"As long as people are willing to fight, and have the right ideas about what to do, and have cultivated an approach to the population more generally, people don't like to die. They especially don't like to die a futile death. I mean, to die for a good cause, or in the hope that the cause will survive, is one thing. But, to die for nothing, stinks. And therefore, as long as we're in there fighting, as far as I'm concerned, I'll continue to fight. And I'll be there. And I just hope some other people are there, too."
Larouche made a hell of a close! thank you for the link.
Only if the USA secured access to the bulk of the oil supply of the Middle East (including Iran's) would it have access to the energy resources required to build the kind of nuclear energy industry that La Rouche envisions. It takes a shitload of petrol to build and run nuclear energy. And only if we had a strong one-world police-state type of government would the safety of the people and the new nuclear energy industry be guaranteed. The whole nuclear energy paradigm has "police-state" written all over it. In short - and this thought has just occured to me now - might LaRouche be one of *them*? He does move from vaguely identifying a sinister multi-generational financial conspiracy (C+ Could explore the concepts more thoroughly) to blaming it all on the hippies (huh?) with mind warping briskness. He skates past the real nub: re-localisation. Hydrogen is a pipedream compared to the nuclear nightmare. See e.g. http://ergosphere.blogspot.com/ (esp.2005 entries) if you're interested in looking for more human and more earthly alternatives. There are alternatives, and the smaller scale alternatives are much better suited to building a less corporate-controlled economy made of high-quality high-paid jobs.
Erosoplier, I have some mixed signals about Larouche and I don't agree with nuclear energy, necessarily - I'm sure we can come up with something safer.
I'll read more about his plans once I'm through with finals.
vper1, sorry! I overlooked WTC7 - forgive me. which one is WTC6?
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
The first one happened on 9/11, where two physical towers were demolished. This one involves two financial towers: America's purchasing power and its deficit, and the usual suspects are behind the controlled demolition.THE dollar has embarked on a big decline that will see it fall against all leading currencies, according to analysts.
The plunge is being prompted by America’s $800 billion (£438 billion) current-account deficit, they say.
The dollar has been under pressure following last weekend’s meeting of G7 finance ministers and central bankers, which emphasised “global imbalances” and said currencies should reflect economic fundamentals. Then China raised its key interest rate to 5.85%, its first hike for months, and Ben Bernanke, the new Federal Reserve chairman, hinted that American rates would pause at 5% after a rise in May. Analysts say that without interest-rate support, the dollar will be weighed down heavily by America’s imbalances.
“I think this is it,” said Tony Norfield, global head of currency strategy at ABN Amro. “The dollar has been supported by high yields but markets are saying that is no longer enough. The question for policymakers [is] how to manage the dollar’s decline. It won’t be a one-way street but the fall is likely to be biggest against Asian currencies.”Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. What's left of America's economy is being deliberately destroyed by global financial demolition firms in a failed effort to save their disintegrating system.
Only one person I know understands exactly what's going on and can help us save our physical economy before the financial one disintegrates.
5 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formthank you kindly for this great read, words takin and very scary to say the least.
Monday, May 01, 2006
3 towers Q!
Maybe more, WTC 6 is questionable due to eyewitness accounts.
Monday, May 01, 2006
"As long as people are willing to fight, and have the right ideas about what to do, and have cultivated an approach to the population more generally, people don't like to die. They especially don't like to die a futile death. I mean, to die for a good cause, or in the hope that the cause will survive, is one thing. But, to die for nothing, stinks. And therefore, as long as we're in there fighting, as far as I'm concerned, I'll continue to fight. And I'll be there. And I just hope some other people are there, too."
Larouche made a hell of a close! thank you for the link.
Monday, May 01, 2006
Only if the USA secured access to the bulk of the oil supply of the Middle East (including Iran's) would it have access to the energy resources required to build the kind of nuclear energy industry that La Rouche envisions. It takes a shitload of petrol to build and run nuclear energy.
And only if we had a strong one-world police-state type of government would the safety of the people and the new nuclear energy industry be guaranteed. The whole nuclear energy paradigm has "police-state" written all over it.
In short - and this thought has just occured to me now - might LaRouche be one of *them*? He does move from vaguely identifying a sinister multi-generational financial conspiracy (C+ Could explore the concepts more thoroughly) to blaming it all on the hippies (huh?) with mind warping briskness.
He skates past the real nub: re-localisation. Hydrogen is a pipedream compared to the nuclear nightmare. See e.g. http://ergosphere.blogspot.com/ (esp.2005 entries) if you're interested in looking for more human and more earthly alternatives. There are alternatives, and the smaller scale alternatives are much better suited to building a less corporate-controlled economy made of high-quality high-paid jobs.
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Thanks, guys, for the comments.
borkafatty, yes it's scary.
Poetryman, I liked that quote, too.
Erosoplier, I have some mixed signals about Larouche and I don't agree with nuclear energy, necessarily - I'm sure we can come up with something safer.
I'll read more about his plans once I'm through with finals.
vper1, sorry! I overlooked WTC7 - forgive me. which one is WTC6?
Tuesday, May 02, 2006