Freedom Portal

Library => Conspiracy then and now. => Topic started by: rottenjohnh on February 25, 2006, 11:24:42 PM

Title: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: rottenjohnh on February 25, 2006, 11:24:42 PM
February 23, 2006

Whose Bombs were They   
by Mike Whitney
 

http://www.opednews.com

`The only viable strategy, then, may be to correct (Iraq`s) historical defect and move in stages toward a three-state solution: Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the center and Shiites in the south` Leslie H. Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations; from `Three-state Solution` NY Times 11-25-03

`We are facing a major conspiracy that is targeting Iraq`s unity.` Iraqi President Jalal Talabani.


There`s no telling who was behind the bombing of the al-Askariya Mosque. There were no security cameras at the site and it`s doubtful that the police will be able to perform a thorough forensic investigation.

That`s too bad; the bomb-residue would probably provide clear evidence of who engineered the attack. So far, there`s little more to go on than the early reports of four men (three who were dressed in black, one in a police uniform) who overtook security guards at the mosque and placed the bombs in broad daylight.

It was a bold assault that strongly suggests the involvement of highly-trained paramilitaries conducting a well-rehearsed plan. Still, that doesn`t give us any solid proof of what groups may have been involved.

The destruction of the Samarra shrine, also known as the Golden Mosque, has unleashed a wave of retaliatory attacks against the Sunnis. Overnight, more than 110 people were reported killed by the rampaging Shia. More than 90 Sunni mosques have been either destroyed or badly damaged. In Baghdad alone, 47 men have been found scattered throughout the city after being killed execution-style with a bullet to the back of the head. The chaos ends a week of increased violence following two major suicide bombings directed against Shia civilians that resulted in the deaths of 36 people.

The public outrage at the desecration of one of the country`s holiest sights has reached fever-pitch and its doubtful that the flimsy American-backed regime will be able to head-off a civil war.

It is difficult to imagine that the perpetrators of this heinous attack couldn`t anticipate its disastrous effects. Certainly, the Sunni-led resistance does not benefit from alienating the very people it is trying to enlist in its fight against the American occupation. Accordingly, most of the prominent Sunni groups have denied involvement in the attack and dismissed it as collaboration between American and Iranian intelligence agencies.

A communique from `The Foreign Relations Department of the Arab Ba`ath Socialist Party` denounced the attack pointing the finger at the Interior Ministry`s Badr Brigade and American paramilitaries.

The Ba`ath statement explains:

`America is the main party responsible for the crime of attacking the tomb of Ali al-Hadi`¦because it is the power that occupies Iraq and has a basic interest in committing it.`

`The escalation of differences between America and Iran has found their main political arena in Iraq, because the most important group of agents of Iran is there and are able to use the blood of Iraqis and the future of Iraq to exert pressure on America. Iran has laid out a plan to embroil America in the Iraqi morass to prevent it from obstructing Iran`s nuclear plans. Particularly since America is eager to move on to completing arrangements for a withdrawal from Iraq, after signing binding agreements on oil and strategy. America believes that without the participation of `Sunni` parties in the regime those arrangements will fail. For that reason `˜cutting Iran`s claws` has become one of the important requirements for American plans. This is what Ambassador Zalmay spoke of recently when he declared that no sectarian would take control of the Ministries of the Interior or Defense. Similarly, America has begun to publish information that it formally kept hidden regarding the crimes of the Badr Brigade and the Interior Ministry.`

Whether the communique is authentic is incidental; the point is well taken. The escalating violence may prevent Iraq from forming a power-sharing government which would greatly benefit the Shia majority and their Iranian allies. Many critics agree that what is taking place Iraq represents a larger struggle between the United States and Iran for regional domination.

This theory, however, is at odds with the response of Iran`s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei following the bombing. Khamenei said, `The occupation forces and Zionism, which seeing their plans dissolve, have planned this atrocity to sew hate between Muslims and fuel divisions between Sunnis and Shiites`¦.Do not fall into the enemy trap by attacking mosques and sacred places of your Sunni brothers`¦.The enemy wants nothing more than weakening of the Islamis front right as Muslims with a single voice have been protesting against the continual provocations of their enemies.`

The belief that the attack was the work of American and Israeli covert-operations (Black-ops) is widespread throughout the region as well as among leftist political-analysts in the United States. Journalist Kurt Nimmo sees the bombing as a means of realizing `a plan sketched out in Oded Yinon`s `A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties` (the balkanization of Arab and Muslim society and culture.) Nimmo suggests that the plan may have been carried out by `American, British or Israeli Intelligence operatives or their double-agent Arab lunatics, or crazies incited by Rumsfeld`s Proactive Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG) designed to `˜stimulate` terrorist reaction.`

