Willease's World Wide Rant

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4742
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 11:32 pm

PostTue Dec 13, 2011 4:21 pm » by Will69ease


absolute wrote:the PTB control china,iran,russian,usa,europe etc... there is no us vs them... its all an illusion. You are simply perpetuating fear mongering. The PTB want world war 3... and it all depends if they can ramp up enough fear and hate in the masses to have one.

Without the masses there is no war.

Listen absolute retard, I am simply reporting the news that for the most part is being ignored by the main stream media. All of these events are real and verifiable. I am offended that you consider it fear mongering. Perhaps it would be better if you buried your head in the sand because denial won't help you. If the truth is too much for you, then stop reading the thread.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4742
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 11:32 pm

PostTue Dec 13, 2011 4:24 pm » by Will69ease


American job seekers turn down offers:
Despite the fact that America’s youth are graduating into a labor market decimated by the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, a full 41 percent of job seekers this year turned down offers—the exact percentage that did so in 2007, when the economy was booming. “Almost universally they want to find a job that’s not just a job but an expression of their identity, a form of self-fulfillment,” says Jeffrey Jensen Arnett, a Clark University psychology professor who interviewed hundreds of young people across the economic spectrum for his book Emerging Adulthood: The Winding Road From the Late Teens Through the Twenties. Expect a soon-coming rude awakening for America’s younger generation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/magaz ... nted=print

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4742
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 11:32 pm

PostTue Dec 13, 2011 4:31 pm » by Will69ease


Missouri removes bans on gambling:
The Missouri Gaming Commission voted unanimously this week to allow gamblers to drop their self-imposed, state-enforced lifetime bans from casinos. Nearly 11,000 of the more than 16,000 people who have banned themselves from Missouri casinos will be eligible to gamble again when the rule change takes effect in April. For desperate families burdened with record debt levels, stuck in the midst of the worst job market in years, state gambling promotion couldn’t come at a worse time.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... _US_News_5

Initiate
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:35 am

PostTue Dec 13, 2011 9:01 pm » by Absolute


Oh the hostility...

As far as I can tell all your sources are mainstream... or piggy backing off mainstream. The PTB are trying to cause WW3. In order to start world war 3 they need to stir up the masses, so they do their geopolitical theater ... and here you are promoting it. Next time, I will try not to offend your overly sensitive ego.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4742
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 11:32 pm

PostWed Dec 14, 2011 1:06 am » by Will69ease


absolute wrote:Oh the hostility...

As far as I can tell all your sources are mainstream... or piggy backing off mainstream. The PTB are trying to cause WW3. In order to start world war 3 they need to stir up the masses, so they do their geopolitical theater ... and here you are promoting it. Next time, I will try not to offend your overly sensitive ego.

The fact that there are countless nuclear bombs proves that WWIII is a given.
History clearly shows that once mankind develops a weapon, they use it. So it's not a
question of if, but when.
Oh and next time, skip the comment and go fuck yourself.

Initiate
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:35 am

PostWed Dec 14, 2011 3:47 am » by Absolute


ya? and what the fuck are you going to do to stop it?

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4742
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 11:32 pm

PostWed Dec 14, 2011 6:09 am » by Will69ease


absolute wrote:ya? and what the fuck are you going to do to stop it?

Typical troll response.

Tension grows over Falkland Islands:
Image
A worker inspects the hull of Royal Navy assault ship HMS Intrepid. The Falkland’s veteran ship was dismantled in 2009.

Friction between Britain and Argentina is increasing. Argentine patrol ships have boarded 12 Spanish fishing boats over the last few weeks, saying their fishing licenses were not valid. They said the boats were operating “illegally” in disputed waters. “The UK has protested to Argentina …. We consider that it is not compliant with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos),” said the British Foreign Office in a statement. Argentina’s National Congress is considering a proposal that would make the country’s Olympic logo the image of the Falkland Islands with the words “The Falklands are Argentine.” Britain’s plans to create a 1 million-square-kilometer protective zone around South Georgia—an island in the region of the Falklands also claimed by Argentina—are not likely to make the waters any calmer. The protective zone is designed to preserve the unique marine life in the area and will limit fishing. Britain’s Times newspaper writes that Britain would not be capable of saving the islands if Argentina took them over, as it did in 1982. “It is highly unlikely that Britain could repeat the mission,” it writes, “particularly since we no longer have an aircraft carrier available. Nor, given France’s ambivalence over the issue, would there be any realistic prospect of borrowing a French carrier, as stipulated under the recent Anglo-French defense pact.” Rockhopper Oil, a drilling company that focuses on the Falklands, is drilling in the seabed around the islands to determine if there are commercially viable fields of oil or gas. This could give the islands more than a geographical significance, which would heat up competition for the islands. This is a competition that Britain has neither the capability nor the will to win.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4742
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 11:32 pm

PostWed Dec 14, 2011 6:15 am » by Will69ease


Britain’s Falklands Test Is Coming

Tension is welling in the South Atlantic—well, in a tiny archipelago about 250 miles off the coast of Argentina, to be precise.

Of course, the current tension over the Falkland Islands is minute compared to what it was in April 1982. It was 29 years ago this week that Argentina’s ruling military government invaded the Falkland Islands and seized control from the British. The taste of victory was fleeting. In his hasty attempt to snatch the Falklands, Argentine President Leopoldo Galtieri underestimated Britain’s commitment to its vital strategic outpost in the South Atlantic.

Within three days, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had dispatched the first battle ships, including two aircraft carriers, to the Falklands. Within weeks, and with near unanimous support from the United Nations, a fleet of 100 ships and 27,000 personnel had crossed 8,000 miles of ocean and was battling to recover the Falklands. From the opening moments of the conflict, Prime Minister Thatcher’s endgame was clear: The strategically vital Falkland archipelago had been sovereign British territory since 1833, and there was no way it would be pried from England’s grasp on her watch.

By June 14, after a resounding display of English resolve, Britain had recovered its prized possession.

Three decades later, and in spite of Britain’s convincing victory in 1982, the Falklands remain a major point of tension between Britain and Argentina. While this week marks the 29th anniversary of the Falklands War, the actions (or lack thereof) in response to this anniversary are a measure of the importance of the Falklands to both Britain and Argentina.

For Argentina, the Falkland Islands—or Islas Malvinas as they’re called in Argentina—remain an issue of vital political and strategic importance. Although Buenos Aires resumed diplomatic relations with Britain in 1992, it continues to ardently oppose British sovereignty over the islands. Just last month, the Argentine Senate unanimously approved a bill created to prevent Argentine companies or people from taking part in exploring for or exploiting hydrocarbons around the waters of the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. The bill is merely the latest in what appears to be an infinite arsenal of political, legislative and diplomatic weapons to attack British sovereignty over the Falklands.

Last weekend, in a major public event marking the 29th anniversary of the war, Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner stoked the patriotic ambitions of her people to reclaim the island archipelago. The “Malvinas are Argentine forever,” Kirchner told the nation, and the government will “never yield in our claim.” Sooner or later, she promised, Argentina will “recover what belongs to us.”

Argentina’s foreign minister, Hector Timerman, also got in on the anniversary weekend action. He said the Falklands question had become a “regional cause,” and an issue that is serving to unify South American states. Britain has established a “military fortress in the South Atlantic,” he complained, and is a “threat for all the region.”

Perhaps even more telling is the fact that the Kirchner government is actively taking the Falklands issue to the international community, particularly the United Nations. This week, Jorge Argüello, Argentina’s ambassador to the UN, chaired a conference in Thailand on the Falklands dispute. Reporting on the conference, MercoPress noted that it is in “the framework of the diplomatic offensive from the Argentine legation before United Nations ….” Argüello has conducted similar conferences in India, Cuba and Germany, and plans to conduct more in other countries.
http://en.mercopress.com/2011/04/05/the ... ts-members
and
http://en.mercopress.com/2011/03/17/arg ... aign=daily

Why would Buenos Aires make an effort to school the international community, especially UN member states, in its claim on the Falklands? Could it be laying the diplomatic groundwork in anticipation of another conflict with Britain?

Meanwhile, the response in Britain to the 29th anniversary of the Falklands War has been pretty much non-existent!

This is no exaggeration. Neither Prime Minister David Cameron nor his coalition government, nor even a single member of the Conservative Party, has specifically addressed the Falklands War. Of course, it would be unthinkable in this age of political correctness to celebrate Britain’s victory in 1982. But Downing Street didn’t even speak out on the anniversary to simply affirm Britain’s commitment to the Falklands. The media has been equally silent. Except for a handful of articles in a couple of conservative papers, very little has been written of the anniversary. There hasn’t even been a token article or speech paying homage to the admirable leadership of Lady Thatcher!

Contrast that with the actions of Argentina’s president, who in addition to publicly voicing her commitment to the Falklands last weekend, made it mandatory that all school children read a letter written by a school teacher who volunteered to fight in the Falklands War!

Although Downing Street and Fleet Street appear to have forgotten about the Falklands, bankers and finance gurus in London have not. Two weeks ago, Rockhopper Exploration, a British energy company, announced that it had discovered a significant column of oil in the seabed adjacent to the Falklands. After the announcement, the company’s shares jumped 32 percent. This week, Rockhopper revised its estimates upward for the volume of oil potentially available. It’s too early to tell how much oil lies beneath the seabed around the Falklands, but Western energy companies under the sanction of the British government are investing a great deal of time, money and hardware searching for oil in the Falklands.

Of course, Argentina boils with anger at the possibility of the Falklands becoming an energy source for Britain.

Watch this issue: If Britain sanctions large-scale drilling of oil in the Falklands, it could provoke a dramatic response from Argentina.

