Topic: USA to be dismantled by internal & external threats - page 3. (Read 6576 times)

Well, I´m actually a conspiracy theorist myself and it certainly hasn´t escaped my attention that all this chaos is the result of terrorist attacks and hopeless war adventures. And always as those Hollywoodshows and wars flop the excuse is incompetence. And stupidity. I guess that diverts people from thinking about these issues in psychopathic terms if you get my drift. In any event; those so called incompetent dumbasses are never fired only promoted. Or kicked somewhere upstairs whatever. Got to have you thinking.

Kissinger has said we may need 30 years of war & pestilance

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-with-henry-kissinger-on-state-of-global-politics-a-1002073.html



http://www.spingola.com/new_world_order1.htm

galdur that makes sense except that I assume the powers-that-be want to bring society to its knees in order to obtain their one-world new order where nations give up their sovereignty.

I think nations and people will only relinquish sovereignty when they've been thoroughly pummeled.

However I do hold out hope for your scenario too.

I don´t necessarily assume that Uncle Sam would launch nuclear missiles in response to a Russian EMP attack. It´s more about the threat sometimes being stronger than the execution. Being such great chess players the Russians realize this very well. And it´s easy to start wars but more difficult to control how they develop. That´s why I doubt that the nuclear powers will escalate things much from the usual proxy wars. Unless there´s friggin lunatics in charge which can´t be ruled out totally.

Oh btw, the reason I was emphasizing that we'd been fooled on Obama and "wife's" sexuality and gender is that it is not outside the realm of speculation that Obama was put in office for the purpose of causing mutiny in the military.

Presumably the masculine, highly logical minds in the military can see clearly what Obama and Michelle really are and plausibly conclude the nation has been taken over by forces that are intent on showing the military how fooled the people are. Thus causing the military coup to forment but be withheld by the lack of awareness (cooperation) of the American public. Thus holding it in the wings to spring forward in martial law post EMP attack with support of the broad, scared public.

These are psy ops. This is the handiwork of CIA (Bush former head), KGB (Putin former head), and the DEEP STATE.

It is plausibly very scripted.

P.S. My ancestor was Isaac Shelby a key general in the revolutionary war and a governor of Kentucky. My name is Shelby Moore. I take my first name from him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Shelby

That is #1 if you assume this isn't all just coordinated show like it was in WW2 where Bush's grandfather Prescott was financing Hitler.

Also factor in that the scenario enables Kissinger's promise of UN blue hat troops on U.S. soil.

Orthogonally you #2 also assume the USA would opt for mutually assured destruction when it can instead respond in kind with an EMP attack. I don't think the chain of command would allow nuclear holocaust to be initiated from our side. The lurking mutiny is something Obama (and Putin) is surely aware of. The coup would happen instantly because they American people are not in favor of a nuclear holocaust as a response to an EMP attack.

Hey I had already worked out all that logic in my mind at the start of this thread.

Well, that´s an interesting point but I doubt that Russia has any real motivation for this. And the U.S. has plenty of nuclear power in subs and bases around the world to strike back. So, it´s mutual assured destruction which means that it won´t happen. Hopefully.

Jaysabi bro, thank you. I concur with all that you said. It is possible to verify who I am, and I do think there is more credibility when a person puts their personal identity on the line, but I will also concur with you that it depends on the integrity or conscience of the person thus your valid point about its relative worth being dubious.

I am hoping a global war doesn't materialize. I doubt it would be an all out war in case, because the USA no longer has the capacity to fight an all out war in multiple hemispheres, so the opponents wouldn't need to. The EMP concept is a very innovative because it means Russia could potentially turn some American "patriots" (survivalists, some radical gun owners, etc) into lovers of Russia for providing a power vacuum they could step into. It doesn't drive the world to a nuclear winter, yet could still achieve the goals of altering the global hegemony of the USA.

It is notable that the USA has been decreasing spending on our external military, while increasing spending radically on our internal militarized police force and "homeland security". Is that just a coincidence?

