The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Whether we like it or not, it's going to happen.
Incase you people don't know, the international bankers that own the Federal Reserve, CIA, NSA etc(practially the whole world) are the ones behind all these tragic events in the world such as the World Wars, famous assassinations like Lincoln, MLK Jr., Kennedys, Cold War, Gulf War, and 9-11. The idea to "them" is to create these tragic events where they have to go liberate some country of their tyrant terrorist ruler, all the while building US military presence in every other country to later on promote one currency, one govt.
The truth is that we're not going to be U.S.A anymore. We're going to be N.A.U. Pretty soon, there won't be a Canada, U.S.A or a Mexico. There is this thing called Project for the New American Century, in which it merges the 3 N.A. countries into one major one called, the North American Union. The dollar will be obsolete, and a new currency, called the 'Amero' will take over. Kinda like the Euro has taken over the pounds in European Union, and Ecoi in what is now the African Union. After the N.A.U. gets established, all that's left is Asia. Once the Asian Union comes into play, then they will have it set to do the final steps in achieving one govt, one currency etc by merging these Unions together to make one super world union, hence the domination of this world by means of stripping away our liberties & nationalism.
Incase you people don't know, the international bankers that own the Federal Reserve, CIA, NSA etc(practially the whole world) are the ones behind all these tragic events in the world such as the World Wars, famous assassinations like Lincoln, MLK Jr., Kennedys, Cold War, Gulf War, and 9-11. The idea to "them" is to create these tragic events where they have to go liberate some country of their tyrant terrorist ruler, all the while building US military presence in every other country to later on promote one currency, one govt.
The truth is that we're not going to be U.S.A anymore. We're going to be N.A.U. Pretty soon, there won't be a Canada, U.S.A or a Mexico. There is this thing called Project for the New American Century, in which it merges the 3 N.A. countries into one major one called, the North American Union. The dollar will be obsolete, and a new currency, called the 'Amero' will take over. Kinda like the Euro has taken over the pounds in European Union, and Ecoi in what is now the African Union. After the N.A.U. gets established, all that's left is Asia. Once the Asian Union comes into play, then they will have it set to do the final steps in achieving one govt, one currency etc by merging these Unions together to make one super world union, hence the domination of this world by means of stripping away our liberties & nationalism.
Page:
Dont worry, National Treasure 2 comes out in december. Apparently its about the missing diaries of John Wilkes Booth. I have every confidence Nicholas Cage is gonna blow this whole case wide open!! Then we'll know the truth.
Edit: Wait... this doesn't fit... Hmm :(
I agree, as I intend to eliminate 99.95% of the population of the world, leaving around 300,000 people alive =D
I've done the math, assuming a growth rate of 1.7%, this leaves me with around 41 years before the population doubles, they gain confidence and overthrow me. =(
[S][This was in the ID forum... but i see its been posted here too]
I agree, as I intend to eliminate 99.95% of the population of the world, leaving around 300,000 people alive =D
I've done the math, assuming a growth rate of 1.7%, this leaves me with around 41 years before the population doubles, they gain confidence and overthrow me. =(
[S][This was in the ID forum... but i see its been posted here too]
Der Nazi wrote:
> So bankers were behind the Lincoln Assassination, before the
> time of large-scale international finance?
You got it!
A little known attempt was made to strip the Federal Reserve of its power to loan money to the government at HIGH interest rates. JFK signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. Mr. Kennedy's order gave the Treasury the power "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This meant that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation. The bankers didn't like what JFK was proposing, that he put the Federal Reserve & CIA out of business, so they got him first before he was able to abolish the Fed Res & CIA, both privately owned by the banking elite. The executive order was stopped by LBJ shortly after JFK was murdered
The same thing happened to Lincoln. He need money to fund the Civil, but these bankers wanted to charge him 38% interest per note, and obviously that was a ludicrous idea. Lincoln made United States notes call Greenbacks to avoid having to pay large sums of interest to the bank. This got them mad, and so they killed him. Same with Andrew Jackson, who actually "killed the bank" before an attempt was made on his life.
JFK's Executive Order 11110 is still in affect today. What we need is a president brave enough to sign it through again. The question is, what future president is willing to pay the ultimate price?
> So bankers were behind the Lincoln Assassination, before the
> time of large-scale international finance?
You got it!
A little known attempt was made to strip the Federal Reserve of its power to loan money to the government at HIGH interest rates. JFK signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. Mr. Kennedy's order gave the Treasury the power "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This meant that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation. The bankers didn't like what JFK was proposing, that he put the Federal Reserve & CIA out of business, so they got him first before he was able to abolish the Fed Res & CIA, both privately owned by the banking elite. The executive order was stopped by LBJ shortly after JFK was murdered
The same thing happened to Lincoln. He need money to fund the Civil, but these bankers wanted to charge him 38% interest per note, and obviously that was a ludicrous idea. Lincoln made United States notes call Greenbacks to avoid having to pay large sums of interest to the bank. This got them mad, and so they killed him. Same with Andrew Jackson, who actually "killed the bank" before an attempt was made on his life.
