget all the people inside the towers who've testified that there were bombs. Or the firemen who said that two hoses would put the flames out in five minutes. Maybe I don't understand the Euro, but you are waaaay off base with 911.

[Juan_Bottom]

Unsolicited Advice to the Government of Iran

Presuming that you are not actually ignorant enough to desire war with the United States, you might be well advised to read the history of the sinking of the U.S.S. Maine in Havana harbor in 1898 and the history of the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964.

Having done so, you will surely recognize that Americans are reluctant to go to war unless attacked. Until Pearl Harbor, we were even reluctant to get involved in World War II. For historians of American wars the question is whether we provoke provocations.

Given the unilateral U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, you are obviously thinking the rules have changed. Provocation is no longer required to take America to war. But even in this instance, we were led to believe that the mass murderer of American civilians, Osama bin Laden, was lurking, literally or figuratively, in the vicinity of Baghdad.

Given all this, you would probably be well advised to keep your forces, including clandestine forces, as far away from the Iraqi border as you can. You might even consider bringing in some neighbors to verify that you are not shipping arms next door. Tone down the rhetoric on Zionism. You've established your credentials with those in your world who thrive on that.

If it makes you feel powerful to hurl accusations at the American eagle, have at it. Sticks and stones, etc. But, for the next sixteen months or so, you should not only not take provocative actions, you should not seem to be doing so.

For the vast majority of Americans who seek no wider war, in the Middle East or elsewhere, don't tempt fate. Don't give a certain vice president we know the justification he is seeking to attack your country. That is unless you happen to like having bombs fall on your head.


This is Gary Harts letter. There is a video, on YOUTUBE(I know you'll hate that), of some students confronting him with it. At first he shruggs it off, but then admits to writing it. It's not even a bombshell really, Because we have been hearing talk of war with Iran for a while now.

[suggs]

Yeah, war with Iran will prob. happen. I just hope the US does a proper job this time.
Ya see, as Toby Ziegler put it: (referring to Islamic fundamentalists, ie murders and women beaters)

"They will like us when we win.
They will like us when WE WIN".

Morality, is what it comes down to in the end. Plus, only the good guys are allowed nuclear weapons, I'm afraid. Not fucking cultish, illiterate, bigoted, (its worht repeating) WOMEN BEATING pieces of shit.

Bomb 'em. Bomb 'em to f*ck, until they teach Thomas Paine. And like it.

Edit: In response to the post below, no I am not being sarcastic.

[Juan_Bottom]

While I cannot tell if your being sarcastic or not, I really doubt if a war can materialize between the US an Iran. After the sell-out of our money a couple of weeks ago, a bunch of nations(Russia being the strongest) put their money in Irans OIL BANK. That is a public vote of confidence in Iran, over the US, isn't it? And the very next day, Bush traved to Russia to discuss our European Missle Defense system(probably not.). And let's not forget that China is allied with Iran. This would put the public alliances at America, Isreal, and Great Briton vs Iran, Syria, Russia, and China.

I think that an open war with China would be the best thing economically for America, I just think that the cards are too stacked against us. Even if Bush plans to nuke Tehrans Nuclear power plant.

But it is definitly true that war is an option on the table.

[Frigidus]

While I cannot tell if your being sarcastic or not, I really doubt if a war can materialize between the US an Iran. After the sell-out of our money a couple of weeks ago, a bunch of nations(Russia being the strongest) put their money in Irans OIL BANK. That is a public vote of confidence in Iran, over the US, isn't it? And the very next day, Bush traved to Russia to discuss our European Missle Defense system(probably not.). And let's not forget that China is allied with Iran. This would put the public alliances at America, Isreal, and Great Briton vs Iran, Syria, Russia, and China.

I think that an open war with China would be the best thing economically for America, I just think that the cards are too stacked against us. Even if Bush plans to nuke Tehrans Nuclear power plant.

But it is definitly true that war is an option on the table.

If you mean militarily, America has the edge. But people would shit themselves if we declared war on an entire fucking continent.

[Juan_Bottom]

I agree. That's why what Gary Hart said was soooo alarming. That our government will just stage another terrorist attack as an excuse to bomb Iran. To gain public support. But honestly, I don't think it will happen. People would really shit themselves.

[InkL0sed]

Juan_Bottom: Congratulations, you have just become my vote for "Most Reasonable Conspiracy Theorist."

