🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:46:46 +0000, Anonymous wrote:

> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occupy-protestors-plan-coordinated-port-
> shutdowns-stretching-from-anchorage-to-san-diego/
> 
> What other motive could they have, than to shut down our country and
> destroy our freedom?!

Republicans already did that.

They're just trying to take the country BACK.





-- 
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution 
inevitable” -JFK





-- 
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution 
inevitable” -JFK

"Anonymous" <Anonymous@Anonymous> wrote in message 
news:jc5i6m12jc@news7.newsguy.com...
>
> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occupy-protestors-plan-coordinated-port-
> shutdowns-stretching-from-anchorage-to-san-diego/
>
> What other motive could they have, than to shut down our country and 
> destroy
> our freedom?!

Like the "freedom" to protest a fascistic government that robs the poor to 
profit the rich?
Or a country run by traitors that kill thousands of innocent Americans in a 
false-flag "attack" to promote war and establish police-state conditions?

The 9/11 "ATTACK" - TEN YEARS, NO JUSTICE!

The crime of the century that mass-murdered 3000 innocent Americans on 
September 11, 2001 remains unsolved. Many know this with certainty and some 
suspect it, but some Americans still believe the coverup lies and propaganda 
fed them through the government-manipulated corporate mass-media. To 
understand why, and know the truth, read on - -

To understand the point I wish to make, let's assume that an obviously alien 
creature was walking peacefully down the street, and observe peoples' 
reactions to it.

Some would simply not see it! Their brains would reject as IMPOSSIBLE what 
their eyes tell them, and block out their awareness of the unearthly 
creature.

Some might stare, perhaps be shocked or frightened, but then go on, 
rationalizing that they only saw someone in costume, or that they had 
indulged too heavily at last night's party and were seeing things. They 
would tell no one what they saw for fear of being thought crazy. They would 
even, in defense of their own rationalization, label other people that 
reported such a sighting as crazy. This is the psychological phenomenon of 
DENIAL.

Perhaps in fear for their own sanity, deniers condemn as crazy others that 
claim aliens or whatever to be real. Such assertions are frightening because 
they violate their sense of reality - "only KOOKS believe in aliens!" Thus 
people tend to reject as unreal what is not comfortable for them to accept, 
and likewise embrace beliefs that do not hold up to scientific scrutiny but 
do provide them comfort. You don't believe what you DON'T WANT to believe; 
denial thus serves to protect the mind from what would be mentally traumatic 
if accepted.

Some things are simply too horrific, too abominably appalling, too greatly 
in violation of what we WANT to think or believe, to accept as actual 
reality - even when they ARE real! "Look; the Emperor wears no clothes," 
said the child too na�ve to know that such facts are not to be spoken of, 
nor even acknowledged to oneself.

PSYOPS - definition paraphrased from Wikipedia:  Psychological Operations.
Techniques used to influence a target audience's value systems, beliefs, 
emotions, motives, reasoning, or behavior. PSYOPS are used to induce 
confessions or reinforce attitudes and behaviors favorable to the 
originator's objectives, and are sometimes combined with black operations or 
false flag tactics. The phrase is commonly used by governments who wish to 
avoid the terms propaganda and brainwashing in reference to their own work 
because those terms have negative connotations. The use of such euphemisms 
for what is in effect mind control is in itself an example of psychological 
operations, i.e. using psychological techniques to persuade a large number 
of people to support something they wouldn't normally support or to 
unquestioningly accept lies.

Obviously, to permit or commit an atrocity on the scale of the 9/11 attacks, 
and/or to exploit the horror, shock, and fear thus created to influence 
public opinion and actions, is clearly a PSYOP. The exploitation of the 
psychological phenomenon of DENIAL is also clearly a PSYOP. Who would want 
to believe that traitors in our own government would permit, or even 
perpetrate, such an atrocity on their own people? How much easier it would 
be to accept the existence of aliens - or fanatical Jihadists!

"But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy 
and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a 
democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist 
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the 
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they 
are being attacked and then denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism 
and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." - 
Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg Trials.

Now that we understand what PSYOPS are, and the psychological phenomenon of 
DENIAL, we are in a better position to rationally investigate the true 
nature and possible sources of the 9/11 attacks.

The UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE of an INSIDE JOB:

BLOWN TO BITS:

The sudden, complete, straight down at near free-fall speed collapse of 
steel framed WTC building 7, which was not touched by the planes, is the 
SMOKING GUN of the 9/11 conspiracy. The building's few small fires and 
superficial debris damage could not account for this collapse, which had all 
the earmarks of controlled demolition by explosives. Videos clearly show 
this. Such demolitions take many days or weeks to set up - not the few hours 
between the plane "attacks" and the collapse. The explosives therefore had 
to be put in place BEFOREHAND. This lends credibility to the use of 
previously placed explosives to bring down the towers as well, which like 
the badly damaged and fire-gutted Deutchbank building would probably have 
remained standing.

Propaganda shills, disinformationists, and those in psychological denial 
still insist the collapse of WTC 7 could not be what it obviously was, and 
they employ often ludicrous rationalizations and fabrications, elaborate 
lies, and infantile ad-hominem attacks to defend their indefensible 
position. The REAL terrorists are desperate to cover up their mass-murderous 
crime of the century - the permitting if not perpetration of, and subsequent 
political and economic exploitation of the fully preventable 9/11 disaster. 
Could Bin Laden have somehow totally incapacitated NORAD - the world's most 
sophisticated aerospace defense system - on that horrible morning? I don't 
think so!

There is evidence of an INSIDE JOB even more clear and indisputable than the 
explosive demolition collapse of building 7 and the standing down of NORAD. 
Many very small HUMAN BODY FRAGMENTS have been found on the roofs of nearby 
buildings. These were too far away to be from jumpers from the towers. If 
the towers simply collapsed from damage and fire alone, what blew these 
bodies to smithereens and sent the fragments flying for considerable 
distances? The plane impacts did not have the explosive brisance (shattering 
force) necessary to do this - only HIGH EXPLOSIVES can blow bodies to tiny 
bits and throw them such distances.

So - who can credibly account for these body fragments, other than their 
being the result of high explosives being detonated in the towers?


The NORAD STAND-DOWN (complete failure to take defensive action) is 
compelling evidence of the 9/11 conspiracy. NORAD is the world's most 
sophisticated aerospace defense system, with backups and redundancies that 
make it extremely reliable and effective. NORAD routinely intercepts off 
course or out of communication aircraft of all kinds, especially near such 
security-sensitive areas as New York City and the Pentagon. On 9/11, FOUR 
allegedly hijacked subsonic-speed commercial jets were out of communication 
and flying towards known terrorist targets for well over an hour. NOT ONE of 
these planes was intercepted by NORAD!  We were told that NORAD only looks 
for aircraft coming from outside the USA, but this is a blatant LIE, given 
the history of NORAD's routine interceptions!


The following article proves, using the inviolate laws of physics, the 
falsity of the government's propaganda explanation for the World Trade 
Center building collapses:

SIMPLE PHYSICS EXPOSES THE BIG 9/11 LIE - GOVERNMENT BUILDING COLLAPSE 
EXPLANATION FAILS REALITY CHECK

On September 11, 2001, the world watched in horror as the World TradeCenter 
(WTC) Twin Towers collapsed, killing thousands of innocent people. Videos of 
the collapses were replayed ad nauseam on TV for days. About 5 hours after 
the towers fell, WTC building 7 also collapsed suddenly, completely, and 
straight down at near free-fall speed. This steel-framed building was not 
touched by the planes that struck the towers, and had sustained relatively 
minor debris damage and small fires. Nearby buildings far more heavily 
damaged remained standing.

In June 2005, in an apparent response to an article by Morgan Reynolds, 
former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated, 
"The American people know what they saw with their own eyes on September11, 
2001. To suggest any kind of government conspiracy in the events of that day 
goes beyond the pale."

We will prove here, with scientific rigor, that it's the government's tale 
that's "beyond the pale!"

Did most of the American people really understand the unprecedented 
phenomena they had witnessed? Could a lack of knowledge of physics, and the 
emotional shock of this mass-murderous "terrorist attack" have stymied 
objective thinking and led to the blind acceptance of authoritarian 
assertions?