Nimmo is not alone in his judgment. Other prominent analysts including, Pepe Escobar, Ghali Hassan, AK Gupta, Dahr Jamail, and Christian Parenti all agree that the Bush administration appears to be inciting civil war as part of an exit strategy. Certainly, the Pentagon is running out of options as well as time. Numerous leaked documents have confirmed that significant numbers of troops will have to be rotated out of the theatre by summer. A strategy to foment sectarian hostilities may be the last desperate attempt to divert the nearly 100 attacks per day away from coalition troops and finalize plans to divide Iraq into more manageable statlets.

The division of Iraq has been recommended in a number of documents that were prepared for the Defense Department. The Rand Corporation suggested that `Sunni, Shiite and Arab, non-Arab divides should be exploited to exploit the US policy objectives in the Muslim world.` The 2004 study titled `US Strategy in the Muslim World` was to identify key cleavages and fault-lines among sectarian, ethnic, regional, and national lines to assess how these cleavages generate challenges and opportunities for the United States.` (Abdus Sattar Ghazali; thanks Liz Burbank)

This verifies that the strategy to split up Iraq has been circulating at the top levels of government from the very beginning of the occupation.

A similar report was produced by David Philip for the American Foreign Policy Council (AFPC) financed by the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation a conservative think-tank with connections to the Bush administration and the American Enterprise Institute. According to Pepe Escobar:

`The plan would be `˜sold` under the admission that the recently elected, Shi`ite dominated Jaafari government is incapable of controlling Iraq and bringing the Sunni-Arab guerillas to the negotiating table. More significantly, the plan is an exact replica of an extreme right-wing Israeli plan to balkanize Iraq`”an essential part of the balkanization of the whole Middle East.`

Is the bombing of the Golden Mosque the final phase of a much broader strategy to inflame sectarian hatred and provoke civil war?

Clearly, many Sunnis, Iranians, and political analysts seem to believe so. Even the Bush administration`s own documents support the general theory that Iraq should be broken up into three separate pieces. But, is this proof that the impending civil war is the work of foreign provocateurs?

The final confirmation of Washington`s sinister plan was issued by Leslie Gelb, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, in a New York Times editorial on 11-25-03. The CFR is the ideological headquarters for America`s imperial interventions providing the meager rationale that papers-over the massive bloodletting that inevitably follow. Gelb stated:

`For decades, the United States has worshipped at the altar of a unified Iraqi state. Allowing all three communities within that false state to emerge at least as self-governing regions would be both difficult and dangerous. Washington would have to be very hard-headed and hard-hearted, to engineer this breakup. But such a course is manageable, even necessary, because it would allow us to find Iraq`s future in its denied but natural past.`

There you have it; the United States is only pursuing this genocidal policy for `˜Iraq`s own good`. We should remember Gelb`s statesman-like pronouncements in the months and years to come as Iraq slips further into the morass of social-disintegration and unfathomable human suffering.

 
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mike_whi_060223_whose_bombs_were_the.htm (http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mike_whi_060223_whose_bombs_were_the.htm)
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on February 26, 2006, 09:31:38 AM
"There you have it; the United States is only pursuing this genocidal policy for ‘Iraq’s own good’."

We had to destroy the village in order to save it.

"collaboration between American and Iranian intelligence agencies." (destruction of Golden Dome)

Interesting.  File away in case supporting data pops up.


“The only viable strategy, then, may be to correct (Iraq’s) historical defect and move in stages toward a three-state solution: Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the center and Shiites in the south” Leslie H. Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations"

"This verifies that the strategy to split up Iraq has been circulating at the top levels of government from the very beginning of the occupation."

Utilizing Islam, and at the same time weakening the players.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: rottenjohnh on February 26, 2006, 09:20:34 PM
"collaboration between American and Iranian intelligence agencies." (destruction of Golden Dome)

Interesting.  File away in case supporting data pops up.

Can't say I think there's much in that either but it's food for thought.

Quote
`The only viable strategy, then, may be to correct (Iraq`s) historical defect and move in stages toward a three-state solution: Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the center and Shiites in the south` Leslie H. Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations"

"This verifies that the strategy to split up Iraq has been circulating at the top levels of government from the very beginning of the occupation."

Utilizing Islam, and at the same time weakening the players.

