democraticunderground? I got banned after one post.

And to end a thesis with the same old tired shit...

Quote:
We face the acute urgency of NOW. The lost Bush/Cheney decade has already condemned humanity to untold misery.

The lull in solar activity is ceasing, and this the temps will begin to go back up. the sun is finally becoming more active.

I'm from the northern climes and oh, maybe 1/2 billion people from the northern areas of the globe can tell you, Lamont, that global warming is 100% real and in their faces, every day, for the past 20 years as a gradual change in the weather. we know it, it is as real as it gets.

However, it is always good idea to be aware that corporate and elitist shills will attempt to control and manipulate any given political or environmental movement or motion for their own benefit and use. Manipulation will be there, and in spades, as it is in the American (or any other country) political system regarding war and societal manipulation to achieve those ends.

the problem is so complex that any group can gather data from many places and manipulate it at will in order to create a lie or shape to fix and control the minds of their given target group.

The smaller seeming realities being that those of us from the northern climes can clearly see that there is a considerable mount of truth to the point of the globe warming.

The problem being the same as it always is, the one of con artists telling us what we want to hear, and even telling us just enough so that we can then 'figure it out' on our own and thus feel that we are not being lied to as we figured it out on our own. And that is the essence of a well played con.

There are no no political parties, just the public and those who wish to control them.

Global warming is real, but how it is dealt with and how it is used as a vehicle for population/societal control ---is the real deal.

You will encounter large numbers of corporate and political groups who are more than willing to tell you it is not real and show you 'evidence' that it is not real, in order to control and shape your opinion for nefarious purposes, same as those who attempt to show you how real global warming is....and manipulate society from that direction.

And yet another study...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091230184221.htm

Quote:
To assess whether the airborne fraction is indeed increasing, Wolfgang Knorr of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Bristol reanalyzed available atmospheric carbon dioxide and emissions data since 1850 and considers the uncertainties in the data.

Now, how come this scientist is able to retrieve data from as far back as 1850 and those other morons managed to throw away all the data that supported Gore's lifestyle?

Possibly ice core samples from glacial deposits, or similar.

If so then I believe that Stereophile is doing a disservice to the world with their promotion of tube based equipment, class A amplifiers and even class AB amplifiers. Class D amps should be their focus regardless of sound quality. High efficency speakers should also be pushed as "the way to go". After all Stereophile is talking about minute differences between equipment at this level. We all should be willing to sacrifice for the good of the environment.

Quote:
If so then I believe that Stereophile is doing a disservice to the world with their promotion of tube based equipment, class A amplifiers and even class AB amplifiers. Class D amps should be their focus regardless of sound quality. High efficency speakers should also be pushed as "the way to go". After all Stereophile is talking about minute differences between equipment at this level. We all should be willing to sacrifice for the good of the environment.

Tubes in the winter with the heat turned down ?

Class D in the summer ?

It's the only responsible way to listen.

Downloads only, no vinyl or CD.
Probably uses more electricity to stream lossless so mp3 at 64 only.

It's tough being green

That never occurred to me. A lot of petroleum based products go into making stereo equipment. WTF? And all that coal burned at power plants to run tubes? I thought we were progressing with solid state? But even those boards have oil in them. We're in deep shit. And WTF are we going to do about the Vaseline industry?

less vaseline = less sex = less people =less carbon = no AGW.
Problem solved......................oh wait, now there's an ice age.

Fuck it, I'm turning the tubes back on.

Quote:
less vaseline = less sex = less people =less carbon = no AGW.
Problem solved......................oh wait, now there's an ice age.

The kind of sex you use Vaseline for shouldn't be spiking the population much.

Does anyone find it interesting that there is all this talk about cutting back on CO2 and how a 100+ billion a year fund must be created to assist countries to cope with global warming in 2025.

And yet, the same level of energy and intensity is not focused on preserving the rainforests and jungles around the world.
So the good news is eventually we will limit CO2, but on the downside we will have no rainforests or jungles by 2025 to deal with this CO2
Please do not take the timescale for deforestation as fact just having a bit of fun.

Furthermore, I wonder if the global warming models even take into account the vast losses so far of the forests and jungles; it may fit in with the trend of global warming if one takes rise of current temps as proof.
Maybe more should be done showing the difference in forestation of say 1700s to now and potential association to temp rises.