If you are in favor of decentralization, privacy, and Bitcoin (which I share with you), then how can you reason that increased regulation by the government will not hurt our cause?

I understand that you felt that corporations could exert control over the internet and thus it would be better in your opinion to have the government exerting some control over the corporations. As you know, I believe the corporations and government get in bed together and form oligarchies in order to maximize corrupt benefits. Even if we dismiss my assumption of the basic nature of government and corporatism, how would even a top-down control over the internet from government help our cause for decentralization, privacy, and Bitcoin when Snowden has taught us that the government is unconstitutionally recording everything via the NSA?

Any way, I think we could side-step the entire debate about net neutrality, because I believe it is a morass either way so it doesn't really matter what happens on that political issue.

I believe any and all real solutions will come from technology that empowers the individual and renders politics entirely irrelevant. For example potentially using stenography to by pass internet filters, etc..

I am a programmer. And since my health has suddenly improved, I am hoping to actually attempt some solutions. So this isn't just hot air from me.

Thank you again for raising the dialogue to a civil tone. You deserve heaps of respect for that unexpected, upstanding action.

Mate, I was responding point by point which I have now deleted in the hopes of finding a less hostile way to converse with you. First, I am not liberal or conservative. I have liberal values, and I have conservative values. I cannot be placed into an either/or box, no matter how convenient that is for dismissing me. Your assumptions on my age and disposition ("a young, liberal punk") are quite off though, and really seems to have colored how you respond to me, as if you can't stand to have someone you perceive to be younger/dumber than you not respect your life experience. (That's my conjecture, btw.) Taking that baggage into a conversation isn't productive. Opinions are a two-way street, but I've noticed that the more I fight with you to express mine, the more entrenched I get into them. That's also not productive for dialogue. I think more than anything else, it has to do with the brash and dismissive nature in which we both communicate with each other. I would guess based on your responses, you are the same way; that the more you express an opinion that is challenged, the more entrenched you get in forcing the other side to validate them. That's more conjecture, I suppose ultimately it's not important why these conversations aren't productive, only that they aren't.

As for this government propaganda agent, it's just ridiculous. That's fine if you're good with putting your identity on the internet. (I don't know who you are, I have no way of verifying if you actually have. Ultimately, I don't care and it's not important to me.) But I'm not inclined to do so. The thing I find revolutionary about bitcoin is the decentralized anonymity of it. I value privacy (the stripping of it, incidentally, is one of my biggest complaints against the government). I further don't see how putting your name down on the forum will have any consequence whatsoever. So what if you put your name down and are proven wrong? Is anyone going to care? Is that going to mark some shift in your life in some way because you put your name behind an idea that didn't come to fruition? It seems very odd to me that someone would ask for that. I'm not inclined to give up my anonymity, and the stated reason for me to do so is not compelling.

In any event, I don't think our interactions are productive, and I don't think that will change. I'll take an equal share of the blame on that. Hell, assign me more if you want. I honestly don't think either of us is open to considering the other person's perspective, as each of us immediately dismisses the other side, often with insults. I'll bow out for that reason.

I am on the record as saying I don't believe a global war/pandemic is likely in 2017-2019. If it comes true, come back and gloat. I'll still be here under this screen name.

I am lacking two very important pieces of data on Michelle Obama's gender.

1. I don't know if the digit ratio statistics are valid for individuals of African ancestry. I noticed in my own experience that black females often have more athletic shoulders and thus more male hormone.

2. I am unaware of any measurement of Michelle's digit ratio, nor am I aware of any medical records indicating which genitalia she has.

The great irony is she could squash the issue very simply by submitting to the same TSA de-clothing body scan microwaves that all Americans have to humiliatingly pass through to board an airplane.

http://images.fastcompany.com/upload/airportscans.jpg

Funny I am rereading my opening post, and I don't see any statement from me conflating either the various sources I provided on the potential effects and capabilities for an EMP attack, nor any statement from me that the alleged the occurrence of military mutiny (not coup) is not orthogonal the former.

You even quoted me below acknowledging this is "wild conjecture":


Again you humiliate yourself because (you have an agenda which clouds your) you lack basic logic and reading comprehension skills. And I notice you haven't asked me to link to the logical ass whipping you received in one of our net neutrality debates.


I have made no statement as to the likelihood of a military coup. I only quoted a source about potential mutiny brewing in the ranks of the U.S.A. military. We have many indications that the circumstances surrounding Benghazi are rife with corruption and abnormalities. The latest development in that ongoing saga is our Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has refused to reveal all of her communications as Secretary of State having hidden her communications behind a private email server contrary to government norms.

I notice you have not challenged the statistical likelihood that Michelle Obama is not a woman by birth, and implications thereof of the honesty and transparency in the highest ranks of our executive governance.

I fail to understand how a cyclical model which has predicted 100s of events correctly (and many exactly to the day) over the past 30 years and has not made an incorrect prediction, can be characterized as a conspiracy theory.  Even if you successfully challenge the veracity of the model's past performance, the best you end up with is YOUR ontological (taxonomy) error.

The-pot-calling-the-kettle-black on conflation.

Note Armstrong has not yet clarified whether the prediction for a pandemic is 100% probability. Also he has indicated that it was not yet clear if it would be a major event similar to the Black Death or a manageable event such as the HIV pandemic which has spread around the world since the 1980s.

The 2017 to 2019 timeframe for the USA to fall into an economic abyss is ≈100% probable according to this cyclical model which has never been incorrect. Some folks will misconstrue generalized statements from Armstrong about potential events (such as his recent statements about weather becoming more volatile) as specific events that must happen verbatim and will thus erroneously accusing him of being incorrect. Any one who has taken the time to read him exhaustively as I have will understand that over a series of communications he conveys an understanding of the probabilities and specificity of timings. Also those who have access to his paid reports have much greater clarity as the exact qualities (time, price, probability) of his cyclical model. Thus any one making accusations without such paid access has more of an agenda than actual data.


Which exactly again in your mind is "ridiculous conjecture"? Is the capability for an EMP attack on the USA "ridiculous conjecture"? Is the high likelihood (>90% statistically) that Michelle Obama is a man "ridiculous conjecture"? Is the near certain probability of the USA starting to fall into an economic abyss in the 2017 to 2019 timeframe "ridiculous conjecture"? (note the cyclical model time frame for the end of this crisis is 2033, so the bottom of abyss may not be reached until say 2024 or later)

I stated "wild conjecture" on the likelihood of an EMP attack and on the potential for their to be sufficient discord within the military to bring about an actual coup. My rough intuition is that the former is more likely before the latter could become feasible enabled by the former. And both remain "wild conjecture" for me. Armstrong wrote recently that the mostly likely timeframe for the beginning of the spread of war is 2017. I believe his conjecture is the festering in Ukraine will eventually reach a more overt shooting war, either in Ukraine or some proxy. And that eventually this has the potential to spread to a direct attack on the USA.

Wild in this context means the data is insufficient to calculate probabilities with sufficient precision.

I do not characterize them as "ridiculous conjecture", because in the case of the potential for EMP attack there seems to be abundant evidence that such a capability might exist. And in the case of heightened levels of discord and mutiny within the military, we have evidence such as Obama replacing roughly 200 top military officers which afaik hasn't happened in such sweeping fashion in the U.S.A. in recent history, we have the Benghazi morass which continues to fester and grow more bizarre, we have the Syrian incident where the U.S.A. funded rebels are alleged to have chemical attacked the citizens, we have the debacle with ISIS allegedly being an offshoot of rebels the U.S.A. was funding and providing arms to, we have the Iraq theater which Ron Paul warned would end up costing more than $100 billion and by now we are $trillions in the hole there and reentering the military threater 3 or 4 times already after declaring victory how many times.

It seems you are the one with a ridiculous stance.

Also it seems to me you are likely a young, liberal punk with no respect for a fellow patriot who is older and wiser than you. I am nearing 50 years old and I have watched my country slide into a pit of corruption and malfeasance.

Perhaps I am mistaken about you being a government propaganda agent, yet I see you are not willing to put credibility behind your opinions by putting your personal reputation on the line. I have put my real name and identity at stake.

No, I'm asserting you conflate an opinion piece published by a reputable news organization with disreputable sources and believe them all regardless of credibility. Were you confused as to which part of your post was a conspiracy theory?


That's funny, the credible news source didn't say anything about a military coup in the US or a cyclical model predicting a global pandemic or a new world order. That was all your conspiracy theory. But I guess because you prefaced a ridiculous conjecture on an actual news report, the conclusions are completely justified!

Well said.  I find people like to spend more time arguing about the cause(or just arguing in general) then figuring out a solution.

Oh another "conspiracy theory":

Perhaps you haven't noticed that one of the articles I linked in the opening post on this threat on the EMP threat comes from the Wall Street Journal. Are you asserting that reputable newspaper publishes conspiracy theories?


Obviously a paid disinformation tactic. Clever.

Readers will clearly see my sincerity and your obfuscation methods.

You will not reveal who you are and readers know my real name.


I have in the past and you were entirely humiliated and caught in an escapable logic error. Do you need to me to provide a link to that past humiliation?


Is attacking a  typo with such vengeance the best feeble obfuscation you can muster? And it is mildly humiliating again for you because you are incorrect:


Your irate tone indicates I've already won because I got inside your head and under your skin. I own you.

Hold on, lemme just post my personal information for some whackadoo on the internet. 

Come at me with all your intellect bro. You're making an epic case for how superior it is with your deep reverence of conspiracy theories and your confusion of the word "shill" (noun: an enthusiastic hawker of ideas) with the word "shrill" (adjective: high pitched and piercing). URSOSMRT! Or best yet, your conclusion that anyone who doesn't agree with you or post their personally identifiable information on the internet must obviously be a government agent.  If that's the level of intellect I could expect to encounter in a debate with you, I'll gladly pass up the opportunity to waste my time.

Jaysabi predictably did not accept my challenge for both of us to provide our real names and permanent contact info. Instead he did a weasel words reply asserting that I expected the recent Obama takeover of the internet to have an instant effect which is obviously never what I said would happen.

I am pretty well convinced that Jaysabi is a paid shrill of the government and that is why he will not provide verifiable contact information. I for one would call and speak to him personally, because I would love to have a live debate with him. I would destroy him intellectually and he knows it and thus hides from me.

---

Beliathon & galdur, you must distinguish between usury model "capitalism" of the industrial age with the knowledge capital of the fledgling Knowledge Age. Stored money is not the real capital in an economy, thus I think you misplace blame on capitalism when in fact what we have now is not capitalism rather socialism or collectivism. I explained this in great detail throughout the One-World Reserve Currency thread and the Economic Devastation thread.

Lol, you're gonna be posting on the internet that the global EMP and nuclear war somehow managed not to destroy? You're more delusional than I first thought.

Oh, you're one of those conspiratards from the Obummer's gonna ruin the internet thread? Nice new name you got there, your bullshit makes a lot more sense now. Hey, how's the disintegration of the internet been treating you since your worst nightmare has come true? When are my rates going up and when is Obama gonna break all the internets? I can't believe it hasn't happened already!1!!

An older version of the image above. The more things change the more they stay the same or so they say.

Good luck, g

Corporatism IS capitalism.

The corporatism that became dominant in the eighties and nineties WAS the zenith of capitalism. Capitalism has been declining for the past twenty years. It is a dying system on life support, and the evidence is all around you.

It remains to be seen how long people are willing and able to ignore the slow death of capitalism. How much suffering can we endure before we accept that it's time to start thinking about what comes next?