Exactly. Just like the Iran/Iraq war. This is what I think is happening. If Iran really wanted to destabilise Iraq they'd have no problems doing so. But there's no benefit for them to do so as far as I can work out.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on February 26, 2006, 09:25:51 PM
"If Iran really wanted to destabilise Iraq they'd have no problems doing so. But there's no benefit for them to do so as far as I can work out."

THAT is an excellent point that needs to be front and center in the wider discussion of Iraq.  Because you know that they are blamed.  I don't trust Islam but I trust Tel Aviv even less.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: rottenjohnh on February 26, 2006, 09:32:56 PM
Yep. Cui Buno!!
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on February 26, 2006, 09:41:59 PM
"Cui Buno"

That means "for whose benefit", right?

I should remind you of Dan Ackroyd in "Canadian Bacon", ALL signs must be posted in English AND Frog-talk.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Rudi Jan on February 26, 2006, 09:45:23 PM

Quote
There were no security cameras at the site and it`s doubtful that the police will be able to perform a thorough forensic investigation.

Even if there had been security cams on site we all know those fail regularly when such events occur.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: rottenjohnh on February 26, 2006, 09:48:07 PM
"Cui Buno"

That means "for whose benefit", right?

Yep.

Quote
I should remind you of Dan Ackroyd in "Canadian Bacon", ALL signs must be posted in English AND Frog-talk.

LOL

I did a couple of years of French in High School and am a lost cause. All I retained was how to count to five.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: rottenjohnh on February 26, 2006, 09:56:45 PM
Quote
Even if there had been security cams on site we all know those fail regularly when such events occur.

It's a little to obvious and convenient for the PTB that this always seems to occur.

That they state in the article that it's "doubtful that the police will be able to perform a thorough forensic investigation" leaves little doubt they aren't interested in investigating the bombing.

Thus protecting their agents is the only thing that makes sense to me.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Sue on February 28, 2006, 10:12:16 AM
"This verifies that the strategy to split up Iraq has been circulating at the top levels of government from the very beginning of the occupation."

Utilizing Islam, and at the same time weakening the players.

I believed this from the beginning...............the old divide and conquer!
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Sue on February 28, 2006, 10:15:28 AM
Thanks for the flags RJ.....I have just discovered them all.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on February 28, 2006, 10:54:49 AM
Hey sushigirl!

How they goin?  You've got a closer look than most to their tactics.  Appreciate your opinion.

Speaking of opinions, I wonder if you'd be so kind as to go here:

http://www.freedomportal.net/forum/index.php?topic=3084.msg17230

And read the long quote in rottenjohn's post 17222.  I'd like to hear what you think.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Sue on February 28, 2006, 01:21:29 PM
Hey sushigirl!

How they goin?  You've got a closer look than most to their tactics.  Appreciate your opinion.

Speaking of opinions, I wonder if you'd be so kind as to go here:

http://www.freedomportal.net/forum/index.php?topic=3084.msg17230

And read the long quote in rottenjohn's post 17222.  I'd like to hear what you think.


I am doing great, thanks.
I will get back to you later.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 01, 2006, 05:34:22 AM
I still say their is the much simpler explanation. The Sunni's and Shi'ite are inextricably apart based on the simple split between the Sunni Muhammedians and the Shi'ite who follow his cousin Ali.

Their is a long history of Sunni oppression of the Shi'ite. Perhaps with good reason with the tribal nature of the region and the constant interference from Iran both covert and overt.

Just have a look at the place! No need for much of a detonator when the explosives have been stacked three feet from a roaring fire.

The Sunni are being marginalised. Partly their own fault. No major oil fields lie in their region of influence. They are going to lose everything. They are as pissed as hell.

The Mosque bombings are no surprise. Sometimes things happen because they happen that way. The plan was ALWAYS chaos in the region. Balkanization and dividing till they fall was always the plan. What was it Brizinsky said in his book? "We must prevent the barbarians from coming together".

Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on March 01, 2006, 05:56:55 AM
DD -

Cui bono?
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: rottenjohnh on March 01, 2006, 04:25:03 PM
I don't for a minute believe every event like this one is commited by special ops but this one in particular very much points in that direction. The sophistication and timing was too well planned out.

I also believe some of the Sunni groups have been infiltrated and are being used for these types of events though I doubt they were involved in this case other than those collaborating and giving the perps the opportunity to plant the explosives.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Proemio on March 01, 2006, 04:50:50 PM
I also believe some of the Sunni groups have been infiltrated and are being used for these types of events though I doubt they were involved in this case other than those collaborating and giving the perps the opportunity to plant the explosives.
Shia groups are infiltrated too (see the 'rogue' revenge attacks). Infiltrating organized groups is what the buggers do really well.
On balance, the Iraqis are very aware of this, though...
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: rottenjohnh on March 01, 2006, 05:38:21 PM
Shia groups are infiltrated too (see the 'rogue' revenge attacks). Infiltrating organized groups is what the buggers do really well.

True.

Quote
On balance, the Iraqis are very aware of this, though...

It's bloody amazing considering after all the varied provactions that they haven't as yet been coaxed into a civil war. Hopefully cool heads will continue to prevail.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Proemio on March 01, 2006, 06:13:23 PM
It's bloody amazing considering after all the varied provactions that they haven't as yet been coaxed into a civil war. Hopefully cool heads will continue to prevail.
I'm in "awe" - almost "shocked". Some we know must be "shocked and outraged"...
Seriously though, it's quite impressive and encouraging.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: rottenjohnh on March 01, 2006, 06:45:23 PM
Quote
I'm in "awe" - almost "shocked". Some we know must be "shocked and outraged"...

LOL Well put!!
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 02, 2006, 05:12:36 AM
Quote
Cui bono?

True. The first rule in Police Work...identify your suspects. Who has a "motive".

Next you note their whereabouts at the time of the event. You take witness statements.

Cui bono? Only part of the equation when you dont have further evidence. To be honest I hav'nt looked into the subject specifically but I merely want to add the point that there are other suspects with good motive.

How would we feel watching our influence go from hero to zero? Watch our country men and tribesmen die? Watch multi billion dollar oil fields move into other hands? Thisngs have been simmering and I agree with others here that it has been a MIRACLE it has'nt exploded before this.

They infiltrate Palstinian movements easily so I guess our "other" tribesmen in the area are busy. Israeli's are working closely with U.S troops on the ground and they are everywhere in the North of the country throwing around alot of cash.

Whatever, certain people are happy.

There is a part in the movie Ghandi where one character is speaking and he says.."We are trying to build a nation now but the British keep trying to seperate us into religions, principalities and provinces". Go here and download the short 800K extract...

http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~falluga/Ghandi Extract.wmv (http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~falluga/Ghandi Extract.wmv)

I guess the modus operandi never changes.



Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on March 02, 2006, 06:15:33 AM
Quote
How would we feel watching our influence go from hero to zero? Watch our country men and tribesmen die? Watch multi billion dollar oil fields move into other hands?

You use that 'our' too glibly.  I, as an american, have about as much to do with those oil fields as the people who will work them.  They'll just make me buy the products at inflated prices so I can run to keep my mortgage paid.  They might try to suck my sons into earning money for college by 'serving' our country.

"Divide and conquer".  The time-honored British way.  You keep running the same play till the opponent stops it.  I see no signs of them even slowing it down.

My @#$%& Windows Media Player is cracked.  Won't play ANYTHING.  Hafta reload the rig.
Thanks Bill.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 02, 2006, 03:42:09 PM
I meant how do the Sunni's feel about losing all their power and looking down the barrel of second and possibly third class citizens.

Strange you should mention Media Player problems. I have a software firewall to stop the basic accessing of the net by windows programs. Last week it suddenly popped up..."Windows Media Player Downloading Codecs". I unplugged the connection straight away and was perplexed. Media player still works BUT Sony Vegas 5 which I use to convert and edit video has ceased to play back files!

I never had an ounce of trouble with my computer till I started sending WMV converted files to Chussodovsky and Jones. At one stage I was reformatting every 6 weeks or so.

I'm paying a Linux geek to get me up to speed. Gates is just too full of holes both overt and covert.

Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on March 02, 2006, 04:53:36 PM
About two years ago, I was doing a lot of posting on a (ahem) WN site.  I was using my wife's computer she brought home from work.  It was faster than mine.  Got weird error messages for about 6hours then the HDD quit.  Would not even reformat.  Couldn't even write zeros. 

Back at Gateway, we use hypothesize that there were viruses that caused HDD actuators to 'chatter' then break.  I think they gave me one.

All because they hate Jesus Christ.  More and more I'm believing that that is the real bottom line.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 02, 2006, 09:36:41 PM
Quote
Got weird error messages for about 6hours then the HDD quit.  Would not even reformat.  Couldn't even write zeros.

