94extreme Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 gas prices are especially bad as a college student who makes next to nothing and is constantly in city driving mode. so heres what needs to happen: remember prohibition? i dont, because im only 19. hahahaha. the point however, is this, if enough people lash out against the fuel prices, something will eventually give. yes thats right, im promoting organized crime. the mafia kicked a#$ during prohibition, and it got to be such a problem that the country ended prohibition and stole back the market for alcohol. why cant it work for fuel. ok so maybe im off my rocker. oh well. but i am gonna make bumper stickers that say "highjack a fuel tanker" that's not too far fetched at all.. i know a guy from... well, let's just say Arabia, who wants to send a tanker this way full of the black gold at $1/gal.. tell me that wouldn't sell fast... hahaha.. i am serious though.. just the beginning of the end.. party is almost over.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Simple... EV's... The technology is there, we are just not using it.http://www.sparrowelectriccars.com/ That would work for most people, and it is not even the most advanced design !! B hey B.. after the 70s oil crisis volvo developed a car that got 100mi/gal of diesel.. the beautiful thing was that you could actually just pour corn oil in that thing and it would just go... (there is so mush freaking corn around here it's not funny).. IN is leading in ethanol production right now.. changes are coming... remember china? got a bicycle? thanks gw... foker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Better get used to it, the prediction is $5/gal by end of next year !! Prepare for a depression !! B winds of change my friends... see how the repubs weather this... it's not as simple as gready execs though.. the oil market is rather more complex then that... but in the end saudi (our friend) pulls many of the strings.. time to buy from citgo.. come on chavez.. hehehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precise1 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 hey B.. after the 70s oil crisis volvo developed a car that got 100mi/gal of diesel.. Well, thats kind of my point MZ... There are many different ways to overcome our over reliance on antiquated technology. Problem is that if the major companies don't produce the products (vehicles) there isn't very much we can do. Too many stupid people get in the way. Hell, the big companies actually lobby against changes, all for their profit. This worsening gas situation has me concerned for the economy, not the republicans (to hell with them). This could very well trash our flat line economy, which will hurt the have nots far more than the haves... B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 it's not my worries abou the repubs.. we just need a bit of old fashinoed mutiny in DC for a change.. man i hope people elect all new mwmbers... rep or dem it doesn't matter.. yeah, the economy was never any good anyway.. those who think so have been smoking a wee bit much whacky 'baccy... i'll look for a couple of thigs here in a sec... stay tuned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 look at the years under this current ruler.. and then read'em and weep: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20050827/D8C8CDNO1.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precise1 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Good article MZ. No suprise here though... B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 oh quit yer bellyaching. Better dubya than herman munster in office. Sometimes, you have to select the less of two evils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSM_guy Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 well, im not a firm believer in the fact that this is all bush's doing. yeah, he may allow for tax breaks for the oil companies...but lets get a few facts straight. the federal government cannot step in and tell a company what to set its prices at...wheather its shell oil or disneyland...the gov't has no control over that. this is a free market economy and people can charge whatever they want for things. i think it would be beneficial for the gov't to step in and advise a reduction in prices...but its not their job. if anyone is to blame for the oil crisis its the oil companies and the exec's who make the decisions. sure, dubya is in the oil business..but he didnt say "hey yall, lets really stick it to the american people bla bla bla". so far i have heard no reasonable allegations. and even as far as getting tax breaks...ok sure...but how would taxing them make us pay less?? it wouldent. its just more money that goes to gov't. get in through your heads people, the oil kings aint rollin in the dough because of tax breaks...its because they have all ganged up on the average american and stuck it to us with $3 a gallon gas. has anyone noticed a chance in motor oil prices? i sure havent. why has gas hiked up a buck in 3 months? it just dosent add up. the fact is, all the oil companies KNOW that we need gas...we HAVE to have it. so they can all rause the price to whatever they want. there is no law against it, and there is nothing to stop it. if we tried to boycott the oil companies it would never work. we may not buy gas for a day...or a week...but you sure know we wouild buy it the week before or the week after! they have us by the balls and they KNOW it. and just a little more on teh political trail...im a moderate conservative...i do sway conservative but i try to stay pretty middle of the road. im not saying bush is the greatest president ever..and nobody is trying to make that argument. there are plenty