trodas

Well, if they view politics as crocks, then you should ask them innocent question right after you have them acknowledge that the politicians are lying bastards: "Law? Who do you think will write the law?" (could it be... the very same politicians? could it be, that the law only give them more power and less responsibility?)

Robert Rak - true for most of your skepticism. But... just wait. Putting 2 and 2 together is not that hard. More and more peoples will figure that out, sooner or later. After all, it is becomming more and more obvious with each step in the global enslavement. The big red pill about the economy is not getting (except WallStreet crocks) better is just around the corner, so they will have to lie even more obviously (What was that this time? Harsh winder? Yenah, right!), witch wake even more peoples pronto.

I have a good news! The simple yet most devastating thruth, that taxes are theft (and violent one too, if you dare not to comply), is slowly becomming mainstream thinking. You can find it even in "innocent" joke: todays thiefs So it is a great news for manking and definitively it is true, that the powers that be have lost the control of the dialog. And that is a good thing. Yet they know it, listen carefully to this war criminal speaking: http://youtu.be/8Zq4f6WYmHU?t=8m43s I mean... who are not happy, when see the first shots of the information war to get fired on? Spread the truth and change will come. I make sure to post this joke everywhere I can Yes, it require a little thinking, but... only a little. When politician "vote for me" is representing a thief, then we are making progress!

kahvi - I better not imagine what this monster can do at home, when are free of the eyes of prying public. What can become from such poor child? What horrors she must survived...? And on top of that, imagine, there are in the discussion between czech news article people, that are trying to defend the mother, saying that "she must be very stressed"... I wonder, how far can I get by defence like this, when I pick and beat little girl in public. I bet the same people won't accept such defence and will call for lynch instead (and almost rightfully to do so). Why there are differences, based on who perform the attack? What if a person with badge do it? Will we call that "lawfull way to theat suspects"? ... That is what disguested me even more. Source: http://www.novinky.cz/zahranicni/340111-.html Discussion: http://www.novinky.cz/diskuse?id=367373&articleId=/zahranicni/340111-agresivni-matka-brutalne-kopla-dcerku-do-hlavy.html&sectionId=2 Examples of defending opinions (use Google translate, I refuse to type such defense in english): "Michal Mudra, Lovosice kouknul jsme se několikrát na video a kop šel do horního ramene...nikoliv hlavy.to by se opravdu jen tak nprobrala.Navíc jak článek vyznívá...holčina nebyla v žádnem nehybném lehu.Byla jen vzteklá a histerická.No u nás se už bojí rodiče na děti sáhnout a podle toho nám vyrůstají generace kriminálníků a násilníků.To je bohužel nepopíratelnej fakt !" "Vojtěch Rybák, Cheb Na záběrech nic drastického neshledávám. Jediné co mě irituje je ten řev." "Zdeněk Lorenc, Pardubice Prej - brutálně kopla do hlavy... Měla plný ruce, tak jí dala mírnýho výchovnýho lepáka nohou. Sice to nevypadá bůhvíjak dobře, ale brutálního na tom neshledávám nic. Kdyby dostala normálně facku rukou, nejspíš by ta pecka byla silnější a ustlala by si taky." ...for example the last guy is defending her because he had "full hands" and therefore he do "a little educational left slap by leg" ... Now that is the mentality of people, we have to live with. Now you understand me, why I leave the translation to Google, because I did not want to have anything to do with defenders of such monsters. Dylan Lawrence Moore - I find very disturbing that in Czech republic, there are plenty of defenders of such behaviour. tjt - me too... poor little girl. And I won't be assuming that this is safe by any means. Maybe the poor kid can withstand the beating physicaly, yes. She seems to be okay. But the trauma she will carry for the rest of the life is IMHO way more serious problem that the physical beating. I mean - bruises heal. Mind is probably disturbed forever. If she accept violence as way to deal with conflicts, where that lead to? Sure thing - if you get in conflict with her, she go violent on you, because that is what she learned. And if she won't be able to just kick you down, then she take anything lying around (bottle, kitchen knife) and this time it could end badly. And even she will be held responsible, in fact it is the parent, who should be jailed also, for what she did to her, that violence is now accepted way to get what she want from others. No wonder, there are wars.