I appreciate some efforts are being applied to try and save these, but nowhere to the same lengths various groups are going on about reducing global warming in other ways.

Also I wonder if the Ozone layer will accelerate in depletion with 3rd world development increasing, and will these groups tell such countries to restrict CFCs.
IMO highly doubtful if we cannot get to grips with the forests and jungles being destroyed.

In fact deforestation is now the 2nd biggest contributor to global warming, some estimates put it at around 25% a year in recent reports.
Now this may be worse if the figure only takes into account what is put back into the atmosphere from storage and not what the forests were still able to absorb.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment...ing-448734.html

http://news.parliament.uk/2009/06/deforestation-and-climate-change-report/

So, with such enthusiasm for global warming and action, isnt it about time to focus more on the effects of deforestation and its potential to skew the temperature changes we are seeing
I doubt socialist scientists and groups care too much to highlight this as it would mean being politically incorrect and forcing change on developing countries instead of solely on us (western world)

BTW I am a believer in global warming (followed this subject since the very early 90s), but it does seem any uncomfortable truths or data showing that this subject is more complex than we understand are swept aside or not emphasised.
Funny enough wiki seems to think all is ok with deforestation and ignores views from Stern report, ESA, government investigations, other space agencies/organisations, etc that disagree and state there is a problem.
And recently in Brazil (reported by their own space agency)deforestation started to increase in terms of % again from 2007, even without the increase the amount destroyed each year in Brazil is around the size of Jamaica.
This is further compounded with what is happening around the world in terms of deforestation today and over the last two decades.

Food for thought anyway.

Cheers
Orb

It has been illustrated that approximately 16 of the world's fleet of the larger ocean going carrier vessels are polluting enough to equal to the pollution of all of the the world's cars/road vehicles.

Yes, a lousy 16 ships pollute at the same level as all of the world's cars, when there are so many of them out there on the ocean... so as to make the idea of hybrid cars and similar a total joke in comparison.

This illustrates that the whole effort to get people into non-polluting cars is a total scam in comparison, with that one piece of data put on the table.

I don't think that cars should be able to pollute either, but the point about the pollution of the 16 ships being directly comparable is highly illustrative of the level and type of manipulation that goes on with regards to news and who owns the news outlets, politics and who own the politicians,and the research and who created and owns the research.

Here's the very very very sad part:

Through the use of hyroxy gas injection into the intake mixture of the given ship engines..the 16 ocean going vessels in question, would pollute no more, period. Zero, zip, nada..no pollution of any kind. The hydroxy gas is produced by the normal use of the engine (as an attached system), and it will use less fuel than normal, even though the engine is producing the gas via powering an electrolysis machine. Thee will be an approximate and permanent efficiency increase of a minimum of 10% and no pollution of any kind from that giant engine.

I should know, I have and own and have played with a 1600l per hour hydroxy gas generator. AKA: "HHO", or "brown's gas" or "Rhodes gas".

I decided to buy one and see if the whole thing was true or not..and it is. The damned things work exactly as advertised. Not one line of the claims about their performance is bullshit, in any way. It cost me $6,000 to buy one and then find that out, but it was worth every goddamn cent. This is the crucial and vital part for you to understand. I have one, I have it and I have tested it and not one word of the performance claims is bullshit. I'll stake my freaking life on that, right here right now. Are you getting this yet?

Why you can't have it:

It deeply and directly powerfully challenges the system of energy production and the science that is accepted and in place, right now. What the gas does is, it is a electrically charged and expanded gas, that has been statically charged in a molecular-like and atomic way) zeeman-like level and way so that when it collapses back (atomically and electrically, I might add)to it's original state, it spins the resultant energy out in a way that destroys the thermodynamic 'regular' function of the adjacent molecules (complex carbon and similar polluting materials) so that they do not combine to create pollution but are destroyed or torn apart at the atomic level down to their constituent components. Ie, the burn is COMPLETE at the atomic level and there are NO emmissive components from the 'burn' other than oxygen,and H2O. That's it. No pollution of any kind. This has been tested and found to be true, 100's of times, now.

The point is that you are -NOT- supposed to know about or use this technology as it is a gateway to understanding that what we popularly (the regular common world of knowledge) understand about atomic structure and how it works is not wrong, per se, but horrendously incomplete.

This also opens the door to atomic breakdown of structures on the individual atomic level in a way that can be seen as what one would call 'over unity' as according to the standard strictures of science, this gas and what it does breaks all of the rules of atomic structure and thermodynamics, period. it fells them all, in one shot and opens the door to multiple avenues in science that would exclude the common man from having his capacity to produce and use energy being controlled by anyone but him.

That is the part that the power mongers of the world do not want to happen. Their control of your life would be excluded --- virtually overnight (less than a decade).

There are a good 50-100 other similar technologies that are out there, if you go looking for them, and contrary to popular belief, most of them are real, just poorly understood in the general sense. They are being purposely held back for the purposes of societal control.

Democratic Underground! I normally refuse to discount an argument based on its source, but I, while working for a computer reseller, was banned three times in under an hour on 3 different PC's because I implied Hillary might be less than honest.

Any site that bans all different views is not in the American tradition so I refuse to even open their site or read their posts.

They are to political debate what a skinhead site is to racial discourse.

They may have a decent argument but I will never know as I will simply refuse to wander into that cesspool of anti-American propaganda.

I've read studies that say that jungles contribute to global warming because they trap and absorb the heat as opposed to reflecting the solar contributions skyward. As for the whole climate change movement, I think it's a poor use of resources that could better be used to have a positive impact on the lives of people and critters. The cost/benefit equation borders on criminality as far as I'm concerned. David Horowitz has written extensively on the infiltration of the communists in the environmental movement as a result of the fall of the Soviets that is at least as persuasive as the flawed science suggesting a substantial contribution by man toward climate change.

Btw, just what is the global thermostat setting supposed to be anyway?

My own bottom line is that we are supposed to be good shepherds, so minimizing air pollution, keeping the water clean, etc. is its own reward.

I always found the economic imperative behind warming denial to be a venal argument and the Al Gore approach to be overwrought.

Too add, the hyroxy electrolysis generators in question for each ship of that total of 16.....each electrolyzer install would cost NO MORE than..oh..$250-300k, absolute maximum. And this could be done in months, if not less. All they use is distilled water. that's it. (in a caustic lye solution so as to make the fluid conductive)

so, we could do the equivalent of taking all the cars on the road, off the road, for about $5 million.

Then we could do the equivalent of taking all the cars on the road off the road..multiplied by 20x..for about $100 million. In less than a year.

But..that would leave people like you and I finding our own way with respect to energy... and the power structure that is in existence right now would falter..so they'd rather see you burn in shit first. Or micro tag you and electronically herd you, first. But freedom? Never.

I'm not kidding here at all, guys. What I'm saying here is real, as real as it gets. This is a very basic technology among those that are being held back.

I hope you are getting very angry. You need to be, before you get off your asses and do some real things.

I agree that either side of the issue could be viewed as venal. However, rejecting a cost/benefit analysis on just about anything is foolish. Just as using the Earth's resources wisely and being the good shephard as you say is the right thing to do, so is using economic resources as they are not infinite and are simply tools to achieve a desired effect. An obvious example that you can appreciate is the Iraq war. Could those 100s of billions of economic resources have been spent in a more productive way?

Most everyone has their own list of what is or isn't a good use of economic resources, but there are consequences that must always be considered. The current global economic crisis is a result of badly misallocated resources with one of the prime side effects being high unemployment and massive debt by the consumers and governments alike. Consequently, state and local governments who can't print money out of thin air like the Feds can are having to make decisions that have consequences because there is no way to continue funding all the entitlements and programs that require money without raising more money from an already busted citizenry. The negative feedback loops from the falling dominos ultimately reverts to the final arbitor of exchanging value for value and determining value is a cost/benefit equation.

The reality is that we have a multitude of solutions that can fix this mess and fix it now, with almost no fuss or change in anyone's lives, today...yesterday even.

They are being purposely held back in order to cause and create an issue to drive you to the state of mind and mental condition that is required for these groups of people to get what they want, out of you.

It really is that simple, when you look into it.

I just told you of a real and actual solution that is not imaginary to me, I've had it directly in my hands for years, as have many other people.

