PDA

View Full Version : Financial apocolypse NOW!!!



Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
27th September 11, 07:35 AM
First Alessio said (video below) that the market would crash as it was now ruled by fear and that all the big players in the field know that the market was toast.

It was at this stage that you got the feeling that he was going to give out a bit more information than the BBC was prepared for.

He then said that those major players also do not care about the state of the European or world’s economies, they were moving their money into the safe havens of all denominations of US Treasuries and the dollar.

When asked to pin down the things that would keep investors happy in today’s economic climate Alessio just said very candidly that he was a trader and, like most traders, didn’t care as long as he made money. In fact he said that he had always dreamt of a recession because of the money making opportunities that recessions offer.

You could almost hear the researcher who had recommended Alessio to the news team chewing his/her knuckles as the transmission went out.

He also said that anyone could make money in this environment and pointed to hedging strategies and buying Treasuries. ‘I go to bed every night, I dream of another recession,’ he said

He then said that it wasn’t governments that rule the world, ‘Goldman Sachs rules the world’ he said. And Goldman Sachs doesn’t care, he added.


Likening the financial crisis to a cancer he said that action was needed now or it would be too late. He then predicted that within 12 months millions of people would see their savings devastated and that this was ‘just the beginning’.

from here (http://www.economicvoice.com/alessio-rastani-gives-the-bbc-more-than-they-bargained-for/50024060#ixzz1Z9huDQPF)

lqN3amj6AcE


KrkwgTBrW78

Well we all knew this already didnt we?

Cullion
27th September 11, 07:50 AM
I was about to post this :)

I told you all not to give these bastards any tax money 'for the system'. Are you gullible Keynesians fucking happy now ?

When this shit happens _let the banks twist in the wind first_.

Craigypooh
27th September 11, 08:02 AM
He should have laughed insanely between sound bites.

Cullion
27th September 11, 08:29 AM
He was sorta trying to be a good guy by warning 'ordinary people' I think.

AAAAAA
27th September 11, 08:30 AM
What about the youtube comment stating

"The person talking is Andy Bichlbaum, a member of "The Yes Men"; a band of satirists and activists. Please Like this so the truth is easier for people to see."

Craigypooh
27th September 11, 08:45 AM
Doesn't look like him to me:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/andy-bichlbaum

Edit:
Although Forbes think there's something to it:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilylambert/2011/09/27/trader-or-prankster-we-called-alessio-rastani-and-asked/4/

Here's the video Forbes refer to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiWlvBro9eI

I'm pretty sure it's a different guy.

Lebell
27th September 11, 09:47 AM
What a nice guy!
' Hai guiz, we screwed you over and the crash is inevitable.
but there's good news! If you turn yourself into a wallstreetshark within 12 months you can actually make money from this!'

He should get dragged from his house, get his balls cut off, shoved in his mouth and then get shot through his ballstuffed mouth.

I welcome the crash forother reasons.
The ensueing chaos will allow me to persue my lifelong dream: becoming a warlord.

Lollius Urbicus
27th September 11, 10:24 AM
Given that this guy doesn't work for any bank or hedge fund and doesn't seem to ever have done, his website just concentrates on his 'professional speaking' and that others reckon he's a professional comedian.

I'm pretty sure this is just a troll job for attention.

Ajamil
27th September 11, 11:03 AM
Trader guy reminds me of Abed from Community, but with a hard-on for trading instead of TV. If he is legit, then my first thought is he wouldn't be telling us this unless he benefits somehow from people freaking out over this candid telling of a common assumption. How does he make money off a run on the banks or a flood of panicked investors into the market?

Also, an interesting comment from the forbes article:


I work in the areas of online identity checking, OSINT and reputation, so I did a little quick digging and found that he has content online going to 2009. Youtube, facebook and myspace. Those timelines are almost impossible to fake. I say he is real.Also whilst searching I found a story about young love in Iran.
“Alessio Rastani, 33, is a London stock market trader of Italo-Iranian origin. He regularly visits his relatives in Tehran.”
http://observers.france24.com/content/20101006-iran-youth-flirting-tehran-cars-traffic-jam-boys-girls-iran-zamin

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
27th September 11, 11:12 AM
Yep I think from having a quick search about that he's legit and that he's basically advertising for his courses in trading.

Something else that isnt that suprising, when looking through a couple of threads on trader forums that popped up on Google the main meme appears to be "What a dick why say that, but he's right though"

Cullion
27th September 11, 12:00 PM
People like Jim Rogers, Peter Schiff and Marc Faber say things like this all the time, they just don't get interviewed by the BBC very often.

Lebell
27th September 11, 12:05 PM
you guys are getting sidetracked.
we must drag the bankers out of their houses and execute them.
lots of bankers are jews.
so if we now go for all the jews we take care of it once and for all.

you know, to be on the safe side.

Lebell
27th September 11, 12:06 PM
cos we hate the bankers.
not the jews.
just to have that clear.

Craigypooh
27th September 11, 01:03 PM
Just to be clear this guy isn't a banker, he's just a trader looking to profit from the mess bankers make. Also the the Market gave him a massive F U today by rallying massively.

Hedley LaMarr
27th September 11, 01:15 PM
cos we hate the bankers.
not the jews.
just to have that clear.
Things could get hectic if we try and kill the bankers, Lebell. At the very least we'll need some way of discerning ourselves from the bankers. Do you have any suggestions about what symbols or uniform we could use to get the bankers?

Lebell
27th September 11, 01:29 PM
well e could force bankers to wear the dollar sign.

Ajamil
27th September 11, 01:42 PM
You mean bankers don't all look like this?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_FssAE-4dcvY/TESjl7HmeJI/AAAAAAAAADM/WesaXR1jQZA/s320/today-cpa-accountant.jpg

And what about people employed by bankers? Do the pretty tellers get shot as well, or just some jail time for association and collusion?

Lebell
27th September 11, 01:46 PM
let God judge them.

Ajamil
27th September 11, 01:52 PM
He's way too selfish to care about people poorer than bankers. (http://www.sociocide.com/forums/showthread.php?58975-Right.-On.)

Cullion
27th September 11, 04:26 PM
Just to be clear this guy isn't a banker, he's just a trader looking to profit from the mess bankers make. Also the the Market gave him a massive F U today by rallying massively.