Makes me wonder, what will the poor girl become, when being subject to such harsh threatment. There is no way that guy can do the same and not get in jail, anyway. I still feel very sorry for the poor girl, because her mother is a monster - but this is a good example of how some mad womens can treat their children. I better should not even to try imagine, what this monster for a parent do, when she is not in public. Poor, really poor child... ... Indeed, Japan is strange place these days. People are paying 80 bucks there to lay near girls in "cuddle cafe" ... however all the nice feelings end for me, when she open her mouth: "What about you? Do you have a boyfriend? Of course not. Of course not? Why of course? Because having a boyfriend is a hassle. Do you evern wanted to have a boyfriend, or do you think that stuff like this is... will suffice? When I see happy couples during Christmas, I wish they would die. Wow. Oh my God. I just don't like seeing people being affectionate in public. That is interesting. For someone who is affectionate to strangers for a living. I have no emotional attachment to my customers." http://youtu.be/qpZbu7J7UL4?t=7m0s

I seems to vaguely remember, that some additional security measures considering the AVS check was made around the George Walker Bush era, or I'm wrong? It is not about me and credit card being in from USA, Texas mechant. It is about knowing, if there are the checks in place. Some sites seems to suggest that they are: http://www.web-merchant.co.uk/avs.asp "The Address Verification Service (AVS) enables the address, including postcode, entered by the shopper to be compared against the UK card issuer's records..." "To use the AVS verification service the address entered by shopper must be their billing address (the address where the shopper's card statement is currently sent). The billing address must match the address held by the Card Issuer exactly." "In general though that AVS outside the UK, Canada and USA is very limited." That in short means, that the billing address is compared to the bank records of the credit card holder and if there is not a exact match, then AVS mismatch is reported and transaction it not permited. https://support.braintreepayments.com/customer/portal/articles/1430406-avs-overview "Address Verification System (AVS) is a cleverly named system used to (get ready for it!) verify that the address information supplied by a customer for a transaction matches what the cardholder's bank has on file." "AVS is not consistently supported in many countries outside of the United States." "If you don't pass a country code, we'll always assume the country is the United States and all of your transactions will have to pass your AVS rules." http://virtualtrak.blogspot.cz/2007/03/address-verification-system-avs.html "AVS can provide secure payment gateways by having the merchant verify credit card data, such as billing address and zip code, against the Visa®/Mastercard billing information of the cardholder" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Address_Verification_System "The Address Verification System (AVS) is a system used to verify the address of a person claiming to own a credit card. The system will check the billing address of the credit card provided by the user with the address on file at the credit card company." "AVS is widely supported by Visa, MasterCard and American Express in the USA, Canada and United Kingdom." ... In short, there are plenty of information about Address Verification System purposes, limits and usage, however not a single line about any law or requirment by law I found. You says "requirment by the credit card companies"? Sounds interesting. Where can I get more info for case of Master card, USA, Texas...?

Guys, this might sounds weird (who cares about laws, we did not agreed to abide by them anyway, right?), but I would actually need to know some informations about internet shops and AVS (Address Verification Check) check when making a credit card purchase.Are in Texas, USA, required AVS check by the merchants? Or are there higher, federal law in existance, that require this, for example?I did not care much what the practical application is (eg. if this is law, that is not respected much), I just would like to know, if there is a law, what it is and where can I read/get a copy of it.It would be a big help, if someone can point me at least where to look, if not provide the exact data :)Thanks a bunch!

