The totalitarian state

Comments about your favorite candidate, the newest PROPOSED law, and the FEMA camp near your hometown should go here.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The totalitarian state

Post by Firestarter » Sat Jan 28, 2017 5:00 pm

More on the police; this time 2 brutal beatings of innocent black men - one died and the other was a deaf man that refused to follow orders…

INNOCENT DEAF MAN BEATEN FOR 7 MINUTES
The first is just a simple beating by the police of a deaf man for 7 minutes because “he resisted two officers and refused to comply with repeated orders to display his hands”.
If I understand correctly the deaf 64 year-old Pearl Pearson was stopped January 3, 2014 because they suspected him of fleeing the scene of a car accident in south Oklahoma City (he must have fit the description of a “suspicious black male”).
Pearson pulled over and rolled down his window, expecting an officer to ask for this identification. A cop ordered him to put his hands in the air and because he simply refused he struck him in the face.
Pearson was then locked up and charged for fleeing the scene of the accident and refusing to follow orders (obviously being deaf cannot be a reasonable excuse). While Pearl was locked up an interpreter was never provided, so he kept wondering “why” the entire time. He had no clue why he was beat up.
In a nice ironic twist Pearson has a son and son-in-law, which are both police officers. In 2015, Pearson was given an award for his amazing service to the community for working with people with disabilities: http://kfor.com/2014/01/13/traffic-stop ... suspended/

Only this month (so 3 years later) the charges against Pearl Pearson were dropped not because he was innocent, but because the trial cost was too high. Pearson, who is deaf remember, needs a translator for court sessions. Because the cost of translators was so high, the DA decided to toss the case out: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/elderl ... s-dropped/
Here’s how Pearson looked after being beaten up.
Image


INNOCENT MAN DIED AFTER BEATING
According to the stories I’ve read this man was beaten to death. My interpretation is that this man was beaten unconscious and died from suffocation. According to the Oklahoma medical examiner he died because of a heart arrhythmia.
In February 2014 a mother and daughter (respectively Nair and Lunahi Rodriguez) were in a heated debate in Moore, Oklahoma in front of the Warren Theatre, with the mother slapping her 19-year-old daughter Lunahi in the face. Some snitch informed the police: in our Brave New World we really don’t like to be confronted with overheated emotions.
The daughter ran away followed by the caring father – Luis Rodriguez. When the police arrived on the scene for some reason they ignored the women. According to the police the husband of Nair refused to show his ID. So they first beat him unconscious and then held him down on the ground while putting him in handcuffs (we all know that unconscious men are very dangerous). Because they held him on the ground – while already unconscious - he died of suffocation: http://www.news9.com/story/24735856/fam ... r-to-death

The widow Nair later posted an angry video on Facebook in which she calls one of these brave policemen by name, insults him terribly with the “pig” that “killed” my husband. She further asks for “help” and “justice”.
She didn’t get “help” but she sure did get the “justice” she requested. She was sued for about $4000 for the legal costs and the travel and lodging costs for this cop: http://newsok.com/article/5535237

Here is the video of the man being held down, if I understand correctly this whole video was only taped after he had first been beaten up and during this 5 minutes dies.
The wife that’s taping this repeatedly criticises the police with “What are they doing this for? Why?”. One of the cop tells her to remain calm and answers because he didn’t show ID (remember that this man was completely innocent).
At about 4:00 in the video Nair sees them carry the motionless body of Luis on the stretcher"; then she suddenly realises that he is death “Luis! Luis! Please somebody tell me that he is alive, he is not moving”: https://youtu.be/Y6ptuQfV4q0
Here you can see the blood on the ground were Luis had been held down by the police.
Attachments
Luis Rodriguez-blood.png
Luis Rodriguez-blood.png (183.27 KiB) Viewed 10887 times
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The totalitarian state

Post by Firestarter » Sun Jan 29, 2017 5:16 pm

How naïve was I to think that Donald Trump is just too dump to be US president?
Since being inaugurated last January 20, Trump has already proven he got what it takes. He has read the speeches that were written for him and above all he signed some very nice executive orders - planned and written by others – while looking very confident.
Just see the confidence after signing the executive order to withdraw from TPP on January 23.
Image


NO AUDIT FOR THE FED
On February 22, 2016 Trump tweeted “It is so important to audit The Federal Reserve” and since then has repeatedly repeated this campaign promise.
Image

No surprise here - Goldman Sachs bankster Steven Mnuchin made clear that the Trump administration will not audit the Fed because “The Federal Reserve is organized with sufficient independence to conduct monetary policy and open market operations. I endorse the increased transparency we have seen from the Federal Reserve Board over recent years”: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... t-priority
Is that the same transparency that I call secretive?!?

QUEEN ELIZABETH REIGNS SUPREME
By his warm friendship with that “terrific guy” Jeffrey Epstein, who specialised in arranging little girls for the sexual perversions of his wealthy friends (including Bill Clinton), Trump made his private jet available for Prince Andrew.
Now that Trump has made it all the way to the oval office he is immediately visited by British Prime Minister Theresa May, that will hand deliver the personal instructions from Queen Elizabeth and Evelyn de Rothschild (the personal financial advisor to the Queen).
Trump’s team is considering a “passporting deal” so that British and American firms can set up and trade in each other’s countries with minimum hurdles. A senior Whitehall source said May hoped to make a trade deal with the USA to strengthen her hand at the Brexit negotiating table. The plans were discussed with Boris Johnson last week.
Donald Trump has also planned a visit to Queen Elizabeth II at Baltimore castle, Scotland this summer. Donald Duck has made clear about his priorities for this visit: he really wants to play golf with the 5 ft 1 (1.55 m) Queen (expected to be 91 years old). This has nothing to do with his love for sports and games, but he wants to better the photos of Ronald Reagan (pictured riding horses side by side with the Queen): http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01 ... mes-first/

WITHDRAWING FROM TPP
Now that we know that “make America great again” means going all the way back to the colonial times of British oppression, it suddenly isn’t so strange that Donald Trump withdrew from TPP while at the same time planning a trade deal with Great Britain. In this way it makes the position of Britain negotiating the Brexit deal with the EU as strong as possible.
According to Donald Duck this is a really great idea because he will make much better deals (than TPP) using his negotiating skills (kissing the ass – excuse me: I mean shaking the hand – of Elizabeth?).
Trump has promised that he will institute a “very major border tax” to make companies move their factories back to the USA: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/01/t ... 34145.html

TORTURING BY THE CIA REINSTATED IN ALL GLORY
"Do I feel it works? Absolutely, I feel it works" Trump said about torturing.
Trump isn’t just like a parrot that says anything his puppeteers want him to; he really, really understands what he’s talking about because "people at the highest level of intelligence" have told Trump that torture does work. He has said in an interview with ABC "When ISIS is doing things that no one has ever heard of, since medieval times, would I feel strongly about waterboarding? As far as I'm concerned, we have to fight fire with fire". Is Trump talking about the same ISIS that was founded by the US government, while their videos are directed by the CIA and the torturing done by Europeans in medieval times?
Trump further stated "I will rely on Pompeo and Mattis and my group. And if they don't want to do (it), that's fine. And if they do want to do (torture), I will work toward that end".
President Trump issued a three-page draft order - Detention and Interrogation of Enemy Combatants – to undo many of the restrictions on handling detainees that Obama instated: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/25/polit ... index.html
Here’s a nice story about the torturing techniques by the CIA: https://news.vice.com/article/senate-to ... nyone-knew

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS
Reportedly President Donald Trump is even less popular than Barack Obama. In 2009 a lot of people came to Obama’s inauguration, in 2013 a whole lot less and for Trump even less. Arguably more protesters than fans of Trump came for the show.
Following you can see a comparison of the crowd for this year’s Donald Duck inauguration (left) as compared to the crowd in 2009 (it would be fairer to compare with 2013).
Image

But of course mere facts are no problem for the one and only real Donald. Media that reported about this were simply made out for liars, while Trump’s spokesman Sean Spicer stated that “this was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration - period” while Trump estimated “it looked like a million, a million and a half people”.
Trump said in response to media reporting the truth (for a change): “I have a running war with the media, they are among the most dishonest human beings on earth, and they sort of made it sound like I had a feud with the intelligence community” - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/21/us/p ... .html?_r=0
Crowd scientists say that the “Women’s March” in Washington had 3 times as many people as Trump’s inauguration.
Surely I agree that journalists are dishonest, but even journalists aren’t such pathological liars as the average politician or lawyer.
Does “make America great again” mean that when the truth is inconvenient: tell “great” lies?
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The totalitarian state

Post by Firestarter » Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:06 pm

Once again one of “my” threads has been removed from ronpaulforums.com and placed in the members only “Hot topics”; so I decided to put the corrupt Ron Paul (Texas representative from 1976-1977, 1979-1985 and 1997-2013) and son Rand Paul (Kentucky Senator from 2011 till now) in the spotlight.

LIBERTARIAN – JOHN BIRCH, TEA PARTY
The family Paul calls their flavour of politrics not Democrat/Republican, but “Libertarian”. I won’t try to explain how all of these names for politrics don’t mean a thing.
Both Ron and Rand Paul are strongly affiliated with the Libertarian movement. Libertarianism is an offshoot of the John Birch society that was founded in 1958 as an opponent to Communism. Fred C. Koch (founder of Koch industries) was among its founding members: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society
Rand Paul and Ron Paul are also members of the Tea party of the brothers Koch (the owners of Koch industries). In November 2010, Joshua Green described Paul as the tea party's "intellectual godfather": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_p ... y_movement
Here’s Ron Paul addressing the Tea party patriots.
Image


KOCH INDUSTRIES – GREG PALAST
Charles and David Koch are the sons of Fred Koch, who ironically made his fortune in the communist Soviet Union, who effectively own Koch industries.
According to Palast Koch industries practically owns the Republican Party; see the following excerpts from Greg Palast’s great 2002 book:
Koch Industries is the biggest company you’ve never heard of—and their owners like it that way. Estimates of its annual turnover, at $35 billion a year, make it bigger than Microsoft or Boeing Aircraft. We can only estimate because Koch [pronounced “coke” like the cola] is a private corporation, second largest in the US. David and Charles Koch, who own nearly all of it, are reported to have a combined net worth of $4 billion.
The Koch clan’s fortune originated in Russia where daddy Fred Koch built oil refineries for Stalin’s regime. In 1946, Koch returned from the Soviet Union to Wichita, Kansas, and founded the ultra-right John Birch Society. David and Charles have rejected their father’s politics, preferring to back ultra-ultra rightwing causes. In 1980, as a Libertarian Party candidate, David campaigned against Ronald Reagan.
(…)
Passage of the legislation depended upon the Republicans holding their majority in Congress. In the 1996 election cycle, Republican control was in jeopardy. Crucial to their ultimate narrow victory in that campaign was a multi-million dollar television advertising blitz in key districts paid for by the Coalition for Our Children’s Future, a registered charity. The action was extraordinary for a child protection society—as was their choice of candidates to assist, Only weeks before CCF purchased the adverts, every one of the incumbent congressmen they helped, all Republicans, voted to abolish food stamps for children of the poor.
The politicians supported by the “Children’s” fund had something in common besides an antipathy to free meals for youngsters. Their districts contained Koch operations.
KISSINGER, BRZEZINSKI
Rand Paul has consulted NWO proponents like Zbigniew Brzezinksi and (Rockefeller’s favourite) Henry Kissinger: http://libertyfight.com/2015/rand_paul_ ... inger.html