Back at Gateway, we use hypothesize that there were viruses that caused HDD actuators to 'chatter' then break.  I think they gave me one.

I had EXACTLY the same problem! My hard drives started "clunk, clunk, clunk..." and doing very strange things when I tried to reformat. That seals it for me. Definately! You're right.

Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on March 03, 2006, 07:27:47 AM
Idunno, but there might be a method to this "anonomouse" stuff. 

You know what that's about?
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 03, 2006, 05:51:37 PM
Your request goes to a central server which offloads your page request and "takes responsibility" for it. Your I.P then remains hidden on the server that is acting as a medium between you and the outside world.

The only problem I have with these things is that the intelligence services are probably running the server with one of their thousands of front companies. It's handy scam as the only people who want to surf anonamously are people who you may want to look at.

Their is NO way to surf anaonamously. Period. So we should all get over it.

The only good thing about it is it prevents to a large degree self motivated computer geeks from giving you a hard time. Especially the ones called Jacob who operate out of Hynie Town and Israel.

Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Proemio on March 03, 2006, 06:02:29 PM
The only good thing about it is it prevents to a large degree self motivated computer geeks from giving you a hard time. Especially the ones called Jacob who operate out of Hynie Town and Israel.
That's about it - keep the referrer logs from screaming "hit me". It doesn't affect internal navigation, and not hard to circumvent.

You probably know that, but for anyone interested, the most convenient way:
- See an intereting link
- Hit "quote"
- Copy the link from http etc. AFTER the anonymouse stuff
- Paste in address bar (of a new window, if you want to return here easily)
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on March 03, 2006, 08:28:51 PM
"Their is NO way to surf anaonamously. Period. So we should all get over it"

That's more or less what I've come to live by.  And as I told some newbie, "we'll be paying for it sometime."  Get you licks in now, because it ain't gonna last.

Then buy a gun.


Hey, I heard they made gun ownership illegal in Oz.  Is that true?
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 04, 2006, 04:49:55 AM
In the end I've just contented myself to Norton Ghost regularly updated. When "solar flare" activity starts occuring I just ghost it and start again. 30 minutes.

Xp is so full of intentional holes and back doors I just gave up. Funny thing is...it's been pretty good lately. I've also come under some attention from the mung bean Feds and local coppers where I live. I hav'nt had a freaky O.S for the last 6 months...till this week. Till I started chasing them around with a video camera of my own. Now the freaky things begin after they ALSO fucked up my phone and internet connection at the exchange. Pure spite no doubt as they removed their surveillence equipment...so i believe. Sounds good anyway. ;) :D

The only other short term answer is Linux and I have to get a geek in to get it running at top notch speed. So be it. It will be good to finally rid myself of the anti-Christs DOS 6 system.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 04, 2006, 06:26:00 AM
Quote
Hey, I heard they made gun ownership illegal in Oz.  Is that true?

Just ask ROTTON.

It may as well be a ban.

It started with the massacre at Port Arthur in Tasmania 1996. 35 killed in some pretty good head and neck shots for a man who did'nt know which way to point his M-16 variant when he took it back to the gun shop owner.

Undoubtably a covert op. Without question.

After that the gov banned ALL semi auto rifles and shotguns. And I mean ALL semi auto including .22 rabbit poppers! Only those with a special license like feral animal cullers can have them. They also included a 7 round limit on hand gun magazines which you already had to be a Saint to get anyway.

Now the black market thrives. A gangbanger wanna be Meth dealer can get one. I cant. Thanx to our government who has our best interests in mind.

It's so silly i dont want to talk about it.

When I see Americans complaining that they're taking their .50 cal elephant stoppers away I just laugh. If they want oppresive gun laws...come here. Then you will experience true stupidity.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Proemio on March 04, 2006, 06:50:35 AM
Xp is so full of intentional holes and back doors I just gave up.
That is correct. Plus, it also has a has a highly vulnerable, simplistic basic architecture, whereas OS' like Linux or Mac are layered. Or, an executable in MS (all of them) will access core functions directly (HD for example), whereas Unix architecture forces apps to talk first with a protective layer (or two), where the legitimacy of the request is determined, through a permissions protocol. Not air tight, but safer by orders of magnitude. MS stuff should theoretically be faster, but that's where the backdoors come in.

