Culling the Herd!

Discussion in 'The Future' started by YankNBurn, Mar 4, 2006.

  1. YankNBurn

    YankNBurn Owner

    Messages:
    12,032
    Likes Received:
    10
    Perhaps no with polution, overcrowding, disease and other problems it is best to cull the herd. I mean let the weaker pass on. If your poor then perhaps you need to fall into place and hold your own if not then be allowed to perish. If you can find a job then one shall be assigned to you, if you refuse to work then be outcast.

    Woah, sorry there, had a this nightmare that Ross Perot got elected for president somehow. Better get myself some warm milk and listen to something soft.
     
  2. Occam

    Occam Old bag of dreams

    Messages:
    1,376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey, the man is a great innovator.
    Look how he spraypainted the grass at corporate HQ with green paint during a dry spell.
    Ross 'caligula' Perot
    A true genius
    Bet he could solve so many of the problems facing the world
    Cause he is always right. And who would argue with that?
    Not him.
    And when he becomes president.
    No one will ever argue with him again...EVER
     
  3. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Messages:
    33,922
    Likes Received:
    2,454
    "Culling the herd" is something that those ruling the world want more than anything. It's no laughing matter, especially when they talk openly about it in their documents.
     
  4. Occam

    Occam Old bag of dreams

    Messages:
    1,376
    Likes Received:
    0
    vertically challenged rodent

    Agree...But only the culling of 2/3's of the poor people..
    They are needed as a 'threat'

    Also agree with comment about 9/11
    Have seen many of the vid clips/pics of the pentagon strike.
    That looks a lot like an unarmed sram* to occam
    [speed height and penetration]
    The pics of hole in wall show hole smaller than width of even
    the fuselage of the plane that they say hit it. but fit a sram
    A 757 would have demolished entire wing of building

    The bigger the lie, the more readly it will be believed [A.Hitler]

    Occam

    *SRAM Short Range Attack Missle..
    [look up agm-131 SRAM II in wikipedia]
    Designed to deliver thermonukes from B1/B2 bombers
    at very high speed. SRAM2 is easy to deny.. it was made..
    but not deployed.. and they only needed say 3 [two for testing]
    Occam suggests this as they are so fast that sound follows
    behind. Perfect for a set up. Cruise missles are too slow and
    people would see them track in to target
    Maveric to small, LGB's come in a 30 to 45 degree angle which
    wont look right after impact without a warhead
    And that pic of small hole on inside wall of building
    Looks just right for a lump of twisted steel that is
    all that remains of missle after it punches through all
    those walls with intitial speed of 2000kmh + while
    comming in on a horizontal trajectory.
    [A thing a 757 could not do unless th pilot had 10
    thousand flying hours under his belt.]

    Why does occam say 'unarmed' or 'without a warhead'
    C'mon...pentagon dont want to 'really hurt itself'
    And srams were not designed to carry convential munitions.
    which was a big mistake. A good lie looks much better if the
    victim is injured.
    Also they want it to 'work first time..no error'
    So Hwarhead replaced with visual guidance.
    Some guy flew it in with a joystick
     
  5. Occam

    Occam Old bag of dreams

    Messages:
    1,376
    Likes Received:
    0
    PS

    Occam asks.
    How many heads of important corporations wer in the trade towers when it happened?
    Do u know?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice