DO YOU STILL BELIEVE THAT WE WILL ALL BE SAVED BY MIRACLES AND ALL THE HATE WILL GO AWAY?

Do you believe in miracles?
Really think about it. Do you?
April 28th, 1937 should be a day forever shrouded in shame and darkness. For it was the day the that evil man was born. He has killed since he was very young and has never stopped since them.
As Adel Darwish put it "His gang of assassins - all thugs, psychopaths and killers from his own clan- became the core of a special security apparatus that he moulded in 1960's on the Nazi SS style. Now they are over 15,000 strong."
Now combine that with Al-Qaida, and all of its affiliates and associates. And add in the Sleeper cells, hate groups and Lone gunmen and Mercenaries and your opinion might start changing. It is not just Saddam. Once the War starts and start it shall, watch closly at our Allies that back down. Our friends that betray us. And countries that were once forever neutral will side with this New Age Nazi and Bring forth the beginning of a Third World War.
Albert Einstein once said " I do not know how World War Three will be fought. But I do know how World War Four Will be fought. With Sticks and Stones.

Think about That as you write to your Representatives. Know who is the Enemy before you say you are againest a war. And don't get me wrong. I HATE WAR. But with people that enjoy killing others, and with people with no moral groundings. A leader who is willing to GAS HIS OWN PEOPLE and launch a missle attack on another country in reply to one of our attacks. Think if he had Nuclear weapons that were aimed at your country and your city. We have NO means to shoot down incoming nuclear missles and certainly not a full scale attack on the United States, Great Britain, and every member of NATO.
Now what do you think?
Visit my web site at and sign my guestbook. I will add more soon. www.geocities.com/joey_kidd_1223/

Ciao,
Joey Kidd

I am all for the war on terrorism because if we don't stop terrorism now, it will just get out of hand to the extent that is no longer reversable later on in the future. If we don't go to war now, and we go to war later, there is probably a good chance of WWIII with nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction. If we stop terrorism in its tracks now, there is a good chance our children can grow up in a peaceful world.

It should also be noted that reporters, editors and a publisher from Time magazine are members of the Council on Foreign Relations and have attended Bilderberg meetings.

Those two organizations, like Skull & Bones and the Trilateral Commission, all point to a One World Government goal.

I wouldn't trust most of what Time publishes.

The whole New World Order thing will happen, is happening now and it will not stop.

I already know this.

But I also know that not very many people even understand this concept of a "New World Order."

You can't expect to fight it because, hello, it's going to happen.

The entire one world government history is rooted in Bible prophecy. It's all Biblical.

The thing we must do, sinope, to answer your question, is to make more people aware of what is going to happen, what is happening, and what we can expect.


That's it; just making more people aware of the government's dealings, economics, backgrounds, etc.

Tanya Shakil Daud
DETECTIVES BATTLING AXIS OF EVIL’
The world awaits the judgment to the Iraq-USA case which has made its appeal in the United Nations Security Council. After almost a period of two months, Bush is yet to gather enough support which will back his stance for a military action against Iraq. So, what are the elements which make the entire drama so interesting? Let’s take it act by act, scene by scene, and do a comparative and critical assessment of the entire scenario.

The American president George Bush is playing the role of Sherlock Holmes and Blair his fellow mate appears as Dr Watson. The villain is of course Satan in disguise, Saddam Hussein and the UN surprisingly this time is not the silent spectator. But it is yet to be decided what character the UN can mould into, after years of endless silence. We also have some other characters but they’ll be introduced as we move ahead.

Now the plot is a thick mixture of all spices &no sugar. It involves all the right ingredients such as drama, emotions, revenge, power, money and all that which comes along with it, enough to create a state of frenzy on the international front. Sherlock Holmes [bush] with the help of his right hand man,DR Watson [Blair] has been trying to convince the UN body that Saddam Hussein and his cronies are producing chemical, biological and warfare weapons of mass destruction within Iraq and poses a grave threat to the world and especially The United States of America.