This market will rally (briefly) all the way to the bottom. None of the interventions so far being mooted are going to work.

Lebell
27th September 11, 05:10 PM
when will you unfold YOUR plan to save us all, Cullion?

cos it's sorta about time...

Lollius Urbicus
27th September 11, 06:33 PM
And lo, the Beeb boobs again...


In the interview Mr Rastani described himself as an independent trader. Elsewhere he claims he's an "investment speaker". Instead of operating from a plush office in Canary Wharf Mr Rastani works and lives with his partner Anita Eader in a £200,000 semi in Bexleyheath, south London. The house, complete with a mortgage from Royal Bank of Scotland, belongs to her not him.

He is a business owner, a 99pc shareholder in public speaking venture Santoro Projects. Its most recent accounts show cash in the bank of £985. After four years trading net assets are £10,048 - in the red.

How a man who has never been authorised by the Financial Services Authority and has no discernible history working for a City institution ended up being interviewed by the BBC remains a mystery.

However, the BBC declined to comment on what checks, if any, it had done prior to the interview.


Mr Rastani was a little more forthcoming.


"They approached me," he told The Telegraph. "I'm an attention seeker. That is the main reason I speak. That is the reason I agreed to go on the BBC. Trading is a like a hobby. It is not a business. I am a talker. I talk a lot. I love the whole idea of public speaking."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8792829/BBC-financial-expert-Alessio-Rastani-Im-an-attention-seeker-not-a-trader.html

jvjim
27th September 11, 08:02 PM
Facepalm.

Lebell
28th September 11, 02:25 AM
I dont want to sound racist but: As soon as I saw that paki bastards gobbler I knew he was ful of it!
This doesnt mean however we still cant drag em out of their houses and throw em in a fire, you know...

Cullion
28th September 11, 04:11 AM
when will you unfold YOUR plan to save us all, Cullion?

cos it's sorta about time...

I'm not planning to save you. Why would I do that ?

Lebell
28th September 11, 04:39 AM
society as a whole.

Cullion
28th September 11, 05:02 AM
None of the things which I believe need to be done are at all part of the public debate amongst politicians likely to be elected to high office in the UK.

Americans have Ron Paul as an option, but they're unlikely to elect him because the boob-tube is teaching them to pick apart detailed nuances of his opinions on evolution etc.. whilst the 'safe', 'mainstream' candidates get a free pass for lunatic ideas like 'invade iran' or 'lets just print another 5 trillion dollars if that's what the banking system says we need to do'.

EvilSteve
28th September 11, 10:00 AM
The irony is, Ron Paul is only 4 points behind Obama- so nationally he's second only to Romney in terms of GOP candidates. However, he's WAY behind in the GOP primaries. Seems liberals like Paul more than conservatives do. I've also noticed noise in conservative circles about how supporting Paul is sabotaging the GOP, much like how in 2004 liberals griped about how a vote for Nader was a vote for Bush.

Commodore Pipes
30th September 11, 03:07 PM
The GOP behaves exactly like it claims unions do. It's got nothing to do with the public good or even reasonable public policy.

HappyOldGuy
30th September 11, 11:12 PM
None of the things which I believe need to be done are at all part of the public debate amongst politicians likely to be elected to high office in the UK.

Americans have Ron Paul as an option, but they're unlikely to elect him because the boob-tube is teaching them to pick apart detailed nuances of his opinions on evolution etc.. whilst the 'safe', 'mainstream' candidates get a free pass for lunatic ideas like 'invade iran' or 'lets just print another 5 trillion dollars if that's what the banking system says we need to do'.

This is such bullshit. He is getting a pass on sooooo many things that would be instakills for any serious candidate.

Letters of marque, black helicopter rantings, rewriting the constitution, the racist crap published by some guy he won't identify under his name, any national politician who wasn't getting the crazy uncle treatment would have been instantly disqualified for doing a tenth of his shit.

Cullion
1st October 11, 02:07 PM
Letters of marque

Bush offered a bounty, he just invaded as well.


black helicopter rantings, rewriting the constitution

What?


the racist crap published by some guy he won't identify under his name, any national politician who wasn't getting the crazy uncle treatment would have been instantly disqualified for doing a tenth of his shit.

Strom Thurmond.

And you're still ignoring all the 'sensible' candidate who believe palpably insane things which really directly dangerous to the interests of an average member of the American public.

That's the thing, most of the other candidates and mainstream media commentators believe palpably batshit things, but because enough authority figures agree, you think they're normal.

HappyOldGuy
1st October 11, 02:29 PM
Bush offered a bounty, he just invaded as well.

A letter of marque is not a bounty. It is a license to commit piracy, totally rejected by all civilized countries. It also never had a snowballs chance in hell of catching a guy who hasn't been aboard a ship or airliner since 9/11.




What?

Which part?

He completely rejects the 14th amendment, chunks of the first, most of Article III, Article 1 section 8, and needless to say the 16th amendment.

He is also an open believer in the NWO conspiracy.



Eric Rainbolt - audience member asking question of Congressman Paul at event near Austin, Texas on August 30th, 2003: "Congressman Paul, I have a question..."

Moderator: "Over here." (pointing to Eric Rainbolt.)

Eric Rainbolt: "Great! If we can take a look at the big picture, could you tell us, the people in this room, any information that you may have of an international and deceptive conspiracy to overthrow the American Republic and its Constitution & Bill Of Rights in order to set up and usher in a totalitarian World Government likely espoused under the UN also.."?

Congressman Paul: " He asked if there was an international conspiracy to overthrow our government. The answer is "Yes". I think there are 25,000 individuals that have used offices of powers, and they are in our Universities and they are in our Congresses, and they believe in One World Government. And if you believe in One World Goverment, then you are talking about undermining National Sovereignty and you are talking about setting up something that you could well call a Dictatorship - and those plans are there!..."



Strom Thurmond.

Was not a national figure after 1948. And got all of 2% even then.




And you're still ignoring all the 'sensible' candidate who believe palpably insane things which really directly dangerous to the interests of an average member of the American public.
That's the thing, most of the other candidates and mainstream media commentators believe palpably batshit things, but because enough authority figures agree, you think they're normal.

Palpable to you, and only you.