JFK's Executive Order 11110 is still in affect today. What we need is a president brave enough to sign it through again. The question is, what future president is willing to pay the ultimate price?
SCALLYWAG wrote:
> Whether we like it or not, it's going to happen.
>
> Incase you people don't know, the international bankers that own
> the Federal Reserve, CIA, NSA etc(practially the whole world) are
> the ones behind all these tragic events in the world such as the
> World Wars, famous assassinations like Lincoln, MLK Jr.,
> Kennedys, Cold War, Gulf War, and 9-11. The idea to
> "them" is to create these tragic events where they
> have to go liberate some country of their tyrant terrorist
> ruler, all the while building US military presence in every
> other country to later on promote one currency, one govt.
So bankers were behind the Lincoln Assassination, before the time of large-scale international finance? I think that predates the first telegraph being laid between the US and UK. Riiight... and it wasn't a deranged ex-Marine with far-left beliefs who got ride of JFK (I don't remember how Bobby was killed)? And bankers started the Gulf War? Admittedly the American military recovered its tarnished reputation post-Vietnam, Grenada etc as a result, but to have started a war which did the important oil industry harm? Unlikely. The Cold War? So, the power struggle between the Soviets and US wasn't caused by a clash of ideologies and ideas of who occupied what, when Western banking had nothing to do with Soviet interests, what with their command economy and secret internal interest, etc etc? And, of course, all of these are linked?
Yes, the assassinations of JFK and Martin Luther King were difficult shots, but both were obvious targets for those who hated them (The KKK etc for King and Civil Rights protests, Extreme-Left activists opposed to the Bay of Pigs and other moves by Kennedy), and we all know the nonsense behind the JFK shooting, but with any rifle made since... 1910 that would have been possible, especially in the case of Lee Harvey Oswald, a trained Marine sharpshooter?
And there was a conspiracy in the Lincoln Assassination, as was bandied around the American press at the time, it was organised by a group of Southern nationalists; remember, they'd just lost a Civil War, and such sentiments had been growing for thirty years? And should I mention that before, say, the 1890s, US Presidents didn't have much in the way of security supporting them?
Oh, and 9/11. An excuse to upgrade security? Very much so a reason to, but it's happening could be attributed to the fact that the Bush administration ignored an awful lot of intelligence, and that the perpetrators simply managed to get past lacklustre security, leaving us to say "...And the rest is History". A plan to take over the world? Yes, of course, why not blame the Jews as well? They've also got nothing to do with it, but some idiot is going to blame them for it, along with the idiot who blames the US government, having looked at unclassified documents which prove nothing, a quick look at Loose Change too? It would be impossible to cover up something like that, and if it was the real deal, anyone invvestigating it would have been blocked or killed, yet there have of course been investigations, and they've been allowed?
>
>
> The truth is that we're not going to be U.S.A anymore. We're
> going to be N.A.U. Pretty soon, there won't be a Canada, U.S.A
> or a Mexico. There is this thing called Project for the New
> American Century, in which it merges the 3 N.A. countries into
> one major one called, the North American Union. The dollar will
> be obsolete, and a new currency, called the 'Amero' will take
> over. Kinda like the Euro has taken over the pounds in European
> Union, and Ecoi in what is now the African Union. After the
> N.A.U. gets established, all that's left is Asia. Once the Asian
> Union comes into play, then they will have it set to do the final
> steps in achieving one govt, one currency etc by merging these
> Unions together to make one super world union, hence the
> domination of this world by means of stripping away our
> liberties & nationalism.
The euro has taken over the pound, yes, ever been to the UK? We're still using the pound, and whether it's economics or a matter of national views, it's not yet been, and so far unlikely to be adopted. The Danes decided not to, for example, and they only joined the then-EEC with the UK and Eire in 1973 because their economy depended on it. The dollar to become obsolete? It's an international standard effectively, for example in the arms trade, and its availability and relative strength means that it's used in nations with weak currencies; any change would be unfeasilbe and pointless.
"North American Union?" Nearest you'll ever get to that is NAFTA, the trade agreement between the three nations, and I think a few others, and President Clinton had difficulty getting that through congress - so much so that he offered out so many "Carrots" (Opposed to Sticks, ie the Whips system as used over here) that congressmen took up the phrase "How many more shopping days 'til NAFTA?" forget it, such a move would be rejected in the US, and Presidential actions alone, such as Executive Orders, would not get it done - and if Congress does not approve of that, what are the chances of such extreme measures? And then, the US constitution and Supreme Court, or the 3/4 of State legislatures that need to approve changes to the Constitution, along with 2/3 of both Chambers of Congress?