You should be fighting angry. So incensed that you want to march out of your house and fight this-yesterday. Until you grapple with this on that level, you aren't going to get anywhere. Humans, especially controlled ones with soft fluffy lives like those in north America, are notoriously lazy and self indulgent when it comes to dealing with hard truths, or even bothering to contemplate deeply enough to see things as they really are. I'm not condemning Americans, the monkey in us all does this same thing under similar circumstances. Americans are merely one of the primary groups of 'sleeping fools' of the given historical moment.

You have to begin to break down and deal with the problem directly, in person, you, individually and as a group, remember, the only way it will ever get done, is when you are literally fighting mad. The key is to make sure that those who want something out of you, the people who have shaped and created this problem, make sure they are not the ones who create that anger, that 'call to action', for if it is them, then it will merely take the shape of a cattle prod delivered at the right moment -- for them, and will not serve you at all, it will drive the knife into you - further. This much has always been obvious.

The powers that be are literally frightened right now, for people actually are waking up to the depth of the disinformation and manipulation. Get them running harder.

This sort of post I'm making now could not actually be posted on a forum even 4 years ago. Too many people would be negative to it for it to survive. Think about that.

Yeah you are right that they trap/absorb (carbon sink), and thats the issue with deforestation that your burning the trees and releasing what they stored.
On top of this you remove any further absorption they could had done so its a double issue that deforestation causes.

Interestingly a study of trees in rainforests has shown that they are increasing in size as the carbon emitted increases.
So the question from what I can tell that has never been done is; how much are the current temps being skewed by deforestation due to the re-release of co2 and the loss of absorption/carbon sink benefits.

As you say, it does seem many other groups have jumped onto this bandwagon since the studies and presentations done in the 90s, with unfortunately more presenting facts and data that suits their needs instead of being more transparent.

Hence why deforestation goes mostly unnoticed, which it should be obvious that once a certain % of deforestation (comparing the 1800s to 2010) is reached you attain a critical point in terms of potential carbon modelling effects.
However this type of focus and study (as an example wiki states in general deforestation is fine) just does not sit with most pushing global warming who for them the cause is solely western civilisation effects such as energy consumption and travel.

Bah I say lets go nuclear and lots of it!!!
At least the grass and trees stays green if it all goes wrong.
As a bonus it stops deforestation if we could build those nuclear stations in the jungle in preparation for when they go belly up, a solution is found
Just need to watch out for the mutant ants and worms, and the odd Godzilla that pops up

Cheers
Orb

Quote:
I agree that either side of the issue could be viewed as venal. However, rejecting a cost/benefit analysis on just about anything is foolish. Just as using the Earth's resources wisely and being the good shephard as you say is the right thing to do, so is using economic resources as they are not infinite and are simply tools to achieve a desired effect. An obvious example that you can appreciate is the Iraq war. Could those 100s of billions of economic resources have been spent in a more productive way?

Most everyone has their own list of what is or isn't a good use of economic resources, but there are consequences that must always be considered. The current global economic crisis is a result of badly misallocated resources with one of the prime side effects being high unemployment and massive debt by the consumers and governments alike. Consequently, state and local governments who can't print money out of thin air like the Feds can are having to make decisions that have consequences because there is no way to continue funding all the entitlements and programs that require money without raising more money from an already busted citizenry. The negative feedback loops from the falling dominos ultimately reverts to the final arbitor of exchanging value for value and determining value is a cost/benefit equation.

Just to add.
Interestingly the Stern report outlined in pretty good detail a costed international business model for preserving the rainforests that was mostly accepted as being well done and workable.
Question is, why wasnt this aggressively persued at Coppenhagen as the UK government Environmental Audit Select Committee outlined:

Quote:

To that end the Committee calls on the UK Government to lobby for a global climate agreement in Copenhagen that will:

Go to
pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com

for a well balanced , non political view of agw.
Pielke is a world renowned climate scientist.
He is not a skeptic but he is also not an alarmist.

Watch the Weather Channel.

FYI missing a d.
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/

Will take a look cheers
Orb

Edit:
Quick look at the site and it does provide some great reading, thanks for the link

Winter Could Be Worst in 25 Years for USA...
CHILL MAP...
3 Deaths Due To Cold in Memphis...
PAPER: GAS SUPPLIES RUNNING OUT IN UK...
Elderly burn books for warmth?
Vermont sets 'all-time record for one snowstorm'...
Iowa temps 'a solid 30 degrees below normal'...
Seoul buried in heaviest snowfall in 70 years...
Historic ice build-up shuts down NJ nuclear power plant...
Midwest Sees Near-Record Lows, Snow By The Foot...
Miami shivers from coldest weather in decade...

US Weather Bureau Report

The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some
places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the
Commerce Department yesterday from ConsulIfft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports
from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a
radical change in climate conditions and here to for unheard-of temperatures
in the Arctic zone.

Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as
far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters
showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been
replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at
many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.. Very few seals
and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of
herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are
being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.

I'm sorry, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922
as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post.

I live in Charlotte and we're currently experiencing the longest streak of sub 40 degree weather since the late 1800's. We could use a little local warming if we can't get any globally.

Well, that great control system, sunspot activity, IS 'apparently' returning ...so we'll see how next year turns out.

It should be notably hotter. We'll see.

Yeah, it working out great...those darn sun spots.

The sunspot activity is reduced due to the earth and solar system going through into the larger dust cloud area that is in the Galaxy's ecliptic, or if the galaxy was cut like a bagel, then we are headed into the cut line of the bagel, on the outer edge. This area is filled with interstellar and intergalactic dust.

More and more scientists are finding that the idea that the universe is electrically based and that gravity, time, etc is just a subset or harmonic distortion on these oscillating voltage and current flow systems.

Now when we get to the dust occluding and filling the space around and in the solar system boundaries and edges, we change the conductivity and flow within the solar system as well. All things being connected, yah now. Since the solar system has balance and the energies outside of it are equal in scope to the energies within, the dust area surrounding the solar system is beginning to wreak havoc with the solar activity.

It's essentially damping or shorting the sun's activity, is the guess. Now, the sun will respond by having no activity for a while but like a tailpipe plugged with a potato.. and the engine being revved, it will eventually spit pretty hard in some unusual ways.

What happens is that the sun is in a low energy area of it's cycle, the 11 year basic sunspot activity cycle, that is...and the interstellar dust (besides all of the gravitational and similar energies being different on this bagel edge) we are now traveling through..and we get an extra damping of the sunspot activity that is essentially hiding the effects of global warming due to man's influence.

When normal sunspot activity returns and slowly, as it is being damped by all this dust and the electrical connectivity to it, etc.. when that activity returns..it will be choked and it will eventually, like that car with the potato in the tail pipe..it will burp pretty spectacularly.

so the upswing into the expected high solar activity cycle that is now beginning, is expected to be ..uhh. QUITE spectacular. Off the scale spectacular. 'Expected' behavior, as no-body knows what to expect.

Just pray to any gods you might care to pray to..that the earth is not turned toward the sun when it has some of the expected MASSIVE coronal ejections (burps).

You won't find this in the popular press, but I'll see if I can find the article of interest that points at this in a way that explains why you have not heard about this. Basically, one of the reasons that it is not a 'public' bit of knowledge, for the greater part, is that it is really.. scary as it freaking gets. Mass panic, religious overtones, etc.

Like the boy who cried wolf, the purposeful ridicule of some interesting bits in the historical context (as in the Mayan calendar showing the cycle to a perfect T) has worked TOO well, and people are now predisposed to ridicule anything about this, even though as a prediction set, it fits the evidence perfectly, as nothing else fits - which makes it doubly interesting.

Found it. This was posted on a whistle blower's website:

My husband is an electrical engineer for a national power company. He has just been told that they are expecting an event in the next 3-4 years that will render every transformer in the world useless. They are desperately trying to find a solution to the problem. If they don't, the entire global electrical system will go down. I know this fits in with some of your research. Have you heard about this?

Second response - to a question for clarification:

My husband is working away from home at the moment on this problem, and I have no way of contacting him. He is not allowed to carry a cellphone on the job. I'll clarify with him when I speak to him next, but the impression I got was that it was definitely going to happen. He mentioned something about electromagnetic clouds in space that the Earth is drifting into. They are under incredible pressure to find a solution. My husband is an engineer, a man of rational logic. He is not prone to flights of fancy, but this news has disturbed him no end.

Third response, for issuance of a desire for clarification:

I apologize for the lack of detail, I am not being deliberately vague, I just don't know much about it. I do not have a background in physics. I shall answer your questions to the best of my ability here, but it would probably be better to speak to my husband about the technicalities. I'll ask him to contact you when he's next home.

The problem will affect the entire planet, and I believe that the attempt to rectify it is an international one, although I don't know what nationalities are involved.

Sorry Bill, this is probably not very helpful, but my knowledge of this is extremely limited. I couldn't even attempt to answer your other questions, I'll leave that to my husband. I would not attach too much significance to my choice of words, like I say I'm no physicist. However, the term 'electronic pulse' sounds familiar. I am pretty certain my husband used that term himself.

The next bit is that is suspected, is that the husband came home and freaked out about the contact with this given site - and the communications ended.

This can be verified or refuted, by poking around in the US electrical grid supply industry, if you want to make an attempt to do so. But all of this does support the idea of a very possible future coronal mass ejection of quite a huge size, at the minimum.

You have to dig into these things. There are no simple answers, at least at the outset. It requires digging.

So you can dig into it, or you can wait to ridicule it after the given time period has passed. Or why wait! Ridicule it now!

But all the available evidence seems to point toward the possibility that this is very... well..uh......possible. When I say possible, I'm not talking about attempting to find truth via the stories but attempting to find rationality and correlation of/in the expected physics, and the potentials involved in correlation via the stories.

Freeze in Florida Tonight Will Be Worst Since 1989...

I do wonder if excessive cloud seeding by some countries is what creates either some or most of these unpredictable weather patterns.
Ah well there is no way to prove this as the current global models are screwed up enough to show we do not have enough data and parameters to create truly accurate models.

BTW this is why I said believe (well sometimes strongly other times tentavely) earlier on; I accept much of the modelling done is not entirely accurate and relies upon many assumptions and restricted scopes/data.
This is why I decide to focus on the carbon sink mechanism that is influenced in two ways from deforestation, but others look to general CO2 from energy/travel/manufacturing for correlation to warming.
But then if you see a well chaired discussion what comes out is that the CO2 temp models cannot predict and match accurately some of the blips we see over a 10 year period and even longer.

Probably for some of the best chaired discussions check out Andrew Neil who I feel is one of the best interviewers we have in the UK; one of only a very few interviewers here in UK that maintain impartiality and puts forward the difficult questions to all sides.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/the_daily_politics/8380451.stm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypolitics/andrewneil/2010/01/i_did_warn_you.html

Funny enough the BBC (he is their only impartial commentator IMO on their TV channel) make sure he is on at awkward times of the day; 12pm to 12:30pm week days and then 11:30pm to 12:20am Thursday night.

Edit:
Ah for entertainment the PROFESSORS FRED SINGER AND BOB WATSON discussion (November 23, 2009) , sorry to say Bob was pretty appalling.

Cheers
Orb

Heh another story is breaking about poor scientific research/presentation associated with an affect of global warming.
IMO the news does not necessarily disprove global warming is happening, just backs up my point about their being what seems an agenda by groups on global warming and that all the facts and data are not known and even the parts recorded are possibly ignored due to a limited scope (whether deliberate or to keep a model oversimplified so in their eyes it may work).

In this case it could be many of the above, including laziness on the validation due to it suiting their needs (bias comes to mind here).
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece
Interesting read anyway that may be as bad as the recent climategate.

Cheers
Orb

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environ...ne-article.html

Quote:
UN climate change panel based claims on student dissertation and magazine article

I Still think that the story of the Iraq war being based on a conversation between an intel agent and a cab driver as they ran around Baghdad deserves top billing and the numero uno spot in the world of disinformation and utter bullshit.

The fact that the story is slowly 'coming out' like some sort of official turd of governmental secrets - which gives it that whiff of credibility, is just off the scale.... well....shit.

Quote:
I Still think that the story of the Iraq war being based on a conversation between an intel agent and a cab driver as they ran around Baghdad deserves top billing and the numero uno spot in the world of disinformation and utter bullshit.

The fact that the story is bullshit? I'm sorry...I got confused for a second there.