Ron Paul is a fucking nutjob. He isn't being penalized because the mainstream media is ignoring him. It's the only thing keeping his campaign alive.

HappyOldGuy
1st October 11, 02:45 PM
BTW, the fact that you don't know these things about him proves my point pretty conclusively.

Cullion
1st October 11, 02:56 PM
A letter of marque is not a bounty. It is a license to commit piracy, totally rejected by all civilized countries. It also never had a snowballs chance in hell of catching a guy who hasn't been aboard a ship or airliner since 9/11.

That isn't what he proposed. A "letter of marque and reprisal" is a permission to cross an international border to effect a reprisal (take some action against an attack or injury) authorized by an issuing jurisdiction to conduct reprisal operations outside its borders. He was proposing offering a bounty on Bin Laden.


Which part?

He completely rejects the 14th amendment, chunks of the first, most of Article III, Article 1 section 8, and needless to say the 16th amendment.

Which part of the first amendment does he reject? Which parts of article III? Which parts of article 1 section 8 ?
He doesn't disagree with the 14th amendment either. Senator Howard, the author, explicitly said that it excludes Native Americans who maintain their tribal ties and "persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers."

But yes, he thinks the 16th amendment ought to be repealed by the due process required to amend the constitution.



He is also an open believer in the NWO conspiracy.

Watch EU politics carefully. Watch the history of the whole project. The lying.

That is what some Americans would like for you with the North American Union. There really are people in positions of responsibility interested in forming enormous regional political institutions, as a precusor to global governance. It's been the publicly espoused goal of many politicians and a certain type of intellectual since at least the early 20th century.



Was not a national figure after 1948.

He was a member of the US senate until he died. That's a bit of a silly claim. Lots of democratic politicians remained friends with this man, despite the fact that he never really recanted his abhorrent views.



Ron Paul is a fucking nutjob. He isn't being penalized because the mainstream media is ignoring him. It's the only thing keeping his campaign alive.

Obama is a nut job. Perry is a nut job. Romney reminds me of Christian Bale in American psycho, 20 years on.

HappyOldGuy
1st October 11, 03:09 PM
Watch EU politics carefully. Watch the history of the whole project. The lying.

That is what some Americans would like for you with the North American Union. There really are people in positions of responsibility interested in forming enormous regional political institutions, as a precusor to global governance. It's been the publicly espoused goal of politicians and a certain type of intellectual since at least the early 20th century.


I understand you share delusions. I'm trying to highlight that for the audience, so thanks for the help.

Cullion
1st October 11, 03:13 PM
I understand you share delusions. I'm trying to highlight that for the audience, so thanks for the help.

You have absolutely no grounds to think this belief is delusional. All the same arguments you're about to pull out were used in Europe too. 43 other congressmen and women agreed with Ron Paul about this.

Hedley LaMarr
1st October 11, 03:30 PM
You have absolutely no grounds to think this belief is delusional. All the same arguments you're about to pull out were used in Europe too. 43 other congressmen and women agreed with Ron Paul about this.
Well over 100 congressmen do not believe in evolution.

Cullion
1st October 11, 03:34 PM
Well over 100 congressmen do not believe in evolution.

That's very different. We're talking about something that you've seen happening across the water and know a minority of the American establishment have supported in the past, along with Mexican and Canadian leaders.

HOG has misinterpreted Ron Paul saying:-

'yes, there are a minority of members of the American establishment and intelligencia that would like this to happen, just as they would like it to happen in Europe and Asia, and we should make it clear that most of us don't want this to happen' as Ron Paul saying :-

'there is a secret alien base under nebraska that is going to force us to unite with Mexico in their slave empire'

HappyOldGuy
1st October 11, 03:42 PM
No I'm not. His journal back when he admits to being involved ran stories about the trilateral commission, the rothchilds, black helicopters etc constantly.

He is that guy. You just can't accept it cause gold.

edit: and you don't know it cause cute crazy uncle treatment.

Cullion
1st October 11, 03:45 PM
I don't even like Gold that much, I mostly just want money creation out of the hands of private interests.

I might agree with him about the trilateral commission, but I want to see evidence of the black helicopter stories.

Lebell
2nd October 11, 04:15 AM
I'm already forming a militia.
We gonna plunder, rape a bit and occupy crucial areas in town once chaos sets in. (the tittiebar, boozeshop, and several pizzaplaces)
I'm going to survive the impending catastrophe no matter what.
If I have to step on a couple of babies: just watch me.

AAAAAA
2nd October 11, 05:16 AM
Don't forget the chainmail.

Lebell
3rd October 11, 03:17 AM
nah man.
i wanna be quick and mobile.
nightraids on settlements of survivors, steal their women, leave none others alive, etc.

its okay, this stuff is stored in my genes, when the time comes ill naturally know what to do.

Cullion
3rd October 11, 11:24 AM
I don't even like Gold that much, I mostly just want money creation out of the hands of private interests.

I might agree with him about the trilateral commission, but I want to see evidence of the black helicopter stories.

I would like to read the black helicopter stories, HOG.

HappyOldGuy
3rd October 11, 11:40 AM
G-O-O-G-L-E

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/more-selections-ron-pauls-newsletters

Hedley LaMarr
3rd October 11, 12:03 PM
In January 1992, Paul writes about his consideration of a presidential bid which he dashed after Pat Buchanan expressed his intention to run. Paul wrote of “the essential compatibility between [Buchanan’s] ideas and mine” and “agreed to serve as the chairman of his economic advisory committee.”



In the April 1993 Ron Paul Survival Report, the author--writing in the first person--states, “Whether [the 1993 World Trade Center bombing] was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.” The newsletters also warns readers to “do your very best to keep your family away from inner cities. If you can’t, have a haven remote from the metropolitan areas.”



The January 1988 Ron Paul Political Reportapprovingly cites Dr. William C. Douglass, who “believes that AIDS is a deliberately engineered hybrid” developed at a World Health Organization experiment conducted at Ft. Detrick. Douglass has long been a fringe medical guru, and today claims that “smoking can help you live longer!!!”

Cullion
3rd October 11, 01:39 PM
G-O-O-G-L-E

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/more-selections-ron-pauls-newsletters

First article is from the stuff that made the news before, which wasn't written by him.

Give me a reason to carry on reading.

HappyOldGuy
3rd October 11, 01:57 PM
"I paid for it. It's published under my name. It includes autobiographical references to events in my life. But I didn't write it. I won't tell you who did. And I no longer have copies of back issues even though I had them for sale a month before you asked."

Yeah...

Red or purple flavor?

Cullion
3rd October 11, 02:13 PM
Oh come on now, that stuff has been done before.

It's pretty obvious that Lew Rockwell or someone like him wrote much of the racist stuff and Ron wasn't paying attention when it was published and is now deeply embarrassed about it.

Look, the opinion of this NAACP official who's known Ron for 20 years has to be worth something on this particular charge.

http://www.nolanchart.com/article1134-NAACP-President-Ron-Paul-Is-Not-A-Racist.html

HappyOldGuy
3rd October 11, 03:08 PM
I didn't say he wrote those specific racist bits. But unless he wrote absolutely none of it, never once even glancing at the publication he was paying for, then he is a black helicopter loon. Cause that's all there was. And then he just has to explain things like his campaign fundraising letter that says the exact same crap.

Cullion
3rd October 11, 03:17 PM
I didn't say he wrote those specific racist bits. But unless he wrote absolutely none of it, never once even glancing at the publication he was paying for, then he is a black helicopter loon. Cause that's all there was. And then he just has to explain things like his campaign fundraising letter that says the exact same crap.

The last time these exact same quotes came up, he demonstrated that he'd been running a medical practice for most of his week when many of the quotes were published. Given that many of the sentiments in them don't jibe with consistent positions and patterns of behaviour documented for over 20 years, I think he's guilty of not paying enough editorial attention to a newsletter carrying his name but written by others.

At this point it's a bit like holding Obama responsible for the wilder things left-wing figures he was once close to have said.

HappyOldGuy
3rd October 11, 03:27 PM
The last time these exact same quotes came up, he demonstrated that he'd been running a medical practice for most of his week when many of the quotes were published. Given that many of the sentiments in them don't jibe with consistent positions and patterns of behaviour documented for over 20 years, I think he's guilty of not paying enough editorial attention to a newsletter carrying his name but written by others.

You're the one trying to deflect this to the racist quotes, because you know you don't have a leg to stand on on the tinfoil hat UN world government black helicopter stuff. Especially since the campaign letter and the various UN, trilateral commission quotes are on video, audio, and official campaign stationary.


At this point it's a bit like holding Obama responsible for the wilder things left-wing figures he was once close to have said.

Obama had to denounce his pastor for much milder things said by the pastor when Obama wasn't even present. The fact that Paul is getting away with "I didn't write it, but I won't tell you who did or let you see the rest of the material" is absolute proof of the double standard he is benefiting from.

Cullion
4th October 11, 03:43 AM
You're the one trying to deflect this to the racist quotes, because you know you don't have a leg to stand on on the tinfoil hat UN world government black helicopter stuff.

There is no 'black helicopter stuff' in the quotes. The reason I'm talking about the racism is that if he'd written or knowingly approved of that stuff it would be the most damning material.



Especially since the campaign letter and the various UN, trilateral commission quotes are on video, audio, and official campaign stationary.

I am not disputing their existence, I am pointing out that they aren't black helicopter material.

You're exactly like a British liberal in the early 90s accusing anybody who publicly stated that the EU was intended as a federal state with it's own army, of being a paranoid xenophobe.

Those people are all kind of quiet now.



Obama had to denounce his pastor for much milder things said by the pastor when Obama wasn't even present. The fact that Paul is getting away with "I didn't write it, but I won't tell you who did or let you see the rest of the material" is absolute proof of the double standard he is benefiting from.

What about Michelle Obama's PhD?

Ajamil
4th October 11, 12:24 PM
If he's so crazy, who keeps electing him to congress for the past 30 years? Where are the videos of ranting speeches made on the floor of the house? When pen meets paper Paul has sanely and consistently for 30 years voted for smaller government, which I believe is what we need right now. His more extreme plans of action won't get through Congress.

So what items of his are solely under executive powers? Bringing troops home - for it. Audited the fed - not sure here but for it. Vetoing any governmental increase congress gives to him, which will basically be everything. Somehow I see Ron Paul as President forcing Congress to work together because nothing will pass without a 2/3 majority to overrule his constant vetoing.

EvilSteve
4th October 11, 03:31 PM
The issue with Ron Paul is not what he stands for- he seems fairly upfront about that. It's whether he has the political capital to get it done.

Assuming he were elected president, he would have to contend with the same congress Obama did which means anything in his platform that has to do with cutting social services or education will pass, while auditing or dissolving the Fed or anything requiring accountability on the part of people who buy elections in this country will go out the window.

This isn't to speak for or against Dr. Paul, or to say all hope is lost. More, it's a call to pay attention to congressional races in addition to the presidential one.

Hedley LaMarr
4th October 11, 04:33 PM
If he's so crazy, who keeps electing him to congress for the past 30 years?
Crazy people get elected to office all the time. Sarah Palin, Pat Buchanan, Jesse Ventura, Michelle Bachmann, Anthony Wiener. I wish I could come up with more contemporary crazy Democrats but they are far too boring to be crazy.

Ron Paul gets elected because he has an (R) after his name on the ballot. Texans elect a lot of out there people because the Republican party can get away with it. If the voters of Texas were a litmus test for sanity, they wouldn't be repeatedly electing Joe Barton to Congress.

Cullion
4th October 11, 04:35 PM
Jesse Ventura is not crazy.

Hedley LaMarr
4th October 11, 04:38 PM
Jesse Ventura is not crazy.
9/11 Truther, crazy person. Same thing. I love Jesse Ventura, but he's nuts.

Cullion
4th October 11, 04:44 PM
9/11 Truther, crazy person. Same thing. I love Jesse Ventura, but he's nuts.

You can't just declare that kind of suspicion as a mental illness unless you catch him believing demonstrably delusional things like 'there was no plane'. Does he actually say things like that ?

Ajamil
4th October 11, 07:17 PM
The fact that every example you gave was a Rep. shows your bias. Also, none of them have tried or survived a presidential bid while Paul has done his three other times already.

Actually looking back on your list you mention Anthony Weiner, but what exactly makes him crazy? A photo of his Johnson? That was foolish, but not crazy. In fact the only one in that list that would get a crazy label from me instead of just unintelligent and bad for the nation is Pat Buchanan. And only then because of his comments on natural disasters being referendums by God on homosexuality - and while upsetting that sort of comment isn't really crazy within the framework of his belief.

Hedley LaMarr
4th October 11, 07:39 PM
The fact that every example you gave was a Rep. shows your bias. Also, none of them have tried or survived a presidential bid while Paul has done his three other times already.

Actually looking back on your list you mention Anthony Weiner, but what exactly makes him crazy? A photo of his Johnson? That was foolish, but not crazy. In fact the only one in that list that would get a crazy label from me instead of just unintelligent and bad for the nation is Pat Buchanan. And only then because of his comments on natural disasters being referendums by God on homosexuality - and while upsetting that sort of comment isn't really crazy within the framework of his belief.
Anthony Weiner is the only person on the list actually seeking help for their psychosis. Every person on that lists has exhibited paranoia, confused fantasy with reality, and have gone on numerous explosive self-destructive episodes. Anthony Weiner's came to light very publicly.

Ajamil
4th October 11, 07:51 PM
I had not heard of any psychosis for Weiner. What examples do you mean for each of them for paranoia, fantasy/reality delusions, and explosive self-destructive episodes?

Just googled a bit, do you mean reports that Weiner has checked himself in order to treat sexual/internet addiction? (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43408285/ns/health-addictions/t/weiner-seeks-treatment-what-ails-him/#.TouozMmsC-o) Because I don't consider a person crazy at all for actions that would barely make people bat an eye if he/she wasn't a public figure. But getting caught, finally​ admitting it (and realy the denial could be seen much more as a way to save his job than a denial of his problem), and seeking ways to manage it are definitely NOT the actions of someone who is crazy.

Hedley LaMarr
4th October 11, 08:10 PM
I had not heard of any psychosis for Weiner. What examples do you mean for each of them for paranoia, fantasy/reality delusions, and explosive self-destructive episodes?

Just googled a bit, do you mean reports that Weiner has checked himself in order to treat sexual/internet addiction? (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43408285/ns/health-addictions/t/weiner-seeks-treatment-what-ails-him/#.TouozMmsC-o) Because I don't consider a person crazy at all for actions that would barely make people bat an eye if he/she wasn't a public figure. But getting caught, finally​ admitting it (and realy the denial could be seen much more as a way to save his job than a denial of his problem), and seeking ways to manage it are definitely NOT the actions of someone who is crazy.
Sexual addiction may not be his real problem, but the fact that he was sending pictures of his dick over the internet is a clear sign of risk-taking and vanity that are abnormal for someone in his occupation. And no doctor would consider seeking treatment as a sign of mental health that would preclude any type of diagnosis. That would be like saying every one who is able to go to a doctor is not in need of treatment.

danno
4th October 11, 09:20 PM
this is kinda glib, but i think americans should worry less about whether government should be bigger or smaller, and worry more about how to make government better. the goal is not to make your government as small as possible, the goal is to make your country as awesome as possible. that may or may not involve cutting public jobs, but it certainly involves a lot of change.

HappyOldGuy
4th October 11, 10:26 PM
this is kinda glib, but i think americans should worry less about whether government should be bigger or smaller, and worry more about how to make government better. the goal is not to make your government as small as possible, the goal is to make your country as awesome as possible. that may or may not involve cutting public jobs, but it certainly involves a lot of change.

You know why I hate canadians. While I was up there there was a weak unemployment report that came out. And the right wing (relatively) PM came up with a stimulus plan based on government spending, and there wasn't a single hint of debate about the basic idea. It was just taken for granted that you should do it, because 99.9% of everybody knows that's what you do. But the worst part. The part that made me want to smush canuck faces, was knowing that it was actually going to work. And that any equivalent Obama stimulus plan would be doomed to ineffectiveness.

danno
4th October 11, 10:44 PM
annex canada?

bob
4th October 11, 10:56 PM
Our most right wing prime minister since wartime would have been assassinated as a communist had he implemented his policies in America. Not even kidding.

HappyOldGuy
4th October 11, 11:24 PM
annex canada?

We would drag them down more than they would pull us up.

But I vote yes if only for the schadenfreude.

danno
4th October 11, 11:29 PM
natural resources. there are swathes of wilderness just waiting to be exploited. you could make ethanol out of old growth forests.

Lebell
5th October 11, 03:28 AM
thats the funny thing bout americans:they're always yapping about freedom, yet they have no idea how unfree they are in comparison to other western countries...gheheh

Cullion
5th October 11, 03:51 AM
You know why I hate canadians. While I was up there there was a weak unemployment report that came out. And the right wing (relatively) PM came up with a stimulus plan based on government spending, and there wasn't a single hint of debate about the basic idea. It was just taken for granted that you should do it, because 99.9% of everybody knows that's what you do. But the worst part. The part that made me want to smush canuck faces, was knowing that it was actually going to work. And that any equivalent Obama stimulus plan would be doomed to ineffectiveness.

Looked at over decades, Canada has tended to have a higher unemployment rate than the US. Recently it's been worse in the US, but that's because your stimulus programme is based on giving trillions of dollars to bankrupt financial services corporations, and they're just keeping it back waiting for asset prices to hit rock bottom, and paying bonuses to a few thousand people.

jvjim
5th October 11, 04:23 AM
That's true, Canada's average unemployment rate is over 8% (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/unemployment-rate) for the past 30 years, which looks to be significantly higher than the US's (http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet) over the same period. I don't know if Canada's unemployment numbers are gamed to the degree the US's are, however.

EvilSteve
5th October 11, 09:52 AM
annex canada?

Be annexed by Canada.

EvilSteve
5th October 11, 09:55 AM
Looked at over decades, Canada has tended to have a higher unemployment rate than the US. Recently it's been worse in the US, but that's because your stimulus programme is based on giving trillions of dollars to bankrupt financial services corporations, and they're just keeping it back waiting for asset prices to hit rock bottom, and paying bonuses to a few thousand people.

Not to pick an argument that I absolutely don't have time for, but might that not indicate that government spending to boost the economy isn't intrinsically bad, but just doesn't work out when you spend that money to bail out a bunch of crooks who will just end up stealing it anyway?

Cullion
5th October 11, 10:04 AM
Not to pick an argument that I absolutely don't have time for, but might that not indicate that government spending to boost the economy isn't intrinsically bad, but just doesn't work out when you spend that money to bail out a bunch of crooks who will just end up stealing it anyway?

Of course, but there's something amiss with HOG's belief in Canada as the epitome of a rationally managed social democracy. Most of the time, the cost of their left-leaning economic ideas has been higher unemployment. Much like a comparison of France and the UK.

And it's not as if America hasn't been experimenting with Keynsian stimulus for decades. You just do it with your military industrial complex. Which is why the only substantial profitable heavy manufacturing you have left is concerned with weapons production.

Capital the state seizes to use for 'stimulus' is capital that isn't available for other uses.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
5th October 11, 11:34 AM
Be annexed by Canada.

...by Mexico they've got better drugs.

EvilSteve
5th October 11, 12:07 PM
And it's not as if America hasn't been experimenting with Keynsian stimulus for decades. You just do it with your military industrial complex. Which is why the only substantial profitable heavy manufacturing you have left is concerned with weapons production.

That's more just corrupt than Keynesian, I think. Also, ITAR and other regulations keep our weapons manufacturing onshore- it's one of the few things we CAN'T outsource. I've been trying to buy more American made goods lately, to feed our own economy rather than outsourced production, and it's damn near impossible. Not just more expensive- it's really hard to find things made in the U.S. anymore.


Capital the state seizes to use for 'stimulus' is capital that isn't available for other uses.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

True, so tax capital that is less likely to be spent. Also, stimulus needs to go to small businesses far more than large ones. I honestly don't know how well that will work- not because the principle is bad, but because our economy and political system is geared to transfer wealth from the many to the few. The right wants to pass legislation to gut social programs, while the left wants to pass regulations that large businesses can weasel out of with armies of lawyers, while small businesses will be decimated.

EvilSteve
5th October 11, 12:08 PM
...by Mexico they've got better drugs.

No, actually, they don't. So fuck Eliot Spitzer.

Hedley LaMarr
5th October 11, 12:10 PM
...by Mexico they've got better drugs.
Wait, which one are you saying has the better drugs? Because that depends entirely on what drug you are talking about.

Cullion
5th October 11, 12:12 PM
True, so tax capital that is less likely to be spent.

Like what ?

EvilSteve
5th October 11, 12:16 PM
Like what ?

Well, you could try increased capital gains taxes. While that money may go back into the market, it is unlikely to buy anything new or substantially grow the GDP.

EvilSteve
5th October 11, 12:17 PM
Wait, which one are you saying has the better drugs? Because that depends entirely on what drug you are talking about.

Exactly. So seriously, Eliot Spitzer can eat a bag of dicks.

Cullion
5th October 11, 02:56 PM
Well, you could try increased capital gains taxes. While that money may go back into the market, it is unlikely to buy anything new or substantially grow the GDP.

So you want to tax people for hedging against printing money ?

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
5th October 11, 03:01 PM
Wait, which one are you saying has the better drugs? Because that depends entirely on what drug you are talking about.

Didnt know Canada was famous for drugs, do tell.

EvilSteve
5th October 11, 03:11 PM
So you want to tax people for hedging against printing money ?

I'd like to tax money earned on investments rather than money earned on sold goods since the former is unlikely to feed the GDP or be circulated widely- it will more likely just feed the markets.

To say that's taxing people who hedge against printing money is a bit disingenuous. The vast majority of invested dollars are not hedges against the Fed printing more. You can do that with a TIPS.

Hedley LaMarr
5th October 11, 03:18 PM
Didnt know Canada was famous for drugs, do tell.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BC_Bud

Cullion
5th October 11, 03:23 PM
I'd like to tax money earned on investments rather than money earned on sold goods since the former is unlikely to feed the GDP or be circulated widely- it will more likely just feed the markets.

You believe that American private industry needs less investment, rather than more ?



To say that's taxing people who hedge against printing money is a bit disingenuous. The vast majority of invested dollars are not hedges against the Fed printing more. You can do that with a TIPS.

You'd impose capital gains on commodities, presumably?

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
5th October 11, 03:30 PM
WOW a $6 billion annual turn over!!!

Business is good in BC

Robot Jesus
5th October 11, 07:05 PM
I advocate a return to Clinton era tax rates, and a one dollar duty on every Canada goose that enters US airspace.

HappyOldGuy
5th October 11, 07:36 PM
Not to pick an argument that I absolutely don't have time for, but might that not indicate that government spending to boost the economy isn't intrinsically bad, but just doesn't work out when you spend that money to bail out a bunch of crooks who will just end up stealing it anyway?

Mostly methodology differences, and a more generous safety net somewhat reduces desperation factor of borderline employables.

http://www.csls.ca/events/cea2003/riddell-cea2003.pdf

Sorry Cullion. My faith is quite intact.

Accept that other people can have functional governments. Just not us.

danno
5th October 11, 08:35 PM
Of course, but there's something amiss with HOG's belief in Canada as the epitome of a rationally managed social democracy. Most of the time, the cost of their left-leaning economic ideas has been higher unemployment. Much like a comparison of France and the UK.

And it's not as if America hasn't been experimenting with Keynsian stimulus for decades. You just do it with your military industrial complex. Which is why the only substantial profitable heavy manufacturing you have left is concerned with weapons production.

Capital the state seizes to use for 'stimulus' is capital that isn't available for other uses.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

you should both study australia as a lefty economy. we recently had a national tax summit, and there was general agreement that the dole needed to be increased, and suggestions of raising taxes for the wealthiest 15% were uncontroversial.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-05/people-struggling-on-newstart-tax-forum/3299966

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-04/the-wealthiest-should-give-back-carnegie/3284288

yet economically we're doing better than just about anyone. though we do dig money out of the ground i guess.