Bush conveyed his feelings effectively by saying the only safe option is the disarmament of weapons and a regime change by extracting Saddam Hussein, the symbol of evil, from the roots. And to do this a military operation is a necessity in the already war torn Iraqi nation. Unfortunately this suggestion has not been welcomed warmly by the other nations of the world especially from the other three UN veto members, France, Russia and China who have held on to the two UN resolutions –one on readmitting UN weapons inspectors and the next spelling out the consequences only if Baghdad does not allow unfettered access to the inspectors.

In order to convince the leaders of key nations and the rest of the world, Blair produced a dossier on 24 September 2002, which was compiled by the various intelligence agencies in Britain and the US over the past twelve years. The dossier issued, stated that Iraq could launch a chemical or biological warhead at 45 minutes notice .In response to this, Amir Al Saadi, the adviser to Saddam, was quoted as saying “We invite Mr. Blair to pass on his dossier to Unmovic [UN monitoring, verification and inspection commission] and IAEA [International atomic energy agency] for proper assessment and soon enough the truth will come out” The dossier failed to convince the US allies and Arab nations, neighboring the Iraqi country which were unanimous in saying that there was nothing new about the report and provided no concrete evidence which could substantiate the attack.

A general prevailing view in the Arab and Muslim world in keeping with the current situation is that Bush wants to establish his hold over the nation which owns the second largest reserves of proven oil barrels. Power and money, both lucrative options, not worth missing out on.Oh but we also have the revenge motive in keeping with the mood of the people. After all as Bush said ‘this was the guy who tried to kill my father’. There you see, now what better reason could the UN ask for.

The second half of the act comprises of various reasons why USA has faced opposition not only on the international front but also in domestic corners. The American population which has not yet recovered from the blow of the September 11 terrorist attacks finds it hard to digest that their nation will once again go on war even though there is no need for it at the moment. They recognize the danger which Saddam poses but as of now he is not an ‘immediate threat’, instead feel that “war on terrorism’ and other domestic concerns such as high unemployment and rising poverty levels should be dealt with first.

Analysts and experts had stated the four fold objectives of the October 2001 US led military operations against Afghanistan: Capture Osama bin Laden and other Al Qaeda leadership, tackle the threat of terrorism through destruction of the infrastructure of terrorism, create stability in the politically turbulent zones of South, Central and South east Asia and rehabilitate the afghan state and society and lay the foundations for a politically stable and democratic Afghanistan. The promises by the Bush administration haven’t been fulfilled and venturing into a new project will misplace the trust of the people around various nations.

Bush also met with new democratic opposition in Washington, where the nations top democratic lawmaker demanded that US president apologise to the American people for politicising a potential war on Iraq and implying that democrats were not interested in the nation’s security. But the most forceful blow was from George bush’s 2000 presidential elections rival, Al Gore, 3 days after bush proposed a national security strategy that speaks of US military dominance in the world.

Al Gore warned “If what America represents the world is the leadership in a common wealth of equals, then our friends are our legion” “If what we represent to the world is an empire, then it our enemies who will be the legion”

Refusal has also come from Arab nations such as Jordan, Iran, Syria, and Egypt who have refused the use of their bases for any military action on Iraq by US and British soldiers. The minister of Jordan added that “you don’t inject democracy in a country. It is a culture that evolves. The notion of somehow rearranging the region and changing the regime and systems of the government in a way that interests of the US is indeed a very scary notion and I hope it does not become US policy at anytime in the future”

On the other hand the Omani minister for foreign affairs said that if UN gives the go ahead signal then Oman will allow the use of its bases on compliance with the UN resolutions, although the UN charter clearly specifies that nations should refrain from interference in the internal affairs of others.

Iraq, the ‘evil of axis’ as branded by the US administration has maintained a defiant stance ,although after much convincing from neighboring states have allowed UN weapons inspectors to have unrestricted access to any site they want to inspect in Iraq after a period of 4 years. The Iraqi administration has over and over screamed out that “Nuclear weapons and arms of mass destruction cannot be hidden in pockets”, a theory which the detective playmates Bush and Blair refuse to accept and feel that Iraq has the capability to do just that.