If such a moment comes, one wonders how Britain would react should Argentina make a significant play on the Falklands. The archipelago has been a vital strategic asset of Britain’s since the early 19th century, giving the British an important outpost in Drake Passage, the sea-lane that connects the South Atlantic and South Pacific oceans. Prime Minister Thatcher was aware of the strategic and symbolic importance of the Falklands to Britain, which is why she responded with terrific force when they were threatened. Thirty years later, Britain’s commitment to the Falklands has clearly diminished.

Be assured, Argentina sees this—and sooner or later will once again test Britain!

When this test comes, Bible prophecy says Britain will lose control of this strategic asset (Deuteronomy 28:52). If a crisis does erupt, one development to watch for will be the emergence of Europe as a key player in the conflict. While British politicians appear disinterested, their counterparts in Brussels have made it clear that the European Union will have a say in the future of the Falklands. In fact, it wouldn’t be surprising if these islands eventually fall, either directly or indirectly, under the influence of Europe—especially if they emerge as a source for energy!

Whatever happens, keep an eye on the South Atlantic: Britain’s Falklands test is coming!

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4742
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 11:32 pm

PostWed Dec 14, 2011 6:33 am » by Will69ease


EU Out to Get Britain
Image
British Prime Minister David Cameron faces a chorus of EU leaders wanting his country out of the EU.

Angered by Britain’s veto of EU treaty reform, several European officials are vowing to get revenge on Britain using the European Union, while others are suggesting that Britain leave the Union. Consider the following quotes:
•The EU “must marginalize Britain, so that the country comes to feel its loss of influence.”—Elmar Brok, German Christian Democrat mep, close to German Chancellor Angela Merkel
•“I doubt in the long term whether Britain will stay in the EU. The EU can, if necessary, do without Britain, but Britain would have more difficulty without the EU.”—Marin Schulz, German mep and next year’s president of the European Parliament
•“Now we must put pressure on the British and force them, by implementing tough regulations on financial markets, to decide if they want out of the EU or if they want to stay inside.”—Daniel Cohn-Bendit, leader of the European Green Party
•“The Treaty of Lisbon explicitly opens the possibility of a country’s withdrawal. The British must now decide whether they are for or against Europe.”—Gunther Krichbaum, chairman of the German Parliament’s EU committee
•“It was a mistake to admit the British into the European Union. … Either they [renegotiate their position in Europe] by themselves, or the EU will be founded anew—without Great Britain.”—Alexander Graf Lambsdorff, German Free Democrat mep
•“It must be made clear to Great Britain: Either you want the whole package, or you can leave it alone.”—Manfred Weber, vice chairman of the European People’s Party
•“The big problem we’ve got now is we’re still members of the EU, we’re still subject to all of their laws, we are more unpopular than we’ve ever been as a member of the Union, we’re in a permanent voting minority, and that very industry that Cameron sought to protect is now very seriously under threat. There’s going to be retribution.”—Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party

And it is not just politicians. French newspaper Le Figaro asked on its website: “Does the UK still have a place in Europe?” Of the 40,000 respondents, 81 percent said “Non.”

Europe has both means and motive for pushing Britain out. The nations that sign up to the new treaty may seek to use EU institutions—the European Commission, the European Court of Justice, and so on—to enforce decisions. Whether they can do this without Britain’s permission is uncertain.
http://www.cityam.com/forum/cameron-mus ... m-strategy
They probably can’t—though the EU isn’t known for its respect of the rule of law. Though they could eventually remove any obstructions Britain put up, it would slow the process down. But to calm the financial markets, Europe needs speed. It would be far more convenient for them to just get rid of Britain.

EU officials are already plotting to make it hard for Britain to stay in the Union. Early next year, eurozone members will meet with non-euro EU members—called the euro-plus group. Through using its veto, Britain is not a part of this group. “A decision taken by the euro-plus summit is a fait accompli for the EU,” the Telegraph’s Bruno Waterfield cites an anonymous source as saying. “If the euro-plus decides, that will be translated into an EU decision via its inbuilt qualified majority.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/fina ... stile.html

The EU won’t have complete power over the UK using qualified majority voting (qmv). But the UK has already surrendered so much to Brussels that the euro-plus group will be able to wield significant power over the nation. Waterfield quotes another diplomat saying that the new grouping “will be a battering ram to force through EU decisions, taken by qmv.”

The EU is about to make life more difficult for Britain. The nation has already taken its first few steps toward the door. It is already outside the main European power, just like the Trumpet has been forecasting for years.
http://www.thetrumpet.com/?q=6072.0.114.0
(The Trumpet said this even earlier than 2009 but this article says it all)

Initiate
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:35 am

PostWed Dec 14, 2011 6:50 am » by Absolute


I don't think you got the part where... they need the masses to start world war 3... Your information does nothing but insight fear and anger... we are all tied in into a collective subconscious.

911 was hinted at dozens and dozens of times to solidify the even in the collective subconscious. THEY NEED US TO THINK IT WILL ALL GO THROUGH.

I never know if i'm talking to a shill anyways..

peace


PreviousNext

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook