But older cars are better than todays cars, NOT

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by ALS, Jun 30, 2017.

  1. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    So you Scots-will probably leave GB-and perhaps re-sign-up with the Europeans.

    I "think" we- USA-E-INS claim that our muslim immigrants do assimilate-or at least aren't stuck in ghettos the way they are in France-
    meaning they are doing above average in economic terms.

    Rockrohar-I disagree-you wrote
    For this reason, the founding fathers of the US government asked, "can the people keep their government?" It was during Lincoln's administration the "we, by and for the people" lost their government held for almost a century. It was then, the tyranny ruled through bribery,

    The Civil war-was fought-mostly-to free slaves.
    At least 20% of the humans in southern states were slaves in 1860-forced migrants
    We-USA- are still paying the bill for their right to own people-forced migrants who sure as heck didn't want to be here.
  2. Jocko

    Jocko Active Member

    In the UK, in a lot of the English cities, the Pakistani Muslim population tend to live in particular areas of their own choosing. More enclaves than ghettos. They also do very well economically, as they tend to own lots of family owned and family run businesses, employing family members. One of the problems, as I see it, is that in recently arrived Muslim families the women do not mix with the general population. A lot of recently arrived Muslim women do not speak any English and do not attempt to learn it.This makes their acceptance into the community rather difficult. Scotland does not seem to have the same problems, perhaps due to the fact we don't have Pakistanis in anything like the same number and more recent immigrants tend to join other family members.
    There has been quite a few high profile cases of groups of Muslim men, particularly in the English Midlands, grooming and sexually abusing young white girls. This has led to a great deal of animosity and ill feeling in many communities.
    Regarding the Scots leaving the UK then rejoining the EU, that is certainly the SNP's plan. That puts me at odds with the party. I voted to leave Europe, and if it came to a vote to remain a member of the UK outside Europe, or Independence as a member of the EU, I would find the choice extremely difficult. I think the former would be my choice as things currently stand.
  3. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    With the US government corporate take over, which congress voted in on 1871 after Pres. Lincoln's assassination, the oligarch immediately began using the evolution theory propaganda to destroy any hope of a Creator. This tactic directed people only to the government for hope. Additionally, by spreading differing ideological politics to pit governments against each other, socialistic communism verses republic, verses democratic as had been done with religion against religion to create wars that the central bank could fund both sides with weapons. Obama funded ISIS to infiltrate Saudi Arabia as well fight terrorism, now are the terrorist! Destroying regimes that stand in the way , as Libya, whether I like that leader or not, is undeniable proof who's in control. People don't count, even if this is the sales pitch.

    Since people on their own want to live and let live, these hatreds are not what any one community would do. Yet those who held power would do if it served a bigger plan to facilitate wealth and secure power! War creates a consolidation of power and wealth.

    In world war 1, no one ever thought th US could be drugged into the war because the US public was still an isolationist country would have never agreed to get involved in another conflict, unless a false flag incident occurred. After Germany published a warning at war with England that all other countries to keep all ships out of their war zone. The US politicians allowed The ship Lusitania cruise ship to be sent into that war zone and sunk, which it was shot down and killed American citizens. The political hype was used as an excuse to declare war on Germany and get the youth to get riled up to fight. Interestingly, the federal reserve was created at the same time, as with the first world war.

    In world war 2 Germany's war efforts were funded by then, bank president Prescott Bush grandfather to President Bush, while also the government agencies were funding federal bid contracts with US corporations to build warplanes, ships, guns and tanks. Hitler was congratulated by Winston Churchill for getting German people reorganized after loosing WW1, back to work creating real value, since people were freezing to death and starving. This was nothing more of a society experiment of rebuilding a new world order government to conduct mass killings, fascist corporate control, genetic engineering. Hitler was used like a pawn that also made bankers rich! After that war the IMF global central bank was established for thee next strategic glottalization plan, upgrading the now defunct League of nations with United Nations new agencies NATO, WHO for their new government. We see the same political excuse for the US sending troops to fight the political Vietnam war with the never confirmed sinking of the ship Tonkin, used to enter the war and fight communism, spending billions of wasted dollars and millions of lives. Iraq is another example, where the first president Bush killed over 500,000 children in 1990 bombing before the war. Was all this just an accident? Getting involved in politics is a game like fighting over which car is better. A person's outlook attitude promotes either life or death, is their spirit each of us choose.