Super World Union? Complete crap. Yes, there are increasing levels of EU interference in Europe, such as EU law overriding Parliamentary soveirignty in the UK, whereby it must be adopted, yet that is much further than imaginable - so what if the UN is weak, that's the nearest it gets. If most of the world's nations coudln't have stopped, say, the Korean War or the attempts at nuclear arnament in Iran and the like, what chances are there of that happening? The US is too heterogenerous to have only one level of government, so it would be ridiculously unfeasible on a world scale.
Yes, assassinations have happened, and indeed there are international scandals, such as what's currently going on with BAE; but linking together all sorts of unconnected themes to create something vaster than what Hillary Clinton called the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Theory", and coming up with a load of unprovable nonsense? If Roy Hattersley had botox, you wouldn't even come close to the vast amounts of unintelligible dribble that this "One World Government" is. To put it simply, this is an overactive imagination combined with movies such as "V for Vendetta" - written 20-30 years ago and originally set in the 1990s, yet to come close to becoming real? Anyone who believes that needs to actually start thinking outside of liars like David Icke who do such things only to get attention and money. He hasn't even got the qualifications he claims to have, for god's sake. So, in conclusion after much ranting: Complete and utter crap, but it'd make a good movie for anarchists to go moist for!
> Whether we like it or not, it's going to happen.
>
> Incase you people don't know, the international bankers that own
> the Federal Reserve, CIA, NSA etc(practially the whole world) are
> the ones behind all these tragic events in the world such as the
> World Wars, famous assassinations like Lincoln, MLK Jr.,
> Kennedys, Cold War, Gulf War, and 9-11. The idea to
> "them" is to create these tragic events where they
> have to go liberate some country of their tyrant terrorist
> ruler, all the while building US military presence in every
> other country to later on promote one currency, one govt.
So bankers were behind the Lincoln Assassination, before the time of large-scale international finance? I think that predates the first telegraph being laid between the US and UK. Riiight... and it wasn't a deranged ex-Marine with far-left beliefs who got ride of JFK (I don't remember how Bobby was killed)? And bankers started the Gulf War? Admittedly the American military recovered its tarnished reputation post-Vietnam, Grenada etc as a result, but to have started a war which did the important oil industry harm? Unlikely. The Cold War? So, the power struggle between the Soviets and US wasn't caused by a clash of ideologies and ideas of who occupied what, when Western banking had nothing to do with Soviet interests, what with their command economy and secret internal interest, etc etc? And, of course, all of these are linked?
Yes, the assassinations of JFK and Martin Luther King were difficult shots, but both were obvious targets for those who hated them (The KKK etc for King and Civil Rights protests, Extreme-Left activists opposed to the Bay of Pigs and other moves by Kennedy), and we all know the nonsense behind the JFK shooting, but with any rifle made since... 1910 that would have been possible, especially in the case of Lee Harvey Oswald, a trained Marine sharpshooter?
And there was a conspiracy in the Lincoln Assassination, as was bandied around the American press at the time, it was organised by a group of Southern nationalists; remember, they'd just lost a Civil War, and such sentiments had been growing for thirty years? And should I mention that before, say, the 1890s, US Presidents didn't have much in the way of security supporting them?
Oh, and 9/11. An excuse to upgrade security? Very much so a reason to, but it's happening could be attributed to the fact that the Bush administration ignored an awful lot of intelligence, and that the perpetrators simply managed to get past lacklustre security, leaving us to say "...And the rest is History". A plan to take over the world? Yes, of course, why not blame the Jews as well? They've also got nothing to do with it, but some idiot is going to blame them for it, along with the idiot who blames the US government, having looked at unclassified documents which prove nothing, a quick look at Loose Change too? It would be impossible to cover up something like that, and if it was the real deal, anyone invvestigating it would have been blocked or killed, yet there have of course been investigations, and they've been allowed?
>
>
> The truth is that we're not going to be U.S.A anymore. We're
> going to be N.A.U. Pretty soon, there won't be a Canada, U.S.A
> or a Mexico. There is this thing called Project for the New
> American Century, in which it merges the 3 N.A. countries into
> one major one called, the North American Union. The dollar will
> be obsolete, and a new currency, called the 'Amero' will take
> over. Kinda like the Euro has taken over the pounds in European
> Union, and Ecoi in what is now the African Union. After the
> N.A.U. gets established, all that's left is Asia. Once the Asian
> Union comes into play, then they will have it set to do the final
> steps in achieving one govt, one currency etc by merging these
> Unions together to make one super world union, hence the
> domination of this world by means of stripping away our
> liberties & nationalism.