Robot Jesus
5th October 11, 09:20 PM
Canadian unemployment rate: 7.3%
USA unemployment rate: 9.1%
Australian unemployment rate: 5.3%


market controls suck indeed.

jvjim
5th October 11, 09:38 PM
Those countries also aren't entangled in Trotskyite continuous revolutions (at least not to the degree the US is). They also both have less than a tenth the size of America's population.

danno
5th October 11, 09:44 PM
i'm not saying you can transplant australian government to america. low population + lots of resources here.

jvjim
5th October 11, 09:52 PM
I'm certainly happy that Australia has attained the level of success it has, especially during the crisis. I will suggest that it could attain greater success with less government involvement IF the people don't allow moral hazard and agency problems to skew market results.

danno
5th October 11, 10:07 PM
smaller government doesn't necessarily mean better government. not sure what you mean by moral hazard and agency though.

Hedley LaMarr
5th October 11, 10:13 PM
smaller government doesn't necessarily mean better government. not sure what you mean by moral hazard and agency though.
I think most people refer to them as human nature.

jvjim
5th October 11, 10:32 PM
Moral hazard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard) and the classical agency problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agency_problem#Other_applications) DO involve natural responses to certain stimuli.

HappyOldGuy
5th October 11, 10:41 PM
Those countries also aren't entangled in Trotskyite continuous revolutions (at least not to the degree the US is). They also both have less than a tenth the size of America's population.

So you really think the US is involved in a socialist catchup program due to a failure to achieve capitalism? Or are you just using big words you don't know the meaning of?

jvjim
5th October 11, 10:45 PM
I was referring to neoconservative movement's roots in Trotskyism and the resemblance between Trotsky's distrust of two stage communism and the Right's demonization of Islam. No, I don't think that the modern Republican party is trying to force a 4th International.

jvjim
5th October 11, 10:47 PM
HOWEVER: Even though it's a bit of a stretch, I do think that you can make a case that the modern "business" class in the upper echelon of American finance and banking does resemble a classic revolutionary class.

HappyOldGuy
5th October 11, 10:56 PM
HOWEVER: Even though it's a bit of a stretch, I do think that you can make a case that the modern "business" class in the upper echelon of American finance and banking does resemble a classic revolutionary class.

This is not even a good troll.

jvjim
5th October 11, 10:58 PM
HOG, the revolution is ALWAYS co-opted by the very bourgeois its designed to replace.

:)

Hedley LaMarr
5th October 11, 10:59 PM
HOWEVER: Even though it's a bit of a stretch, I do think that you can make a case that the modern "business" class in the upper echelon of American finance and banking does resemble a classic revolutionary class.
Your applications of Trotskyist theory and classical economics are intriguing. Are these ideas your own invention or do the originate somewhere else? If the latter please point me in the direction of the source as I'd like to read more.

HappyOldGuy
5th October 11, 11:03 PM
HOG, the revolution is ALWAYS co-opted by the very bourgeois its designed to replace.

:)

Always as in never, not even one single time. The whole point of permanent revolution is to reconcile the fact that no country with a fully developed bourgeoise has ever had a communist revolution.

jvjim
5th October 11, 11:05 PM
:smile: How do you explain (edit) Chapter Two: Proletarians and Communists endorsement of a 'vanguard party?'

jvjim
5th October 11, 11:08 PM
Always as in never, not even one single time. The whole point of permanent revolution is to reconcile the fact that no country with a fully developed bourgeoise has ever had a communist revolution.

8>) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parisian_commune

HappyOldGuy
5th October 11, 11:11 PM
:smile: How do you explain (edit) Chapter Two: Proletarians and Communists endorsement of a 'vanguard party?'

You're playing a really weird game of mad libs. Mixing the manifesto, trotsky, and lenin together on subjects that they vehemently disagreed over. It's like you went through this stuff sideways and bits of it got stuck in you.

jvjim
5th October 11, 11:15 PM
Hold on, commrade, Lenin, Marx, and Trotsky ALL agreed on the formation of an inner party, they just disagreed on the borders and time-frame.

HappyOldGuy
5th October 11, 11:17 PM
And rather vehemently on it's makeup. Which seemed to be the point you were trying to make.

jvjim
5th October 11, 11:21 PM
You're not suggesting Trotsky retained his support of the mensheviks post-1917, are you?

jvjim
5th October 11, 11:30 PM
Your applications of Trotskyist theory and classical economics are intriguing. Are these ideas your own invention or do the originate somewhere else? If the latter please point me in the direction of the source as I'd like to read more.

Some if it is just me messing around, some of it I gleamed from reading lewrockwell.com. I can post a link if you really want, but I doubt it's a source you'd give much credence to.
EDIT: I don't mean that in a dismissive way, I just don't want to waste your time with something you probably wouldn't want to read.

HappyOldGuy
6th October 11, 12:05 AM
On the one hand, that's kinda like going to Richard Dawkins for bible study. On the other hand, they are the only people in the US (besides the last 3 actual CP-USA members living in an assistive living community somewhere in Florida) who take that stuff even slightly seriously.

jvjim
6th October 11, 12:15 AM
This sets out Kristol's history as a Trotskyite. (http://www.lewrockwell.com/dmccarthy/dmccarthy23.html)

Craigypooh
6th October 11, 03:30 AM
Like what ?

Mansions: http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/7254348/why-mansion-tax-makes-sense.thtml

Edit: a bit late - never mind

Cullion
6th October 11, 04:13 AM
yet economically we're doing better than just about anyone. though we do dig money out of the ground i guess.

Yes. This is why it works in Norway, too.

Cullion
6th October 11, 04:14 AM
Canadian unemployment rate: 7.3%
USA unemployment rate: 9.1%
Australian unemployment rate: 5.3%

market controls suck indeed.

The US has had a highly centrally planned economy for some time. The plebs just don't get to vote on it.

danno
6th October 11, 08:00 AM
Yes. This is why it works in Norway, too.

i'm not completely convinced our relative economic success is only due to that however, i'd like to think we do some things systematically better. for example:

http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/health/spend/cost_longlife75.gif

but i know, we definitely wouldn't be doing this well without our resources.

i agree that what is happening in places like greece is fucking ridiculous. you can't live beyond your means.

Cullion
6th October 11, 08:42 AM
Yes, public healthcare provision can work very well, even in countries that don't have an economy powered by fortunate natural resources. I've been forced to admit this before.

But don't mistake what America has for the kind of laissez-faire capitalism I espouse. Their government intervenes in the economy on a massive scale, just not in a way intended to give ordinary people nice things.

danno
6th October 11, 09:14 AM
i should become a full-blown communist so we can have some delicious arguments.

