Mass Murderer Gets 98% Positive Feedback On Ebay

[Mr Arkadin]

nah, i'm not too into icke, though. there are many things that are too hard to prove there. there's more than enough proof of collusion without shapeshifting. i have no doubt that there's plenty of truth in many of his assertations, though. the rights of freemasonry speak of such things(the family line of cain and all that rot and drivel)....

Well i don't buy into the reptiles thing - however to be fair to Icke his objective is to just 'put it out there' and let you decide what you want to take from his findings - i mean the whole idea is to be free thinking. However as more and more 'back door' ideas pop into everyday life - chipping, DNA ID cards, CCTV, cashless society, etc - all for our own good of course - i do get the feeling there's some master plan at work that we have no idea of. Even if you don't buy into all or any conspiracy theories any right-minded person must see that something's going on and it isn't good. In a lot of ways i agree with you gary, but not on the gun issue - maybe i'm just too English for that (not European - i love my European neighbours but a European super state is not what i want and we're almost there).

i actually think Blair is a worse character than Saddam. At least under Saddam people knew they had a dictator. We get sold the idea of democracy as if we have some control over what happens when in reality we're no better than under a dictator. In fact we're worse because we foolishly believe we actually change things. If everyone just laid down their guns the Illuminati (or whatever) would seriously have no power - they rely on armies and police to carry out their plans. Sadly that can never happen due to human nature.

[garyb]

oh yes, that part is very real. did you see the article in the gaurdian recently where the british government expects to use nuetron bombs against compacted cities of protesters who have mandatory brain implants by the year 2035?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story ... 20,00.html

and the actual report:
http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/5CB29DC4 ... 3jan07.pdf

if we lay down our weapons, there will be nothing stopping the cleansing of the planet of 6 billion people.....there won't be any public opinion to be swayed by ghandi-like tactics....

[Mr Arkadin]

That's some scary shit, and in today's climate sadly believable (it would have seemed sci-fi a few years ago). i still don't see guns as empowering as you do, but my ideal sadly relies on the average Joes that populate the armies and police forces laying down their arms too - you're right if they have weapons and we don't then we're buggered if it comes to conflict. However if the only people who had weapons were a handful of the elite they would be easily overcome - without the plebs and proles to push the buttons and snap their heels they would have no power: we empower them in our own stupidity/blindness.

Gosh that sounds bleak, but i don't feel that positive about where we're going with technology to control the masses. There's already an elite club in Holland (i think) that uses chips for its members to access the VIP area. Slowly they're getting us used to the idea as something positive and there's lots more of this type of 1984-by-the-back-doot type stuff going on.

[King of Snake]

oh yes, that part is very real. did you see the article in the gaurdian recently where the british government expects to use nuetron bombs against compacted cities of protesters who have mandatory brain implants by the year 2035?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story ... 20,00.html

I wonder if we're reading the same article here because I read nothing about mandatory brain implants, or the british government using neutron bombs against protesters.
But if I were you I would start wearing my tin-foil hat already just to be sure

[Immanuel]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story ... 20,00.html

from the article:
"The global population is likely to grow to 8.5bn in 2035, with less developed countries accounting for 98% of that. Some 87% of people under the age of 25 live in the developing world."

That will be 170,000,000 people living in "higher developped countries". What would the reason for this heavy population decrease be? Seriously, it looks like statistical probaganda to me.

[garyb]

kos, did you read the headline of the gaurdian article? " Revolution, flashmobs, and brain chips. A grim vision of the future"

of course i made a worst case summary, but there's no reason to just dismiss without reading a little more. if you disagree, you don't have to get mad, i hope you're right. but i don't see how you're more qualified than i to interpet these things. you're as in the dark about the plans of the planners as anyone. i just read the planner's own policy papers from time to time. i'm not inside their apparently syphalittic heads....

did you read the actual report?

from the article:
The development of neutron weapons which destroy living organs but not buildings "might make a weapon of choice for extreme ethnic cleansing in an increasingly populated world".
and from the report:
ICT - By the end of the period it is likely that the majority of the global population will find
it difficult to ‘turn the outside world off’. ICT40 is likely to be so pervasive that people are
permanently connected to a network or two-way data stream with inherent challenges to
civil liberties; being disconnected could be considered suspicious. There are a number of
trends that will lead to this pervasiveness including: an expanding global economy,
potentially far-reaching improvements in processing power, greater cultural assimilation
and awareness of technology, and the continued convergence of information and
communication technologies. In turn, ICT will itself be a major engine of growth for the
global economy.
and
Erosion of Civil Liberties. Technology will enable pervasive surveillance in
response to terrorism, rising transnational crime and the growing capability of
disparate groups or individuals to inflict catastrophic damage or disruption.
Coupled with intrusive, highly responsive and accessible data-bases, the
emergence of a so-called ‘surveillance society’ will increasingly challenge
assumptions about privacy, with corresponding impacts on civil liberties and
human rights. These capabilities will be deployed by the private as well as the
public sector.
and
By 2035, an implantable information chip could be developed and wired directly to the
user’s brain. Information and entertainment choices would be accessible through
cognition and might include synthetic sensory perception beamed direct to the user’s
senses. Wider related ICT developments might include the invention of synthetic
telepathy, including mind-to-mind or telepathic dialogue. This type of development would
have obvious military and security, as well as control, legal and ethical, implications.
and
The ability to inflict organic destruction, while leaving infrastructure intact, might make it a
weapon of choice for extreme ethnic cleansing in an increasingly populated world.
and.....

this report was not designed to create panic. it does, however, illustrate the mindset of the planners of such things. if they have such a clear veiw of the future, they could certainly do more to stop the worst scenarios. instead, it's business as usual. all they need is for the sheep to "baaah" in agreement....


of course, it's statisical propaganda!

[Nestor]

Gary, is this you are talking about?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Vrl5Ti35Clk& ... ed&search=

To be truly worried about... anyway...

[garyb]

tip of the iceberg.
you see that the guy making the assertations was the head of the los angeles office of the fbi. just another foil hatter. but so many europeans know about this old religion and are ardent practitioners(they're not the only ones though), but don't know anything about the higher forms of the practice and who couldn't possibly believe such a thing...

why do you think every official national war cemetary has a statue of the goddess?

but that is off topic.

the point was the propaganda out there about the ebay purchase. the US news said the guy bought bullets on ebay. he bought a couple of empty clips. ebay doesn't even sell ammunition. it's illegal. the powers that be want to paint a picture of gun availability gone haywire with bullets up for grabs at the corner in a big barrel marked "free for all". "oh my! we can't allow that!" goes the cry of the nice but ignorant and lazy middle class, the only ones who's opinions matter(read 1984)....

[garyb]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story ... 20,00.html

from the article:
"The global population is likely to grow to 8.5bn in 2035, with less developed countries accounting for 98% of that. Some 87% of people under the age of 25 live in the developing world."

That will be 170,000,000 people living in "higher developped countries". What would the reason for this heavy population decrease be? Seriously, it looks like statistical probaganda to me.

uh, that would be from population control such as virus( live, sterility causing HPV vaccine administered to school girls as a "requirement"(though not by law) of school attendance, abortion, breakup of the family and social convention/"lifestyles" as well as chinese style forced one child policies. it includes cancer viri in vaccines and other environmental pressures, and the encouragement of "mercy death" as well as out and out murder of "fringe" or "rogue" elements of society.

the acknowledged goal for the human population is 500,000,000 for the entire world. that will require the death of 61/2 to 7 billion people. that's 6,500,000,000..... http://www.thegeorgiaguidestones.com/stones.htm this has been put forward as a goal by all the nations' royals as well as the heads of banking and business and science. the funny thing is, everybody's ok with it because they figure that the other guy's the one who's gonna get it....

