posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 03:22 PM
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Well...he has a right to his opinion no matter how wrong it is.
The BP disaster has NOTHING to do with global warming...it does relate to "alternative energy" though. And the only thing Obama has said about this
BP disaster is that it shows we have to move to alternative energy...which everyone on ATS should be excited about right....RIGHT? Don't I see
threads all the time about how they are suppressing alternative energy technology to stay on oil??? So shouldn't everyone be happy that this may be
a push in the right direction for alternative energy???
This disaster is bad enough without trying to distort what is being said.
Fair enough. He has a right to say what he wants. I'll agree there. Misled or not - we can at minimum agree that it's irresponsible to use
'celebrity' in this manner.
The singer said: "I don't accept the criticism of Barack over the oil spill."
"I think he's been great. It's tough if we Brits whinge that he's whingeing at us. Tough, then don't spill oil."
Sir Paul - who met Obama for the first time earlier this month - added: "BP isn't just a British company any more, it's half American.
Well, that comment above is equally absurd. It's evident that he hasn't been paying attention at all to this event. There is another comment in the
article where he says that he's too busy with his show to open up his birthday presents. Therefore, it may be safe to say that he's too busy to read
a newspaper, or more importantly, read alternative news sources and gather a more broad range of information to base his opinion on. I wonder if he
got a talking point sheet like those fine folks at MSNBC.
Regardless, I confidently feel as if Sir Lord Legend Paul McCartney and MANY others are simply misinformed puppets, unknowingly encouraging the
following events. (Sorry! - Everyone has a theory to how this is going down, and now I have mine)
1.)To promote climate legislation, including cap and trade.
It's always in the bill, it's part of the bill. It's the definition of the bill. It's not about alternative energies, it's about creating another
volatile derivatives market and another element of governmental control standing between people and their lives.
2.)To diminish food supplies in order to provide more government dependence and regulation.
We'll likely see a lot of seafood poisonings and more legislation for FDA guidelines and a likely revisitation of Codex Alimentarius. Control the
food, control the population. Simple.
3.)To destroy the business infrastructure along the coastlines, so that the populations must aggregate to larger cities.
People displacement. Threat of gasses as well, real or not.
4.)Create a stronger bond within the North American union countries by establishing a common enemy and/or problem.
This will likely unite the region intentionally for the purpose of a transcontinental corridor. "We need to work together as one North America!"
sound bites to come soon. I'm calling it.
and if I really dig deeper, I'm sure there are more potentially sinister plans afoot. But those will do for now. And I'll absolutely agree that I'm
probably incorrect with some of my predictions. But they are just that. Predictions. Let's watch how this pans out and I'll bow down in advance at
To conclude, Paul is just one of MANY who have the dangerous predicament of knowing a little information and are forced or expected to talk
confidently about the subject to the masses.