The government and the media TOLD US what we saw. The government told us 
that we had witnessed a "gravitational" collapse; what is now referred to as 
a "pancake collapse". According to the government claims, the plane crashes 
and subsequent kerosene (like lamp oil - jet fuel is NOT exotic) fires 
heated the UL-certified structural steel to the point where it was 
significantly weakened, which is very difficult to believe, never mind 
repeat in an experiment. Even with massive fires that incinerate everything 
else, the steel frames of such buildings generally remain standing.

According to the "pancake theory", this purported (all physical evidence was 
quickly and illegally destroyed) weakening supposedly caused part of the 
tower to collapse downward onto the rest of the tower, which, we've been 
repeatedly told, somehow resulted in a chain reaction of the lower floors 
sequentially, one at a time, yielding to the weight falling from above.

There are some problems with that theory - it does not fit the observed 
facts

* It cannot account for the total failure of the immense vertical steelcore 
columns - as if they were there one moment and gone the next.

* The collapse times were near free-fall, far too rapid to be due to gravity 
alone. This article focuses on the latter of these two discrepancies.

Those that concocted the "pancake theory" made a fatal error - they didn't 
check their story against the inviolate laws of physics! This is easy to do, 
even without any physical evidence to examine. We can test that incredible 
pancake tale using basic high-school physics. Let's do that - use a simple, 
unassailable, incontrovertible conservation-of-energy analysis to perform a 
reality check that establishes once and for all that the government, and 
such government story backers as PBS, Popular Mechanics, and Scientific 
American have falsified the true nature of the 9/11 disaster.

How Gravity Acts:

Sir Isaac Newton noticed that apples fell from trees. Others had also 
noticed this, but none had ever devised a theory of gravity from the 
observation. Over the years, mankind has learned that the force ofgravity at 
and near Earth's surface produces an acceleration of known constant 
magnitude. That doesn't mean we know HOW it works, or WHY, but we have 
become able to predict its effects with a high degree of precision and 
certainty - gravity has always had the same, predictable, effect.

Galileo Galilei used the leaning tower of Pisa to demonstrate that a large 
ball and a small one (of lesser mass) fell (accelerated downward) at the 
same rate. Prior to Galileo, people had just assumed that heavier objects 
fall faster, much the way they had assumed the Earth was flat.

So while an object of greater mass will exert more force (its weight) upon 
anything supporting it against gravity's pull, it does not experience any 
greater acceleration when gravity's pull is not opposed - when it is 
falling. Earth's gravity at and near the surface of the planet can only 
accelerate objects downward at one known, constant rate: 32 feet persecond 
for each second of free fall. As Galileo demonstrated centuries ago, heavier 
objects are not accelerated any quicker than are lighter objects.

So Earth's gravity produces a downward acceleration of 32 feet per second 
per second. This means that an object, after falling one second, will be 
falling at a speed of 32 ft/sec. After the 2nd second, it will be falling at 
64 ft/sec. After the 3rd second, it will be falling at 96 ft/sec., and so 
on.

Further, since gravity's acceleration is constant, and an object isfalling 
at 32 ft/sec after one second has elapsed, we know that it has averaged 16 
ft/sec for the entire distance. Thus after one second, the object has fallen 
16 feet.

Scientists have derived simple free-fall equations that can be used to 
harness this knowledge mathematically. These equations can be found inany 
high-school physics book

* Falling velocity = acceleration of gravity x time. (V = G x T)
And
* Distance fallen = 1/2 x acceleration of gravity x time squared. (D =1/2 x 
G x T x T)

So if we want to know how far an object has free-fallen after 3 seconds

Distance = 1/2 x 32 x 9 = 144 feet

So after 3 seconds in Earth's gravity, an object will have fallen 144 feet 
and will be falling at 96 ft/sec.

Checking Our Work:

We've just solved a simple physics problem. Now let's check our work,using
conservation of energy.

We know that energy can neither be created nor destroyed - it merely changes 
form. If we take the potential (in this case chemical, molecular) energyin a 
barrel of oil and burn it, it changes to heat energy. When we burn gasoline 
in our car's engine, we get kinetic (motional) energy, plus some heat, as an 
engine is not 100% efficient. When we use our car's brakes to bleed off some 
of that kinetic energy (slow down), that energy isconverted into heat (the 
brakes get hot). Explosives convert potential energy [molecular or atomic] 
to kinetic energy (explosive force) quickly enough to shatter or even 
pulverize concrete.

In the case of the free-falling object, the two kinds of energy we are 
concerned with are kinetic energy and potential energy. Examples of 
potential (gravitational) energy are the energy available from water stored 
up high in a water tower, or a boulder perched atop a hill. If whateveris 
holding it up there is removed, it will fall under the influence of 
gravity's pull. As it accelerates downward, the potential energy is 
converted to the kinetic energy of the object's motion.

So, as an object falls, it changes its potential energy into kinetic energy.

The equation for potential energy is
* Potential Energy = Mass (or weight) x Gravity x Height. (PE = M x G xH)

The equation for kinetic energy is
* Kinetic Energy = 1/2 x Mass x Velocity squared. (KE = 1/2 x M x V x V)

So let's just say, for the sake of simplicity, that our falling object hasa 
mass of 1. (Remember, the object's mass will affect its energy, and its 
momentum, but not its rate of free-fall.)

The potential energy given up by falling 3 seconds (144 ft) is: 1 x 32x144
= 4608

The kinetic energy gained after falling 3 seconds is 1/2 x 1 x 96 squared
=1/2 x 9216 = 4608

So, the available potential energy was converted into kinetic energy.Seeing 
that energy was, in fact, conserved is how we know that the answer in the 
simple case above was correct. We've checked our work, using an independent 
analysis, based upon the sound physical principle of conservation of energy.
Now, and only now, we can be certain that our answer was correct.

One Little Complication - the effect of air resistance

The free-fall equations above reflect a perfect, frictionless world. They 
perfectly predict the behavior of falling bodies in a vacuum. In fact, you 
may have seen a science class demonstration in which the air is pumped out 
of a tube and then a feather will fall, in that vacuum, just as fast as will 
a solid metal ball.

That's how parachutes work: much of the falling object's potential energy 
gets expended doing the work of pushing a lot of air out of the way inorder 
for the object to fall. As a result, not all of the gravitational potential 
energy can go towards accelerating the object downward at gravity's rate of 
32 ft/sec/sec.

In other words, only when there is zero frictional resistance can any 
falling object's potential energy be completely converted into kinetic 
energy. Anything that resists a falling object's downward velocity reduces 
its acceleration from the maximum gravitational acceleration of 32 feet per 
second per second, as some of gravity's potential energy is consumed in 
overcoming frictional resistance.

This explains the phenomena of "terminal velocity". The free-fall equations 
predict that a falling object's velocity will continue to increase without 
limit. But in air, once a falling object reaches a certain speed, its 
propensity to fall will be matched by the air's resistance to the fall.At 
that point the object will continue to fall, but its speed will no longer 
increase over time. Another way of looking at it is this: gravity's 
incessant force produces a downward acceleration, but friction with theair 
creates an upward force and thus an upward acceleration. When falling at 
terminal velocity, the acceleration downward equals the accelerationupward, 
they cancel each other out, and a constant downward velocity ismaintained.

Thus the parachute, with its high air friction resistance, allows theperson 
attached to it to float to earth unharmed.

A Quick Recap:

Earth's gravity causes objects to fall, and they fall according to precise 
physical equations. The equations assume no air or other resistance. Any 
resistance at all will cause the object to fall less rapidly than it would 
without that resistance. If a falling object is affected by airresistance it 
falls slower than it would if free-falling, and it will take longer to fall 
a given distance.

Free-fall From WTC Building Heights

The towers were 1350 and 1360 feet tall; average = 1355 feet. Let's start by 
using our free-fall equation to see how long it should take an objectto 
free-fall from the towers' height.

Distance = 1/2 x Gravity x Time squared. (D = 1/2 x G x T x T)

With a little basic algebra, we solve the equation for the fall time,T:

2 x Distance = Gravity x Time(squared) (2 x D = G x T x T)
Time squared = (2 x Distance) / Gravity (T x T = 2 x D / G)
Time squared = 2 x 1355 / 32 = 84.7 (T = square root of (2 x D / G))
Time = 9.2

So our equation tells us that it takes 9.2 seconds to free-fall to the 
ground from the height of the WTC towers.

Using our simpler equation, V = G x T, we can see that at 9.2 seconds, the 
free-falling object's velocity must be about 295 ft/sec, which is justover 
200 mph.

But that can only occur IN A VACUUM.

Since the WTC was in Earth's atmosphere at sea level, you might be able to 
imagine how much air resistance that represents. Think about putting your 
arm out the window of a car moving even half that fast! Most free-falling 
objects reach their terminal velocity long before they reach 200 mph. For 
example, the terminal velocity of a free-falling human body is around 120 
mph. The terminal velocity of a free-falling cat is around 60 mph.

Therefore, it is clear that air resistance alone will make it take longer 
than 9.2 seconds for anything falling from the towers' height to reach the 
ground.

Observations from 9/11:

On page 305 of the 9/11 Commission Report, we are told, in the government's 
"complete and final report" on 9/11, that the South Tower collapsed in 10 
seconds. Here is the exact quote

"At 9:58:59, the South Tower collapsed in ten seconds". That's the 
government's official number. With all the videos that show it, they could 
not lie about this.

But as we've determined above, the FREE-FALL TIME IN A VACUUM is 9.2 
seconds, and 10 seconds is an exceptionally short fall time through the air.

This "collapse" was not without far more physical resistance than from the 
air alone. It proceeded through all the lower stories of the tower. Those 
undamaged floors below the plane impact zone offered resistance thousands of 
times greater than that of air. Those lower stories, and the central steel 
core columns, had successfully supported the mass of the tower for 30 years 
despite hurricane-force winds and tremors. Air cannot do that.

Can anyone possibly imagine undamaged lower floors getting out of the way of 
the upper floors as gracefully and relatively without friction as air would? 
Can anyone possibly imagine the lower stories slowing the fall of the upper 
floors less than would, say, a parachute?

It is beyond the scope of the simple but uncontested physics here to tell 
you how long such a collapse should have taken. Would it have taken a 
minute? Ten minutes? Hard to say, but certainly it would take far more than 
10 seconds!

What is certain, beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that the towers could not 
have collapsed gravitationally, through their intact lower stories, as 
rapidly as was observed on 9/11. Not even close. This is shown above to be 
physically impossible!

Not only was tremendous energy expended in causing the observed massive 
high-speed sideways debris ejections, but virtually all the concrete and 
glass of the tower was pulverized - actually dissociated is a better word. 
Never mind what happened to all the supporting steel core columns! The 
energy requirements to do anything like that, alone, rival the total amount 
of potential energy that the entire tower had to give. Gravity alone is 
sufficient to cause some things to fall that far, even through air, in close 
to the observed 10 second collapse time. But that is without the huge 
expenditure of energy necessary to pulverize all of that concrete and glass, 
eject debris, plus cause the steel core columns to effectively disappear. 
The gravitational potential energy present was certainly not enough to have 
done all these things at once.

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed; it only changes form. So WHERE
DID ALL THAT ADDITIONAL DESTRUCTIVE ENERGY COME FROM?

Conclusions

In order for the towers to have collapsed "gravitationally" in the observed 
duration, as we've been told over and over again, one or more of the 
following zany-sounding conditions must have been met

* The undamaged structure below the impact zone offered zero resistance to 
the collapse.
* The glass and concrete spontaneously disintegrated without any expenditure 
of energy.
* The massive vertical steel core columns simply vanished, as if by magic.
* On 9/11 alone, in that location alone, gravity was much stronger than 
gravity.
* On 9/11 alone, in that location alone, energy was not conserved.

None of these laws-of-physics-violating, and thus impossible, conditions can 
be accounted for by the official government theory of 9/11, nor by any of 
the subsequent analyses and arguments designed to prop up this official myth 
of 9/11.

The Bottom Line

The government explanations for the WTC collapses fail the most basic 
conservation-of-energy reality check. Therefore the government theory is 
FALSE; it does not fit the observed facts, and the notion of a "pancake 
collapse" cannot account for what happened. The "pancake collapse" 
explanation is impossible, and thus absurd. It is A LIE.

It is utterly impossible for a gravitational collapse to proceed so 
destructively through a path of such great resistance in anywhere near 
free-fall time. This fact debunks the preposterous contention that theWTC 
collapses can be blamed solely upon damage resulting from the plane impacts.

The unnaturally short durations of the top-down collapses reveal that the 
towers did not disintegrate because they were coming down, but rather they 
came down because something else was causing them to disintegrate.

So, to the extent that people accept the ridiculous "pancake collapse" 
story, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Gates' other 
premise, that people know what they saw, is also false. It is left to you to 
decide if his conclusion, which was based upon clearly incorrect 
presumptions, is also flawed.

The collapse of WTC building 7, which was NOT hit by any plane, and which 
also collapsed within a second of free-fall time later that same day, 
similarly fails the conservation-of-energy analysis. The 9/11 Commission 
made no attempt to explain it.

Just how and why so many highly-accredited and credentialed people all so 
miserably failed to check the "pancake collapse" theory, by giving it this 
basic physics reality check, is beyond the scope of this analysis.

---------
FURTHER IRREFUTABLE PROOF BY PHYSICS OF THE 9/11 INSIDE JOB

http://vehme.blogspot.com/2007/12/glaring-proof-of-something-hotter-than.html 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck's_law_of_black_body_radiation Also see: 
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646

SO - WHO DONE IT??

Any good detective will tell you that the way to find criminals is to 
investigate those that benefitted, or stood to benefit, from the crime. 
Surely those that were quickly blamed for this mass-murderous crime of the 
century - Bin Laden, etc., had evil intentions against America, but could 
not have done it single-handedly. Just after 9/11 Iraq and Saddam Hussein 
were implied as guilty in a PSYOP to justify the invasion of Iraq, when in 
fact they were blameless for 9/11.

Here are some that, under the criteria of the good detective above, must be 
considered suspects:

Bush, Cheney, and their fellow Republican/neo-conservatives then in power.
Then NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani.
WTC owner/leaseholder Larry Silverstein.
The theocratic nation of Israel.

DEMAND that congress reopen the investigation and bring the real 
MASS-MURDERERS to justice!

NINE ELEVEN - NEVER AGAIN!

"6338 Dead, 1481 since 1/20/09" <dead@gone.com>  wrote :

> On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:46:46 +0000, Anonymous wrote:
> 
>> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occupy-protestors-plan-coordinated-port-
>> shutdowns-stretching-from-anchorage-to-san-diego/
>> 
>> What other motive could they have, than to shut down our country and
>> destroy our freedom?!
> 
> Republicans already did that.
> 
> They're just trying to take the country BACK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Occupy my asshole with your lips, commie!

"Freedom Man" <freespeech@4eva.com>  wrote :

> "Anonymous" <Anonymous@Anonymous> wrote in message 
> news:jc5i6m12jc@news7.newsguy.com...
>>
>> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occupy-protestors-plan-coordinated-port-
>> shutdowns-stretching-from-anchorage-to-san-diego/
>>
>> What other motive could they have, than to shut down our country and 
>> destroy
>> our freedom?!
> 
> Like the "freedom" to protest a fascistic government that robs the poor
> to profit the rich?

If you really believe that, you're stupid beyond help!

On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:46:09 +0000, Anonymous wrote:

> "6338 Dead, 1481 since 1/20/09" <dead@gone.com>  wrote :
> 
>> On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:46:46 +0000, Anonymous wrote:
>> 
>>> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occupy-protestors-plan-coordinated-
port-
>>> shutdowns-stretching-from-anchorage-to-san-diego/
>>> 
>>> What other motive could they have, than to shut down our country and
>>> destroy our freedom?!
>> 
>> Republicans already did that.
>> 
>> They're just trying to take the country BACK.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> Occupy my asshole with your lips, commie!

Yawn.  The trolls are getting more and more unoriginal.




-- 
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution 
inevitable” -JFK

"Anonymous" <Anonymous@Anonymous> wrote in message 
news:jcepgr42kbk@news3.newsguy.com...
> "Freedom Man" <freespeech@4eva.com>  wrote :
>
>> "Anonymous" <Anonymous@Anonymous> wrote in message
>> news:jc5i6m12jc@news7.newsguy.com...
>>>
>>> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occupy-protestors-plan-coordinated-port-
>>> shutdowns-stretching-from-anchorage-to-san-diego/
>>>
>>> What other motive could they have, than to shut down our country and
>>> destroy
>>> our freedom?!

>> Like the "freedom" to protest a fascistic government that robs the poor
>> to profit the rich?

> If you really believe that, you're stupid beyond help!

And if you unquestioningly swallow all the government coverup lies and 
propaganda about the 9/11 INSIDE JOB false-flag attack, you are brainwashed 
beyond help!