    Diversity in man and culture make life interesting, as anyone of us could find ourselves being a part of with or without consent, certainly wouldn't think we need to destroy it! When we see obsolescences built in, it becomes obvious destruction is the plan. Yet those bent on hurting innocent people for greedy and selfish gain are seen to be the real criminals to be taken out of society. The oligarch see themselves above the common people free to do whatever pleases them. The fact they inherited wealth and live as parasites off the common man is reprehensible. Many politicians vie to be accepted, but are easily discarded. "Scum always rises to the top"

    Thinking in principle truths lead to understanding, so as to help everyone, not destroy it. Only greed tries to kill off anyone else that sees others as competition. Forcing others to change what's unnatural is a violation of that person's unalienable rights, unless the belief that there is no Creator, we amount to nothing more than cattle with no other hope than to be slaughtered and used. Since the principle truth of "cause and effect" is evidence of a Creator, there is a hope other than this short and temporary life, so that we can build on our understanding of this truth, if we are to have any faith for a future without men ruling men.
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2017
  4. Jocko

    Jocko Active Member

    And there's me and many other Brits thought Pearl Harbor brought the US into the war.
  5. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    If a person accept what is hearsay, they more than likely will not look any further, simply accept what they are told without further looking! In a court of law, hearsay is inadmissible! If we don't look for documented evidence, we should not expect to develop more than an opinion let alone useful information to make wise decisions.
    I hope you never take my word for it, but research it for yourself!
    You owe that much to yourself. I hate finding out after the fact, "I could of, would have or should have", if I'd only known, have no one else to blame, but myself. Like Led Zepplin's Robert Plant sang, "Nobody fault but mine" LOL

    Don't confuse WW1 with WW2. During the second world war,as Prescott Bush was funding Hitler's government, as many other corporations including Ford. The US knew about Japan's plan ahead of time and never warned the navel base in Hawaii, purposely left this base open to be attacked! This was set up to enter the war. Google search it! Also, the propaganda that dropping the atomic bombs on Japan saved lives, was nothing more than an excuse to make Japan another experiment to mimic of the US bankrupt economy running on a fiat currency that has been collapsed since the 1970's.
    You can find many documentaries films recorded back in the 1950'-1970's on you tube, from many different historians all confirming the same things.
    It's recorded history that many involved spoke about their involvement after the war was over, posting many sealed classified documents later opened after the statute of limitation ended.
    As with the supposed US civil war being over slavery, was made an issue was not the real reason for the war, but rather what they want people to think it was and end of slavery.
  6. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    Right-Japan(Germany's ally) sucker punched us.

    Right-we were at odds with Japan-refused to sell them scrap iron and oil-because
    1) we-correctly-suspected they were planning to dominate the Pacific-
    2) we also were appalled at how they were treating the Chinese-"Rape of Nanking" etc-but that was secondary to their plans to dominate the Pacific

    The Germans-we were actively fighting them-their subs- before the declaration of war-but if Hitler hadn't declared war on us-we might have just concentrated on japan-
    Germany-beginning of 1942-was having problems in USSR-even without our trucks-supplies-the USSR might have beaten Germany-eventually.
    Germans were suffering LOTS of casualties-their allies-Romanians I think and others-weren't high quality troops(why would they want to fight for Germany).
    USSR+ GB might have defeated Germany without our help.
    We sure as heck were going to defeat Japan.

    Funny various "not democracies" always seem to believe that Euro style democracies are weak-effete-won't fight-will quit
    Germany thought that in WW1-in regard to GB France
    Germany and Japan thought that in WW2 in regard to GB USA and our not democratic USSR allies

    Some Middle Easterners currently think roughly the same(won't fight too weak) in regard to Europe USA-
    why in the world would 3rd world folks think the Germans(who in living memory gleefully slaughtered their way across Europe N Africa USSR-) wouldn't be up for the mass murder of 3rd world immigrants-when they methodically murdered their own assimilated jewish citizens.
    Heck WW1 the Brits LITERALLY were their cousins.

    Same story Brits who fought 2 wars for the "free market free enterprise" right to sell opium to the poor Chinese-in exchange for high quality goods-silk ceramics-really think they are that far removed

    Europe-USA-history is soaked in blood warfare-total war.

    The French-literally BOMBED GREENPEACE-1985 or so-they are pretty aggressive about their security
    The small Greenpeace ship was planning to interfere with their Pacific nuclear testing-one person was killed

    We don't have to imagine what the Germans might do-they have done it in living memory.
  7. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    Democracy was proved to be a failed type of government, since popularity votes is based on opinions, not reality. Yet the US Republic was never a democracy in that managerial over site stewards were elected, not as leaders, but simply assure the people's will was enforced. Before the US became a corporation and the state governments came under the federal government no one really cared who was president. Afterward, a political divide began calling the US a democracy to supplant in the minds of citizens a different type of government. With the people politically divided, they are easy to manipulate or change direction in mainstream, simply by appointing an elected official through vote manipulation. Obama said, "Trump will never be president." as if he knew what would happen next. They are all puppets. We see what happened to Pres. Kennedy if you go against the oligarch.

    When England, Spain, France and other countries sent explorers, colonies and missionaries, it was in hopes to expand their government's rule, as a world power controlling subject citizens with their laws and taxes, as Rome had in Europe, suppressing individual freedoms. Yet when the new US Republic was formed by people who believed in god given personal rights that no government had the right to take away from anyone, told these governments, "don't tread on me" realized the people are the free economy, as workers and consumers, didn't want governments or central banks stealing and living off their blood sweat and tears, as parasites.

