25 Feb 2016 14:30:53
Putin will have something. If nato stays out then Russia will act. The arab armies are useless anyway. The only issue would be mounting casualties but with control over all media Putin can keep control for a time unless it gets really bad. Depends what Iran does. And china.
Ed033’s profile
Ed033
Replies to these posts
25 Feb 2016 05:56:16
its amazing how two faced this world we live in is ed033. a leader has the gall to defend his country, he has an ally in putin who knows what the west really want to help him, and hey presto we need to remove these "evil tyrants" for the good of the people who we know they don't give a damn about, whilst arming rebels. However if a group of "terrorists" launch a campaign of terror against innocent civillians the whole of mankind ( known as the eu) are appalled and we are told no stone will be left unturned to bring these people to justice.
What good has it done by us invading these countries which we leave in a worst state than which we found them. The biggest example of west hypocrisy for me was the killings of saddam and gaddaffi, two of our best customers for years despite who they were as humans, but as soon as we had no use for them for the good of mankind we had to kill them.
if like Mugabe you live in a place where you have nothing we want to take, carry on raping and killing and starving your own people we don't care, and because they thought assad was going to be a push over and he obviously hasn't been we get the action you described, almost like how dare he have the gall to defend his own country. would we just let someone else try to take over Britain and not do anything about it. I think not. sorry for the rant ed0033 it just makes me so angry, we even get flippant when we bomb civilian houses now, knowing full well that innocent women and children are inside, but if that's a western family we are outraged.
Read discussionits amazing how two faced this world we live in is ed033. a leader has the gall to defend his country, he has an ally in putin who knows what the west really want to help him, and hey presto we need to remove these "evil tyrants" for the good of the people who we know they don't give a damn about, whilst arming rebels. However if a group of "terrorists" launch a campaign of terror against innocent civillians the whole of mankind ( known as the eu) are appalled and we are told no stone will be left unturned to bring these people to justice.
What good has it done by us invading these countries which we leave in a worst state than which we found them. The biggest example of west hypocrisy for me was the killings of saddam and gaddaffi, two of our best customers for years despite who they were as humans, but as soon as we had no use for them for the good of mankind we had to kill them.
if like Mugabe you live in a place where you have nothing we want to take, carry on raping and killing and starving your own people we don't care, and because they thought assad was going to be a push over and he obviously hasn't been we get the action you described, almost like how dare he have the gall to defend his own country. would we just let someone else try to take over Britain and not do anything about it. I think not. sorry for the rant ed0033 it just makes me so angry, we even get flippant when we bomb civilian houses now, knowing full well that innocent women and children are inside, but if that's a western family we are outraged.
Reply · 
hsf · 25 Feb 2016 10:32
hsf · 25 Feb 2016 10:3225 Feb 2016 10:33:54
I think he has around 2100 aces Ed033, no?
Read discussionI think he has around 2100 aces Ed033, no?
24 Feb 2016 22:34:38
Interesting.
Read discussionInteresting.
Reply · 
Sanogolovesbentner · 15 Feb 2016 21:40
Sanogolovesbentner · 15 Feb 2016 21:4015 Feb 2016 22:22:12
That's the thing it has made Europe a continent full of moderates and mentally weak people! Coupled with the fact the general population have no means to fight back.
Read discussionThat's the thing it has made Europe a continent full of moderates and mentally weak people! Coupled with the fact the general population have no means to fight back.
Reply · hsf · 15 Feb 2016 21:37
hsf · 15 Feb 2016 21:3715 Feb 2016 20:44:30
Unarmed you say? It's very, very easy to get hold of guns in the UK.
Read discussionUnarmed you say? It's very, very easy to get hold of guns in the UK.
15 Feb 2016 22:04:02
Scary times around the corner it would seem, and all this would tie in with Obama trying to get guns outlawed in the states, if ever the yanks give their weapons up then it's game over.