...and if corrupted police chiefs are not enought, then check out these corrupted judges: http://www.novinky.cz/krimi/299094-.html They take bribes to get the paying customers released from jail pronto on probations and in some cases not even go in In one case they manipulated with evidence too. I think the whole justice is corrupted beyong repair in Czech republic, and I dubt it will be significantly better elsewhere.

marginalist - Heh, good work, nice captions. I know this "fast crash course" into 9/11 Similar and quite old one was made in flash about the Pentagon alleged crash: http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/swf/pentagon_en.swf No one is denying (I quess?) that the US govt has gained massive advantages and pushed towards total control hard by 9/11 event. Never let good crysis to get wasted is their motto. Never read the Classified Woman, but it might be worth checking out. I was just astonished, how glaring holes are in the official version of the event. Even in just the one simple fact about planes hitting the steel... errr, buildings I'm aware that this part of the story is the key part, because if there was no planes, then they cannot blame this on some terrorists, so that "selling point" was major and crucial and it is just false. I still wonder, how they pull it out, but I quess that the public massage over years and years counted up... Bastii - well, I believe that questioning 9/11 is important, because: - "war on terror" is still going strong, sometimes even by directly supporting the terrorists (Syria) - the only way to prevent such false flag attacks in the future are to brought these accountable to justice, not "letting it be" - I still feel fascinated, how did I miss that for years and years I never questioned the actuall existence of planes hitting WTC So part is my astonishment (how the hell they did it) and part is to show something really out of the box for most people. As work, well, you did not seen anything yet from me. Just on this first page about 9/11 are some posts from deleted old forum, where I was come public with my findings around 2004/2005: http://trodas.wz.cz/index.php?act=ST&f=5&t=287 See? So that was nothing yet.

At first, even that I should be between open minded people, a serious word of warning. Anyone who dare to read futher from this point, please don't read/view, if you are not eased and prepared to questing the seemingly impossible. This one will be hard. Almost as questioning the Moon landings (sorry, that did not happen either) or holocaust (not to worry, this happend, just on quite different scale and no gas chambers are used). So, unless you can let me present my case, then please did not read any futher. Thank you. I, for very long time, firmly believe, that 9/11 attack was inside job of US govt, much like the first WTC bombing. I was focused on the benefits for US govt from it (antiteror laws, destroying Iraq and reverting the sales of oil from euro back to dolars, massive war on terror, spying everyone, etc.) as other individuals (Silverstein insurance money, his son get to be ambassador) and even governments (hint: search "five dancing israelis" on YouTube). But about year ago I tried to listen to seeimingly outrageous argument, that alleged that there are no planes that hit the WTC towers (there are also no plane that hit Pentagon and no plane that crashed in Pennsylvania, but that was obvious from start). And when investigating the problem futher I come to conclusion, that we all saw impossible lie. I was believed, that they used remote controlled planes before. Now I firmly believe, that there are no planes that stuck WTC towers. What changed my mind? Well, at first, there are THIS video: ...where you can jump right to the important second half part: So if you survived this, then let me lay my own case and arguments: 1) Aluminium cannot cut steel As we know, WTC towers are composed mostly of steel and concrete. The steel beams are very solid "boxes" of 2 inches (50mm) thick quality construction steel, forming pretty formidable box: That means that the plane have to cut thru 100mm thick steel, not to mention being reinforced each 3 meters by concrete floor. That 100mm of steel is equivalent to frontal armor of older tanks. So, what the military use to cut thru the steel of tank? Well, they use rods of very dense materials, such as Wolfram, Tungsten or the Depleted Uranium. Why they use such metals, when aluminium works that well? Secondly, the "damn innfective military" for some reasons insist on very high shell velocity. Typical armor piercing velocity is around 6000 km/h (3750mph), where the speed of "planes" impacts are calculated to be 933km/h (580mph). That seems to be grossly underrated speed to cut the steel like butter, when "people that know how to punch thru steel" insist on at least 6x higher speeds and more dense materials, that the steel is. Even with these insane advantages the army call "penetration", when they get 25% (or 33%) weight of the shell behind the steel plate (WW2 tables, first German, second Russian rating). On modern shells, where there is just a small rod that go in, it is just like 10% or so by my quess. ...and that bring us into second huge problem... 2) Buildings are not known to eat planes This is almost as funny, as it is serious, but bear with me, please. The first problem I have with the planes story is, that even the very fragile ends of the wings get inside of the buildings w/o any signs of crash. The planes just slide in and that was it. Well, this is just not possible at all. For starters, based on many images are quite visible, that altrought many culums seems to be deformed (like pushed from sides by shapecharges) and mostly the fireproofing are off, pay attention that many columns are not even cut, where the videos showed us that wings just "slide in" the buildings: If the culums are not even entierly cut, then how the planes can get into the buildings? This is not possible at all. I know that this is very disturbing and unconfromtable, but just look at the damaged columns 145. The steel frame is intact, the exterior covering form nice, but NOT cut anywhere curve over it and that it is. And that is not the only one, see them all! This is simply not consistent of the videos we all saw: And ignoring the laughable story of heat that "melted" the steel (the woman in the picture is clearly holding the steel, so unless she is fireproof, then the temperatures cannot account for the demolition of the buildings) for sake of "no planes" argument, there is another problem with the planes... 3) You cannot simply fly into building Well, technically, you can, provided you master the plane. Ignoring for the moment that many of the alleged pilots are found to be alive and well and that the piloting abilities of other alleged hijackers was insufficient to fly a simple propeler plane used to learn flying, there is the cartoon physic we see. At first, the planes did not even slow down their speed, when "sliding in" the buildings. This is not possible at all, because the buildings are made from solid materials, witch would resist such "fly in." You simply cannot fake the physic there. There must be slow-down, as the plane push thru the materials, yet there is not. As second, the planes are build very lightly. While technically speaking, there is not "just" aluminium, but more aluminium alloys and even steel and titan (in the landing gear and engines), then still the wings and mainly the end tail section are completely made from very light materials. And there come the video, that at first brought my trodas account on YouTube down: This pretty well show, how fragile are these commercional airplanes. They are - basicaly - very light build aluminium tubes, that does not have any solid structures to speak off. The "losing the tail" is very common in many crashes. I present for your consideration few images of planes, that do hard crashes to bedrock and similar catastrophic failures: The point I trying to stress there is, that when plane even land harshly, then it lose the tail completely. And based on the videos and lack of any debris of plane into the impact zones (!!!) we can see, that the tail was not even as much, as twisted, when the plane allegedly hit the building. And this is again just and simply not possible. If we see crash of airplane to building, then the fragile parts of the aircraft will immediatelly snap off the plane. Even poor bird can seriously damage propeler plane, what is flying hardly 1/3 of the alleged impact speed: But as the plane not even slow down, much less shown and signs of impact, then only possible explaination is, that the collision simply does not happen. Period. 