    In the bible, it speaks of these governments as "beasts rising out of the sea" of people who support them, which is the commercial, political and religious elements that benefit from it's existence. This is the seed produced by Satan's woman that comes to maturity to rule the world. While the US has already been sold out to support globalism, it has already exercised power over the whole world. According to bible chronology, in the book of Daniel, reveal the "times of the nations" right to rule that Satan was given to prove man could rule himself without the Creator, ended around Oct.1913. At that time, the appointed King as an heir of King David throne took seat unseen to human eyes, cast Satan down to his earthly domain, uses every lie and deception to turn people away from the truth, knowing he's got a short period of time, wants to drag everyone down with him. The principle truth, "Pride is before a crash." Satan makes himself a god.

    Historically, as in no other time in history, in the past 100 years, man has materially made more advanced technical progress that been commercially sold to be his salvation from life's struggles, while not being able to escape being enslaved to governmental control. In the bible, this 8th king (UN) that springs up out of the seventh king US/England world power from the Roman government will run riot on all nations, until the declare they now have, "Peace and Security" for themselves while most everyone is serving them, sudden destruction is upon them. As the Egyptian Pharaoh that went after the venerable trapped Israelites, they are the ones who walk into the trap.

    The theme of the bible is how truth and justice proves beyond a shadow of the doubt who the rightful ruler is. The Creator could have killed the rebels immediately, but would have only proved who was more powerful, not who has the right to rule. True freedom is taking in accurate knowledge and loving it enough to understand how to use it judiciously reflecting the Creator's personality, instead of following our temporary opinions and whims, as a freedom. The bible likens knowledge as a mine we must work to obtain the valuable gold and gems of truth. "The truth will set you free!" "We can't slave for two masters, we'll end up hating one and loving the other" or have a divided heart that will betray truth! Opinions divides our hearts!
  8. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    The words below your paraphrase of the Declaration of Independence
    were written by "founding fathers"
    but you certainly don't believe they meant what they wrote to apply to everyone?
    T Jefferson was a slave owner G Washington-same story-they sure as hell didn't mean for slaves or po folks to have the same rights they reserved for themselves.
    They were slave owners-and their Government-Limey and then the USA- allowed/encouraged them to enslave slaves-
    They literally lived off the blood sweat and tears of the slaves.
    The new US Republic was not what you think it was.
    and they were big on indentured servants too-one notch above slavery.

    Oh they could have "hired" poor Europeans for labor-but slaves were cheaper,so....
    (hell the potato famine-cheap labor- might have had more to do with the end of slavery than high ideal and morality)

    Yet when the new US Republic was formed by people who believed in god given personal rights that no government had the right to take away from anyone, told these governments, "don't tread on me" realized the people are the free economy, as workers and consumers, didn't want governments or central banks stealing and living off their blood sweat and tears, as parasites.
  9. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    One thing you are forgetting is immigrants moved to the US from everywhere because of the freedoms and the right to homestead. Many of whom were better known as cowboys, most of the time worked for only room and board, and only got paid if the crops they helped grow and cows taken care of went to slaughter and if was profitable year or not! That is of coarse if they stayed on hand at the ranch. Isn't that better than today's demand for free hand outs? You don't work, you don't eat!
    While black folks also owned black slaves, as their own families sold them, doesn't necessarily mean everyone in the US lived by the Declaration of Independence, as
    much as it reveals, man's attempt to be free from evil control governments, not families. Yet the truth be known, most black slaves were loved and trusted with their mater's children, as much as any family, sometimes more than blood relatives.
    It was the democratic party that created the KKK also reveals man's hatred and selfish greed for power that must be curtailed. Just like Satan, many think more of themselves than others, look for ways to get what they want now. Why try to heap everyone with the same attitude? Any truly loving family man knows there's more happiness with giving than receiving, especially when your wife and children have nothing to pay you back! Each person stands on their own two feet before the Creator.
    In Israel, a person who fell into debt, which could happen to anyone, no fault of their own, but by time and unforeseen occurrences, could sell himself into slavery to pay off their debt, instead of a bank taking their home away from one's family. A cyclic jubilee freed everyones debt, yet some who loved working for their master, choose to stay on, even marrying into that family. The idea that a master whipped his slaves, is the same as saying a farmer purposely destroyed his investment in farm equipment, is economically stupid. The lies are intended to spark the imagination of the same racial hatred stirred up, that the rulers use to hide behind the problems they create, similar to the bankrupt currency through corporate greed or the public is addicted to oil when the government uses more oil that the whole population combined. The political KKK democratic movement is responsible for racism, as much as black lives matters does today. Is this suppose to reflect everyone's attitude? Is it yours? I think you are smarter than that!
    By trying to compare truth with opinions, which we have been trained to do, this is a common trap we can fall into. Remember the OJ Simpson telephone voting charging $5 bucks to enter an opinion vote if OJ was guilty or not? The stations running this made millions of dollars from people who didn't have a clue or any facts to know anything, but the news coverage! It's the dummied down approach. The bible states in Proverbs, "Guard your heart, its the source of your life!" also to the untrained mind and heart motive, "the heart is desperate and treacherous, who can know it?" Only we can guard what we feed our mind on. Lies create doubts and opinions. Truth put into practice produces confidence (faith) from good results. We are free to choose even the bad, as Satan because he focused on it.
  10. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    Trying to defend slavery-2017-impossible.
    Hell is turned out to be impossible in 1861.
    Slavery wasn't invented in the south-colonies-
    probably as old as civilization organized warfare-maybe even older.
    But Thomas Jefferson knew it was evil
    Geez how can you write about "freedom from a tyrannical government" when your government sanctions taking freedom from fellow humans?
    He knew it-but he had big financial problems-couldn't bring himself to free them.

    My favorite USA heros-Generals Sherman and Grant
    Grant because he knew how to win the war-beat Lee -Lee was strictly a tactician(who knew he couldn't exchange man for man-casualty wise-but that is what he repeatedly did) Grant forced him to do just that.Once the Union troops became as good as the southern troops(south initially had an advantage rural vs city),but the Union troops learned battle hardened-they stood and fought.

    Sherman because despite his private feelings(which were mild by the standards of the day but racist by current standards) he hated the southern elite for forcing the poor southerners (not slave owners) to fight for their cause.He did his duty-followed his oath-and he was a very very good general-better strategy tactics than the southerners.

    Anyway-slavery-just isn't defensible.
    No one buys the "slaves treated like family"-they didn't buy it in 1861 and certainly not now.
    Yeah some were but that isn't the point.
    They weren't FREE-
    Impossible-to argue for freedom from tyranical government-while 25% of the population is not one bit free.
    And the Brits-1776-were not Tyrannical.
    The war was about TAXES-yeah $$.
    GB wanted the american colonies to pay for their-GB-latest interminable war with the French(their cousins)
    Going back to 1066 Normans-Normandy-North-men-vikings-Danes(explains Shakesphere(sic) interest in Danes/hamlet)
    Limeys were constantly battling with their cousins across the channel(literally their cousins in some cases)

    Your argument is just doesn't hold water-freedom for tyranny while greedy plantation owners are becoming the richest people on earth by enslaving people?
    They could have paid more-hired poor Micks- or some other variety of Euro-poor which is exactly what happened eventually.
    They found even cheaper labor-north and south-

    Anyway one of your points-the corporate elite dominate USA-
    that isn't new-goes waaay back to those plantations-and the various bankers-in the north and in Europe-that bankrolled the shipping trade etc.

    Pretty sure the bible says something like "nothing new under the sun" or maybe it was Shakes.(sic)
  11. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    News brief-"from wire reports-London" in our local paper
    "Scots urge post Brexit wisky protection"
    Scottish Economic Secretary Keith Brown has written to officials asking for strong legal protections for the industry-worth $5.3 billion-dollars
    EU laws will no longer apply to GBafter 2019 exit.
    Now apparently the law protects sales from substandard products-
    I don't think that means only Scots can make whisky-but maybe it means USA manufacturers can't sell alcohol and water infused with artificial colors flavors as Scotch in the EU
    $5,300,000,000 fair amount of $$
    Lots of folks like to swill pricy Scotch
    I'm not a whisky fan-bitter smokey astringent-(but Gin-a brit favorite is worse-smells tastes like perfume)
    but plenty of people like "GENUINE SCOTS SCOTCH" or something that sounds like it

    Yeah even Scotch will suffer with the Brexit deal

    Many years ago-1970's some young women I knew liked Scotch-loved Chivas Regal which seemed pricy-but I suspect Chivas wasn't "made in Scotland" Scotch
    But it had a GREAT LABEL- silver trimmed-so it sold well
    Taste wise-no better than Sir Malcolm(some cheap scotch my dad had around)
    Cutty Sark-Scotch I think-Great name great label(I always said Shark- sark??-looked it up-think it was underwear????)
    Great labels -names-sell-
    Power of advertising-you buy with your eyes
    Like the tiny car-Berkeley- great looking-slow as molasses-but great looking!
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2017
  12. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    phoebesis, The points made about slavery doesn't necessarily justify it, it simply points out how we all are slaves, whether we wish to admit it or not. You are right about none of us being free! The idea that man should be able to decide for themselves is even recognized by most courts, the same as the bible states.
    In the day it was called "manifest destiny" for anyone moving west. Yet whether we accept being a slave working for someone for nothing but a place to lay down at night and a bowl of soup or forced into it, as in a chain gang or sold into it by our own family to be someone else property, the same is provided. It's our attitude about it is based on how we see our relative position. Just because I live in the US, you either ignore that I never have supported a tyrannical corporate America or you are presumptuous in your opinion that the corporate USA is my government. The legal rights for any citizen to declare themselves sovereign citizen not part of this tyrannical government that I posted, also relating to driving you car and legal ownership, XCEL deleted, since there are more here for corporate America than I.
    Since you look up to these war heroes for corporate America, you must also support corporate America. While you say your opposed to slavery, you actually support it! SPEAK FOR YOURSELF, DO NOT INCLUDE ME! I DO NOT BELONG TO ANY MAN MADE GOVERNMENT!
    Either we serve joyfully to do good or we become a problem child looking for anyway out of our situation, instead of trying to be a better person. THIS IS THE POINT! If we rely on our opinions, we become impatient out of doubts, loosing all hope, except outright revolt that can hurt or kill even the innocent!
    The Jesus stated, "everyone who sins (makes mistakes) is a slave to sin." Since we all make mistakes, we easily fall into enslavement that is accountable to correct it, whether someone calls us on the carpet or no one else knows about it, but us!
    The principle truth, "what you sow, you reap" which is the same as "what goes around, comes around" takes hold if we fail to change and fix the problem. Any good mechanic looks for potential problems that could prove to be dangerous because we can become enslaved to a bigger problem if we ignore it. Fortunately, the Creator has given man a hope to choose either the riches of this corrupt world or the riches obtained obeying principled truth, which by the way was the Creator's first creation!

    While others can be examples, we should never compare ourselves to others and making heroes out of them is a mistake, since each one of our lives is uniquely different with problems they never addressed, we must make our own way. "riders on the storm"
    As long as you see freedom from tyranny outside of yourself and not within, it will be hard to reconcile both, the same way you try to believe a master would beat up and wound a slave he invested his hard earned money through his own labor, so his investment was disabled, is pure nonsense. Buying into the visions created in Hollywood or what governments have painted slavery to be a whipping boy, is exactly how they see you and me or anyone that refuses to do their bidding! The bible states, "no one has the right to infringe on another man's conscience." which the IRS does, though taxes are suppose to be voluntary. Slavery?
    As with your point of 1861, slavery was made moral issue the same way gay marriage is today, so gays can get tax breaks only heterosexual couples benefit from. Historic documentation of pres. Lincoln memoirs stated, he feared the creditors, which was the UK central banks still demanding payments from the colonial days over the state governments. The US economy was based n the southern agricultural states that produced the US GDP with slave labor. England's plan to create the industrial revolution needed to create a war to destroy the US economy, seize the government control by incorporating the US. Six years after Lincoln's assassination in 1871 US congress voted in the central bank, known today as the federal reserve. To try and justify destroying the US agricultural economy, stripping all the workers, slavery was made the issue of the day, painting tyrant masters with helpless slaves. The same is done today in a divorce. The judge see the woman as a poor and wonderful loving caretaker stuck at home with children and the man as a greedy sexual predator, walking wallet living the high life, responsible for all her misery needing to pay! Could this be true? Yes, but in most cases, it's far from the truth, which only a bigot would try to stereotype, as the government and their subsidiary Hollywood, has also done with slavery associated with skin color, which you obviously also have bought into, even though you know their policies is to live off enslaving people's weaknesses and work. Hitler said, "tell a lie long enough and the people will accept it as true."

    As with my point about car design weight to power ratio, Jay Leno shows off his cars he has built with this same concept, going back over 50 years ago using this same technology that modern manufactures purposely ignore.

    As has been repeatedly done to information presented here, this should not be misconstrued that I've endorsed slavery or I've chosen old or new cars, though I like them better, but only that the technology was already built in some old cars long before today, is still a valid means to gain clean mpg.
  13. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    Phoebesis, to address your comment, "No one buys the "slaves treated like family"-they didn't buy it in 1861 and certainly not now." NO ONE? Sounds like a drunk that says, "everyone drinks!" I have many foreign friends that tell me, "you are just like my family."

    This comment sounds racist since the slaves are people that have the same feelings like everyone else. It's how valued a person is for what they do, rather than the physical appearance. Maybe it's only you that refuses to accept people for who they are only to stereotype them in a demeaning term as "slave". Personally, I get great joy serving others and seeing their joy from my labors, even if they don't look like me. Even a dog or an old workhorse can become a beloved part of a family!
    Many slaves fought the northern troops and after the war refused to leave the plantation. They refused to move north to work for money in the industrial factories because it was too cold. It wasn't until the early 1900's when the agricultural economy was in decline and farm business failed, many moved north including these "x-slaves" and left the south. As a kid in a rural Chicago school, new kids swarmed our school from the south who's parents had moved there for corporate labor jobs. It was only in the intercity race riots provoked by the corporate city police where violence emerged.
    Regardless, many blacks away from the city were friends who respected everyone.
    Upon moving to Florida in the early 1970's the black communities were some of the nicest people I had developed many good friends.
    While these remarks could be construed you are racist, I believe you really are not and it's the misinformation you have been fed that has formed an incorrect opinion. Unless you state otherwise, I believe you mean the best!
  14. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    commentary on economic slavery
    The Race Against Time
    by Jeff Thomas | July 31, 2017

    For decades, in discussing the ever-increasing hegemony of the world’s principal governments (US, EU, et al.), I’ve been asked repeatedly, “When will the governments understand that this obsession they have to become all-powerful is not in the interests of the people?”

    The answer to this question has also remained the same for decades: never.

    Although most all thinking people will readily admit that they regard their government (and governments in general) to be both overreaching and corrupt, they somehow attribute political leaders with a desire to serve the people. This is almost never true.

    In my own experience in working with (and against) political leaders in multiple jurisdictions, I’ve found them to be remarkably similar to each other in their tendency to be shortsighted, self-aggrandizing, and almost totally indifferent to the well-being of their constituents. Indeed, it’s a real rarity to encounter a political leader who does not fit this description.

    Therefore, we should take as a given that all political leaders will continue to pursue their own power and wealth, at the expense of their citizenries.

    This, then, begs the question: “If they won’t stop themselves in this progression, is there no other outcome than eventual total slavery to the government?”

    Well, here, history informs us that this is not the case. All governments will tax the people as much as they can, regulate them as much as they can, socially dominate them as much as they can, and remove as many rights as they can. However, they rarely totally succeed and, even when they do, the clock is ticking against them.

    In 1999, I began to warn that the US military would steadily increase its warfare against other nations and would only cease their military expansion if and when economic collapse made it impossible to continue the expansion.

    In 2008, I began to warn that the US, EU, and other jurisdictions would eventually attempt to eliminate the use of paper currency, or “cash,” and force all people to rely almost totally on electronic transfers of money. (I had pictured plastic credit cards being used—I hadn’t imagined at that time that smartphones would make such transactions even easier.)

    In addition to the above abuses, I projected that these jurisdictions would become more collectivist, would increase legislation to dominate their citizens socially, and would eventually come to resemble police states.

    But, at the same time, I projected that, although I believed that all these developments would increase steadily, both in magnitude and frequency, they would reach a peak point, then begin to unravel—and would do so more quickly than they had been implemented.

    This would happen for two reasons, and neither of these reasons come from some crystal ball. They come from history.

    As has always occurred, for millennia, such rapidly expanding excesses cannot be created by governments without creating debt. The more rapid the level of change, the greater the debt necessary.

    Today, we’re witnessing the greatest level of debt the world has ever seen. As always in history, this is a ticking time bomb.

    The second reason is that such rapidly-expanding excesses cannot be created by governments without creating resentment. The more rapid the level of change, the greater the resentment.

    Taken as a whole, what this means is that all of the increased hegemony, of every type, rises to a peak, then collapses—often all at the same time.

    We can see the economic warning signs as the financial institutions have run out of new measures and are now relying on band-aid measures. This tells us that we’re entering the final years (or possibly months) of the debt mania. Consequently, the only remaining measures will come under the heading of abuse to the consumer within the system.

    Militarily, we see the end nearing, as the world becomes ever more resentful of the US as the self-imposed world policeman. (This is particularly acute outside of the US, as those who live outside the reach of the US media understand that the US has, for years, been inventing its excuses for warfare where there was no real justification.)

    For many years, I’ve said that we’ll know that the unravelling will be very near when the creators of the abuse begin to realise that the hegemony is nearing its end and is due for a reversal.

    Recently, two events have occurred that suggest that this part of the process has begun.

    First, the EU has launched public consultation to get the pulse of the people of Europe on their War on Cash programme (which they term, “de-cashing”).

    The findings, even though the questions were phrased to make it difficult to oppose the concept, indicate that more than 99% of respondents see no benefit in de-cashing. Further, 87% regard the use of cash as an essential personal freedom.

    Although the people of Europe have tolerated one hit after another from Brussels, de-cashing may well prove to be their Waterloo.

    As this was occurring, across the pond in the US, the military performed a study to learn how much further they can push the world with their present level of aggression and have determined that “the status quo that was hatched and nurtured by U.S. strategists after World War II,” and has been dramatically expanded in recent decades, “is not merely fraying but may, in fact, be collapsing.”

    It’s often assumed that empires tend to expand until a point at which they subside, but this is not the case. Very much like a market bubble, they tend to reach a dramatic peak just before they collapse. Almost invariably, those who are the last to understand that the end is near are those who are at the very apex of power. Therefore, rather than back off their programme of hegemony, they expand it right until economic collapse destroys it. Like heroin addiction, greater amounts of the drug are injected, right until the fatal overdose takes its toll.