Onto the final bit of the act which describes what will be the effects of the war n the various Middle Eastern regions, Iraq itself and on a global scale. More than 2000 demonstrators marched through the streets of Western US city of Denver and was called as the “Coloradans against Bush’s war on Iraq’ on 29 September, a sequel to the anti war rally which took place in London on 28 September, with raised placards calling for an end to the sanctions imposed on the Iraqi people and a change of regime in the US and British administration.

Three important Us congressmen visited Iraq the past week to assess the humanitarian situation in Iraq after a decade of sanctions, and declared that there was no need for a war at the moment and a military action could lead to devastating affects in the region and beyond.

The Turkish Prime minister is afraid of the spills of the war and said that Turkey could react to an attempt by the Iraqi Kurds to take possession of the oil rich area of Northern Iraq. Their fears are well founded as the Kurds in Iraq could form a separate state and boost calls from turkey’s own Kurds, also seizing Kirkuk, putting them in a precarious situation.

Last not the least, the Western nations especially America could face alienation from the Muslim community, within the country as well as outside, in the form of its close allies such as Saudi Arabia ,Pakistan and Libya. The UN therefore needs to assume the role of the narrator and take charge before Bush and Blair whistle off to their tunes, leaving behind an ugly backdrop.

Actually I'm trying to write a book about a man who becomes dictator of the U.S. and attempts to take over the world, and nearly accomplishes this goal, too. Guess what his "title" is (instead of President or King)? "The One." I didn't even know about the "One World" conspiracy, either. What a coincidence...

Now about Iraq... According to Time Magazine, the U.S. will most likely have to occupy Iraq for at least five years with upwards of 50,000 troops at costs of several billion dollars. If America abandons Iraq or becomes lazy with its nation-building, the area will break out into a civil war, much like the one that rocked Lebanon for 15 years. But here's a quote from Time concerning the Bush Administration's take on the matter:

quote:

---

The U.S., says Cheney, will shape an Iraq "that is democratic and pluralistic, a nation where the human rights of every ethnic and religious group are recognized and respected." Yet Washington sometimes gives the impression that it isn't much worried what the next government will be like. Asked by TIME about the shambolic state of the Iraqi opposition, a senior Adminstration official replied, "Personally, I don't care."

---

This is one thing that frustrates me so much about the Bush Administration's plans for war with Iraq. They have pretty-sounding ideals, but no solid, rational, well-thought out plans for dealing with any negative matters that may arise from their actions! When it comes to knowing who and what they are dealing with, it seems that they simply "don't care."

ever read that book by william cooper. i bet you have dauben. the illuminati exists!!! i tried to read it (behold a pale horse) once but after 75 pages it was inside my head and making me scared to go outside. so i stopped.

i don't think that joey is off base with the whole New World Order thing. i mean not only is it apparent that globalization WILL happen, but it's pretty much inevidable. we can't just sit across the ocean from one another and not expect economic relationships to form on a interconnected level. the euro is a perfect example. i can go to europe with 20 u.s. dollars, and recieve about 20 euros. it makes converting easier. NWO is continuous and omnipresent. if "it" was written dauben, then so let it be written.

what would you suggest?

And on another note, it's just real complicated to explain the minute details of this One World Government the United States is headed towards.

I mean, there is just so much information and documentation and facts that it's incredible.

Working in the newspaper business is fun, but tedious. You have to deal with documents, documents, documents and then to top it off, you've got to get a hold of interviews, etc.

I should be careful what I pray for. But man, I have tons of links to all the stuff I'm referring to.

If anyone wants, I can make those available:

joeydauben@hotmail.com

Or if you want to do it yourself, go to:

http://www.infowars.com/resources.html

http://www.propagandamatrix.com

http://www.cooperativeresearch.com

Hahaha, sorry "you people."

I hate using the word "ya'll" though; people make fun of me all the time because I'm from Texas anyway, so ...using that word would be more uh, not good lol.

Well, the "speculation" I refer to has been quoted, documented and broadcasted (as well as printed) and you're more than welcome to view a majority of it:

http://propagandamatrix.com/archive_new_world_order.html

Thank God for websites. On the above link, you will be able to find the origin, histories and the basic facts of many of the aspects of a One World Government.

Speculation?

And to provide a follow-up, which you might understand even more if you read through that archive, is that the United States is still the most powerful nation on earth, yes.

But, sending our troops to 114 different countries doesn't ring anyone's alarm? Signing a United Nations treaty in 1945 to override our U.S. Constitution doesn't make our country all big and bad as first thought.

Just look on the back of a $1 bill. Under that pyramid it has some latin words; translated means "NEW WORLD ORDER."

I rest my case for now.

I can see why you're upset, Joey... I'm suspicious of the power that large corporations have over governments, and the power the Bush Administration has over the rest of the government. But your "proof" is still based on speculation; you're reading too much into things, I think. I believe the U.S. as a superpower poses more of a threat than the UN or the European Union ever could (unless they got their hands on enough nuclear weapons...). But lets please get back to the topic at hand, shall we? Haven't you made posts about this on other topics anyway?

...Also, if you want to win over people to your ideas, Joey, it helps not to call your audience "you people." :/

For one, if you can prove something, then it is not longer a conspiracy "theory." It is, obviously, fact.

The majority of mainstream media feeds you people propoganda! I guess being a newspaper reporter makes me more skeptical; not saying any of you guys aren't already. But did you know that Brokaw, Jennings and Rather are members of the Council on Foreign Relations? If you aren't sure about CFR, maybe you should look it up.

The CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberger Group, Skull & Bones...They're all subjected to one goal: One World Government.

How can you people NOT see the evidence? The United Nations has their own political body, their own capital (NYC) and has their own charter, which this country is running under (no, the Constitution is void people - especially during war time).

The European Union has its own currency, president and almost has every western European country under its belt.

There's no evidence of a One World Government?

Bush speaking before the United Nations. Clinton speaking before the United Nations. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) planes patrolling our skies.

Still not convinced?


These aren't theories if they can be proven. Clinton, Bush Sr., Dubya ...all three have talked about a New World Order (One World Government).

More research would help you guys understand more.

I'm merely providing what I have found.

quote:

---

If you don't believe that, then you subscribe to the stupidity doctrine that our mainstream media is so eloquent in providing for us.

---

Ah, good defense.

You've got to admit, you sound like an incredibly paranoid conspiracy theorist. I'm starting to wonder about your credibility. (That sounds mean, but I really, honestly don't mean it as a personal attack.)


Love, Jenny

*Looks at Joey* So, if that's the case, then WHY do you think that the US would be stupid enough to trash their own country? Why are they putting innocent lives on the line? Why are they tearing apart the same country that was built by the principles that should been kept well over 200 years ago? And also, we don't have any hard evidence that a One-World Government is really going to form. Sure, you may have those sources down right by your post, but just based on opinions based off of actions by the US and not on 100% facts.

Sorry if any of these might be incorrect, but I have a HUGE writer's block on me and I really wanted to get this in. Also, I couldn't edit the last post since there's a 5-min time limit to edit posts. Sorry peoples.

While I agree that Saddam is no more of a threat than this administration, there is still the underlying truth that NOBODY has hit.

And it's a One World Government. The United Nations is a big supporter of it (in fact, that's what law we're currently working under, not the U.S. Constitution).

The European Union desperately wants our nation's independence, and ever since Sept. 11, those One World Government(ers) are real close to getting what they want.

Not only do big oil buddies get filthy rich, but the U.S. government gets more and more and more and more of our individual rights.

It's not against the law in some countries to even DISCUSS anti-government, anti-war subjects - AGAINST THE LAW!

Jody, Bill Clinton is the biggest One World Government supporter I've read about, so please, don't say he could have stopped it.

In fact, there is so much government involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing that reporters who try to report about it are fired from their job (case in point: Jayna Davis uncovered TONS of crap for a TV station in OKC only to be fired a few months after).

Let's also get one thing straight.

Pearl Harbor was not a surprise.

Vietnam was not a war.

Sept. 11 was not a surprise and the "War on Terrorism" is not a war.

The government planned the attacks on Sept. 11 and trained the guys who carried them out.

That's the end of discussion.

Clinton, both Bushes, Ford, Reagan, etc, etc...

The goal is a One World Government, One World Currency, One World leader ...


If you don't believe that, then you subscribe to the stupidity doctrine that our mainstream media is so eloquent in providing for us.


http://www.infowars.com/resources.htm

http://www.propagandamatrix.com

War agaisnt terrorism...that's what they say this is all about...honestly...I don't think it is! I think that's just a pretext to uncover many other reasons, or interests for this war. The hipocrisy on this matter is such on a high level that I don't know even how to start...First of all...the United States don't even have the moral authorithy to claime the existence of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons in Iraq. How can George Bush acuse Iraq, when the U.S. have as much, or even more weapons of that nature. Secondly...the manipulative attitude of U.S. on the United Nations, like on the rest of the world is simply deplorable...this kind of preasure is a living evidence that after all capital make the world run...after all, it's all reduced to dolar bills. About Iraq on itself...well...if you ask me if Mr. Sadam Hussein has indeed nuclear, biological and chemical weapons...my answer will be: yes, it's highly probal that he got those kind of weapons. But there's other ways to solve problems...that's what diplomacy is all about. But of course...U.S. have more beneficts in doing this war, then using civilazed and inteligent forms to reolve this issue. Of course the oil reservations are quite useful...This isn't about a war against terrorrism...it's about the backstage interests, that are covered by this fake pretext...That's Man in his worse!

why is it every time there's a problem, there's got a be a "war" on it? whose ingenious plan was that???? ("uhhhhhhh; i've got! let's start bombing!") violence begits violence, eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind, why fight fire with fire when all that's left is ash's and rubble?


WHAT IF IRAQ STARTED A WAR ON TERRORISM !!!!(terrorism as described as killing civilians under an ideological purpose).
would it be justified??????????

quote:

---

I'm against the war on Iraq becuase there is no proof that Saddam is any more of a threat to our conutry than he has been for the entire time he has been in power.

---

Ya wanna know something even crazier? Recent CIA research suggests that Saddam is less of a threat than he's ever been to the US. Crazy, no?

quote:

---

If we don't do anything now, there's a possibly an event like the Sept. 11 could repeat!

---

Yeah, and if we do do something now, it's practically a definite that there will be a repeat of an event like September 11th -- the war will most likely lead to urban warfare, which will entail canvassing cities with bombs. Cities where millions of entirely innocent people live.


Love, Jenny

Well...some people like it, others hate it, and I'm just pretty much in the middle. Sure, a large sum of the UN oppose war on Iraq, and that he could cause major casulaties on the homeland via terrorists, which could be possibly worse than attacks on the US soldiers, but we must understand that Saddam has chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction, and remember Sept. 11! If we don't do anything now, there's a possibly an event like the Sept. 11 could repeat! However...

...if we go to war, then its possible that other nations will side against the us and bombard us. Sure, we may be the greatest military power in the world, but at this rate, quanitity could outvalue quality. Plus don't forget that the Al-Quedia is still about, ableit weak but still a treat, and Osama Bin Laden!

Sorry for sounding so pessimsitc, but there's not much else I could say at this rate....*sighs*...I dunno where to side either *dublesigh*

...oh well, might as well go with the flow...

Give me a break. I'm immoral? I'm against bush because he signed the death warrants on over 150 people in Texas. I consider that murder. I'm against the war on Iraq becuase there is no proof that Saddam is any more of a threat to our conutry than he has been for the entire time he has been in power. But if we start a war with him? then of course he's going to F*** with us!!! then he'll bomb us, then he'll be pissed! What if this turns into another vietnam? do you want your brother drafted? how about your best friend, or your boyfriend? how about your cousin, or your dad? war is not a solution to injustice. Saddam is a horrible man, but this war would hurt more than help.