[Juan_Bottom]

But the speculative thing about war with China is, that they have a CONTROLLING interest in our dollar. As our dollar fell, they exchanged their money for our own(as an investment). Now since the walkout, they are stuck, and so are we. If they trade back our money, they will lose hundreds of billions. It would inflate the dollar to its death. And it would send both economies into immediate depression. But if we ditch our money and tell them to get lost, at least one of us should pull out ok. And we are the stronger military.....

Only it means war.

[Juan_Bottom]

Thank you, INKLosed. You are pretty awesome.

[chaosfactor]

Do you know where your Portsmouth FC Avatar banner comes from? Cyrpus, King Richard the 1st stole it of of the byzantine greek ruler on his way back home after kicking Saladins arse in The Middle ~East (Ie, a by-project), and presented it too the first port of call,,, Namely Portsmouth, before meeting norses great great great great great great Flame mother.

[chaosfactor]

Oh shit I forgot to quote someone, oh well,
what were we talking about, America Sucking?
Average Mental IQ of a squirrel, Charm of a Toaster, Ego of an Idiot, Somewhere west of Central, Best forgotten about, we Brits Invented the internet, Get off our land filth

[muy_thaiguy]

Oh shit I forgot to quote someone, oh well,
what were we talking about, America Sucking?
Average Mental IQ of a squirrel, Charm of a Toaster, Ego of an Idiot, Somewhere west of Central, Best forgotten about, we Brits Invented the internet, Get off our land filth

Oh go drink your tea and continue believing that you are still high and mighty.

[Juan_Bottom]

I realize that I may not have communicated myself clearly, and so I apologize and want to make things right. that Website I posted should have all the links that you need. Like the Vicente Fox interview I was talking about. I think that I may have gotten upset over nothing?

Also, I don't understand a word of what CHAOSFACTOR said, save one thing. Al Gore invented the internet. AMERICA RULES WHOOOOO!!!!!!

[Dancing Mustard]

Would you listen to Vicente Fox saying ... I keep pointing you back.

You keep talking about it. But you don't seem to be able to provide any kind of link. That's all I'm asking for.

Also, I note that this is the only official source you can cite.

Btw, you are the most rational conspiracy theorist we've had here for some time. I believe I owe you an apology for being a little too dismissive in my original posts to you. Trust me though, if you'd seen some of your predecesors in action, I'm sure you'd understand my, originally, somewhat hostile tone (Xtratabasco is the name you're searching for, should you care to delve).

And I'm shocked to hear you say that you looked at the facts and don't believe that my government took down the towers. More CNN? Even my governments 911 commission report stated that the collapse was unlikely. I don't know; Given all the first of 911, that makes sense right? It was the first time in history that steel buildings ever collapse with "fire" as the official explanation (three times), and it was the first time a plane has ever vaporized (happened twice). I believe that it was also the first time in history that a world bank came up missing $20 billion in gold, melted away in a fire. And lets not forget all the people inside the towers who've testified that there were bombs. Or the firemen who said that two hoses would put the flames out in five minutes. Maybe I don't understand the Euro, but you are waaaay off base with 911.

Sorry, but these are all arguments we've heard before, and to which there are multiple logical rebutals. But this isn't the thread for them. Seriously though, go have a look for some of the old ones in here... there's some good stuff in there.

[The1exile]

Also, I don't understand a word of what CHAOSFACTOR said, save one thing. Al Gore invented the internet. AMERICA RULES WHOOOOO!!!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

[Juan_Bottom]

I only named this site because they have all the links that I would think anyone would need. After that, any curious party can find circumstancial evidence too, elsewhere.The link to the Vicente Fox interview can be found there I am sure, or just check the Larry King archives. The first time that Mr. Fox openly talked about the Amero, that I know of, was on Larry King Live. After that, he has spoken openly, several times, about the NAU and a single monitary system.

All right, I went and got the interview myself, for everyone to enjoy. The rest are just articles naming names, but all can be found at amerocurrency.com. And I hope that no one belives that it is incredulous to say that the Amero coins for sale today(the ones made at the Denver mint) are prototypes. Daniel Carr designed them, and that's what he called them. It's definitly open for debate, but not incredulous.

I have dail-up, so bringing back all this stuff is a real pain. But this is the LARRY KING interview.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYGrn0hZlCQ

And this is an article that appeared in the Globolization research paper.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... a&aid=7854

And this is an article about BANKINTRODUCTIONS.COM advising clients about the possability of the Amero coming within the next decade
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=43860

And this just names names.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/oc ... rrency.htm

[Ditocoaf]

That Amero website is a joke. My favorite piece is this picture featured there:

Would any serious website use that?