4) Punchy engines Let's go back to 7.28.1945. At this date, an unfortunate B-25 bomber was lost in fog and crashed at 320km/h into the Empire State Building: Killing 14, the ESB did not collapsed, nor sustained any significant damage. What is even worser, majority of the plane ended up (as I argued above) outside the building. The fuel set huge fire: What is important for us is, what happen with the engines. Despite the speed are somewhat low (nearly only 1/3 of the WTC impact speed), the engines burried into ESB. One ending up in elevator shaft, starting fire in basement, another punch thru 7 walls and nearly poke on the other end of the building. Now what happen with much more heavy and almost 3x faster moving engines? At WTC 1, there are no engines flying thru the poor building at all. In case of WTC 2, there was one engine, that allegedly could pass thru the building (but can be also stored there and pushed out by explosives as well), yet it was later discovered, that since the 767 Boeings in posession of American Airlines use only Pratt&Whitney engines, then it cannot be engine from the alleged flight. Still there is no evidence about the thre remaining engines and given the fact, that they weight over 6 tonns and travel at 933km/h - they should punch thru the buildings neatly, unless they hit some of the steel columns... Also the titanium and steel engines are constructed to withstand the fuel burning temperatures. There should be mentioned that the temperature at witch the Jet A-1 fuel burn under normal conditions is only 260 - 315°C....! (a little known, but very significant fact) However in the turbine, when compressed and pre-mixed with air, it can get at high, as 980°C: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel This is the absolutely maximal temperature. The steel of witch WTC was constructed was certified to withstand far more that is the maximal temperature, that cannot be achieved in non-pressured-air-injection enviroment. The point is, that there is no way, how the other there engines (if we accept the one as really "the" engine, witch is not true) disappear. If they can find bone fragments size of the nail clip and cannot find over 6 tonns of titan and steel, then there was simply no planes to begin with. 5) Impact speeds impossible What is wastly overlooked is, that from the videos and radar data, the speed of impact into WTC buildings are around 580 mph, hence 933km/h. However even the Boeing 767 can almost teoretically reach this speed (567mph) 10km above the ground, it cannot reach it at sea level. The reasons are quite simple - planes fly at high altitudes, because there is the air 4x less dense, hence the airplane drag is 4x smaller. Boeing itself say, that maximum speed at sea level is 414mph, witch is 666km/h. Not 933km/h. At such speed (even if someone give the plane *much* better engines - expert claim you need 6x more power!) will the plane desintegrate. Even near the maximal speed limit the plane experience significant vibrations, people will literally be thrown out of their seats unless bucked and there will be impossible to precise controll the plane at it heading on target, that is not much wider that the plane wings are. So the speed is simply not possible for Boeing 767 and even near the alleged speed will the plane become uncontrolable. Again, this are not theories, but proven and tested facts. 6) No wake vortex The final nail to the coffin of "planes hiting the towers" are phenomen called wake vortex. At the tips of wings of any flying airplane are formed rotating vortexes. These are invisible, unless there are smoke in the area: Now since this wake vortex is persistent for at least a minute, then the explosions and smoke have to form the wake vortex and curve to it, as the napalm did, when USA bombarded Vietnam, as shown there: http://youtu.be/8Pax8aMggfI?t=15m45s Yet since we did not see even the slightest hint of wake vortex, then it should be concluded with almost 100% certainty, that there was not any plane at all, that fly into these WTC buildings. ... I must say that I did not have all the answers. I cannot prove, what was done and how. There are many witneses that claim there are no planes, there are many that claim they saw planes... There are even conflicting videos (eg. the one that show the plane approaching in perfectly level flight to WTC 2 ( http://postimg.org/image/mdcuphrup/ - http://postimg.org/image/n1vserquv/ ) - versus the shoot from behing the WTC 2 that show the plane descending and turning rapidly, witch is not consistent at all), so I cannot and will not speculate what was done. We all know, that the complete 9/11 myth was first put on by some punk at street interviewed, so I cannot rule out that the choosed interviews to be aired are just the guys that are agents. There is possible that all submited videos are doctored (I saw some proofs ( http://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ ), but nothing really definitive) and there is also possible that there could be some kind of holographic projection to cover much smaller jet/missile that was incomming... I don't know. All I say is, that: - aluminium cannot cut steel - buildings did not eat planes - there was no impact - there are missing engines or any parts from the 3.1 milions of them of Boeing 767 - the impact speed was impossible for Boeing 767 - there are was wake vortex at all I hope that I presented my case as well, as I can and I can only hope that people try to understand, that I was not trying to put forward something crazy and unfounded, but rather a consistently researched question that might have some significance, since some planes obviously tend to disappear

Count me IN then! As the cold records beat the heat records, there is no global warming. Period. There is a more weather unstability, but that is linked to the Sun undergoing the magnetic flip. That it is. Humans have nothing to do with it. Who believe that nonsense, must answer from questions first, w/o looking on Google: 1) how much the "bad CO2" are in atmosphere anyway? ... Answer: 0.0385% ... do you really believe, that this insignificant gas can change anything? The "precious" cas Argon is more that 24 times present in the atmosphere! So, get real, CO2 folks! 2) how big is the Sun, compared to the planes? ... Answer: 99.866% of whole Sun system weight is the Sun! So if you looking for something to blame for the climate extremes, then blame Sun: See the problem? 3) What do you learn from Climategate? ... In case you don't know, then the exponencial warming was based on only one specific tree, when all others did not show any increase at all. So from all and all the tests, these cherrypicking liars take this: See the problem now? 4) How do you read this news: http://canadianawareness.org/2013/02/ipcc-head-rajendra-pachauri-acknowledges-17-year-stall-in-global-warming/ "The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released last week. The figures, which have triggered debate among climate scientists, reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures." Do you interpret the "no discrenible rise" in global temperatures as heating? If yes, then you need a reality check

You could be right. Recently there was a 8 years sentence in Czech republic for elite cop from the most elite UOOZ brigade that deal with organized crime and terrorism (recently they do the raid in mosque, telling people (including diplomats) not to move or they will be shot in the process) for selling part or whole crime case files to third parties: http://www.novinky.cz/krimi/332025-.html I think that power corrupt. The more power, the more the corruption grows. Unless people can remove the corrupted from power by some mechanism, we never stand a chance to the free money corruption offer.

The same heard mentality is present everywhere. Go on the other continent (Europe), and start asking bad questions about almost anything contraversial, point to the glaring holes on govt theories, that require magical thinking to overcome, and you will be also considered almost mentaly ill or insane... The first call will be, that you are "conspiration theoretic", even when the first thing you do is to present a evidence. The path to freedom is to stop worring what people thing is say. I say outloud even the most contraversional things and don't give rat arse about what the others think about me, when they disagree.

Yep, a small country inside of the center of Europe. Former Czechoslovakia, then sadly divided back in 1993 as the politicians decided w/o out consent... Anyway, from some critical views of Stefan Molyneux points I get to actually listen to his show and 99% of time I fully agree on what he says, so I thought that I would join the forum to provide sometimes some material, that I find deeply disturbing. To be clear - I did not agree that monetization of the justice system could lead to justice as well, as I did not agree that many solutions has to involve money as these issues are mostly social issues and these canot be dealt with money. But I wholeheartedly agree on Nonaggression pricipe, the state is evil, taxes is stealing, money cannot be created as debt (that way they serve just the crediters and enslave all of us), etc. Never the less, I would like to contribute at least by informations, when I cannot afford to donate, as for example my monthly income is $170 ATM, witch is not quite much. Keep up the good work, Stefan! (and shame on YewTube for the censorship attempt - yep, the "typo" is there on purpose, but not to worry, I'm not racist, I only despise these attempts to silence oposition and point out, that the company with motto "don't be evil" do evil stuff all the time and was fonded by two jews from Russia)

Studies consistently show, that exposing population to lead in the gasoline, cause 20 years later very nicely corresponding rise in crime. And from the ban of lead fuel, it looks like that the crime is falling nicely, despite there are more people and the economic conditions are hardening: Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27067615 "Studies have shown that exposure to lead during pregnancy reduces the head circumference of infants. In children and adults, it causes headaches, inhibits IQ and can lead to aggressive or dysfunctional behaviour." "When the amount of lead in the environment increased, Nevin showed a corresponding rise in violent crime two decades later. And when the amount of lead in the environment fell, violent crime also tracked down - again about 20 years later." "There is a substantial causal relationship," she says. "I can see it in the state-to-state variations. States that experienced particularly early or particularly sharp declines in lead experienced particularly early or particularly sharp declines in violent crime 20 years later." So not only spanking poisoning the minds to people become more violent, these poisons work as well.