PETER THIEL
Billionaire Peter Thiel is a huge sponsor of both Ron and Rand Paul.
In 2011 Thiel was the biggest donor to the Ron Paul super PAC “Endorse liberty” with a whopping $900,000: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/super-pacs- ... ig-donors/
Here’s a video where Rand Paul is asked about the Bilderberg group (of which Thiel is a member) and answers that he only knows what he heard from Alex Jones: https://youtu.be/k9sctUOlOw8
Peter Thiel was also a major contributor to Donald Trump’s successful presidential campaign. More interesting is his support for human blood drinking. In the 21st century drinking blood by the elite isn’t called vampirism, but parabiosis (which sounds almost scientific and medical): http://www.inc.com/jeff-bercovici/peter ... blood.html
I think it’s out of the question that Peter Thiel supports any politician that is against blood drinking, while this also confirms that Bilderberg members are vampires

RAND PAUL – EXXON, BP
Now I finally get to the most damaging facts to explain why my thread on the BP oil disaster has been removed from the Ron Paul forum. Rand Paul is on the take from the oil corporation (Koch has high stakes in oil). Why else would he defend ExxonMobil and BP?
In August 2012 Rand Paul strongly advised President Obama to not punish Exxon (that played a part in this oil disaster), because when punishing “the rich, the jobs that are lost are those of the poor and middle class”.
Rand Paul even pledged his support for the Keystone pipeline “When you block the Keystone Pipeline, you punish the welder who works on the pipeline”: http://grist.org/politics/mr-rand-paul- ... xon-mobil/
Here’s a story by Greg Palast (him again) that explains how the Keystone pipeline is destined to stab the US people in the back to make the brothers Koch even richer: https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/koch ... l-pipeline

Then it gets even better.
Rand Paul actually defended BP after President Obama dared to criticise BP for the 2010 oil disaster! Rand Paul actually said that it was an unfortunate accident "And I think it's part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that it's always got to be somebody's fault instead of the fact that maybe sometimes accidents happen": http://www.nbcnews.com/id/37273085/ns/p ... -american/
Surely an “accident” sounds much better than premeditated...! And we really don’t want to punish the rich for their (corporate) crimes, do we?

BLOCKED ON INTERNETFORUMS
In April 2012 I went to the local office of Amnesty International (in Amsterdam) for help. Amnesty told me that they don´t provide any help for the “type” of human rights violations I described and advised me to put information on the internet.
Since then I´ve put some texts on several internet forums. Most of my texts have been removed. All of the following forums have removed information and/or blocked my profile:
rechtenforum.nl, radartv.nl, eerstehulpbijrecht.nl, ouders.nl, indymedia.nl, viva.nl, schulden-vrij.info, denk.onsgeld.nu, internationalskeptics.com, projectavalon.net, educationforum.ipbhost.com, thefreedictionary.com, davidicke.com, madinamerica.com, thescienceforum.com, secure.gn.apc.org, rationalskepticism.org, ronpaulforums.com.

The only forums that allowed me to place information without problems are: lawfulpath.com and letsrollforums.com
Last edited by Firestarter on Mon Sep 04, 2017 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The totalitarian state

Post by Firestarter » Wed Feb 01, 2017 5:34 pm

More child abuse.

NICHOLAS RAY - NATALIE WOOD (16)
Natalie Wood co-starred with James Dean in “Rebel without a cause”. The 16-year-old Wood landed the role by having sex with the director of the movie - Nicholas Ray (44 at the time).
During filming Dennis Hopper was the next to get young Natalie Wood in bed (I guess by now 17): https://selvedgeyard.com/2009/02/10/the ... haracters/
There is also a rumour that Kirk Douglas brutally raped Natalie Wood (I doubt this one).
Here are (from left to right) Natalie Wood, James Dean, Nicholas Ray on the set of “Rebel without a cause”.
Image

Natalie Wood drowned in 1981 under suspicious circumstances.
Christopher Walken and husband and wife Robert Wagner and Natalie Wood were having a party on the yacht Splendour that included drinking (too much) alcohol. The official story is that Natalie Wood wanted to take the dinghy for a boat ride and fell in the water and then drowned.
This doesn’t make sense at all because she wasn’t dressed for a boat ride and she could have climbed back in the yacht easily after falling in the water (even with a little too much to drink).
According to the statements of the captain of Splendour, Dennis Davern, in his book “Goodbye Natalie, Goodbye Splendour”: Natalie was killed by Robert Wagner (her husband). According to Davern the Wagners had a quarrel in which Robert told his wife Natalie to get off the boat. Then he refused to search for her: https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/ ... spotlight/


JONATHAN KING (BBC)
Jonathan King, that famously discovered Genesis, was sentenced to 7 years in prison in 2001 for molesting 5 boys aged 14-16; he was released in 2005.
King became famous in the 1980s for BBC’s Entertainment USA show. King has not only denied his own guilt, but also claimed that Jimmy Savile was innocent because he never appeared in court: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... users.html


JOHN LEVENDOSKY - BOY SCOUT
I really don’t know what kind of actor John Levendosky was, obviously not very famous.
Levendosky was an assistant scoutmaster that took 3 young boys (11, 12, 13 years) on a camp-out. He ordered the boys to play strip poker and sleep naked.
Levendosky bound the boys to trees and then with his pocket knife cut the letter “T” in their chest. He admitted that this aroused him, but to me this looks more like torture than sexual. One of the parents noticed the carved “T” and notified the police: http://old.post-gazette.com/neigh_westm ... scout3.asp

EVA IONESCO (PLAYBOY)
Firestarter wrote:Before “Pretty baby” Brooke Shields had been photographed by Gary Gross in 1975 when she was only 10 years old in what can only be described as child pornography. These pictures show everything what could be seen in a 10-year-old girl.
These pictures weren’t published in some second rate underground paper, but in the ”Sugar and spice” photo book for Playboy.

The French actress Eva Ionesco appeared as the youngest Playboy nude pictorial (aged 11) in the October 1976 edition of the Italian Playboy. Apparently the pictures of Brooke Shields didn’t show enough to be considered full nudity.
The mother of Eva – Irina Ionesco – photographed her nude daughter numerous times in erotic poses from 4 to 12 years of age.

