This guy nails Oil wars, Bankers, Terrorism aswell as the ignorance of the people.

a reply to: TrueBrit

1400 years of Islamic invasion of western lands would disagree with that.

The Barbary Wars, Americans first real encounter with Muslims, would disagree with that:

en.wikipedia.org...

The Barbary Wars were two wars fought at different times over the same reasons between the United States and the Barbary states (the de jure possessions of the Ottoman Empire, but de facto independent, Tunis, Algiers, and Tripoli) of North Africa in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. At issue was the Barbary pirates' demand for tribute from American merchant vessels in the Mediterranean Sea. If ships of a given country failed to pay, pirates would attack the ship and take their goods, and often enslave crew members or hold them for ransom.

This isn't one sided. And it certainly didn't begin on 9/11/01 just because most of the western world hadn't dealt with too much Islamic terrorism up to that point.

We're at war both with an ideological enemy who has sought the subjugation of the West for centuries, and against the major powers for the resources needed to maintain the balance of power on this planet. Something you don't really want to upset too much.

a reply to: projectvxn

Well, for a start, we all had pirates back in the day. No nation has ever been free of evil men.

And I would argue that western lands are a concept which has no meaning until right around seventeen hundred or so. Roman occupation of pretty much every place between Britain and Egypt ensured much mingling, which really only settled out into the background WELL after their collapse as a culture.

As for not wanting to upset the balance? It is not a balance which benefits me, or any person I have ever met. The balance as it is allows one tiny group of people, to manipulate the teeming billions on the earth. It MUST be upset, even if it causes us misery. Freedom and sorrow are better than being happy to be shackled.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Freedom and sorrow are better than being happy to be shackled.

^^^^ (Tears of joy btw)

a reply to: TrueBrit

Freedom and sorrow are better than being happy to be shackled.

This is very true.


While I'd rather be free(and therefore happy), it is important to note that most revolutions have not gone in favor of liberty.

Edit to add:

A Brief History of Revolution:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: projectvxn

I am aware of that. Starkly aware.

However, we have better information about that period in history, than the people of that period had about the times which came before. We have instant access to data, sources myriad at the touch of a button. We have the ability to inform ourselves, refuse to be lead by someone, to choose to lead ourselves.

That is something that the French did not have at their disposal. We learn much from their example, both that the revolution was justified as can be, and that what happened after was a clusterbang of epic proportions. We can also learn how not to fall into that particular hole.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Dude we live in a world where disinformation, pseudoscience, political chicanery, and media manipulation is RAMPANT.

“If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed.”

-Mark Twain

If he weren't only alive today to see how little has actually changed in all that time.

a reply to: projectvxn

That is true. We do live in a BS saturation which is quite high. However, when compared with our ancestors we have a great deal more information on average, which is factually correct. We also have access to more data, which means that with a little discernment, we can make better choices than our ancestors if we put our minds to it.

Seems to me that the real problem is will. People have weak wills, would rather be led than lead themselves, and only themselves. That weakness is becoming rarer, as the opacity of the cage we are placed in at birth grows, as more and more people are becoming aware of the rotten tendrils winding through every facet of the control mechanisms in society.

my 2 cents....most people in this world do not have the luxury that wealth provides, namely the freedom of "time". most people have to concentrate on keeping themselves and families fed, clothed, and sheltered....this is why I'm getting pissed off at people that keep saying "wake up" or "don't be a sheeple".....knowing about something, and having the intellectual ability, money, and prolonged time span, to take on these problems are 2 different things......
in other words, the majority can't take off weeks, months, and years from earning a living, to try and settle the worlds problems. we (the general population) have to trust in others (the people that do have the luxury of time) to handle these problems. therefore, we elect and pay people that we think are mentally, emotionally sound, and who will represent our interests to be our representatives....so why do we need these people to represent us?...because down through the ages, people with wealth wielded enormous power over the people, and most of the time it was not in a good way....basically, we choose people that we "think" can represent the general population, rather than the wealthy who are already well-represented.