Read discussionScary times around the corner it would seem, and all this would tie in with Obama trying to get guns outlawed in the states, if ever the yanks give their weapons up then it's game over.
15 Feb 2016 22:08:38
Could you see patriotic service personnel turning on there own countrymen, while knowing that to do so would be a death knell for our way of life and everything countless ancestors have worked and fought for?
Some, maybe but I think patriotism and a feeling of belonging to a "clan" would force many to refuse.
Read discussionCould you see patriotic service personnel turning on there own countrymen, while knowing that to do so would be a death knell for our way of life and everything countless ancestors have worked and fought for?
Some, maybe but I think patriotism and a feeling of belonging to a "clan" would force many to refuse.
15 Feb 2016 21:58:34
Science accepts the existence of both parasitic and symbiotic relationships. Furthermore, symbiotic relationships remain so in the presence of case specific ratios between involved organisms. When said ratios are altered an umbalance occurs and the relationship transforms from one of symbiosis to parasitism.
The human body is ordinary in that it cooperates with microorganisms to enhance its abilities. Indeed, it does operate due to its own cells but when placed in an environment with other organisms these microbiota benefit the host. Among their documented advantages are the transformation of certain substances into others (e. g. fermentation), the production of vitamins (e. g. vitamin K) and protection against harmful bacteria.
It's only an assumption but the human body would probably develop the most useful of these abilities, by producing similarly functioning cells through biological evolution, in time. The principles of our efficient universe however guarantee the continual availability of these valued and thus developed abilities to all species capable of achieving and maintaining symbiosis.
In regards to the use of entheogenic substances, an interesting contemplation is the role fulfilled by the people employing them in relation to society through the ages.
Read discussionScience accepts the existence of both parasitic and symbiotic relationships. Furthermore, symbiotic relationships remain so in the presence of case specific ratios between involved organisms. When said ratios are altered an umbalance occurs and the relationship transforms from one of symbiosis to parasitism.
The human body is ordinary in that it cooperates with microorganisms to enhance its abilities. Indeed, it does operate due to its own cells but when placed in an environment with other organisms these microbiota benefit the host. Among their documented advantages are the transformation of certain substances into others (e. g. fermentation), the production of vitamins (e. g. vitamin K) and protection against harmful bacteria.
It's only an assumption but the human body would probably develop the most useful of these abilities, by producing similarly functioning cells through biological evolution, in time. The principles of our efficient universe however guarantee the continual availability of these valued and thus developed abilities to all species capable of achieving and maintaining symbiosis.
In regards to the use of entheogenic substances, an interesting contemplation is the role fulfilled by the people employing them in relation to society through the ages.
15 Feb 2016 18:03:55
Well one face of the European project was to reduce nation states and push the pc agenda. Very successfully. I do think people are now pushing back against this. Is it too late though.
Read discussionWell one face of the European project was to reduce nation states and push the pc agenda. Very successfully. I do think people are now pushing back against this. Is it too late though.
15 Feb 2016 16:34:47
Do you think possible British exit from the EU and the possible domino reaction amongst other countries (possibly Denmark would also look to secede and Greece also maybe) would be against the plan and why the stay in campaign is stirring the rhetoric?
Read discussionDo you think possible British exit from the EU and the possible domino reaction amongst other countries (possibly Denmark would also look to secede and Greece also maybe) would be against the plan and why the stay in campaign is stirring the rhetoric?
15 Feb 2016 17:28:09
top post ed 33. you never stop learning on this site. it certainly explains a few things. personally I think this world would be far better with no religion at all. the so called peace loving religions are amongst the most violent.
Read discussiontop post ed 33. you never stop learning on this site. it certainly explains a few things. personally I think this world would be far better with no religion at all. the so called peace loving religions are amongst the most violent.
15 Feb 2016 10:17:07
Ed, perhaps people have had enough of having this multiculturalism forced upon them, this could just be the start of the push back, mainstream media dare not critisise Muslims or Islam for fear of offending so called minorities and going against what looks like an agenda' yet it's ok for the indigenous populations of so called Christian countries to be demonized and told how bad and wicked we are for not falling in to line and accepting the islamification of countries or continents.