BTW. Did you see the number of posts on my post above? Hmmmm...
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on March 04, 2006, 07:55:40 AM
I saw where Jews were stirring up the issue in Brazil.  It's the same people world wide, under the guise of the UN.  That should tell people something.  But they're not listening.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Proemio on March 04, 2006, 01:53:57 PM
I saw where Jews were stirring up the issue in Brazil.  It's the same people world wide, under the guise of the UN.  That should tell people something.
I was wondering about the relative merit of 'working' on the UN problem, and concluded that the United Noahides will collapse automatically, once immunization from talmudism has reached critical mass. Bluegrass found a great article from the NYT (early century) wherein tribal leaders gloated about getting their League of Nations. That 'cunning' plan did not pan out either. UN = LoN v2.11.6...

Quote
But they're not listening.
I understand you are doing missionary work (not sure). If so, aren't you supposed to have great patience/confidence? Cheer up, we are slowly getting there...

Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on March 04, 2006, 02:32:32 PM
Quote
United Noahides

Good one, pro.  I'm gonna steal that one too.

Quote
their League of Nations

Actually, they still have it.

Quote
missionary work

Not lately.  Just local, personal work.  Confidence?  Up, some days.  Down others.  Patience?  None.  I hafta use His.

But seriously folks, I do see movement.  And we're on the edge of it.  Most people are afraid to look under the bed right now, knowing that what they find will upset their already upset world.  But topics that were verboten are now on the table with some. 

The window of opportunity is NOW.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 04, 2006, 06:21:37 PM
Quote
That is correct. Plus, it also has a has a highly vulnerable, simplistic basic architecture, whereas OS' like Linux or Mac are layered. Or, an executable in MS (all of them) will access core functions directly (HD for example), whereas Unix architecture forces apps to talk first with a protective layer (or two), where the legitimacy of the request is determined, through a permissions protocol. Not air tight, but safer by orders of magnitude. MS stuff should theoretically be faster, but that's where the backdoors come in.

Good stuff! I did'nt know that. The specifics. I am NOT that computer literate BTW. I know some stuff because of my geek friends which may make me sound like I know what I'm talking about. I'm a fast learner though.

If you have the time and the urge takes you feel free to educate me more about the abomanation Xp and the anti-Christ Gates.

Start something over at the tech thread? :)

Quote
BTW. Did you see the number of posts on my post above? Hmmmm...

Not quite sure what you mean? ??? Please explain?
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 04, 2006, 06:24:32 PM
Quote
I saw where Jews were stirring up the issue in Brazil.  It's the same people world wide, under the guise of the UN.  That should tell people something.  But they're not listening.

Have a friend over their in Sao Paulo. The globalists will have their hands full with Brazil. They may be 'semi-poor' but they are not stupid.

Wait a second! Breaking news..."Oh my gawd! Brazil is developing nuclear baby killer weapons of mass destruction!" Just in from Fox. Bush is ordering the mobilization now to counter this latest threat to world peace. :D

Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on March 04, 2006, 08:26:25 PM
Give us a break DD, we embarrassed enough!

Danged wallabys.
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: Proemio on March 04, 2006, 08:40:58 PM
Start something over at the tech thread? :)
Right after all planned programming is done on (to) this forum :o

Quote
Not quite sure what you mean? ??? Please explain?
The post I was talking about was #666. Of course it changed, since I couldn't keep myself from dispensing 'great wisdom' - I should have thought of that...
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 04, 2006, 09:24:38 PM
Quote
The post I was talking about was #666. Of course it changed, since I couldn't keep myself from dispensing 'great wisdom' - I should have thought of that...

 :o Shivers! But no surprise. I'm quite sure Gates is a confirmed Satanist. Seriously.

Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: DonnieDarko on March 04, 2006, 09:29:00 PM
Quote
Give us a break DD, we embarrassed enough!

Yes. I should be more chivelrous. I said to an American tourist what was it like to have the Global Village Idiot representing your country. She said she did'nt want to talk about it. :'(

Quote
Danged wallabys.

Yes, but we're your Danged Wallaby's.  :D

(http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2005/07/18/bushhoward_wideweb__430x285.jpg)

(http://www.nicholsoncartoons.com.au/cartoons/new/2004-04-08%20Iraq%20dead%20priest%20better%20or%20worse%20400.JPG)
Title: Re: Whose Bombs were They
Post by: gregor on March 04, 2006, 09:41:12 PM
Nah! Gates just worships himself. 

Which actually is what LaVey says that true satanism is.  Hmmm.

Never mind.


Man!  What a couple of dogs for first ladies!  No wonder we're in the mess we're in.  When's the last decent looking one?  Rosalyn Carter?  How can you respect a leader without a good looking wife?  Even Gorbachev understood that!