The euro has taken over the pound, yes, ever been to the UK? We're still using the pound, and whether it's economics or a matter of national views, it's not yet been, and so far unlikely to be adopted. The Danes decided not to, for example, and they only joined the then-EEC with the UK and Eire in 1973 because their economy depended on it. The dollar to become obsolete? It's an international standard effectively, for example in the arms trade, and its availability and relative strength means that it's used in nations with weak currencies; any change would be unfeasilbe and pointless.
"North American Union?" Nearest you'll ever get to that is NAFTA, the trade agreement between the three nations, and I think a few others, and President Clinton had difficulty getting that through congress - so much so that he offered out so many "Carrots" (Opposed to Sticks, ie the Whips system as used over here) that congressmen took up the phrase "How many more shopping days 'til NAFTA?" forget it, such a move would be rejected in the US, and Presidential actions alone, such as Executive Orders, would not get it done - and if Congress does not approve of that, what are the chances of such extreme measures? And then, the US constitution and Supreme Court, or the 3/4 of State legislatures that need to approve changes to the Constitution, along with 2/3 of both Chambers of Congress?
Super World Union? Complete crap. Yes, there are increasing levels of EU interference in Europe, such as EU law overriding Parliamentary soveirignty in the UK, whereby it must be adopted, yet that is much further than imaginable - so what if the UN is weak, that's the nearest it gets. If most of the world's nations coudln't have stopped, say, the Korean War or the attempts at nuclear arnament in Iran and the like, what chances are there of that happening? The US is too heterogenerous to have only one level of government, so it would be ridiculously unfeasible on a world scale.
Yes, assassinations have happened, and indeed there are international scandals, such as what's currently going on with BAE; but linking together all sorts of unconnected themes to create something vaster than what Hillary Clinton called the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Theory", and coming up with a load of unprovable nonsense? If Roy Hattersley had botox, you wouldn't even come close to the vast amounts of unintelligible dribble that this "One World Government" is. To put it simply, this is an overactive imagination combined with movies such as "V for Vendetta" - written 20-30 years ago and originally set in the 1990s, yet to come close to becoming real? Anyone who believes that needs to actually start thinking outside of liars like David Icke who do such things only to get attention and money. He hasn't even got the qualifications he claims to have, for god's sake. So, in conclusion after much ranting: Complete and utter crap, but it'd make a good movie for anarchists to go moist for!
FantasyMeister wrote:
> I miss David Icke. In a mad world he was our rock of sanity.
True story: my mum was a reflexologist and David Icke was one of her patients/customers. A mate of mine (who used to think he was funny by saying "David Icke!" instead of "Jesus Christ!") what at our house and answered our telephone for me and took a message for my mum -- the end of the conversation was:
Mate: "And your name is ... ?"
Caller: "David Icke."
Mate: " ... "
Erm, not sure what my point was, but there you go.
> I miss David Icke. In a mad world he was our rock of sanity.
True story: my mum was a reflexologist and David Icke was one of her patients/customers. A mate of mine (who used to think he was funny by saying "David Icke!" instead of "Jesus Christ!") what at our house and answered our telephone for me and took a message for my mum -- the end of the conversation was:
Mate: "And your name is ... ?"
Caller: "David Icke."
Mate: " ... "
Erm, not sure what my point was, but there you go.
SCALLYWAG wrote:
> Why? What kick do these men get out of it? I have no clue.
Power silly. It's the ultimate aphrodisiac. Grab a couple of 6v batteries and pop them in your front left jeans pocket and go out for a night on the town. Girls fall for that one all the time. (I wouldn't recommend a car battery though, they can leak).
Power = Women = Offspring = Immortality
Just ask the Duracel Bunny.
> Why? What kick do these men get out of it? I have no clue.
Power silly. It's the ultimate aphrodisiac. Grab a couple of 6v batteries and pop them in your front left jeans pocket and go out for a night on the town. Girls fall for that one all the time. (I wouldn't recommend a car battery though, they can leak).
Power = Women = Offspring = Immortality
Just ask the Duracel Bunny.
Silent Thunder wrote:
> I don't like the name of the world government, is that all they
> could come up with?
What the gain is the consolidation of the power over many/all into the hands of a few.
Why? What kick do these men get out of it? I have no clue. Just a group of greedy crooks with their plan deviced to work out for them only. Is this the Anti-Christ? Who knows....
> I don't like the name of the world government, is that all they
> could come up with?
What the gain is the consolidation of the power over many/all into the hands of a few.
Why? What kick do these men get out of it? I have no clue. Just a group of greedy crooks with their plan deviced to work out for them only. Is this the Anti-Christ? Who knows....
I miss David Icke. In a mad world he was our rock of sanity.
Everybody knows the Illuminati are in control anyway. And David Icke already proved conclusively they're all reptilian.
Marks & Spencer was their original choice but they didn't think it had the right ring to it.
Page: