It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

page: 438
<< 435  436  437    439  440  441 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 06:54 AM
Wait just a darn ethnocentric minute guys!

Why must the drone characters be read from left to right?

They could be read a la orthodox Jewish folk, as in Hebrew reading from right to left, or in Arabic again from right to left...

...or in Japanese, down and up and down and up...especially when they flip their comic books backwards from the back to the front to read, or any one of a number of other civilized lingos with non-Westerner surprises.

Ah, what the heck.

All I can say for sure is:

Lookie like da closet openeded once 'gen...and dem bats dey be a-flyin' out.

posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 12:12 PM
reply to post by klatunictobarata

Klatonictobarata,try the members list on ATS,the connection between Hamel and this legitimate energy source was posted several years ago by another member,that was the name that the posts were made under.

If you want to google then Google David Hamel and dont stop until you have listened to him personally explain his concepts and until you have seen the actual parts of his craft as he builds it.

Links are a lazy way to learn,fast but lazy,you miss to much if you just get linked to the juicy parts,like skipping all the boring chapters in a book.

Learning to understand HOW you got to the point of aquiring new information is equally important to the fact that you have learned something new.

If I managed to learn this with my limited computer skills---google--then surely I would hope that as others surf the information highway along the same path I have that THEY SEE THINGS THROUGH THEIR OWN EYES AND PROVIDE US ALL WITH THEIR OWN UNIQUE INTERPRETATION OF WHAT IS THERE AS FACT.

I didnt come here to simply argue in invalid point,I am aware of the amount of time that has been invested in this thread,but if I am expected to read each of four hundred plus pages of the thread then I think it is fair to expect some of the lazy members lurking here to do some real work for once.

I mean you for a start seem to be a little standoffish,read Hamels information,and pat yourself on the back because you have already added an important piece to this puzzle with your contribution.


Do you see that by simply working JUST a little bit you have shown us another important connection,you see the poster I named has an actual name for this energy type and function,I didnt understand it completely when I read it and I surely didnt google the name --I SHOULD HAVE--but am glad you did,I was unaware there was a connection to the name itself and crop circles,but it now seems worth looking into further thanks to your observation.

This poster identified Hamel as posessing the RIGHT concepts concerning this energy source or function.

A connection between the posters chosen name and crop circles or their contents is interesting,it shows that this wasnt a random comment by someone unversed with deeper issues we are discussing here,the poster is in the know and has shown it through their choice of name,like a clue if you will.

So we have someone who chooses a name with a direct connection to our topic of discussion, this person makes a post several years ago that DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTES ACTUAL AND PERTINENT KNOWLEDGE OF A NEW ENERGY SOURCE OF FUNCTION TO MR.DAVID HAMEL,a Canadian who spent most of his life researching and developing this information, and building prototypes of anti-gravity craft,then we end up here on this thread once again attributing this knowledge to Mr.David Hamel.

This guy posted long before I did and I just recently discovered the posts,I had no foreknowledge that these posts existed.

The issue here is acceptance of Hamel,then viewing the Probes in a new light,one that shows the need--by someone-- to COVER UP AND HIDE HAMELS CHRONOLOGICAL HISTORY OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPEMENT.

I am trying to show you how to understand why there has been such an incredible and ongoing effort to prove these probes are CGIed or hoaxed,NO ONE expected ,or obviously could have predicted ,there to be a corroboration between Hamels craft and the Probes that have been and will continue to be documented.

One must also understand that the government and other entities must stay ahead of all of the people interested and researching this issue today,SO THEY ARE VERY PRO-ACTIVE in their efforts to bury or distort information.

There is a high probability that someone already had private knowledge that we were being exposed to this form of technology and that sooner than later pictures and videos would begin showing up in the media.

The HOAX that has been PROVEN in this case "IS THE HOAX ITSELF",

This looks to be a peemptive strike at debunkery,a shot in the general direction of the documentation of the Probes themselves,I heard the sound of the shot and came to investigate,and HAMEL came onto the scene,we need to accept and incorporate tbis developement.

However many members seem to not understand the premise that THEY are required to do the grunt work and research to DISPROVE HAMELS DIRECT CONNECTION TO THE PROBES,and just because I pointed out what they overlooked doesnt place the burden of proof on me,it in fact obligates THEM to research and learn enough about Hamel to come back here and intelligently discuss the topic,you see obviously the people posting here are familiar with the probes and the pictures of them,therefore they already know generally what the Probes look like ---this is actually undeniable of most posters on this thread,SO THEY ARE IN A DIFFICULT SPOT RIGHT NOW,because as soon as they aknowledge that they have LEARNED WHAT DAVID HAMELS CRAFT LOOK LIKE AND HOW THEY FUNCTION,and accept the multi-decade chronological history of his research and developement AS BEING FACT,they must then admit what is to me the bloody obvious,that HAMELS ANTI-GRAVITY CRAFT AND THE PROBES HAVE COMPONENTS THAT ARE IDENTICAL IN FORM AND FUNCTION.

Not just identical in form,but also IN FUNCTION.

Its like force feeding babies,you cant tell them what the food will taste like,so they cant ever REALLY BE PREPARED FOR THE EXPERIENCE.Your reactions dictate their reaction as much as their own sensory input does at times.

Here is the information,I cant tell you how it will feel when you learn it,but I am trying to allow you the chance to experience it,you dont have to embrace the knowledge,in fact you can ignore it,but sooner or later you will need it so badly you will search for it desperately.

Hamel is undeniable,learn that and come back here,I didnt say embrace Hamel or even agree with him,I SAID LEARN ABOUT HIM,then when you come back you will be changed forever in your perspective.

I am really trying to force you to aknowledge and accept Hamels multi-decade chronological documented history of research and developement of anti-gravity craft,I dont care if you agree with Hamel or if you think his ideas may not be workable,those are your choices,but the existance of Hamel and his history ARE FACT,and must be aknowledged.

Once you accept these facts and incorporate them into your reality or perspective ,YOU IMMEDIATLY WILL BE DENIED THIS REDICULOUS PERSPECTIVE THAT THE PROBES ARE NOT REAL.

You yourself will not be able to deny the reality that the probes are in some aspects identical in form and function to David Hamels anti-gravity craft proto-types.

It matters not if Hamels craft flew or it didnt,it is his history that CANNOT BE ERASED.

You will then understand why this thread being manipulated into suggesting the Probes are a figment of someones imagination is in itself a designed and implemented DEBUNKERY HOAX.That is attempting a pre-emptive act of debunkery on information that will undoubtably ,inevitably become public knowledge.

Enter David Hamel,and now all who learn his work as consciencious observers.

posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 12:29 PM
Freelance-Zenarchrist,could you possibly connect the meaning in form and function as well as the locations in relation to the name on each particular part of Hamels craft,then compare it to pictures of the writing on the Probes to see if the particular LOCATION of the writing or symbols relates to Hamels english extrapolation of the same form and or function?

I am saying ,location,location,location,the where and the function will allow us to compare the symbols and english words that match to describe an identical concept.

Like two plumbers working together by virtue of their common acceptance and understanding of CONCEPT AND FORM AND FUNCTION,no verbal language is needed and if it is together they can EASILY CREATE ONE USING THEIR COMMON KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING.Two plumbers who spoke different languages could very easily install a toilet together and if they so chose could write a manual together and change EVER SINGLE TERM AND PHRASE but still provide an accurate educational resource,original to itself in terminology and language,but common to all other plumbing books in concept,form and function.

In some cases Hamels verbal explanations may have to be documented and independantly connected to the particular pieces of the probes symbols we wish to decipher.

There also may be commonalities in the types of information put on military craft,in terms of realation to form and function,we used to paint and word planes in our past and still do today,so we might expect for example that there will be some words and names that will be difficult to work with.The probes symbols might be approached this way because it is obvoiously military.

Hamels craft will be more difficult to pigeonhole because we didnt have a final build of his craft that was labeled and in use.But we have his own words.

We have to identify places on the craft and on the probes that have a common form and function,and go from there.So with Hamel we need to document the LOCATION of the labelling and document it as a location as opposed to just a word or symbol.

A picture of a piece and the symbols or words attatched compared to the same location on both craft.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by one4all]

posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 04:23 PM
You talk a lot nonsense and don't say nothing.

I would suggest, that this is worth a price. Thanks for the entertainment!

posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 05:24 PM
Why, Johnnie, it’s as easy as one, two, three when you see what one4all says:

Not just identical in form, but also IN FUNCTION.”

#2. “You yourself will not be able to deny the reality that the probes are in some aspects identical in form and function to David Hamels anti-gravity craft proto-types.
It matters not if Hamels craft flew or it didn’t…”

#3. “You will then understand why this thread being manipulated.”

Well smarty-boy, you said that it’s identical in function, and that function is to fly, and then you say it doesn’t matter that it didn’t fly, then it didn’t function like the drones flying up in the air AT ALL and you contradict yourself for all to see…and you wonder why everyone laughs at you, eh?

Don’t show yourself to be more foolish than we already see, for the sake of your good mental health one4all.

We HAVE researched your allegations (both past and present) all over the place and can only conclude that you are correct about one thing:

ATS is the premier site for looking at conspiracy theories, amongst other things.

YOU claim that this thread - along with others – is one big conspiracy to keep this Hamel chap’s so-called eureka discovery a secret.

It’s not, and there are many other researchers here that manage to rightly hold their tongue at this attempted threadicular hijack.

It didn’t work and it won’t work.

Just for chuckles, being that you claim that nobody here wants to Google Hamel, I leave you with this link to a video that is so darn funny…look at the Hamel antigravity prototype shake like an out-of-balance clothes washer until it fails unceremoniously at timeframes 2:10-2:12.

Google Video Link

If the video doesn't play here, go directly to this on YouTube:

Too funny for words.

“Conscientious [sic] observers” indeed one4all…

[edit on 2-8-2010 by klatunictobarata]

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 12:09 PM
Mr O you steadfastly in troll fashion refuse to back up your already contradictory statements and and accuse the posters a form of pre emptive debunkery. Your evidence consists of nothing more than several extensive narratives that give absolutely nothing ..pure gibberish.The only pix I see germane are the drone pix themselves and the analysis that remain standing .
The drones were debunked..period..whether their origins are based on scifi and simple science cincepts readily available to anyone...

Since you claim these are identical in form and function..and identical does mean exactly us the letters..the craft design..that you say Hammy had that we can equate..we all researched and found nada of the sort ..You failed to provide any of the info we requested other than your zealous faith to somehow connect hammys byproducts to the Drone Failure itself..
If you can't and its morethan amply apparent you cannot even explain the letters and craft from even the drone pix. implying earlier you and Hammy were like one....That constitutes a FAIL Mr.O..a MASSIVE FAIL and are an incorrigible LIAR. Those early posters not once mentioned a connection between Drone and Hammy..despite having three years to do so..Until you come here with a plumbers pipe dream and snowballs chance in hell you can by Hook or by Crook...

This is reminiscent of those You've Been Punked! reality shows where the contestant gets a reward for seeing how can long they can tie up the cashier with talk with a long line waiting behind..

I have no doubt you would win hands down.on that show..
But the reality here on this as you describe us ..a pre-emptive debunking thread is that..
The cashiers Here are are smarter and they don't take wooden nickels.from failed punks...much less like shoplifters..

@remaining posters..I would either place this shmuk on ignore and or refrain from even spelling that other losers name or works and not link to it. Thereby, defeating this very transparent ploy to generate hits for him ..that's what buzz is all about..simple SEO analytics ....the cookies you leave behind when visiting reveal a lot more about you..than this clown will ever about himself and his agenda. You leave emptyhanded..while they fill their baskets with info..

[edit on 3-8-2010 by Sys_Config]

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 08:50 PM
Hey sis,have you seen the ufo hunters episode that featured the Probes,I would have loved to have seen your expression if Hamels information had been there to support those who feel as I do.It was the only thing missing.

You hoax supporters do understand that Hamel is not the only one to have developed technology that will verify the existance of the probes ,using the exact same method,in fact there are quite a few,I chose Hamel because of his documented history that cannot be disputed,but there are others with similar historys,but can you imagine adding another factor to what already seems to be some sort of weird puzzle to you hoax supporters,what a FUBAR that would be eh mates.

Try a man names Searl.

And stop being so rude,its simply pointless,I wont play,so either cease your personal attacks and stay vaguely on topic or look somewhere else for drama.

You have a right to express your personal feelings here if you need to do so,I question wether the moderators you so often beg support from would deem your countless personal attacks as being quite on topic,but as far as I am concerned your general state of mind and ability to process and control your own emotions and the resulting verbal outbursts screams volumes about your credability as a whole.

The similaritys between David Hamels anti-gravity craft proto-type and the Probes are visually verifiable,the functions are theoretically similar,cumulatively this information verifies the likely existance of such functioning Probes.

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 09:19 PM
At least you stopped shouting and your absolute arrogance.

Now prove that Hamel's machine could beat a coffee maker and we will follow you en masse.

Ah, sorry! Forgot, we are are only a few. So we follow you en few.

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 06:40 PM

Originally posted by Siddharta
At least you stopped shouting and your absolute arrogance.

Now prove that Hamel's machine could beat a coffee maker and we will follow you en masse.

Ah, sorry! Forgot, we are are only a few. So we follow you en few.

Spot on!

Recall this bit of heroic history Sidd:

"Never was so much owed by so many to so few..."

- Sir Winston Churchill

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 07:35 PM
Well, THIS is identical in function too, and you have to remember - to stick to the rules of thread hijacking completely - you just CAN'T change the well accepted hoaxer term 'drone' and start calling them 'probes.'

Not good form at all.

So this thing has the same function as Hamel's: both don't fly!

And Sys, you are most likely right again...we need to ignore the thieves who can't even spell/grammar check their rants...and shoo them over to droneteam where they will be most valued.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by klatunictobarata]

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 01:43 AM
reply to post by an0maly33

I certainly didn't notice that, but I didn't look really hard (just saying that for my own personal edification).

A) I am not a CGI artist and I'm not even an amateur at debunking. That being said, just to be objective, if I were a CGI artist and I wanted to fool other CGI artists I certainly hope that I would be good enough to not be so careless. In other words, to a CGI person, wouldn't such a blunder be obvious? Wouldn't a CGI artist know better? Even an amateur?

B) Not that I think that its real or not, but is it outrageous to offer that the "symbols" are arranged as they are so that the device will "function" properly? I mean, they are alleged to be the "brain power"---- if the devices were two "engines" mounted together, perhaps the mirroring is by design. Like the thing would "fight" itself to pieces or not function properly if they were arranged in an opposing manner. Would a device of foreign design really have to conform to our sensibilities and logic to be what it is? Why? It may operate on totally different principles than we are accustomed to, or not. For instance if this object were to rotate wouldn't one end rotate one direction and the other end would have to actually rotate in the opposite direction of the first for the object to "spin"? If one end were to exert itself clockwise then to "jive" the other would have to exert itself counter clockwise. If not it would twist against itself on the axis (just an example)--- perhaps whatever forces would be at work in this "machine" would need to be designed in such a mirror image fashion. and/or Perhaps the language works in reverse, means the same thing, but opposite direction (positive verse negative, left verse right, ---> verses

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 02:36 AM
Typos are forgiveable..Lord I have my share..I would be in there too..hahaha

The drone is like a Goose whose Gander was that the Gander is "Dead" will the goose lay the golden egg? I am sure a rooster and a duck might make good company for her..but the possibility of offspring is as likely as can chicken have duck?

So here we have Ham's chef.. and now throw in Searl for for some seasoning in disproportion to our taste and reality..

.This is a goose without a Gander home.. a thread start over again..without its drone..which is the DRTs job to look for..and a job they relish...waiting for one to be spotted so they can help the goose..make geese..Perhaps Mr O..can fit the bill (no pun intended

We want a civil discussion.yes..more important..we want an intelligent one.
When one party asserting something in complete contempt of the the facts and the people who did the work and amazingly wants us to research and prove his case and create the buzz for him..Well Is something wrong with that picture?

As in Newtonian physics...applicable as well to social networking ..for every contemptible action expect an equally vigorous one as well..
It wasn't I who , paraphrasing you ..chose the expression taking down their best man at a hockey game..that speaks volumes as well..about the true intent coming a juvenile spoiling for a fight..even when you are not right..even with extra make it right you still were not right..

Even without a moderator, or referee , and thats gravy for you...its clear your argument and even the science you based it on .Mr. O. were benched a long time ago..and as Klatt pointed out..the only thing in common..none of the pseudo science birds could fly..Neither Isaacs..nor Hammys..the bleachers are empty..and the game over..

IMO, Honk as you may.. I don't think you did Hammy, much less the Goose you tried to mimic and connect to (an odd way to score a goal by the way) any favors...

Have a great day!

If you can get it to make coffee..then make it straight cup o' may be easier to know..keep it simple..I hate those lattes , capuccinos and fancy additives..


[edit on 6-8-2010 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 6-8-2010 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 6-8-2010 by Sys_Config]

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 03:22 AM
reply to post by Amberite

I tend to agree. A mirror image doesn't prove that its a CGI to me. But I've only read up to this point, so when I get a couple more hundred pages under my belt who knows, maybe I'll find out that I've been an idiot and a fool (live and learn). Further to the point I'm not a CG artist, so, you know, all the buzz words and techno jargon don't really prove anything to me. If you want to prove your point to the masses you'll need to start using language that we all can understand or at least define some of the more important terms. I understand that this isn't a photoshop lesson forum. But in the same breath, I am self taught using photoshop and have been using it for almost 10 years and I still don't know what is meant exactly by a mesh. Now before some of the more antisocial folks jump on that as some avenue for a humiliating rant-fest against me, just so you know, I'm not going to be insulted because I don't know all of the jargon (I never needed to). It just seems that this forum is being ruined by all of the smack-down opportunity jumpers. There are a lot of jumping someone else's train jumpers, too. Some of the people posting in here need to lighten up--- You're ruining the entire point of having this website.

[edit on 6-8-2010 by Solarsails]

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 03:55 AM
I don't know if its true or not, for certain. To you that means I want to blindly believe? Does that mean that since you say that it is falsified that I'm supposed to pack up and go home because your interpretation is like solid gold in the bank? Gosh, please forgive me for even thinking about stating that just because you say that its a flimsy cgi doesn't necessarily mean that it is. Even if it turns out to be, at this point in time, you don't seem to be able to offer irrefutable proof that it is, in order to shut down the naysayers. All you have up your sleeve is ridicule and humiliation tactics. My oh my, we didn't even need a discussion about this after all, because you said it was so (how dare anyone even think otherwise). There are a lot of over inflated ego - lamers around here... Lighten up, you're not as super wonderful-fabulous as you may think.

Originally posted by an0maly33
i think it's funny how people who want to believe in something blindly refuse to accept pretty decent *evidence* (not proof) that something isn't real. i wanted to believe in this thing, but for me the symmetry is too far outside the realm of believable. my challenge to those who still think it's real is to offer matching evidence that supports that it may be real.

I find it really funny how people who are out to prove something is a hoax suddenly transform into bona fide alien technology experts when it comes down to proving their point.

Now, I'm not saying I think this is real. I'm keeping my mind open and am on the fence. But some of the assumptions and conclusions being brought up are laughable.

This mirrored object connection is by far the funniest. I've looked at this picture VERY carefully, and aside from the mirrored and inverted "language" elements, I see nothing strange about this photo. Cars are symmetrical, our bodies are symmetrical (mostly), in fact almost every element in nature is symmetrical. As for the "language" elements, Isaac said very specifically that this is not really a language, and because of this we, the readers, have no idea whether orientation or direction has any contextual meaning like in regular languages. It could very easily be that orientation, or even inverted characters, have no discernible effect on their functional use.

What I'm trying to say is that if such technology existed, at this point in time not one person on these forums is capable of saying what will and what won't work with it.

So please, stop these ridiculous "it's inverted! That means its CGI because **I** do it in my projects!" posts. It's laughable. Focus on something more concrete than your supposed understanding of a technology that, if it existed, is probably 1000s of years outside our comprehension.

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 06:09 AM

Originally posted by Solarsails
an0maly33 posted on 28-6-2007 @ 01:04 PM
i've got it. CGI.

Err... Sol... You realize that you are answering to the past, don't you?
Nobody tried to insult you three years ago. I think.