    What this means to the reader is that, although he may either live in or in some way be under the control of one of the current empires, his lot is far from hopeless, but he must be wise enough to keep his powder dry until the collapse is under way.

    From the present day until the collapse, the empires will increase taxation, increase regulation, increase warfare, increase social dominance, and remove the rights of their people in ever more dramatic ways.

    Those who seek to sidestep this process might well pursue international diversification as a bridge to freedom. In this race against time, nations will make it increasingly difficult to escape, and freedom will only be realized after the collapse. The greater the preparedness today, the greater the likelihood of coming out the other side in several years with wealth and freedom intact.



    Jeff Thomas
  15. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    Evidence the US corporate political parties are part of the global elite by entering agreements and honoring murderous dictator Stalin's bust, in spite of public protest,
    as a great man who organized Russia's citizens into slave labor camps and murdering
    10's of millions of the population.
    By efforts controlling every industry sector, as we see shaping up in the automotive sector, the oligarch plan to eliminate all cars, trucks and vans by 2040, (posted above in previous post) eliminates personal freedom to travel claiming they are protecting people. Similarly, corporations like GE who claim to be helping people, also has government military war contracts would never risk that relationship by revealing government secrets against the publics better interests, even if it means killing their own people, let alone foreign women and children to further their cause. History provides the evidence! The cold war and disdain is nothing but a smokescreen!
  16. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    Terrorism is the same topic today being played out again!

  17. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    The new electric vehicles can not be made lightweight, due to the heavy batteries.
    The sad about electric vehicles is the short distance and long charge time is not practical for business as usual. The one link that makes electric cars practical is the micro turbine charge systems, China has built, Jaguar, besides several other manufactures, but the US regulatory has denied these cars, similarly to Tata motors air car. All car designs meet the US safety and clean air vehicle standards! Obviously clean air and public safety has nothing to do with it. [​IMG]
  18. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    The psychological war on people's minds to redirect them to be in conflict with principle truths and imaginary ideals is seen throughout history, is being played out today. Fake news lies are necessary to get people not to see the truth to divide and conquer the masses of people! It's plain to see with democrats global ideals trying to undermine republican national ideals.
    Great Briton's control over the world through financial control over other nations has used the concept of incorporating, classifying, industrialization, compartmentalizing, institutionalizing, stereotyping, profiling, creates an imaginary reality of what is good or bad by forcing people who buy into it to follow demented politically correct laws and rules meant to inhibit and prohibit truth, while enslaving everyone, instead of using common sense based on principle truth to guide a free conscience to serve to create real value! People being enslaved to these institutionalized mentalities are diametrically opposed to the free market comprised of consumers and entrepreneurs. Why? They want to be accepted by being politically correct!
    It was common sense to standardized measurements for tooling, so parts were widely made available to everyone supports a principle truth that all people are equal. It's not surprising that the very ones who try to support laws and rules that only support their ideals also must adjust their ideals back to principle truths, only when it's convenient and to their advantage because they have bankrupted the whole system they created, now want one currency, which they can hide the bankruptcy! A hypocritical oxymoron!
    As with the long lasting older all steel automobile still on the roads, the campaign to destroy these cars with "$5000 trade in cash for clunkers" to buy a new biodegradable plastic automobiles that are not expected to last more than 10 years, is obvious they don't want anyone to have access to any car by 2040 when all cars are hoped be made obsolete! Is this the will of the people on this forum? Many members here want personal transportation, yet ironically support slavery to the corporations that sell these lies. phoebesis claims to hate slavery, but has grown to love it! Yes, I slave to do a good job and create value, but how can phoebesis justify enslaving all men?
    I support the FREE the market, where people create and build their own value to have & offer to society! Why would any person not want to do this?
    Today's commentary explains:
    The Madhouse
    by Jeff Thomas | August 07, 2017
    In the late 17th century, we British decided that, as a humanitarian effort and public service, we’d collect up all the people from the towns and countryside who were bonkers and confine them in institutions, so that society could be protected from them.
    As so often proves the case, the idea of a collective solution to an individual problem is doomed to failure from the start.
    There are many problems with madhouses. First, they need funding and, of course, the entity that receives the funding is likely to prefer skimming off whatever they can, rather than spending it on the inmates. Second, the sort of people who apply to become staff are often not the most desirable, and in fact are often dangerous. Third, one madman might be a social problem, but what happens when you throw them all in together? Are conditions likely to make them less mad or more mad? (I would suggest the latter.)
    When I was a teenager, I had the dubious pleasure of visiting a state-run madhouse—the maximum-security ward, where all the most violent inmates were kept.

    I’d been asked to visit a short-term inmate named Billy, who’d been committed to the mental institution for a month as punishment for a petty crime. My purpose was to hopefully raise his spirits, but my one visit there provided me with insight that I couldn’t have gained otherwise and has stayed with me for life.

    I was taken through several layers of security before being led through a series of heavy steel doors into a large room. There were tables and chairs in the middle and beds along the walls. About fifteen men were talking congenially in small groupings.

    I sat down with Billy. Although we weren’t friends, he was glad to have a visitor, and the men with him were also glad to see a new face. One man was having a lunch that had been sent by a relative, and he insisted that I have his dessert, a cupcake. He seemed quite a nice guy, although I later learned from Billy that he had been a schoolteacher and was sentenced for life, having butchered his mother and a female pupil.

    Billy advised me that all of the inmates were easy to get along with, but most were relatively paranoid and could “go off.” He said that there had recently been a bloodbath in the ward, so everyone was enjoying a week or two of calm, hence the friendliness of my reception.

    However, soon, each inmate would begin to wonder if any of the others had managed to make or find a weapon. The more they worried, the more they’d try to get a hold of a weapon or make one themselves. After a month, it would be assumed that most of the men had a weapon of some sort. After two months, it was assumed that they all now had hidden weapons, and tension would be building. Conversations would diminish over time, and each man would become increasingly withdrawn.

    At some point, the paranoia would become so great that some errant word or small gesture by an inmate would inadvertently trigger violence in another inmate. When this happened, it became every man for himself immediately. They’d all reach for their weapons, and there would be a bloodbath. Some would try to hide in corners, whilst others would attack whoever might be near to them.

    Afterward, the weapons would be collected by the orderlies and those wounded would be taken to hospital. For a time, the survivors would return to congeniality—happy that there were no more weapons, allowing them a “normal” social life with each other.

    My visit was brief, only an hour or so and, during that time, all the inmates were quite calm and polite to me. I was perhaps nineteen at the time and, later, I mentally compared my rather privileged upbringing with the life of those committed to the asylum. I decided that, if I were ever in a situation that might result in my becoming an inmate in such a place, I’d exit the situation as quickly as possible, before I was trapped in such a deplorable institution.

    So. Fast-forward to the present day, and we witness the US government providing a regular stream of misinformation on the Middle East, Russia, China, and pretty much any nation that poses any economic threat to the present American hegemony.

    The network news in the US is clearly eating this up and expanding upon it—not only crying wolf, but using a bullhorn to do it. The US has more 24-hour news programmes than any other nation, and many of them spend over 90% of their time warning of the dangers of Russia and other “enemies.”

    It can truthfully be said that, when an empire slides into decline, the leaders almost always opt for war, partially because it creates a distraction from political misdeeds and partially because most people will get behind their government, no matter how flawed, if there’s a war on.

    This is clearly the case in the US today. The rhetoric-attack against other nations has largely succeeded in convincing Americans that Russia, China, the Middle East, etc. are “out to get us.” Russia and China, in particular, have consistently tried to expose the lie of this rhetoric, but their efforts are never reported on the US programmes, so the average American has no idea that he’s being lied to on a wholesale basis by his government and the complicit media.

    Virtually every news item that’s reached the American ear as to developments in Ukraine and Syria has been falsely reported by the US news, to the point that many Americans believe the US should “go in and straighten them out.”

    The creation of islands in the South China Sea by the Chinese, which they have held claim to for hundreds of years, has allowed US military “experts” to declare repeatedly on the news that “We can’t allow the Chinese to expand into the South China Sea.”

    And, of course, the US, in the last sixteen years, has invaded or bombed Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc., under the dubious claim of “keeping the world safe for democracy.”

    Again, cooler heads on the other side of this equation have done all they can to calm down the rhetoric. Even US allies in Europe, such as the French and Germans, have refused to endorse US sanctions against the Middle East and Russia, for fear that they might be dragged into not only a trade war, but possibly a shooting war.

    In such an atmosphere, it’s no wonder that the world in general is ramping up its storehouse of weaponry. As America celebrates the creation of a new aircraft carrier, the rest of the world does what it can to quietly build up its own arsenal, “just in case.”

    This, of course, is what foments wars, even world wars.

    When all the inmates begin to realise that tension is building and the other inmates now have lethal weapons, the question is no longer, “Can I win against them?” but, “Can I afford not to do all I can to protect myself, no matter the outcome?”

    This reveals a basic failing of empires—the assumption that they’ll force other nations to cave in to their threats. The opposite is in fact true. Once everyone is trapped in the madhouse together, the moment the violence is finally triggered, all the inmates reach for their weapons. And what happens after that is anybody’s guess.

    I’ve spent the balance of my life avoiding madhouses by living in countries that are not rooms within the madhouse. Today, the US is heating up the world to a dangerous degree, and those who don’t wish to be trapped in the madhouse when the tension boils over might be advised to seek a safer place to live before the panic occurs.

    Editor’s Note: Doug Casey, the original International Man, literally wrote the book on “escaping the madhouse.” Now Doug is sharing his strategies in a special video. Click here for the details.


    Last edited: Aug 8, 2017
  19. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

Share This Page