Oh Noo's for the people of the US

[Guiscard]

Man, if this is true, it's all the more reason for me to get the f*ck out of the US as soon as possible.

But I'm 99.9% sure that it isn't true, so I suppose I'm safe for now.

What the original article? 100% true:
Just google the name of the directive!

[red bull]

Man, if this is true, it's all the more reason for me to get the f*ck out of the US as soon as possible.

But I'm 99.9% sure that it isn't true, so I suppose I'm safe for now.

Ive seen this coming since the first election, So far it seems legit...
Not exactly what to search for either though "George Bush Dictator Clause"?

I totally agree its time to get out of the US before they start loading kids up in black trucks, even Columbia is looking to have a brighter future...

Pack your bags.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Send us a postcard from Mexico (or Columbia), let us know how great things are down there.

second that and could you send me a return address so i can send you some cards too

[Dmunster]

Man, if this is true, it's all the more reason for me to get the f*ck out of the US as soon as possible.

But I'm 99.9% sure that it isn't true, so I suppose I'm safe for now.

Ive seen this coming since the first election, So far it seems legit...
Not exactly what to search for either though "George Bush Dictator Clause"?

I totally agree its time to get out of the US before they start loading kids up in black trucks, even Columbia is looking to have a brighter future...

THe futures always bright in Colombia! All that blow!

[Anarchist]

I bet the weed and mushrooms are some of the best in the world too!

Official link of original post
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases ... 09-12.html

[I GOT SERVED]

I wasn't talking aboot the original article. I was talking about the WW3 dealy.

But I am incredibly surprised about the original article.

[jay_a2j]

I knew there was something about Bush that didn't sit right with me. Hold on tight! He has a year and a half to orchestrate the next 911 so he can assume "total control".

[Guiscard]

I knew there was something about Bush that didn't sit right with me. Hold on tight! He has a year and a half to orchestrate the next 911 so he can assume "total control".

Is it not applicable to any future president as well Jay?

Rome had more than one corrupt Emperor...

[b.k. barunt]

Isn't that the "trickle down effect"?

[2dimes]

I'm thinking Columbia and Mexico are not in the top ten places to flee toward. But is there some place looking good?

I'm questioning North America's ability to maintain it's current state as the fun place for too many more decades.

I have heard rumour that the Bush family perchased thousands of acres of land in a country in South America. Can't remember which one and never found out if it was fact or fiction.

[Anarchist]

I'm thinking Columbia and Mexico are not in the top ten places to flee toward. But is there some place looking good?

I'm questioning North America's ability to maintain it's current state as the fun place for too many more decades.

I have heard rumour that the Bush family perchased thousands of acres of land in a country in South America. Can't remember which one and never found out if it was fact or fiction.

Europe is very crowded and involved in world affairs,
Id say northern Europe might not be bad.
Still putting my money on South America being the place to go, after all Oceana would be nice but will be gone in fifty years....

America has wealth, but its own policies keep it from reaching its full potential, all great civilisations build themselves up for collapse. America is involved in too many wars and are on the verge of a great depression, not to mention certain right wing movements that scare the hell out of me!

As for the land it wouldnt suprise me, sure its not Central America?
my guess would be Brazil or Ecuador, ofcourse theres a revolution brewing between the people of South America and the private sector.

Also heard that the Bush family was in possesion of Geronimos' bones. Family wanted them back, never heard a result from it...

[b.k. barunt]

2dimes, Sri Lanka is the place to flee (sung to the tune of "Green Acres"), or Tasmania, depending on your climatic and terrain tastes. As to the (paltry) 40,000 acres that the Bush family purchased, it is in Guyana. The said reason for purchase was to help preserve the rain forest there (naahh, doesn't sound suspicious to me).

[2dimes]

Guyana was not where I had heard. Either that's a different story or there were two seperate purchases. I wouldn't be suprised if there were two.

I'm thinking buying a nice little acreage near them would be a good plan. I would suspect it will be a nice safe place. I guess one never knows for certain.

I think it was one of the countries that started with an A.

Tasmania sounds nice, except for that "gone in fifty years part." then again I probably only have about 70 or so left my self.

[Jenos Ridan]

If this is our fate, then I'm going to start piracy up on US ships (or, at least, any that pass near Indonesia or South America).

[Iz Man]

2dimes, Sri Lanka is the place to flee (sung to the tune of "Green Acres"), or Tasmania, depending on your climatic and terrain tastes. As to the (paltry) 40,000 acres that the Bush family purchased, it is in Guyana. The said reason for purchase was to help preserve the rain forest there (naahh, doesn't sound suspicious to me).

40k acres? He bought that? Unbelievable. I bet with his own money too. GRRRRRR

Well, at least the Bush's have a ways to go if they're to match the British Queen:

Balmoral Estate: 20k hectares (50,000+ acres)
Throw Sandrigham Estate in there and you can add an additional 8000 acres.
Oh, and there's Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, Palace of Holyrood House, and Hillsborough Castle. Not bad eh?

But wait, there's more........

Throw in the rest of the Royals, and you've got all kinds of uber-high society estates, now THAT"S nice.
The Prince of Wales:
Clarence House, London
Highgrove, Gloucestershire
Birkhall House, Balmoral
Llwynywormwood, Myddfai, Llandovery, Carmarthenshire
Tamarisk, Isles of Scilly
The Duke of York:
The Royal Lodge, Windsor, Berkshire
Buckingham Palace, London
The Earl and Countess of Wessex:
Bagshot Park, Surrey
Buckingham Palace, London
The Princess Royal:
St. James's Palace, London
The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester:
Kensington Palace, London
The Duke and Duchess of Kent:
Wren House, Kensington Palace, London
Prince and Princess Michael of Kent:
Kensington Palace, London
Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy:
Thatched House Lodge, Richmond, Surrey
St. James Palace, London

They're Royalty, you know, so why should they have to pay for it when the people will pick up the tab?

Gotta love that Monarchy......

[jnd94]

If this is our fate, then I'm going to start piracy up on US ships (or, at least, any that pass near Indonesia or South America).

I would SO join you. IF the apocalypse was to come, i would rent an old boat and hijack other boats. Best idea ever.

[Guiscard]

2dimes, Sri Lanka is the place to flee (sung to the tune of "Green Acres"), or Tasmania, depending on your climatic and terrain tastes. As to the (paltry) 40,000 acres that the Bush family purchased, it is in Guyana. The said reason for purchase was to help preserve the rain forest there (naahh, doesn't sound suspicious to me).

40k acres? He bought that? Unbelievable. I bet with his own money too. GRRRRRR

Well, at least the Bush's have a ways to go if they're to match the British Queen:

Balmoral Estate: 20k hectares (50,000+ acres)
Throw Sandrigham Estate in there and you can add an additional 8000 acres.
Oh, and there's Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, Palace of Holyrood House, and Hillsborough Castle. Not bad eh?

But wait, there's more........

Throw in the rest of the Royals, and you've got all kinds of uber-high society estates, now THAT"S nice.
The Prince of Wales:
Clarence House, London
Highgrove, Gloucestershire
Birkhall House, Balmoral
Llwynywormwood, Myddfai, Llandovery, Carmarthenshire
Tamarisk, Isles of Scilly
The Duke of York:
The Royal Lodge, Windsor, Berkshire
Buckingham Palace, London
The Earl and Countess of Wessex:
Bagshot Park, Surrey
Buckingham Palace, London
The Princess Royal:
St. James's Palace, London
The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester:
Kensington Palace, London
The Duke and Duchess of Kent:
Wren House, Kensington Palace, London
Prince and Princess Michael of Kent:
Kensington Palace, London
Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy:
Thatched House Lodge, Richmond, Surrey
St. James Palace, London

They're Royalty, you know, so why should they have to pay for it when the people will pick up the tab?

Gotta love that Monarchy......

And how many tourist dollars is Bush gonna get from people visiting his place in South America?

The Royal family and their estates are one of the biggest tourist draws in the UK.

[DirtyDishSoap]

Cant open the link, can someone copy and paste it so i know how badly were screwed?

[Iz Man]

And how many tourist dollars is Bush gonna get from people visiting his place in South America?
The Royal family and their estates are one of the biggest tourist draws in the UK.

It matters not if no "tourist revenue" is generated from a private purchase of land. Does that mean U.S. taxpayers should subsidize Disney World because its a huge tourist attraction?
So you mean to tell me the Wren House, Thatched House Lodge, Kensigton Palace, Bagshot Park, etc. are tourist attractions because people drive by and say "ah, Duke so-and-so lives there".?
My whole point of bringing up the "Royals" was in response to the standard attempt by the left to promote class-envy. That because someone (in this case Bush) is rich and purchases land, that person is baaaaad. Evil rich bad people. They don't need that money. Blah blah blah.
The Royals are rich from doing what? Do they live and reside on the fruits of their own labor? Or on the backs of the British people?
I ask you, as a Brit, what your take is on the Monarchy. I've seen one poll (albeit from 2002) that says 41% of Brits believe the Monarchy is out of date, and 44% believe the Royal Family costs too much money.

[Avron]

Cant open the link, can someone copy and paste it so i know how badly were screwed?

What one?

[Guiscard]

And how many tourist dollars is Bush gonna get from people visiting his place in South America?
The Royal family and their estates are one of the biggest tourist draws in the UK.

It matters not if no "tourist revenue" is generated from a private purchase of land. Does that mean U.S. taxpayers should subsidize Disney World because its a huge tourist attraction?
So you mean to tell me the Wren House, Thatched House Lodge, Kensigton Palace, Bagshot Park, etc. are tourist attractions because people drive by and say "ah, Duke so-and-so lives there".?
My whole point of bringing up the "Royals" was in response to the standard attempt by the left to promote class-envy. That because someone (in this case Bush) is rich and purchases land, that person is baaaaad. Evil rich bad people. They don't need that money. Blah blah blah.
The Royals are rich from doing what? Do they live and reside on the fruits of their own labor? Or on the backs of the British people?
I ask you, as a Brit, what your take is on the Monarchy. I've seen one poll (albeit from 2002) that says 41% of Brits believe the Monarchy is out of date, and 44% believe the Royal Family costs too much money.

Oh, I think you've missed the point of the story...

Bush's land purchases are generally considered deplorable because:

a) In some cases in South America it seems to be linked to control of natural resources, for example the water base, which could in the future be used to tighten the screw on South American dissent.

b) Some see it as somewhere to run and hide, like Nazi war criminals running to Brazil. If he is away from American laws he can be away from American prosecution.

And as a Brit, I can certainly tell you that a lot of people do support the monarchy. Approximately 70p a year (less than $2) of our taxes per person goes to the monarchy. To me that is brilliant value, and I approve of both the industry they bring to the country and the way in which they represent our nation. The Queen is the most dignified, composed and scandal-free representative our country could get. Then we take into account the charitable foundations and suchlike run by various royal figures (Prince Charles is a fine example) and we can see further benefit. The Royals are also Chancellors of prestigious Universities, unpaid ambassadors abroad and fulfil many more tasks which present a great image of Britain as a whole. It's not pre-revolutionary France... They don't exactly live to excess anymore, and there has been significant 'pruning' of the royal household in recent years which has seen more distant family members 'relegated', as it were, and royal privileges tightened.

Anyway, if you want to rip into the monarchy that's a different thread...

[DirtyDishSoap]

Cant open the link, can someone copy and paste it so i know how badly were screwed?

What one?

Nevermind, i didnt realize it was a video (At the college lab)

[Iz Man]

Bush's land purchases are generally considered deplorable because:

a) In some cases in South America it seems to be linked to control of natural resources, for example the water base, which could in the future be used to tighten the screw on South American dissent.

b) Some see it as somewhere to run and hide, like Nazi war criminals running to Brazil. If he is away from American laws he can be away from American prosecution.

Both of these accusations are pretty outrageous.

And as a Brit, I can certainly tell you that a lot of people do support the monarchy. Approximately 70p a year (less than $2) of our taxes per person goes to the monarchy. To me that is brilliant value, and I approve of both the industry they bring to the country and the way in which they represent our nation. The Queen is the most dignified, composed and scandal-free representative our country could get. Then we take into account the charitable foundations and suchlike run by various royal figures (Prince Charles is a fine example) and we can see further benefit. The Royals are also Chancellors of prestigious Universities, unpaid ambassadors abroad and fulfil many more tasks which present a great image of Britain as a whole. It's not pre-revolutionary France... They don't exactly live to excess anymore, and there has been significant 'pruning' of the royal household in recent years which has seen more distant family members 'relegated', as it were, and royal privileges tightened.

Fair enough. I don't dispute the good deeds or the good names of your Royalty. I just don't believe in the concept of a Monarchy, to me it makes no sense to subsidize an entire family and its future generations just because of who they are. Good deeds or not.
We have philanthropists in America too, and we don't give them palaces to live in.

Anyway, if you want to rip into the monarchy that's a different thread...

I didn't mean to "rip" your monarchy, just wondering how its existence is justified. No offense meant.

[Alexwales93]

Hopefully that report is utter crap.
Besides, I'm going to America in a year with my school, and I don't want a war going on!

[Guiscard]

Bush's land purchases are generally considered deplorable because:

a) In some cases in South America it seems to be linked to control of natural resources, for example the water base, which could in the future be used to tighten the screw on South American dissent.

b) Some see it as somewhere to run and hide, like Nazi war criminals running to Brazil. If he is away from American laws he can be away from American prosecution.

Both of these accusations are pretty outrageous.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international ... 28,00.html for a bit of a summary. I know they're a bit far fetched, but I just wanted to correct you on your understanding that the opposition was about class or money. I didn't think anyone disagreed with genuine and fair purchase, just the motivation.

[Anarchist]

Bush's land purchases are generally considered deplorable because:

a) In some cases in South America it seems to be linked to control of natural resources, for example the water base, which could in the future be used to tighten the screw on South American dissent.

b) Some see it as somewhere to run and hide, like Nazi war criminals running to Brazil. If he is away from American laws he can be away from American prosecution.

Both of these accusations are pretty outrageous.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international ... 28,00.html for a bit of a summary. I know they're a bit far fetched, but I just wanted to correct you on your understanding that the opposition was about class or money. I didn't think anyone disagreed with genuine and fair purchase, just the motivation.