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 11:24 AM
Its almost like talking to ghosts Sid...enough of those it will be like one big ball of spaghetti, no telling where it began or ended..perhaps someone clever will read string theory into it to power the rest of the conversation..

Our Library just ordered a ton of Ms Marple books!..I thought of you instantly..I really hope you get to do another skit..Just super!

@ fellow Skeptics, Debunkers, Debullionairs, and beloved Random Citizens..
I reflect on Colin Bennett frequently like a Buddhist mantra..where he states in his most recent article
part 2: Cargo-Culting Big Media

“Al cultures are advertising systems. As soon as we conceive of Matter as Media, then we are able to talk to the system, and we obtain a whole new idea of material causation.”
Meme Wars: We Have an Agenda

In that article he aptly describes what we saw in the Drone and its staunch defenders a cult in the making as Colin accurately puts these things ...a Totem Pole in Cyberspace...

This is a MUST read for everyone . and especially anyone who patiently endured the previous several pages of baffling bull$hit. anyone seriously concerned with the manipulative forces and effects of staged events..especially, the "theater of the absurd" we sometimes refer ufology as.. and the role of these synthetic memes in creating, shaping, directing new paradigms of belief for pop culture consumption..

Bon Appetite!

[edit on 6-8-2010 by Sys_Config]

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 03:36 PM
reply to post by Siddharta

Eh, hehehe... Will it ever really "be over"?

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 05:19 PM

Originally posted by Solarsails
reply to post by Siddharta

Eh, hehehe... Will it ever really "be over"?

(Is it me or is this guy is beginning to sound a tad familiar?)

Dude, for someone who took the time to register less than 24 hours ago, you sure do know how to make a killer first impression!

I believe that your interests would be better served - and I'm sure that's what you want - over on the site a.k.a. the DRT.

You will be welcomed there with open arms I figure and will have the chance to freely expound without looking foolish.

No, don't have to thank me now...

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 08:22 PM

Originally posted by Solarsails
reply to post by Siddharta

Eh, hehehe... Will it ever really "be over"?

You are talking about the game, I guess. Yes it is ending, because people like you only try to boil up the flea-bitten story.
If you are talking about the drones. They never took off.

@Sys: Don't know, if I ever mentioned my Ms. Marple film at youtube. I don't get to many clicks over there, but Ms. Marple rules my stats already after 6 months.

@Klat: Yes, he knows a lot, although he is still fighting his way through the first pages of this thread. Katterfelto could make a nice pic of Sol fighting his way through the jungle with a big machete, I guess.

Maybe the whole internet is a humour thread after all.

posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 08:31 PM
Link me please Sid..I know she had one called It Was Done with Mirrors, if I recall..thats so funny by itself!
Reflecting on this..I find some commonality in the ufology circuit with the American classic Blue Velvet ..on the surface mystery occurring in a sleepy nice community with an event jarring things..a human ear is discovered and a young man investigates for the rightful owner and the suspects he meets are gangsters, kidnappers and a woman he falls in love with..has a taste fo rbeing beaten before love making..Like the believers coming back for more and more again..The movie define the Noire genre for filmaking..
Colins article on the Mental illness of one of the Exoolitics architects..then
R Thielman in those bondage pix, Virgil and Sebastian and the panty fetishes, Virgil crow caine in the Drug thing. Hustler type corporations s with Alienware and Warners-Fox its ok to borrow other peoples property and not give credit..Lord even the unexpected tragedy with Reyes..a homicide to boot..I must catch up with that , the trial this or next week.
Aug 24 to be precise
Its a bizarre world and the internet does indeed make it uncomfortably smaller..

Confucious didn't have to tell may we live in interesting times ..we are in them.

We created the web and like an errant spider..have fallen on it..

On another matter Sid..One good thing about that military leak on the internet by that seems to have influenced the war..exposing the reality not merely of the carnage..but the wanton lies of the leaders amongst themselves and to the world just so we can continue sending our boys over there..Iam sure more will come out..and hopefully the latter will stop once and for all.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 8-8-2010 by Sys_Config]

new topics

top topics

<< 435  436  437    439  440  441 >>

log in