[King of Snake]

kos, did you read the headline of the gaurdian article? " Revolution, flashmobs, and brain chips. A grim vision of the future"

of course i made a worst case summary, but there's no reason to just dismiss without reading a little more. if you disagree, you don't have to get mad, i hope you're right. but i don't see how you're more qualified than i to interpet these things. you're as in the dark about the plans of the planners as anyone. i just read the planner's own policy papers from time to time. i'm not inside their apparently syphalittic heads....

it's just that you were explaining it like your interpretation was what was actually being said in that article. It isn't. It speaks about brain implants sure, this is hardly surprising, although personally I don't really see it taking off anytime soon as a laptop replacement, but rather for medical purposes. Nowhere in the article does it say anything about mandatory brain-implants (supposedly implanted by The Government?). That is just your "worse case scenario". Sure it's possible, just like it's possible that aliens visited our planet. I just don't see it as nearly the most likely scenario.
It seems like you continuously deem the worst case scenario as the most probable scenario, no matter that there are dozen more scenario's that are much more probable. (Humanity has had atomic weapons for 60 years now but somehow we still managed to prevent nuclear war)

this report was not designed to create panic. it does, however, illustrate the mindset of the planners of such things.

This is a future possible scenario report, it is not a "plan" of any kind. Moreover, it's a specific military risk analysis so obviously it's gonna sound a bit doom and gloom.

if they have such a clear veiw of the future, they could certainly do more to stop the worst scenarios. instead, it's business as usual. all they need is for the sheep to "baaah" in agreement....

Actually I'd say the very reason the do these risk analysis, is to be able to counter worst case scenario's more effectively so I'd think you would be pleased that they did it. Also:

Admiral Chris Parry, head of the MoD's Development, Concepts & Doctrine Centre which drew up the report, describes the assessments as "probability-based, rather than predictive".

so it doesn't sound like they have a "clear view of the future" at all. Again it's just painting as many possible/probable scenario's as possible.

[garyb]

ok, you're putting words into my mouth now. i said this was the work of planners, which is obvious(they plan EVERYTHING in government for obvious reasons), not that this article was "the plan". obviously, it's a report, and obviously it's for public consumption. it's not any kind of in-depth careful, detailed study. my paraphrase was relativly accurrate though. what was said about implants was this(again!): ICT40 is likely to be so pervasive that people are
permanently connected to a network or two-way data stream with inherent challenges to
civil liberties; being disconnected could be considered suspicious.
most likely brain implants will be "voluntary" like eating. you won't HAVE to take the implant, but then you won't be able to participate in life either, and one might be in jail for being a likely terrorist(or just being "suspicious") this is most definitely implied in the report. don't think so? i hope you're right.

but, whatever. i wrote an hour long explanation that would've made this all clear to you, but then i had to go to work and my wife closed the window before i came home and sent it. so who cares, forget it. i hate typing enough to give it all up. one point i will make, it is the USA that you can thank for your democracy that you trust so much. the former relative freedom of the USA has been an inspiration to the world. this freedom has always been secured with a bullet(malcom x "the ballot or the bullet", thomas jefferson writing the declaration of independance). that freedom has always been predicated in that governments as organizations are untrustworthy by definition and must have their power curtailed, because the natural prediliction of governments is to usurp the power of it's people. without such thinking(inspired by english nobles who ripped human rights for themselves from their king, making him sign the magna carta at the point of a blade), y'all on the other side of the water would still owe your lives directly to your soveriegn, which points up our differences. all americans by law(not practice) are sovereign. the sovereign always has the choice in whether or not to weild weapons. serfs may never weild weapons, except to kill themselves or another sovereign's serfs, as their sovereigns are their earthly gods, not to be opposed.

it's nice in the Village. all your needs are taken care of and it's lovely there. all you have to do is cooperate. call me Number 6.

[King of Snake]

ok, you're putting words into my mouth now. i said this was the work of planners, which is obvious(they plan EVERYTHING in government for obvious reasons), not that this article was "the plan".

I stand corrected

obviously, it's a report, and obviously it's for public consumption. it's not any kind of in-depth careful, detailed study.

Strategic Trends is an independent view of the future produced by the Development,
Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC), a Directorate General within the UK’s Ministry of
Defence (MOD). It is a source document for the development of UK Defence Policy.

While I can't say how careful or in depth the study was (nor can you) it doesn't seem primarily made "for public consumption" according to that quote from the document.

my paraphrase was relativly accurrate though. what was said about implants was this(again!): ICT40 is likely to be so pervasive that people are
permanently connected to a network or two-way data stream with inherent challenges to
civil liberties; being disconnected could be considered suspicious.
most likely brain implants will be "voluntary" like eating. you won't HAVE to take the implant, but then you won't be able to participate in life either, and one might be in jail for being a likely terrorist(or just being "suspicious") this is most definitely implied in the report. don't think so? i hope you're right.

I don't know man, if we look at todays internet the extrapolation in the report isn't all that hard to figure out for everyone by themselves. Most people with cable or DSL internet lines are already connected pretty much permanently to a network and the issue of civil liberties and modern communication technology is oviously an important topic even today, so I'm not denying that even the current situation (for instance, excessive phone taps in USA, camera surveillance in the UK), is grounds for keeping a close eye on what the government does with regards to monitoring information and communication, but the extrapolation of "mandatory implants" is still just a wild conspiracy theory. Again, sure it COULD happen, but it's certainly not the most likely scenario. (even regardless of the question whether or not brain implants on such a level would become common in the coming 30 years, something I personally find to be in the realm of "flying cars" still)

but, whatever. i wrote an hour long explanation that would've made this all clear to you, but then i had to go to work and my wife closed the window before i came home and sent it. so who cares, forget it. i hate typing enough to give it all up.

well seeing as we both have the same information basically I don't neccesarily think that however long an "explanation" you would write would convince me of yourp point. Obviously we differ in our interpretations of the information we're given (which is perfectly fine of course just that when you say "if I just explain it to you it will all be clear" as if you have all the "facts" and I don't is pretty arrogant IMO)

[garyb]

arrogant?
ok, i'll eat that one, assuming we both have the same info.

hey man, have a good life. the leaders are trustworthy, at least where you live.

the mention of 2 way info technology was in reference to possible 2 way brain implants, but that's another 200 cups of coffee. this seems far out, but in light of things that were inpossible in your grandmother's prime that are commonplace today, i don't feel so safe in being dismissive. especially, given the things that are currently happening in the USA. it's not just a few phones being tapped, it's ALL of them. it's illegal immigrants getting bank accounts and loans with NO ID and NOT being arrested when committing crimes like drunken driving, manslaughter, and drug trafficking(police will confirm this, as will bank tellers, ive gone so far as to check the rumors and ASK), while citizens are subject to roadblock searches, demands for ID, spying on bank and credit card activity, phone tapping and government child abduction for such offences as spanking and driving without insurance. high ranking officials have said that the president has the right to torture the small child by crushing his testicles to get his father to talk if his father is suspected of being a "terrorist".(John Yoo, google it!)all this in the land of the "free"...of course, it was you grandmother who lived through such things in your country just 60 years ago.... the american forces were signed over to the U.N. during Clinton's administration for Kosovo, we truly have world government NOW in the form of trade agreements and all the "Unions", asian, african, european and now north american, all under the aegis of the U.N.. things are relatively calm, but stormclouds are forming...

one parting shot King, George Orwell worked for British intelligence. his books were non fiction. reread 1984(which was originally titled 1948...)

later...and thanks for the civil debate.

[petal]

One funny thing strikes me about this thread. Neither side of the discussion believes in the people we entrust with "dangerous" tools of power.

Distrust seems to be the one thing we have in commen.

[garyb]

with good reason. memory shows that to be prudent.

[petal]

I guess that sad fact can be said of both sides

[braincell]

...

[garyb]

so, kill me?
not very loving.....

[braincell]

Sorry Gary, I didn't mean to say that!

[garyb]

brother, there's no problem.