Read discussionEd, perhaps people have had enough of having this multiculturalism forced upon them, this could just be the start of the push back, mainstream media dare not critisise Muslims or Islam for fear of offending so called minorities and going against what looks like an agenda' yet it's ok for the indigenous populations of so called Christian countries to be demonized and told how bad and wicked we are for not falling in to line and accepting the islamification of countries or continents.
Reply · hsf · 12 Feb 2016 22:31
hsf · 12 Feb 2016 22:3112 Feb 2016 21:21:53
Are you referring to the Terry Wogan interview? Yeah he was being set up on that which is wrong, even Terry said that it never sat well with him what they did.
Read discussionAre you referring to the Terry Wogan interview? Yeah he was being set up on that which is wrong, even Terry said that it never sat well with him what they did.
Reply · hsf · 12 Feb 2016 04:21
hsf · 12 Feb 2016 04:2112 Feb 2016 05:18:58
I can't trust a mans word after he's claimed to be Jesus. I just can't take a man seriously after that.
Read discussionI can't trust a mans word after he's claimed to be Jesus. I just can't take a man seriously after that.
12 Feb 2016 01:32:56
Now its you who seems to be missing my point mate. I'm not saying we 'need to use a drug'. I'm saying its known that we have used this drug for tens of the thousands of years. Its known its been on our planet for millions of years. Our brain has delevoped receptors that sole purpose that we know of (you can argue that means nothing as its stated as the only known use, but until you put forth another, or one is discovered, your arguement is lacking) is to process THC, which has a high that is only induced through smoking the plant (eating it causes a reaction in the liver and a different 'high' altogether. ) So to think our brain developed receptors that process the psychoactive compound of the plant, and alter our state of consciousness and to be so narrow minded to believe that it could have no impact of our conscious advancement over the past 200,000 years is extremely naive.
As anyone who reads this page knows I'm a huge fan of meditation/ floatation tanks/ sensory deprivation tanks etc, and don't for a second believe you need a plant, or a drug if you prefer that term, although I hope you also use the same terminology for coffee, tea or any other natural plant that effects your brain function, in order to reach higher states, however to believe it hasn't had an impact on our advancement in consciousness, is in my opinion, wholly naive.
Not once have I said humanity needs it. But they've certainly used it for thousands of years of known use, and have had access to it for millions more. I have seen you constantly talk about the missing link in the expansion of our brain and neural processes in terms of evolution, yet it seems if a theory, which is exactly how I have presented this, gets put forward, and has substantial evidence to back it up, isn't claimed as fact, but a possibility you are quick to shoot it down. Seems strange mate.
Read discussionNow its you who seems to be missing my point mate. I'm not saying we 'need to use a drug'. I'm saying its known that we have used this drug for tens of the thousands of years. Its known its been on our planet for millions of years. Our brain has delevoped receptors that sole purpose that we know of (you can argue that means nothing as its stated as the only known use, but until you put forth another, or one is discovered, your arguement is lacking) is to process THC, which has a high that is only induced through smoking the plant (eating it causes a reaction in the liver and a different 'high' altogether. ) So to think our brain developed receptors that process the psychoactive compound of the plant, and alter our state of consciousness and to be so narrow minded to believe that it could have no impact of our conscious advancement over the past 200,000 years is extremely naive.
As anyone who reads this page knows I'm a huge fan of meditation/ floatation tanks/ sensory deprivation tanks etc, and don't for a second believe you need a plant, or a drug if you prefer that term, although I hope you also use the same terminology for coffee, tea or any other natural plant that effects your brain function, in order to reach higher states, however to believe it hasn't had an impact on our advancement in consciousness, is in my opinion, wholly naive.
Not once have I said humanity needs it. But they've certainly used it for thousands of years of known use, and have had access to it for millions more. I have seen you constantly talk about the missing link in the expansion of our brain and neural processes in terms of evolution, yet it seems if a theory, which is exactly how I have presented this, gets put forward, and has substantial evidence to back it up, isn't claimed as fact, but a possibility you are quick to shoot it down. Seems strange mate.
12 Feb 2016 01:47:43
Just to clarify mate, I certainly don't think you're a naive person, just your argument on this seems to be a naive approach to take. These pages have tought me plenty, which can be directly attributed to yourself, and the other Eds, so as always appreciate the work you lot do.
Read discussionJust to clarify mate, I certainly don't think you're a naive person, just your argument on this seems to be a naive approach to take. These pages have tought me plenty, which can be directly attributed to yourself, and the other Eds, so as always appreciate the work you lot do.
11 Feb 2016 11:03:33
I'm a couch space traveler and I do admit that if you look enough you will find loads of 'evidence' supporting this drug and that. But in my personal experience (and its vast) they can help you find out about yourself but shit all about anything else! I have never thought it gives you a higher knowledge. Nothing I have experienced in a trip could ever be real it's 100% nonsense but it's my little nonsense.
Read discussionI'm a couch space traveler and I do admit that if you look enough you will find loads of 'evidence' supporting this drug and that. But in my personal experience (and its vast) they can help you find out about yourself but shit all about anything else! I have never thought it gives you a higher knowledge. Nothing I have experienced in a trip could ever be real it's 100% nonsense but it's my little nonsense.
Reply · 
Mr.x · 11 Feb 2016 09:55
Mr.x · 11 Feb 2016 09:5511 Feb 2016 10:54:16
To be honest guys I think David icke is "trippin" on some of the things he says. Maybe not all the things he says but most. The mans on the right track though and I thank him for all the hard work he puts in.
Read discussionTo be honest guys I think David icke is "trippin" on some of the things he says. Maybe not all the things he says but most. The mans on the right track though and I thank him for all the hard work he puts in.
11 Feb 2016 06:25:03
I don't think I'm missing the point at all mate. I'm not stating anything as fact, and think with something as complex as life you need to open to new information changing perceived views. Saying widely accepted isn't just some random guess they've plucked out of nowhere. It's based on current knowledge of meteorites smashing Earth for millions of years, the substances they have introduced to our planet, their beliefs around those substances creating a reaction to the environment and advancements in life happening as a result. It shouldn't be taken as fact, but also shouldn't just be dismissed as guesswork.
As for THC receptors, it's just a theory and due to research being restricted for a long time around marijuana consumption, and often one sided, with a problem sort after, rather than discovered, we probably won't know just how important it has been in our conscious evolution for a while yet. I don't think anyone has to or is meant to use it, but it certainly has its benefits for our current society, as shown in Colorado. At the time of writing it is also the only known natural substance that triggers a reaction from the THC receptors and gives you a 'high'. You don't have to believe that means anything about anything, but I think that would be a very naive approach to take.
Read discussionI don't think I'm missing the point at all mate. I'm not stating anything as fact, and think with something as complex as life you need to open to new information changing perceived views. Saying widely accepted isn't just some random guess they've plucked out of nowhere. It's based on current knowledge of meteorites smashing Earth for millions of years, the substances they have introduced to our planet, their beliefs around those substances creating a reaction to the environment and advancements in life happening as a result. It shouldn't be taken as fact, but also shouldn't just be dismissed as guesswork.
As for THC receptors, it's just a theory and due to research being restricted for a long time around marijuana consumption, and often one sided, with a problem sort after, rather than discovered, we probably won't know just how important it has been in our conscious evolution for a while yet. I don't think anyone has to or is meant to use it, but it certainly has its benefits for our current society, as shown in Colorado. At the time of writing it is also the only known natural substance that triggers a reaction from the THC receptors and gives you a 'high'. You don't have to believe that means anything about anything, but I think that would be a very naive approach to take.