In 1977 Irina Ionesco lost custody over her daughter after some controversy over the child pornography of her daughter in Playboy; Eva was further raised in the house of Christian Louboutin. This didn’t stop Irina from selling more nude pictures of Eva. Eva Ionesco was also pictured naked in the November 1978 edition of the Spanish Penthouse and made the cover of (the German) Der Spiegel. Here are 3 censored pictures of the 11-year-old Eva Ionesco in the Italian Playboy.
Image

Eva Ionesco sued her mother 3 times. Her mother was ordered to also hand over the negatives of the nude pictures (in 1998 the French police confiscated hundreds of photos of the nude Eva). Eva got awarded 10,000 euro from the court as compensation for being exploited by her mother: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... s-her.html

Also in 1976 Eva Ionesco appeared in Roman Polanksi’s “The Tenant”. But I haven’t found information that Polanski molested Eva, so maybe even for Polanski 11 was too young: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eva_Ionesco
Last edited by Firestarter on Sat Jun 08, 2019 3:07 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Dutch message to President Trump

Post by Firestarter » Sat Feb 04, 2017 10:55 am

Post removed (see new thread)
Last edited by Firestarter on Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The totalitarian state

Post by Firestarter » Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:12 pm

More on the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil disaster and the BP environmental criminals.

ECOLOGICAL DISASTER
The following quotes are from October 2013 some 3 ½ years after the oil disaster.
Brad Robin: "It's disturbing what we're seeing. We don't have any more baby crabs, which is a bad sign. We're seeing things we've never seen before"
Robin (oyster fisherman): "We're seeing crabs with holes in their shells, other seafood deformities. The state of Louisiana oyster season opened on October 15, and we can't find any production out there yet. There is no life out there"
Kathy Birren: "Our stone crab harvest has dropped off and not come back (…) We've seen fish with tar balls in their stomachs from as far down as the Florida Keys. We had a grouper with tar balls in its stomach last month. Overall, everything is down

Dean Blanchard: "We have big tar mats coming up on Elmers Island, Fouchon, Grand Isle, and Grand Terre."Every time we have bad weather we get fresh tar balls and mats". Blanchard said his business generates only about 15 percent of what it did before the spill. Blanchard has seen shrimp with deformities. He attributes the deformities to BP's use of toxic dispersants.

Dr Ed Cake: "The impacts of the Ixtoc 1 blowout in the Bay of Campeche in 1979 are still being felt," said Cake, referring to a large oil spill near the Mexican coast, "and there are bays there where the oysters have still not returned. My prediction is we will be dealing with the impacts of this spill for several decades to come and it will outlive me (…)
Mississippi recently opened their season, and their oyster fisherman are restricted to 12 sacks of oysters a day. But they can't even reach six. Thirty sacks would be a normal day for oysters - that was the previous limit
"

Bobby Jindal: "Three and a half years later, BP is spending more money - I want you to hear this - they are spending more money on television commercials than they have on actually restoring the natural resources they impacted"
But according to BP we don’t have to worry because: "Seafood from the Gulf of Mexico is among the most tested in the world, and, according to the FDA and NOAA, it is as safe now as it was before the accident" - http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/featur ... 44754.html

HEALTH EFFECTS
According to a report from 2013: former spill cleanup workers are carrying biomarkers of many chemicals from the oil in their bodies, and women and children along Louisiana's coast are reporting health effects probably caused by the oil disaster.
Initial results of the WaTCH study among 150 women showed that 31% suffered from depression a year after the spill, which compares to a rate of “only” 20% in the nation's general population, and 17% among women in the area of Alaska affected by the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
A study from the Columbia University aimed at health effects among the children of 1,437 parents living less than 10 miles from the coast found that (according to the parents) more than a third of the children suffered from physical or mental health symptoms.

The US FDA only tests for a small group of PAHs that can cause cancer. According to Robert Dickey, director of the FDA Gulf Coast Seafood Laboratory:
"Folks are understandably concerned about the variety of different compounds that are out there in nature. But there are thousands of different compounds in oil and there's no way we can monitor and analyze for every one of them. What has been decided internationally is that we focus on the potentially cancer-causing compounds, and take a representative subset of those for which we have a lot of information. If we monitor for those, we know that's going to be representative of the potential mixture as a whole"
Just to be on the safe side they won’t even bother to test for the chemicals in Corexit: http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill ... l_sci.html

Another study from 2011 by Tulane University tested 954 people living in the area (83% permanent residents). Nearly half of this group reported an increase in health problems consistent with exposure to chemicals – coughing, skin and eye irritation, and headaches. Dizziness, nausea and skin irritation were classified as sudden and severe.
These symptom numbers are significant.
The use of over-the-counter medication corresponded to the reported symptoms. More than 30% bought cough, cold or allergy medicine and other medicines for self-treatment: http://www.labucketbrigade.org/sites/de ... INAL_1.pdf

A cohort study from 2016 of almost 2200 Louisiana women found "high physical/environmental exposure was significantly associated with all 13 of the physical health symptoms surveyed, with the strongest associations for burning in nose, throat or lungs ; sore throat; dizziness and wheezing”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_co ... _oil_spill

WILLIAM ALLEN KRUSE - SUICIDED
William Kruse was hired by BP in 2010 for the clean-up of the Gulf of Mexico.
One day Kruse sent his deckhands off the boat to get some supplies and said he would meet them at the fuel dock. When he didn’t show: they discovered his corpse on the boat with a bullit in his head.
William Kruse was an extremely vocal type - a community leader who people looked up to. Kruse told fellow Captain Chris Garner about their work for BP:
Don’t try to rationalize it. . . . Just sign your name and get on your boat, and don’t try to tell anybody how to run the program, and don’t try to tell ’em what the local knowledge is. The cleanup is hopeless, and you’ll just tire yourself out trying to improve the situation (…) It’s just like prison”. Less than a week later he was death.
Kruse also spoke about his frustrations over the loss of business (due to the oil disaster) and BP didn´t pay him on time and owed him $70,000. Can anybody see a motive for killing William Kruse?
The police ruled a self-inflicted gunshot wound. I don’t think many people would plan to commit suicide, go to work, tell the crew to get supplies, and then blow their brains out: https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/0 ... iam-kruse/

HALLIBURTON & BP – DESTROYING EVIDENCE
In January 2014 Anthony Badalamenti was sentenced to one year probation (what kind of punishment is that?) because he instructed 2 Halliburton employees to destroy evidence. The corrupt judge said that the sentence of probation is very reasonable and told Badalamenti: "I still feel that you're a very honorable man".
Halliburton cut its own deal with the Justice Department and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanour charge for Badalamenti's misconduct. The company agreed to pay a $200,000 fine and contribute $55 million to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.
Halliburton settled plaintiff court cases for $1.1 billion.
On December 18, 2013 a jury convicted former BP drilling engineer Kurt Mix for destroying evidence.
BP well site leaders Robert Kaluza and Donald Vidrine pleaded not guilty to manslaughter charges (the deaths of 11 workers on the Deepwater Horizon). Kaluza and Vidrine botched a key safety test and disregarded high pressure readings that were glaring signs of trouble before the blowout of BP's Macondo well: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/halliburton ... oil-spill/

BP – MORE DISASTERS:
BP has been involved in more oil disasters besides the Gulf of Mexico and Exxon Valdez.
By general consensus BP has the worst safety record of all oil companies since the 1960s. According to Jordan Barab of the OSHA: “The only thing you can conclude is that BP has a serious, systemic safety problem in their company”.
According to a report by the Center for Public Integrity from 2010, in the last 3 years, BP refineries in Ohio and Texas have accounted for 97% of the "egregious, willful" violations handed out by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). BP ran up 760 "egregious, willful" safety violations, while Sunoco and Conoco-Phillips each had 8, Citgo 2 and Exxon 1 comparable citation.
The definition of "egregious, willful" is that an employer demonstrates an "intentional disregard for the requirements of the [law], or showed plain indifference to employee safety and health".

After a 2005 BP refinery explosion in Texas City that killed 15 and injured 180, a Justice Department investigation found that the explosion was caused by "improperly released vapour and liquid". Years later OSHA found 270 cited safety violations that weren’t fixed, 439 new violations and fined BP for $87 million.
On April 2, 2010, a fire at the Tesoro Corp. refinery in Anacortes, Washington killed 7. The refinery had been cited in October 2008 for 17 serious safety violations, 14 of which were dropped after negotiations with the Washington State Department of Labor & Industries. Several other major incidents – including a pipe failure that caused $30 million in damage – occurred at the same BP refinery just months later: https://www.publicintegrity.org/2010/05 ... ty-problem

The following examples I found on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BP
In December 1965, Britain's first oil rig, Sea Gem, capsized when two of the legs collapsed. Thirteen crew members were killed.
In 1967, the giant oil tanker Torrey Canyon foundered off the English coast. Over 32 million gallons of crude oil was spilled into the Atlantic and beaches of Cornwall and Brittany, causing Britain's worst-ever oil spill.

In September 1999, BP Exploration Alaska (BPXA) pleaded guilty to criminal charges for illegally dumping hazardous wastes, paying fines and penalties totalling $22 million. From 1993 to 1995 BP's contractor Doyon Drilling had dumped hazardous wastes on Endicott Island, Alaska. The firm illegally dumped waste oil, paint thinner and other toxic substances.
In March 2006, a BPXA oil pipeline in Prudhoe Bay leaked for 5 days causing the largest oil spill on Alaska's North Slope. In November 2007, BPXA pleaded guilty and was fined US$20 million.
In 2007, a BP pipeline poured 200,000 gallons of crude oil into the Alaskan wilderness. Investigators discovered BP was aware of corrosion but did nothing.

In 2003 California’s South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) filed a complaint against BP/ARCO, seeking $319 million in penalties for thousands of air pollution violations over an 8-year period. In January 2005, the agency filed a second suit against BP based on violations between August 2002 and October 2004.
In 2005 BP settled these cases for $25 million in cash penalties and $6 million in past emissions fees, while spending $20 million on environmental improvements and $30 million on asthma treatment.

On 25 April 2006, the OSHA fined BP more than $2.4 million for unsafe operations at the company's Oregon, Ohio refinery (violations similar to the 2005 Texas City explosion).
In 2007, 143 workers at the Texas City refinery were injured when a toxic substance was released at the plant. In March 2010, the federal judge awarded 10 of those workers less than $500,000 each. U.S. District Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt said the plaintiffs didn’t prove BP was grossly negligent.
In August 2010, BP was charged with illegally emitting harmful air pollutants from its Texas City refinery for more than a month. BP admitted that malfunctioning equipment led to the release of over 530,000 pounds (240,000 kg) of chemicals into the Texas City air from 6 April to 16 May 2010.
In 2013 474 Galveston County residents living near the Texas City Refinery filed a $1 billion lawsuit against BP, accusing the company of "intentionally misleading the public about the seriousness" of a two-week release of toxic fumes which began on 10 November 2011.

In 2006, Colombian farmers reached a multimillion-dollar out-of-court settlement with BP for environmental damage caused by the Ocensa pipeline. The company benefitted from the regime of terror by Colombian government paramilitaries to protect the 450-mile (720 km) pipeline.
In 2009, another group of 95 Colombian farmers sued BP, because the Ocensa pipeline caused landslides, damage to soil, affecting crops, livestock, and contaminating water.

In 2008 BP and several other major oil refiners agreed to pay $422 million to settle a lawsuit for water contamination tied to the gasoline additive MTBE.

On 17 September 2008, a gas leak was discovered and one gas-injection well blown out at the Azeri oilfield, a part of the Azeri–Chirag–Guneshli (ACG) project, in the Azerbaijan sector of Caspian Sea.
User avatar
editor
Site Admin
Posts: 690
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:24 am
Contact:

Re: The totalitarian state

Post by editor » Mon Feb 06, 2017 8:47 am

It's not a great stretch to imagine that BP, or any other company, will go to great lengths and expense to try to ensure their own financial survival.

This explains why oil companies drill wells; why they transport crude oil by ships, or whatever the ultimately least expensive method may be, and even why they may spend a great deal of money on public service announcements in an attempt to improve their public image. Ascribing nefarious motives to any of this is no different than calling a beaver evil for building a dam.

What I find hard to understand is anyone believing the Keystone or Dakota pipeline protests by progressive wingnuts have anything to do with the environment. Pipelines are an environmentally safe way to transport oil and natural gas; much safer than transport by ship or truck, making any protest on environmental grounds retarded.

It's no different from the New York Times calling Trump a liar over his claims of voter fraud by illegal aliens, voting in the name of the dead, or voting multiple times, and simultaneously objecting to voter ID. It's an irreconcileable contradiction.

People never stop to realize that oil companies generally make less than five percent profit. Between 2006 and 2010, the largest oil companies averaged a profit margin of around 6.5%. Banks, on the other hand, make an ungodly profit that can't even be quantified properly due to their use of fractional reserves on debt-credit instruments which were never even real to begin with. Yet they demonize the oil companies, and say little about the banks.

The protests against fracking are a fraud. In my opinion, it is the same elite behind Climate Change who sponsor this, and most (or all) other energy-related protests. It's envy-based. Particularly here in America the elite resent the fact that oil and gas rights are owned privately by landowners. I think they believe (or hope) they can control the political climate such that in a decade or more they seize privately owned mineral rights, and keep all the proceeds for themselves. So they stage protests designed to convince farmers not to allow drilling on their lands. Later, the gullible farmers lose their farms to foreclosure, instead of keeping their lands and becoming rich.

You don't believe it? What is the primary scare tactic these groups use against fracking? It will ruin your groundwater and poison your well. Sounds scary, right?

I'm not going to say it can't ever happen. Back in 2009 or so, a company called Cabot drilled a well in northeastern Pennsylvania. As I understand it, they used substandard steel and concrete to seal off the groundwater substrate, and contaminated a landowner's water. Cabot ended up trucking fresh water in to that family for several years, until the expensive cleanup, and time passed, and the water finally cleared up.

The cost was astronomically higher than if they had used proper materials in the first place. What's more, the bad publicity resulted in lawsuits from scores of other landowners who thought maybe they could get a piece of the pie. After all, oil companies have deep pockets, right?

So here's what happens now, with every new natural gas well ever drilled in Pennsylvania, and I'm pretty sure anywhere in America for that matter: Prior to breaking ground, the oil company hires three independent testing companies to test the groundwater from every water well within a five mile radius of the proposed gas well. The results are archived. This way, when some idiot farmer gets the idea he can sue the oil company for big bucks because they poisoned his water, the State regulatory commission can test the farmer's water, along with the wells surrounding the farmer, and compare the results with the archived pre-drilling tests.

They can easily determine if the groundwater was effected. They can also easily tell if the farmer contaminated his own well in the attempt to commit fraud, for which they will prosecute him.

This obviously raises the cost of drilling gas wells, but is a reasonable solution to avoid frivolous lawsuits.

I'm not saying oil companies are immune from their own fraud, mismanagement, and corruption. But anyone who thinks we don't need energy, or that energy will just spontaneously erupt out of our butts because Obama says so, is either on George Soros' payroll, or one of his useful idiots.
--
Editor
Lawfulpath.com
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The totalitarian state

Post by Firestarter » Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:47 pm

The Trump administration is working very hard to build a wall between the USA and Mexico: not a physical one, but a 20% tax on imports (that only starts with Mexico).
The bankers want us to believe that economics is really difficult. Please don’t think that if you understand the following 7 “steps to damnation”, you’re some kind of genius.

White house press secretary Sean Spicer explained that “right now our country’s policy is to tax exports and let imports flow freely in, which is ridiculous". For once I agree with Spicer: taxes are ridiculous.
According to economic insiders: Spicer is talking about a Border Adjustment Tax (BAT). Trump had previously described this as "too complicated" (but then again: what isn’t "too complicated" for Donald Duck?).
The GOP proposal allows companies to subtract the cost of labour, land and input goods, from the taxed amount. This could be either a scheme to give preferred suppliers the possibility to evade taxes or a ploy to give the USA the authority to spy on what’s happening in other countries (how else can they uphold this?): http://www.businessinsider.com/problems ... &r=US&IR=T

1 – INFLATION
Import taxes will increase the prices in the USA – this is inflation.
According to Michael Gapen, chief economist at Barclays: "We estimate that a 20% border tax could increase year-over-year rates of core inflation by 0.5-1.0 percentage points and reduce real GDP growth by 1.0-1.5 percentage points”.
As a result of inflation, we – the slaves – have to work harder to make ends meet. A fight we cannot win.
Inflation gives the banksters the right to print additional money (the percentage of the inflation); which keeps the inflation perpetual.

2 - JOIN THE ARMY
According to Donald Trump and his ilk; lower taxes create jobs. That sounds reasonable when we hear this often enough, but this depends (more) on other factors. Now the Trump team tells us that increasing taxes will create jobs. Please don’t ask the president to explain this contradiction, this might be “too complicated”.
According to Michael Gapen a border tax would hamper sales, reduce the GDP (a recession). This means that the import tax would reduce the amount of jobs.
The result of rising inflation and no available jobs (a recession), is that the slaves have no choice, but to join the army.
When you look at world history it’s clear that in the bigger scheme of plans the USA isn’t destined to produce stuff, but to destroy by throwing bombs.
If the atrocities abroad become large enough will the USA look “great” in comparison?

3 - EXPORT SUBSIDY
The effect of a 20% import tax is that countries will look for other markets to sell their products (than the USA). This could decrease the trade deficit for the USA, but we really want the third world to work for us, so we want them to export cheaply.
Following the import tax, come the export subsidies (Europe has been doing this for decades). In this way the prices for the products from the third world go down. This will force the third world to sell to the developed world for lower prices.
This crashes the economy of those poor slobs in the third world.

4 - WORLD BANK & IMF: MISSIONARIES
As a result of these schemes the third world cannot make ends meet, and then they have to beg the World Bank and IMF for help.
The mission of these wonderful banks is to preach helping the poor, when in reality they are finishing off their economy. The third world gets deeper and deeper in problems while they also get indebted by the banksters.
Then the foreign investors (the banksters) step in to buy the economy pennies for dollars, to add to their growing world domination.

5 – MONOPOLY
Higher taxes sound honest: we all have to pay equally for the great “service” of our government. But then comes the kick: all are equal, but some are more equal than others.
The elite use tax exempt NGOs, trust funds and Swiss bank accounts to evade taxes. Corporations can set up mail boxes in the Dutch Antilles or Luxembourg to flee from taxes. As a last resort they can even use their control over politrics to lower their taxes.
Because of the high taxes the small businesses simply disappear, adding to the ever growing monopoly of the elite.

6 – BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES (BIT’S)
For really philanthropic reasons the developed countries suggest the third world to make Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) for lower tax barriers.
This gives multinational to right to sue using Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). This is arbitration where basically the World Bank decides if a corporation is hampered by some law.
As a result democratically elected parliaments can only change the legislation when allowed by the multinationals. This is: power to the... banksters.
To ensure that this is really democratic: the ISDS provisions are made in secret.

7 – GOD IS A BANKER
Because of the effective monopolies: the big corporations (controlled by a small group of “investors”) decide where we work, what we wear, hear, eat, drink, and what price we have to pay.
Using BITs and the ISDS the investors force countries to privatise their hospitals. So now the elite have become God: they decide everything, including life and death.

editor wrote:What I find hard to understand is anyone believing the Keystone or Dakota pipeline protests by progressive wingnuts have anything to do with the environment. Pipelines are an environmentally safe way to transport oil and natural gas; much safer than transport by ship or truck, making any protest on environmental grounds retarded.
I have started an investigation on the pipeline orders signed by President Trump.
I had already done some investigation on the Keystone pipeline. The Keystone pipeline will in fact make the prices for oil higher.
Because the Keystone pipeline transports "tar oil" (if that's the correct word); it also bad for the environment - because they need to use chemicals to make this oil more fluid to be able to transport it through the pipeline. This is an argument for a railway, train because then this oil doesn't have to be treated with the dangerous chemicals.
For me it is very strange that this oil will be transported all the way from Canada to Texas...
editor wrote:Banks, on the other hand, make an ungodly profit that can't even be quantified properly due to their use of fractional reserves on debt-credit instruments which were never even real to begin with. Yet they demonize the oil companies, and say little about the banks.
I try to bring awareness about the evil banksters: it appears that Goldman Sachs has complete control over Trump, Obama and Clinton.
It's really the powerful, rich bankers that own the major oil companies; Dean Henderson has written about the 4 horsemen of oil and the 8 families (bankers) that control everything.
There is one important difference: oil has a real intrinsic value, while "money" has only a made-up value.
editor wrote:The protests against fracking are a fraud. In my opinion, it is the same elite behind Climate Change who sponsor this, and most (or all) other energy-related protests. It's envy-based. Particularly here in America the elite resent the fact that oil and gas rights are owned privately by landowners. I think they believe (or hope) they can control the political climate such that in a decade or more they seize privately owned mineral rights, and keep all the proceeds for themselves. So they stage protests designed to convince farmers not to allow drilling on their lands. Later, the gullible farmers lose their farms to foreclosure, instead of keeping their lands and becoming rich.
It's the same elite - oil-bankers - that are behind the environmental, eugenics movement. It would be interesting to know who's behind these protests. Lots of protests have been orchestrated by the elite as a ploy to eliminate competition.
Here in the Netherlands we have great wealth in natural gas. This gas should make us rich, but for some reason this gas made the average Dutch person more poor - the Dutch disease. Joseph Stiglitz wrote that we can cure this now; but the elite don't want others to profit: https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... landpetrol
"Particularly here in America the elite resent the fact that oil and gas rights are owned privately by landowners". This sounds like US citizens have a little more rights, than over here in Europe.
editor wrote:What's more, the bad publicity resulted in lawsuits from scores of other landowners who thought maybe they could get a piece of the pie.
This part sounds like you're against the right to sue for damages. In my opinion this is the only way to prevent the big corporations from messing everything up. Once again my conclusion is that in the USA the people have more rights than over here.
Over here in the Netherlands there regularly appear stories in the press to warn about American situations: court cases for astronomical amounts. To prevent attorneys to actually get the most they can: no cure, no pay is illegal over here. Attorneys are under strict control of the government, to prevent them from doing things in violation with the "public" interests. As a result - attorneys help the big companies and the district attorney (Openbaar Ministerie).
User avatar
editor
Site Admin
Posts: 690
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:24 am
Contact:

Re: The totalitarian state

Post by editor » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:22 pm

editor wrote:
What's more, the bad publicity resulted in lawsuits from scores of other landowners who thought maybe they could get a piece of the pie.
Firestarter wrote:
This part sounds like you're against the right to sue for damages. In my opinion this is the only way to prevent the big corporations from messing everything up. Once again my conclusion is that in the USA the people have more rights than over here.
I'm not against legitimate suits for actual damages. I was in Pennsylvania during the time I previously related. I saw firsthand how many people tried to sue because they said the fracking had ruined their wells. This included people who were miles away from any drilling activities, and also people who had bad water before the first well was ever drilled.

There are water wells in parts of Pennsylvania where natural gas comes out with the water all the time-- it's been that way since the water wells were put in, a hundred or more years ago. It's a hazard-- you can actually hold a flame to the faucet while the water is running, and get bursts of blue flame. I feel bad for folks with wells like that, but it's not the oil companies' fault, or legal responsibility.

Greed, envy, and stupidity, in varying proportions.
--
Editor
Lawfulpath.com
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The totalitarian state

Post by Firestarter » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:03 pm

editor wrote:Greed, envy, and stupidity, in varying proportions.
This reminds me of the story I heard of an owner of a night club (in the USA) that was sued my somebody that beat up his girlfriend. He claimed that the nightclub was responsible because they had given him alcohol (which made him agressive)...
Careful examination of the tapes of the security cameras showed that this man had not even entered the night club that night.


On January 27 Donald Trump fulfilled a campaign promise and signed the executive order to block entry for citizens from the following 7 countries (a 90/120-day ban): Syria, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and Libya.
Didn’t the USA restore democracy and freedom in Iraq by removing Saddam Hussein…

Then U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle blocked (froze) Donald Trump’s Muslim ban from taking effect. The plaintiff was Washington State.
Judge Robart implied that since refugees or nationals of the 7 banned countries had not committed terrorist attacks in the USA “that they constituted particular threats to national security didn’t count as a rational basis”: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... m-ban.html
I can understand that a judge can decide that this Muslim ban is racist, so in violation with constitutional rights, but I don’t get how such a (low) judge can rule for the whole USA…

According to Trump’s team the president has clear authority to “suspend the entry of any class of aliens” to the USA under the guise of national security. They also defended the law by saying that the countries banned under the executive order had already been singled out by the Obama administration (for their visa screening process).
According to Donald Trump: "But courts seem to be so political and it would be so great for our justice system if they would be able to read a statement and do what's right. And that has to do with the security of our country".
I thought that judges must uphold the laws to protect us…
A Cato Institute study found that no Syrian refugee has been charged for carrying out a terrorist attack in the USA in the last 4 decades, and only 17 people from the 6 other countries. No one died as a result of a terrorist attack by anyone from these 7 nations: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 69341.html

To sell the Muslim ban; Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway made up a terrorist attack by Muslims from Iraq: the Bowling Green massacre. Conway also erroneously claimed that the Obama administration banned Iraqi refugees from entering the USA for 6 months in 2011 because of this terrorist attack: http://www.vox.com/world/2017/2/2/14494 ... n-massacre
According to a recent poll by Public Policy Polling, 51% of the Trump voters agreed with the statement “the Bowling Green massacre shows why we need Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration?
Image

It wasn’t the first time Conway spoke about the “Bowling Green Massacre”; she later apologised and said that she had meant to say “Bowling Green terrorists”. I am probably not the only one that had never heard of Bowling Green. The following happened at Bowling Green (involving Iraqis)...
In 2010, an unnamed man paid by the FBI, approached an Iraqi refugee living in Bowling Green named Waad Ramadan Alwan, and asked if he’d be interested in shipping weapons and money to Iraqi insurgents. Alwan said yes and recruited another refugee - Mohanad Shareef Hammadi.
In the next months, Alwan and Hammadi deposited machine guns, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, Stinger missiles, and C4 plastic explosives in warehouses and tractors. The FBI arrested Alwan and Hammadi in May 2011 (the only terrorism-related arrests of Iraqi refugees in US history): http://www.vox.com/world/2017/2/6/14521 ... onway-lies
Isn’t this clear evidence that the FBI is criminalising the USA…

It looks like blocking the Muslim ban was a set-up, because another plan has been unfolded.
Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly explained that - because the Muslim ban has been blocked -there are now plans to ask visa applicants for passwords for their social media accounts.
Kelly said "If they don't want to cooperate, then they don't come in" to the United States”: http://news.abs-cbn.com/overseas/02/08/ ... -passwords


Andrew F. Puzder was nominated by Donald Trump for Secretary of the Labor Department. Puzder is (another) corrupt lawyer, best known as the CEO of CKE Restaurants (the parent company of Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr.).
Puzder and his wife donated $332,000 in support of Donald Trump, most of it right as he secured the nomination. So basically Puzder bought his spot in the Trump cabinet.
Puzder has a controversial reputation when it comes to labour rights. He is violently opposed to (higher) minimum wages. Puzder said in reply to a law raising California’s minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2022: “How do you pay somebody $15 an hour to scoop ice cream? How good could you be at scooping ice cream?”.
Remember that this comes from a corrupt lawyer that would break down and cry if he would be forced to work for such a (low) hourly rate. Of course I’m very impressed that it took him till he was 28 years old to finally get his law degree and then had such a successful career anyway...

Restaurant employees of CKE complained they were forced to work (extra) hours without wages. Some said they were expected to start early but weren’t allowed to clock in until later. Others said they were forced to work through their mandatory breaks. These “rest periods” were even unpaid. Tracy Bradshaw complained about these practices and later showed papers that her pregnancy would prevent her from doing certain tasks. A week later, she was fired.
Mr. Puzder defended CKE by saying that these rest breaks make no sense and that “Lawyers support state politicians out of profits from class-action lawsuits, and once they’re elected, lobby those politicians to pass more restrictive laws”: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/15/us/p ... etary.html
Puzder claimed that the laws protect the workers (too much) because politicians are bribed by lawyers. I’ve good reasons to believe that both politrics and lawyers are under control of the big corporations, but nobody listens to a little guy like me...

In 2016 Puzder said that he wanted to increase automation in his restaurants because machines are "always polite, they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there's never a slip-and-fall or an age, sex, or race discrimination case".
Puzder wants to use this kind of rhetoric to lower the minimum wages (while continuing automisation to reduce the amount of jobs). He claims that millenials actually prefer being helped by a machine over human beings. Maybe I’m the only one to think that something is very wrong: http://www.businessinsider.com/carls-jr ... &r=US&IR=T

Andrew F. Puzder acknowledged last Monday that he had employed an undocumented immigrant to clean his house for several years. According to Puzder he fired her after learning of her status and paid back taxes in full to the IRS later.
Puzder isn’t the first cabinet nominee who has hired undocumented workers. Mr. Trump’s choice for the Commerce Department, Wilbur Ross, had employed an undocumented household worker for several years.
Representative Mick Mulvaney, Republican of South Carolina and the nominee for White House budget director, said that he didn’t pay taxes on a nanny. He had to pay more than $15,000 in taxes and penalties to the IRS: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/us/p ... .html?_r=0

In 1989 “The Riverfront Times” published an article claiming that Puzder had abused his wife. To support his nomination the allegations were recently retracted by his ex-wife: http://www.riverfronttimes.com/newsblog ... lText=true
Post Reply