of things i agree with, and plenty i dont. i know the war and the economy arent going that well...but i cant see putting the blame on one man. i know he is the figurehead and will take most of the grunt, but lets at least be fair here. as far as the war...i do think they had WMD's..and i think we will find them. you forget they had 10 years to bury all this stuff in their own countries and take them over the border to neighboring nations. they had hundreds if now thousands dedicated to this. dont think for a second when they knew we were comming they didnt just leave everything laying on the floor. its out there, buried under the sand or in some other country. yes, the war is now a mess. it is nice that we went in and liberated the people...but that wasnt the real objective. i would honestly have more respect for bush if he came out and said "look, we are still looking for the weapons, were pretty sure they are out there but they may not be, and if our reports were incorrect we are sorry. but, since we are here..i will ask for the support to help the citizens of iraq form a democratic nation if they so choose." that would give me respect..if he would admit that he could be wrong....and then change directions. but no, now after we havent found anything yet we smoshed over and say well.....the liberation is the important thing and thats the real goal. i agree, it was something we might as well have done while we are over there, but at least admit that your changing course...instead of denying the possibility of being wrong. personlly i think our part should be over in that hell hole. those people arent gonna accept democracy. they cant even agree on anything and arabs have been fighting eachother since ancient times...what makes you think their gonna put down their AK's now? even the citizens wont help us..they let terrorist take pock shots from their balconies and cache weapons in their homes. they wont give us crap for information so as far as im concerned they can go back to the dictatorship they had. and from now on if anyone threatens us...send no troops...just bomb their ass and go home. i support the troops, and i think its a good thing we are trying to help...but you cant help those who wont even help themselves. i think its a lost cause and we just need to let them do their own thing. bush had a noble cause..but the way we got to where we are now isnt all that great...and i must say i disagree with it as stated above. and yes, i know that last section was way off topic...but since it took on a more political stance in the last couple pages i did feel the need to express my views. i may be a repub, and i may have voted for busy...but it dosent mean im so blinded by my beliefs that i dont see when things go array. and as my college gov't teacher said..."if you dont vote, dont bitch" and i have at least earned my right to voice my opinion. (not that nobody here hasnt..not what im implicating.) p.s. but i do think were better of than we would have been with kerry. the UN would have been over here rationing gas and kerry woulda been burning up the phone lines to every country asking what to do. when in a bind when quick decisions were needing to be made my dad always said "do something, even if its wrong". and thats what i admire about bush. sure...he may have made some wrong decions..but at least he didnt cower down, waste time and sit in the corner writhing his hands over what to do like kerry would have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precise1 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 You could dig up Al Capone's molds, syphilitic cascass and prop him up in the chair for all I care. He'd still probably do a better job, and thats all I care about !! B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 well, I use my Finder for work- it is a reliable source of income... so, as you know a 6-day-a-week jobby will cost in the realm of $100/wk, oh and I tow my 4000 lb ski boat to the lake every single day off, though the war finance petrol -program is a pain in the ass, the local wallet area I WOULD NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS SELL 'ER...EVER! -----heart racing----- EVER! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 oh, and F' BUSH! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ltear Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 (edited) I came across a 1990 diesel 4cl, right hand drive pathy in my home town but it has a price tag attached..... see attached if your interested. It looks like it is in good shape low km. More pictures are on the dealers site. Lisa. http://www.buysell.com/root/detail/BC/1990...ERRANO_R3M.aspx Edited August 31, 2005 by ltear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 can't blame Bush for the gas prices. Blame the wall street slimebags who are running up the bidding on crude oil futures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precise1 Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Yes and no k9sar. What I do blame Bush for is The budget surplus of $236 billion in 2000 turned into a deficit of $412 billion last year That devalues our currency, makes the already expensive oil cost that much more and threatens to destablize our weak ecomony. I think that is enough damage for 1 man. We won't even mention the other things he has done... B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 dsm guy, the only thing i am gonna say here is: wow, what a fast acting leader especially the first 10 minutes after the attacks on 9-11... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Pickles Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 can't blame Bush for the gas prices. Blame the wall street slimebags who are running up the bidding on crude oil futures. Um, and his buddies running the oil companies, and his interests in the oil companies, and his family interests in Saudi Arabia, and.......... oh yeah, he's president! Very convenient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Pickles Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 dsm guy, the only thing i am gonna say here is: wow, what a fast acting leader especially the first 10 minutes after the attacks on 9-11... Come on now, lets not get too mean and personal. He was busy reading with his classmates. Er..., um........ Time out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 (edited) dsm guy, the only thing i am gonna say here is: wow, what a fast acting leader especially the first 10 minutes after the attacks on 9-11... I can see my imput is not needed here. MZ is on the ball. But just in case... Bush is directly resposible for the oil prices that we all pay today. Not only that, he is a liar and a snake. **** HIM ten times over. Bush along with Blair and our own (man of steel) Howard should all be sharing a prison cell with Malosavic (sp) for war crimes!!!!!!!! I will go one step further here. 911, everyone rembers it I assume? How many think Bush set that up to justify an illegal war for oil in Iraq. You will note the the US has not yet put evidence forward that says that Bin Laden was the person that carried out the attacks. I have seen a doco called '911 in plane site' and it just makes you wonder. I suggest you all see it. Edited September 3, 2005 by 88pathoffroad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 OMFG! What a bunch of uneducated crap. Do your f-ing homework before spewing garbage like that. You probably forward chain emails too so you don't break out in hives or so little timmy can have that operation he so desperately needs. Take you liberal heads out of your asses and go look at who really sets the price of oil. It's a big f-ing auction on wall street. Companies who are in the business of making money selling gasoline are bidding on the barrels of oil that are being projected to be extracted and shipped. If there are fears of a shortage, they bid higher since they fear that they may run out of their own supply and not be able to keep the refineries open. Bush actually made an important step in trying to keep the price of gas down. By releasing federal oil reserves to the refinery companies, they should no longer fear that they will run out of crude oil and the price should not be inflated by fear. The problem is that the gasoline companies see an opportunity to have a price increase and will all follow suit. Companies like Exxon could very easily govern the prices that are set at your local station but they do not. It is up to the station owner to make the determination of how much money he can make and what the local competition is. Independant companies that sell gas, like Wawa, Sheetz, 7-11, etc, buy gasoline from suppliers (like Gulf) and must set their prices based on what they buy it for (plus profit of course). As soon as someone yelled 'shortage', these companies all jacked up their prices to make enough profit to cover themselves in the event that they are unable to get gas from the third-party suppliers in the future. They must meet their profit margin for the fiscal year with or without selling gas. My local station went from 2.64 to 3.15 in a few hours and I guarantee that it was the same gas in the underground tanks all day. The profit margin jumped way high for gasoline that was purchased at a much lower price. Just because Bush has friends in the oil industry does not give him any more control of gas prices than you I. And as for your dumbass comments V, what f-ing cave have you been living in. Bin Laden openly admitted to the attacks. The war in Iraq had very little to do with the Sept 11 attacks. The trouncing of Afganistan did. The Iraq situation was because Hussein was harboring known terrorists, was producing chemical weapons (and using them on his own people too), and was not following the terms of the UN treaty and preventing UN inspection teams from enforcing the treaty. That had been going on since 1991. I don't necessarily agree with Bush's decisions but I don't go around whining about conspiracy theories with no basis. I suppose Bush has a secret weather generator too and caused the tsunami in Indonesia and hurricane Katrina too. NExt he'll cause earthquakes and plagues of locusts in New Zealand. If you're not going to say anything intelligent, just shut the F up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 (edited) Bin Laden openly admitted to the attacks. The war in Iraq had very little to do with the Sept 11 attacks. The trouncing of Afganistan did. The Iraq situation was because Hussein was harboring known terrorists, was producing chemical weapons (and using them on his own people too), and was not following the terms of the UN treaty and preventing UN inspection teams from enforcing the treaty. That had been going on since 1991. I will not lower myself to you standards and personally attack you. However, Bin Laden has never said he was responsable for 911. All he did was praise those that did do it. If you have information to contradict me post it! If not retract your statement here! The one thing you got right was that 911 had nothing to do with Iraq. That was oil! Who were these terrorists then? You seen to know more than most of us. Post up the information please. He was making what? Chemical weapons?? Are you sure? Are these the same weapons that could be launched in 20 minutes? Are these the same weapons that the USA said "we know where they are" and could not tell the weapon inspectors the location? I am guessing that these are the same weapons that were later confirmed as distroyed in 1991. Treaty?? What treaty? Are you sure there was a treaty? Oh, you mean resolution. Yes, Iraq was in beach of a UN resolution. Stiff sh!t. Israel is in breach of nearly 200. True, he did screw the inspection teams around. But at the end of the day he let them in and it was Bush that stopped the inspectors. Even though the inspectors said there was no WMD. He used chemicals weapons on his own people? There are other spins on that story why don't post those up too. As for being uneducated or unintelligent, guess again little man. To quote you "If you're not going to say anything intelligent, just shut the F up." Oh, and I don't own an ass. Donkeys have no place in the suburbs of AUSTRALIA. $10 says you don't have a passport. Edited September 2, 2005 by Vsicks Pathy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 well, nice you guys.. WMDs what a joke.. you know they had them, why you ask, well ol' Rummy sold them to Saddam back in the 80s when he worked for Reagan... that's the reason why "we" can't find them.. what would the world think then... Sad used chemical weapons on the marsh arabs in the south.. Halabja is a bit different story that normally is told... Iranians are just as much to blame for that one as Saddam.. look into it.. the truth is out there.. the price of gas is directly linked to US' unprovoked and unjustifiable attack on a once sovereign nation.. Shrub is a thug and everybody who voted him in both times is a freaking moron.. as to the oil markets: there is way more to this then meets the eye but china's consumprion is also a big part of today's price.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 Let me start off by saying that, while I work for a large corporation, I have access to many sources of classified information due to my security clearances. I am however, unable to post any of the specifics of the that information due to a non-disclosure agreement that I have with the government. The opinions I have are based on facts that may or may not be available to the general public. You may certainly choose to base your own opinions on whatever information you choose to consider to be factual. However, Bin Laden has never said he was responsable for 911. All he did was praise those that did do it. If you have information to contradict me post it! If not retract your statement here! On October 29, 2004, the Arab television network Al Jazeera broadcast excerpts from a videotape of Osama bin Laden addressing the people of the United States, in which he took responsibility for the September 11, 2001 attacks, condemned the Bush government's response to those attacks, and presented those attacks as part of a campaign of revenge and deterrence begun after having personally seen destruction in the Lebanese Civil War in 1982. A copy of that videotape was given to U.S. diplomats in Qatar just prior to the broadcast. The transcript from that tape is readily available from Al Jazeera's website. The one thing you got right was that 911 had nothing to do with Iraq. That was oil! The original reason for the war in Iraq was that "Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction (WMD)" and that "al Qaeda operatives were being backed and harbored by that country and its geographical neighbor, Iran." At a recent speech in Coronado, however, Bush addressed the reason for US troops to continue fighting in Iraq: protection of the country's vast oil fields, which he said would otherwise fall under the control of terrorist extremists. Al Qaeda is very active in Iraq under the leadership of Abu Musab alZarqawi and continues to wage war against the US forces there. They are using the war in Iraq as their own personal battleground and seizing the opportunity to combat America wherever possible. While the oil fields are now one of the main focuses, it is not because we are there to take them. America's mission in Iraq is to turn it into a democratic ally just as the United States did with Japan after its 1945 surrender. ''We will build a free Iraq that will fight terrorists instead of giving them aid and sanctuary." So, in response to your comment... yes, oil has it's part in the current focus of the war but not for the reasons that many implying. If Bush and his buddies are in the oil business, why would they push to fight to obtain a new source of oil? If anything, they should try hard to prevent it from getting to the US so that the domestic oil can be inflated in price but that ain't happening, is it? Who were these terrorists then? You seen to know more than most of us. Post up the information please. The US first hit Al Qaeda in Afghanistan but it has been a well known fact for years that Al Qaeda was regrouping in new bases and safe harbors granted by Iraq, Iran and Syria. This means that those countries stand in violation of U.S. wartime policy. Iraq was the first target under discussion rather than Iran or Syria because that its leader had developed weapons of mass destruction. Ansar al-Islam is a group of several hundred terrorists who were initially trained and organized by bin Laden troops and co-financed by al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's secret police. They have also tested chemical and biological weapons at a facility in northern Iraq and against the Kurdish people of northern Iraq when Kurdish leaders tried to drive the group out of their mountain stronghold. Treaty?? What treaty? Are you sure there was a treaty? Oh, you mean resolution. My apologies. It was not a treaty, it was UN Security Council resolution 1441. He used chemicals weapons on his own people? There are other spins on that story why don't post those up too Eyewitnesses have said that