EvilSteve
6th October 11, 09:40 AM
You believe that American private industry needs less investment, rather than more ?

No, I believe that the investing class ought to be taxed at the same rate as the working class. The tax burden should be least (or at least even) on those with the greatest marginal propensity to consume as that will feed the economy the most. I presume you don't feel that such a tax scheme is possible without it damaging those it is intended to help?


You'd impose capital gains on commodities, presumably?

You mean raise them to match? Tough call since increased taxes on commodities capital gains is likely to translate to higher commodities prices and may dampen production. On the other hand, might also reduce speculation in commodities markets.

Cullion
6th October 11, 09:47 AM
No, I believe that the investing class ought to be taxed at the same rate as the working class.

Then tax dividends as income and stop artificially inflating paper assets by printing money.


The tax burden should be least (or at least even) on those with the greatest marginal propensity to consume as that will feed the economy the most. I presume you don't feel that such a tax scheme is possible without it damaging those it is intended to help?

I agree with progressive taxation, it's just I don't think you should tax capital accumulation, just the income derived from capital. The problem is that traders derive their income from capital gains. I'd rather lower middle class taxes and cut spending.



You mean raise them to match? Tough call since increased taxes on commodities capital gains is likely to translate to higher commodities prices and may dampen production. On the other hand, might also reduce speculation in commodities markets.

See above about money printing.

EvilSteve
6th October 11, 10:01 AM
Then tax dividends as income and stop artificially inflating paper assets by printing money.

I agree with progressive taxation, it's just I don't think you should tax capital accumulation, just the income derived from capital. The problem is that traders derive their income from capital gains. I'd rather lower middle class taxes and cut spending.

I'd agree there- my aim is, as you said, to tax income on capital, more so than capital itself, lest we dampen production and economic growth.

Not to say that'll fix all of our economic problems, but it's a step in the right direction.

Lebell
6th October 11, 10:07 AM
I find it ironic that the longer I keep living to see this world dissapear down the drain, the more I realise the nazis werent as stupid as many people make em out to be.

Massimmigration, unemployment, bankers (we all know who the bankers are, right), none of this would have ever happened had uncle Adolph gotten his way...

danno
6th October 11, 10:23 AM
grandad killed quite a few nazis. he even executed some unarmed prisoners.

Cullion
6th October 11, 10:23 AM
Why do you refer to him as 'uncle' Adolph?

Cullion
6th October 11, 11:09 AM
The Governor of the Bank of England has just publicly stated that he thinks this crisis may be more serious than the 1930s.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/8782663/Debt-crisis-live.html

Way to catch up, 'tard.

Lebell
6th October 11, 11:18 AM
grandad killed quite a few nazis. he even executed some unarmed prisoners.

uhuh, thats what he told you.
chances are he was in tobruk crying for his mummy like the rest of those fagg0ts.

Lebell
6th October 11, 11:19 AM
The Governor of the Bank of England has just publicly stated that he thinks this crisis may be more serious than the 1930s.


zomg!
the 30ies brought us the nazis, can you imagine what this crisis can bring us?!
zombie nazis or something?
or zombie jihad islamic nazis with a sympathy for communism!

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
6th October 11, 11:28 AM
Why do you refer to him as 'uncle' Adolph?

Most dutch are decendants of german sausage swallowing paratroopers

Lebell
6th October 11, 11:30 AM
*krch* inmate Stirner has to report for desinfection sofort! *krch*

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
6th October 11, 11:43 AM
nur, wenn Sie schlucken meine Wurst

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
6th October 11, 11:44 AM
..............said the paratrooper to the dutch maid

Lebell
6th October 11, 11:48 AM
your German is godawfull.
even for a jew.

Lollius Urbicus
6th October 11, 11:53 AM
Blase mein Schwanz.
FTFY

Lebell
6th October 11, 11:54 AM
MUCH better.

Cullion
6th October 11, 11:59 AM
stop turning every thread into the same nazi-troll you boring bastard.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
6th October 11, 12:05 PM
stop turning every thread into the same nazi-troll you boring bastard.

He cant help it. He has repressed gay nazi yearnings that he can only manifest over the internet in a hope of hooking up with some strapping aryan bratwurst.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
6th October 11, 12:06 PM
Google's German is godawfull.


FTFY

Lebell
6th October 11, 12:22 PM
fucking idiots...
'i dont get Lebells nitricate way of thinking, hey i know, im gonna save face and yell: he be trollin! lolol0olz!'

Cullion
6th October 11, 12:39 PM
i just want you to put all these gems in one thread so we know where to find them.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
6th October 11, 01:14 PM
i just want you to put all these gems in one thread so we know where to find them.

Lebellend's Ode to Hitler thread? (http://www.sociocide.com/forums/showthread.php?59008-An-Ode-to-the-erect-penis...)

Ajamil
6th October 11, 04:27 PM
Springtime for Hitler and Lebelland.

Cullion
6th October 11, 05:16 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbEEQxtnkHE

bob
6th October 11, 06:26 PM
What's the deal with Hitler's half arsed seig heils? Dude needed to take that shit more seriously.

nihilist
7th October 11, 02:20 AM
i just vant you to hide all zeeze in one place so ve know vhere to find zem.

Cullion
7th October 11, 02:32 AM
Hitler is receiving the heils rather than sending them. Catching, not pitching.

I'm serious.

Yiktin Voxbane
7th October 11, 02:36 AM
A Pitcher of Hitlers .... The Cocktail that makes you want to invade Poland ...

danno
7th October 11, 03:20 AM
I'm serious.

but lebell is even more serious.

Lebell
7th October 11, 03:38 AM
Just saying, things werent as bad as they are being made out to be now.
The nazis brought us to the moon, eversince that generation died....how many times have we been to the moon again?

SoulMechanic
7th October 11, 03:42 AM
One of these days Lebell! One of these days...
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSEetL3REE66DxczMA_njPv26PjVhhhd 9RxtYIOwGl_ZOHN6vm7

Lebell
7th October 11, 09:45 AM
BAM! right in the kisser!

nihilist
7th October 11, 10:33 AM
The password is: "POW!" or were you secretly fantasizing about Bam Margera?