Has anyone been to www.abovetopsecret.com?



zapper said:
Yes damning stuff…Funny, with such concrete evidence at their disposal, the dems don’t go after Bush, Cheney etc but trump up charges against Lott….Seems like if what took wurmy all day to post is true then the Libs must be in on it for I don’t see them going to the people with this…Oh, perhaps boxcar might forward his excerpts to Hillary…


I personally think that “sasquatch” was the culprit….

Did you read the entire book Zapper ? Obviously you haven't !
 
limerickman said:
Did you read the entire book Zapper ? Obviously you haven't !
Why should I...Wurm posted it all here...All 500 terabytes...

Secondly, why should I have to read a book to see if the libs are going to pursue it?
 
zapper said:
Why should I...Wurm posted it all here...All 500 terabytes...

Secondly, why should I have to read a book to see if the libs are going to pursue it?

Because if you did read the entire book - you'd know that the information about WMD was bollox.
Ritter tells us this.

Which begs the eternal questions - as to why did your country willfully lie about a threat that never existed ?
Why did your country chose to ignore Hans Blix and UNSCOM ?
Why did your country - which was under no threat whatsoever from Iraq -
invade there in 2003 ?

Oil.
 
limerickman said:
Because if you did read the entire book - you'd know that the information about WMD was bollox.
Ritter tells us this.

Which begs the eternal questions - as to why did your country willfully lie about a threat that never existed ?
Why did your country chose to ignore Hans Blix and UNSCOM ?
Why did your country - which was under no threat whatsoever from Iraq -
invade there in 2003 ?

Oil.
Gee, I never thought about it that way…You are absolutely correct…Rather than squash the environmental liberals and push for more drilling here in the great lakes,(BTW Canada is pulling up 100 million barrels a day out of the Great lakes) Chesapeake bay etc what do we do? Oh, devise this plan to fly planes into buildings, killing thousands of our own people, make up WMD intel to invade a foreign country killing and wounding thousands of our own people and spend billions of dollars in doing so…Yep, that plan is much easier and cheaper than exploration here in the states…You are a genius! :rolleyes:


Man, boxcar has you snowed or are you two one and the same?
 
zapper said:
Oh, devise this plan to fly planes into buildings, killing thousands of our own people,
........you claiming that the Iraqi's flew the planes in to the WTC ?
Still haven't managed to ween yourself off that lie, eh ?


zapper said:
make up WMD intel to invade a foreign country killing
.........your goverment did make up intelligence about WMD.
your goverment lied.

Your own Senate confirmed that your goverment lied - even Colin Powell admitted that what he said about WMD on 5th february 2003 at the UN was incorrect.


zapper said:
killing and wounding thousands of our own people and spend billions of dollars in doing so…Yep, that plan is much easier and cheaper than exploration here in the states…
few weeks back you disputed the number of dead.
But hey, your goverment isn't interested in counting numbers of body bags.
 
zapper said:
BTW Canada is pulling up 100 million barrels a day out of the Great lakes
Oil in the Great Lakes? Did you mean Alberta - 2000km to the west? This is where most of Canada's oil is pulled out of the ground. Total Canadian oil production is only 3 million barrels/day - not anywhere near 100 million barrels/day.

North American output pales in comparison to OPEC - and to the Middle East.

And as far as exploration goes in North America, all the places where oil might be found have more or less been covered ad naseum. You would not, for example, drill in the area of the Great Lakes and have much chance at finding a super field ...
 
zapper said:
BTW Canada is pulling up 100 million barrels a day out of the Great lakes
Oil production in Southern Ontario (Great Lakes) is around 3000-4000 barrels/day.
 
current production is 2.6 million barrels/day, the 3 million is projected by 2015.
www.oilonline.com/news/headlines/internet/20040716.Industry.15233.asp


geocycle said:
Oil in the Great Lakes? Did you mean Alberta - 2000km to the west? This is where most of Canada's oil is pulled out of the ground. Total Canadian oil production is only 3 million barrels/day - not anywhere near 100 million barrels/day.

North American output pales in comparison to OPEC - and to the Middle East.

And as far as exploration goes in North America, all the places where oil might be found have more or less been covered ad naseum. You would not, for example, drill in the area of the Great Lakes and have much chance at finding a super field ...
 
yeah, that was some texas sized roundin' up, allright.

some here would, as a closed mind dictates, refuse to consider investigative analysis yet find a way to post grossly erroneous figures. brings down one's credibility
a notch or two, doncha think?



geocycle said:
Better to round up to 3 than to 100, no?
 
limerickman said:
zapper said:
Oh, devise this plan to fly planes into buildings, killing thousands of our own people,
........you claiming that the Iraqi's flew the planes in to the WTC ?
Still haven't managed to ween yourself off that lie, eh ?
Show me where I said Iraq's flew the planes...I demand you withdraw that false accusation!


Don't hide from the point I"m making here...You are telling me that this was the plan...to make up this whole attack to go to war with iraq to get our hands on oil which we don't have for if we did gas would be $1.20 a gal. right now...
 
Hypnospin said:
yeah, that was some texas sized roundin' up, allright.

some here would, as a closed mind dictates, refuse to consider investigative analysis yet find a way to post grossly erroneous figures. brings down one's credibility
a notch or two, doncha think?
So? I was only 97 or so million barrels off. Big deal, to be honest, I was going off of memory on that one, the report may have said 100 million plus barrels a quarter etc...The fact remains that it would make mores sense to explore off shore exploration and other places that have been "off limits" than hatch this evil plan to kill our own people etc...If you buy into wurms theories then that brings your credibility down more than just an erroneous figure...
 
ah, the holy grail of the alaskan slope. it does seem, back when the enviromental matters of our nation where still a newsworthy concern, this did not go over well, creating a bit of a crisis for the next 50 yrs of bush empire environmental exploitin'.

time to look elsewhere, then, captain?
perhaps a newly freed nation with a hastily drawn-up constitution mght be just the thing...



zapper said:
So? I was only 97 or so million barrels off. Big deal, million plus barrels a quarter etc...The fact remains that it would make mores sense to explore off shore exploration QUOTE]
 
Hypnospin said:
ah, the holy grail of the alaskan slope. it does seem, back when the enviromental matters of our nation where still a newsworthy concern, this did not go over well, creating a bit of a crisis for the next 50 yrs of bush empire environmental exploitin'.

time to look elsewhere, then, captain?



zapper said:
So? I was only 97 or so million barrels off. Big deal, million plus barrels a quarter etc...The fact remains that it would make mores sense to explore off shore exploration QUOTE]
Chesapeake bay is a virgin to explore....
 
zapper said:
So? I was only 97 or so million barrels off. Big deal,
No big deal, it's only 1100%.

zapper said:
to be honest, I was going off of memory on that one, the report may have said 100 million plus barrels a quarter etc...The fact remains that it would make mores sense to explore off shore exploration and other places that have been "off limits" than hatch this evil plan to kill our own people etc...If you buy into wurms theories then that brings your credibility down more than just an erroneous figure...
I didn't mention anything about Wurm's theories - only your figure - so I'm not worried about my credibility. I am however deeply concerned about that vein on your forehead.
 
the cost to theoreticaly extract this oil neccesitates water injection to make the oil deposits liquid, much more difficult logistics than just sticking our straw in the sands.

there are also numerous environmental groups ready to square off against this one, you know, comprised of citizens who actualy live in the areas to be impacted by such a move.

contrast this with iraq, where the populus seems to wield a bit less influence over their own affairs in regard to their resources being at the ready for exploitation by us corporate interests...
this, a result of, what was it again?
oh yeah, invasion and occupation under false pretenses.


zapper said:
Chesapeake bay is a virgin to explore....
 
geocycle said:
No big deal, it's only 1100%.
close...


I didn't mention anything about Wurm's theories - only your figure - so I'm not worried about my credibility. I am however deeply concerned about that vein on your forehead.
The main theme of my post was to illustrate how absurd Wurms theory was. You chose to make an issue of my colossal mathematical error…. Yet you seem to hone in on my mistake rather than the obvious absurdity of his post… Therefore, you must agree with his theory, if you don't agree with wurm, feel free to grace us with your opinion now…

As for the vein in the middle of my forehead, it is a sign of intelligence..
 
zapper said:
Therefore, you must agree with his theory,
Ah yes, A + B = C

I was only pointing out that North American oil reserves are quite diminutive relative to those of the Middle East and certainly OPEC as a whole.

And also, there are no more Carboniferous Super-fields to found anywhere in the world ... not in the Middle East nor in Chesapeake Bay. The oil reserves that are known now may be increased slightly, but they are pretty much it.

You can take that how will.

Cheers,
 
geocycle said:
Ah yes, A + B = C

I was only pointing out that North American oil reserves are quite diminutive relative to those of the Middle East and certainly OPEC as a whole.

And also, there are no more Carboniferous Super-fields to found anywhere in the world ... not in the Middle East nor in Chesapeake Bay. The oil reserves that are known now may be increased slightly, but they are pretty much it.

You can take that how will.

Cheers,
Nice waffle...go back to your happy hour. I'll just mark you down as a conspiracy theorist...
 
zapper said:
Show me where I said Iraq's flew the planes...

Your words in message 164 :

"Oh, devise this plan to fly planes into buildings, killing thousands of our own people, make up WMD intel to invade a foreign country killing and wounding thousands......"

Where else did your country invade that has vast oil reserves ?
Afghanistan ?
Where else did your country invade that, allegedly, has WMD ?
Afghanistan ?

Zapper - let's be clear here : you were referring to Iraq when you posted that entire sentance linking planes flying in to buildings and WMD.

So my answer is NON : i won't withdraw that false allegation because it ain't false.
Your words were your words.

zapper said:
Don't hide from the point I"m making here...You are telling me that this was the plan...to make up this whole attack to go to war with iraq to get our hands on oil which we don't have for if we did gas would be $1.20 a gal. right now...

Yep, that's what I am saying - your country invaded Iraq for oil.
it didn't invade Iraq for any other reason.
 

Similar threads

M
Replies
52
Views
1K
Road Cycling
Howard Kveck
H
P
Replies
10
Views
549
UK and Europe
Colin McKenzie
C
L
Replies
2
Views
462
Road Cycling
The Hookmaster
T