Iraqi warplanes dropped three clusters each of four bombs on the village of Birjinni on August 25, 1988 after the ceasefire that ended the Iran-Iraq war. Observers recall seeing a plume of black, then yellowish smoke, followed by a not-unpleasant odor similar to fertilizer, and also a smell like rotten garlic. Shortly afterwards, villagers began to have trouble breathing, their eyes watered, their skin blistered, and many vomited--some of whom died. All of these symptoms are consistent with a poison gas attack. The Birjinni attack was one of dozens of chemical weapons attacks launched against the Kurds in 1988 that were part of a genocidal campaign carried out against Kurdish civilians. Scientists have been able to prove the use of chemical weapons through the analysis of environmental residues taken years after the attack occurred. Soil samples taken from bomb craters near the village in northern Iraq by a team of forensic scientists from the Chemical & Biological Defence Establishment (CBDE) of Great Britain's Ministry of Defence at Porton Down were found to contain evidence of nerve gas. Analysis by gas chromatography and mass spectrometry found that six soil samples taken from the first two craters contained mustard agent and/or thiodiglycol, a compound produced by the hydrolysis (breakdown by water) of mustard, 1,4- thioxane and 1,4-dithiane, were also detected in these samples. The chemists at Porton Down also found the presence of the compound tetryl, an explosive that, according to Dr. Hay, is widely used in chemical munitions. The second six samples, including pieces of metal, contained "unequivocal" residues of methylphosphonic acid (MPA) and isipropyl methylphosphonic acid (iPMPA), according to analytical chemists at Porton Down. MPA is a product of the hydrolysis of any of several chemical weapons nerve agents. iPMPA is a product of the hydrolysis of the nerve agent GB Other instances... March 17 and 18 1988 - Halabja was bombarded more than twenty times by Iraqi regime's warplanes with chemical and cluster bombs April 1987, twenty four villages of Iraq's Kurdistan were targeted by the chemical bombardment These villages were chemically bombarded twice in less than 48 hours. April 28 1987, Iraqi warplanes dropped 18 chemical bombs at Sheikh Dassan, Kani Bard, Pasian and Tuteman villages He was making what? Chemical weapons?? Are you sure? Are these the same weapons that could be launched in 20 minutes? Are these the same weapons that the USA said "we know where they are" and could not tell the weapon inspectors the location? I am guessing that these are the same weapons that were later confirmed as distroyed in 1991. Just a few examples: In the early weeks of 2003, over a dozen 122 mm chemical munitions that had not been disclosed in the December 7 declaration were found by inspectors. In late February 2003, the Iraqi regime refused to destroy nearly 100 al-Samoud ballistic missiles. 1991 Inspections -vs- documentation uncovered the following discrepancies. The items are believed to have been buried in storage facilities or temporarily relocated into Syria: 150 R-400 aerial bombs, and 25 or more special chemical/biological Al-Hussein ballistic missile warheads biological weapon sprayers for Mirage F-1 aircraft 17 metric tonnes of iological weapon growth media 2,000 aerial bombs, 15,000-25,000 rockets, and 15,000 artillery shells capable of carrying chemical weapons several al-Hussein (modified Scud- missiles with 650km range and 500kg payload and it is believed that they retain samples of smallpox and camelpox which was tested prior to the Gulf war Additionally, several missiles were found and destroyed by troops outside of Nassiriya. These missiles were equipped to deliver a "non-explosive agent" Inspectors also found a clandestine "network of biological laboratories" and a deadly strain of botulinum in October '03 $10 says you don't have a passport. you can mail it to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 my sources tell me that Iran is the one that has/had mustard gas and not Iraq... Alqeada was never in Iraq untill we ivited them in by attacking their mortal enemy SH.. the WMD hunters have gound nothing, NOTHING! read their report.. also read the UNSCOM report on pre-war assesment of Iraq's WMD capabilities.. they didn't have any. the reasons for the war has been shifty the whole time just like the shrub himself.. sometimes oil men want more oil... this war was at least stupid and a huge waste of life and effort.. we sent these young men to the sand box to die intead of having them help out on the Katrina disaster and of course there is that 300billion bucks that is just being burried in the sand.. next thing you'll tell us that the economy is just peachy... smoke up my firend.. smoke up. i suggest you read up more on the MiddleEast and oil because you seem to know something but i am just not sure what the heck it is.. US intel is/was a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 believe what you want. but... consider this... Would it be smart to reveal that you had information if the fact that you were able to obtain it revealed your intelligence gathering capabilities? The greatest source of information for enemy is our own free press. We had a person locally who was leaving pipe bombs around and causing quite a problem in the area. The police were very close to catching him until the newspaper reported that police were focusing on a certain bus route that was common to all the attacks. Next day, the pattern changed and he was never caught. I laugh every time I hear about the Rhino Force and how pissed the news media was that they were also deceived and helped pull it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts