Jump to content
Clubplanet Nightlife Community
Sign in to follow this  
sassa

Cronkite Warns of Armageddon

Recommended Posts

Cronkite warns of Armageddon

Walter Cronkite, once the most trusted man in America, is now warning World War III is around the corner.

Speaking at Texas A&M Sunday, the former CBS News anchor, and lately a spokesman for globalist, one-world causes, said the United States should not take action against Iraq without the support of the United Nations.

"The threat from the White House is to go in anyway," Cronkite said, according to a report in the college paper, The Eagle. "Our only ally would probably be Great Britain. That is not good enough. I see the possibility if we do that of really setting forth World War III."

If the United States goes in without worldwide support, however, other countries in the region such as Iran and Pakistan could retaliate against the U.S., Cronkite said. He said the threat of nuclear exchanges between India and Pakistan could be increased if a conflict arises.

Cronkite said he fears Americans are learning less and less about what their government is doing, and worse, they do not seem to care.

He cited recent presidential elections that have seen less than half of registered voters go to the polls. The result has been leaders who are chosen by about a quarter of the electorate.

"That means we don't have a democracy," he said. "We've got an oligarchy here, not a democracy. Our democracy is in some danger if we don't concentrate on educating the populace."

Educating Americans should rest with the media, he said. But more often than not, nightly newscasts and the networks' magazine-style shows focus more on entertainment than hard news. Cronkite said this approach is the result of directives from the companies that own the networks to make things more "interesting."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gore Vidal Claims 'Bush Junta' Complicit In 911!

By Sunder Katwala

The Observer - London

10-27-2

America's most controversial novelist calls for an investigation into whether the Bush administration deliberately allowed the terrorist attacks to happen...

America's most controversial writer Gore Vidal has launched the most scathing attack to date on George W Bush's Presidency, calling for an investigation into the events of 9/11 to discover whether the Bush administration deliberately chose not to act on warnings of Al-Qaeda's plans.

Vidal's highly controversial 7000 word polemic titled 'The Enemy Within' - published in the print edition of The Observer today - argues that what he calls a 'Bush junta' used the terrorist attacks as a pretext to enact a pre-existing agenda to invade Afghanistan and crack down on civil liberties at home.

Vidal writes: 'We still don't know by whom we were struck that infamous Tuesday, or for what true purpose. But it is fairly plain to many civil libertarians that 9/11 put paid not only to much of our fragile Bill of Rights but also to our once-envied system of government which had taken a mortal blow the previous year when the Supreme Court did a little dance in 5/4 time and replaced a popularly elected President with the oil and gas Bush-Cheney junta.'

Vidal argues that the real motive for the Afghanistan war was to control the gateway to Eurasia and Central Asia's energy riches. He quotes extensively from a 1997 analysis of the region by Zgibniew Brzezinski, formerly national security adviser to President Carter, in support of this theory. But, Vidal argues, US administrations, both Democrat and Republican, were aware that the American public would resist any war in Afghanistan without a truly massive and widely perceived external threat.

'Osama was chosen on aesthetic grounds to be the frightening logo for our long-conteAl-Qaeda's plans.

Vidal's highly controversial 7000 word polemic titled 'The Enemy Within' - published in the print edition of The Observer today - argues that what he calls a 'Bush junta' used the terrorist attacks as a pretext to enact a pre-existing agenda to invade Afghanistan and crack down on civil liberties at home.

Vidal writes: 'We still don't know by whom we were struck that infamous Tuesday, or for what true purpose. But it is fairly plain to many civil libertarians that 9/11 put paid not only to much of our fragile Bill of Rights but also to our once-envied system of government which had taken a mortal blow the previous year when the Supreme Court did a little dance in 5/4 time and replaced a popularly elected President with the oil and gas Bush-Cheney junta.'

Vidal argues that the real motive for the Afghanistan war was to control the gateway to Eurasia and Central Asia's energy riches. He quotes extensively from a 1997 analysis of the region by Zgibniew Brzezinski, formerly national security adviser to President Carter, in support of this theory. But, Vidal argues, US administrations, both Democrat and Republican, were aware that the American public would resist any war in Afghanistan without a truly massive and widely perceived external threat.

'Osama was chosen on aesthetic grounds to be the frightening logo for our long-contemplated invasion and conquest of Afghanistan ... [because] the administration is convinced that Americans are so simple-minded that they can deal with no scenario more complex than the venerable, lone, crazed killer (this time with zombie helpers) who does evil just for the fun of it 'cause he hates us because we're rich 'n free 'n he's not.' Vidal also attacks the American media's failure to discuss 11 September and its consequences: 'Apparently, "conspiracy stuff" is now shorthand for unspeakable truth.'

'It is an article of faith that there are no conspiracies in American life. Yet, a year or so ago, who would have thought that most of corporate America had been conspiring with accountants to cook their books since - well, at least the bright dawn of the era of Reagan and deregulation.'

At the heart of the essay are questions about the events of 9/11 itself and the two hours after the planes were hijacked. Vidal writes that 'astonished military experts cannot fathom why the government's "automatic standard order of procedure in the event of a hijacking" was not followed'.

These procedures, says Vidal, determine that fighter planes should automatically be sent aloft as soon as a plane has deviated from its flight plan. Presidential authority is not required until a plane is to be shot down. But, on 11 September, no decision to start launching pmplated invasion and conquest of Afghanistan ... [because] the administration is convinced that Americans are so simple-minded that they can deal with no scenario more complex than the venerable, lone, crazed killer (this time with zombie helpers) who does evil just for the fun of it 'cause he hates us because we're rich 'n free 'n he's not.' Vidal also attacks the American media's failure to discuss 11 September and its consequences: 'Apparently, "conspiracy stuff" is now shorthand for unspeakable truth.'

'It is an article of faith that there are no conspiracies in American life. Yet, a year or so ago, who would have thought that most of corporate America had been conspiring with accountants to cook their books since - well, at least the bright dawn of the era of Reagan and deregulation.'

At the heart of the essay are questions about the events of 9/11 itself and the two hours after the planes were hijacked. Vidal writes that 'astonished military experts cannot fathom why the government's "automatic standard order of procedure in the event of a hijacking" was not followed'.

These procedures, says Vidal, determine that fighter planes should automatically be sent aloft as soon as a plane has deviated from its flight plan. Presidential authority is not required until a plane is to be shot down. But, on 11 September, no decision to start launching planes was taken until 9.40am, eighty minutes after air controllers first knew that Flight 11 had been hijacked and fifty minutes after the first plane had struck the North Tower.

'By law, the fighters should have been up at around 8.15. If they had, all the hijacked planes might have been diverted and shot down.'

Vidal asks why Bush, as Commander-in-Chief, stayed in a Florida classroom as news of the attacks broke: 'The behaviour of President Bush on 11 September certainly gives rise to not unnatural suspicions.' He also attacks the 'nonchalance' of General Richard B Myers, acting Joint Chief of Staff, in failing to respond until the planes had crashed into the twin towers.

Asking whether these failures to act expeditiously were down to conspiracy, coincidence or error, Vidal notes that incompetence would usually lead to reprimands for those responsible, writing that 'It is interesting how often in our history, when disaster strikes, incompetence is considered a better alibi than .... Well, yes, there are worse things.'

Vidal draws comparisons with another 'day of infamy' in American history, writing that 'The truth about Pearl Harbour is obscured to this day. But it has been much studied. 11 September, it is plain, is never going to be investigated if Bush has anything to say about it.' He quotes CNN reports that Bush personally asked Senatelanes was taken until 9.40am, eighty minutes after air controllers first knew that Flight 11 had been hijacked and fifty minutes after the first plane had struck the North Tower.

'By law, the fighters should have been up at around 8.15. If they had, all the hijacked planes might have been diverted and shot down.'

Vidal asks why Bush, as Commander-in-Chief, stayed in a Florida classroom as news of the attacks broke: 'The behaviour of President Bush on 11 September certainly gives rise to not unnatural suspicions.' He also attacks the 'nonchalance' of General Richard B Myers, acting Joint Chief of Staff, in failing to respond until the planes had crashed into the twin towers.

Asking whether these failures to act expeditiously were down to conspiracy, coincidence or error, Vidal notes that incompetence would usually lead to reprimands for those responsible, writing that 'It is interesting how often in our history, when disaster strikes, incompetence is considered a better alibi than .... Well, yes, there are worse things.'

Vidal draws comparisons with another 'day of infamy' in American history, writing that 'The truth about Pearl Harbour is obscured to this day. But it has been much studied. 11 September, it is plain, is never going to be investigated if Bush has anything to say about it.' He quotes CNN reports that Bush personally asked Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle to limit Congressional investigation of the day itself, ostensibly on grounds of not diverting resources from the anti-terror campaign.

Vidal calls bin Laden an 'Islamic zealot' and 'evil doer' but argues that 'war' cannot be waged on the abstraction of 'terrorism'. He says that 'Every nation knows how - if it has the means and will - to protect itself from thugs of the sort that brought us 9/11 ... You put a price on their heads and hunt them down. In recent years, Italy has been doing that with the Sicilian Mafia; and no-one has suggested bombing Palermo.'

Vidal also highlights the role of American and Pakistani intelligence in creating the fundamentalist terrorist threat: 'Apparently, Pakistan did do it - or some of it' but with American support. "From 1979, the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan ... the CIA covertly trained and sponsored these warriors.'

Vidal also quotes the highly respected defence journal Jane's Defence Weekly on how this support for Islamic fundamentalism continued after the emergence of bin Laden: 'In 1988, with US knowledge, bin Laden created Al-Qaeda (The Base); a conglomerate of quasi-independent Islamic terrorist cells spread across 26 or so countries. Washington turned a blind eye to Al-Qaeda.'

Vidal, 77, Majority Leader Tom Daschle to limit Congressional investigation of the day itself, ostensibly on grounds of not diverting resources from the anti-terror campaign.

Vidal calls bin Laden an 'Islamic zealot' and 'evil doer' but argues that 'war' cannot be waged on the abstraction of 'terrorism'. He says that 'Every nation knows how - if it has the means and will - to protect itself from thugs of the sort that brought us 9/11 ... You put a price on their heads and hunt them down. In recent years, Italy has been doing that with the Sicilian Mafia; and no-one has suggested bombing Palermo.'

Vidal also highlights the role of American and Pakistani intelligence in creating the fundamentalist terrorist threat: 'Apparently, Pakistan did do it - or some of it' but with American support. "From 1979, the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan ... the CIA covertly trained and sponsored these warriors.'

Vidal also quotes the highly respected defence journal Jane's Defence Weekly on how this support for Islamic fundamentalism continued after the emergence of bin Laden: 'In 1988, with US knowledge, bin Laden created Al-Qaeda (The Base); a conglomerate of quasi-independent Islamic terrorist cells spread across 26 or so countries. Washington turned a blind eye to Al-Qaeda.'

Vidal, 77, and internationally renowned for his award-winning novels and plays, has long been a ferocious, and often isolated, critic of the Bush administration at home and abroad. He now lives in Italy. In Vidal's most recent book, The Last Empire, he argued that 'Americans have no idea of the extent of their government's mischief ... the number of military strikes we have made unprovoked, against other countries, since 1947 is more than 250.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MER Comment:

John Pilger: `The Americans want Iraq's oil'

BY JOHN PILGER

[speaking in Sydney, Australia, 30 Nov]:

Today, I am reminded of all the other great demonstrations that have happened around the world. At the end of September, I addressed 400,000 people in the centre of London. In Washington, there have been something like 200 demonstrations in the last couple of months. In Florence, a couple of weeks ago, the population of that city was doubled when up to a million people marched and demonstrated against the outrageous prospect of attacking Iraq.

And your being here today is so important. You are the democratic opposition in this country. Newspapers often categorise people into moderates and extremists. You are the moderates, the members of the Australian government are the extremists.

They have to be extreme to attack — unprovoked — a country that offers no threat to Australia, a country with whom Prime Minister John Howard's government is prepared to trade. Iraq is a nation held hostage to a medieval embargo, which has strengthened the grip of Saddam Hussein. The people of Iraq — 22 million of them — are young, more than half are children. Many of the rest are widows, vulnerable people. Many of those are suffering after a dozen years of one of the most vicious blockades of any society in modern history.

Five-billion dollars worth of humanitarian goods approved by the United Nations Security Council are currently kept “on hold” in New York by the United States, with Britain's backing. They include medicines, dialysis machines, agricultural equipment, fire-fighting equipment, infrastructure for schools and school books. All are being blocked by the US.

We hear much propaganda about how the regime inf weeks ago, the population of that city was doubled when up to a million people marched and demonstrated against the outrageous prospect of attacking Iraq.

And your being here today is so important. You are the democratic opposition in this country. Newspapers often categorise people into moderates and extremists. You are the moderates, the members of the Australian government are the extremists.

They have to be extreme to attack — unprovoked — a country that offers no threat to Australia, a country with whom Prime Minister John Howard's government is prepared to trade. Iraq is a nation held hostage to a medieval embargo, which has strengthened the grip of Saddam Hussein. The people of Iraq — 22 million of them — are young, more than half are children. Many of the rest are widows, vulnerable people. Many of those are suffering after a dozen years of one of the most vicious blockades of any society in modern history.

Five-billion dollars worth of humanitarian goods approved by the United Nations Security Council are currently kept “on hold” in New York by the United States, with Britain's backing. They include medicines, dialysis machines, agricultural equipment, fire-fighting equipment, infrastructure for schools and school books. All are being blocked by the US.

We hear much propaganda about how the regime in Iraq is starving its own people and denying them medicine. In fact, it is the other way round. Our governments — the Australian government, the US government and the British government — have contrived, if not conspired, to kill more people in Iraq than in many wars in my life time.

They want to attack Iraq for one reason only. The stated reason, that of concern about Iraq's “weapons of mass destruction” is repeated incessantly in the media; and yet the issue is false. It is a red herring.

Four years ago, the same Hans Blix who is leading the UN weapon inspectors back to Iraq said that 90-95% of Iraq's arsenal of chemical and biological weapons had been dealt with. There was not a country in the world that had been so comprehensively disarmed. The basic structure of Iraq's weapons-making industry had been destroyed; and that is what the inspectors are finding now. But the US has no intention of accepting that truth.

On November 20, Richard Perle, one of US President George Bush's closest advisers, told a British parliamentary committee that regardless of what the inspectors found, the US reserved the right to attack anyway.

The true reason why the US wants to attack Iraq is strategic control of a country that is of pivotal importance to the US. Iraq is the only oil producing country in the world that can increase its prod Iraq is starving its own people and denying them medicine. In fact, it is the other way round. Our governments — the Australian government, the US government and the British government — have contrived, if not conspired, to kill more people in Iraq than in many wars in my life time.

They want to attack Iraq for one reason only. The stated reason, that of concern about Iraq's “weapons of mass destruction” is repeated incessantly in the media; and yet the issue is false. It is a red herring.

Four years ago, the same Hans Blix who is leading the UN weapon inspectors back to Iraq said that 90-95% of Iraq's arsenal of chemical and biological weapons had been dealt with. There was not a country in the world that had been so comprehensively disarmed. The basic structure of Iraq's weapons-making industry had been destroyed; and that is what the inspectors are finding now. But the US has no intention of accepting that truth.

On November 20, Richard Perle, one of US President George Bush's closest advisers, told a British parliamentary committee that regardless of what the inspectors found, the US reserved the right to attack anyway.

The true reason why the US wants to attack Iraq is strategic control of a country that is of pivotal importance to the US. Iraq is the only oil producing country in the world that can increase its production. Oil is running out. In five to 10 years, oil production will decline by about 5 billion barrels of oil per day. According to the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, Iraq is the only oil-producing country whose known reserves will increase. The Americans want that oil.

Saudi Arabia, the greatest oil source, is proving unreliable. Although a US oil protectorate, Saudi Arabia was the home of 15 of the alleged hijackers of September 11 and of al Qaeda. So Saudi Arabia is, in imperial thinking, unreliable.

Iraq is what they want. What they want is control of the oil fields of the Middle East. There is nothing new about this. Indeed, nothing has changed since the 1920s, when the British Royal Air Force bombed Iraq in order to control it. It is an insult to our intelligence for us to have to go through all these pretexts, of weapons of mass destruction and so on.

And that Australia should write another chapter in its melancholy history of following great power in its imperial adventures is tragic. Yet again, the Australian establishment is putting its hand up: “Please let us be part of this! Please!”

So our heroic SAS go from their great campaign against helpless asylum seekers on the high seas to chasing tribespeople in Afghanistan — for which they were just given medals. What for? Now, they are off to join the Americauction. Oil is running out. In five to 10 years, oil production will decline by about 5 billion barrels of oil per day. According to the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, Iraq is the only oil-producing country whose known reserves will increase. The Americans want that oil.

Saudi Arabia, the greatest oil source, is proving unreliable. Although a US oil protectorate, Saudi Arabia was the home of 15 of the alleged hijackers of September 11 and of al Qaeda. So Saudi Arabia is, in imperial thinking, unreliable.

Iraq is what they want. What they want is control of the oil fields of the Middle East. There is nothing new about this. Indeed, nothing has changed since the 1920s, when the British Royal Air Force bombed Iraq in order to control it. It is an insult to our intelligence for us to have to go through all these pretexts, of weapons of mass destruction and so on.

And that Australia should write another chapter in its melancholy history of following great power in its imperial adventures is tragic. Yet again, the Australian establishment is putting its hand up: “Please let us be part of this! Please!”

So our heroic SAS go from their great campaign against helpless asylum seekers on the high seas to chasing tribespeople in Afghanistan — for which they were just given medals. What for? Now, they are off to join the Americans in a new adventure.

I watched ABC news last night and there was an item about an Australian warship back from the Gulf. There were the familiar scenes that press all the right emotional buttons. Someone draped a sign over the ship, saying, “I will marry you”, and the fresh-faced sailors were reunited with their wives and children. All very touching. But what were they really doing in the Gulf?

The ABC didn't tell us. Instead, there was manufactured pride about Australia being given the leadership of the naval blockade of Iraq. Don't they understand — those sailors and the journalists who echo propaganda — exactly what is being blockaded? The Royal Australian Navy is blockading men, women and children, vulnerable human beings, a stricken nation.

For example, Iraq cannot import equipment that would decontaminate the southern battlefields, where depleted uranium — a genuine weapon of mass destruction — was used against the Iraqis by the Americans in 1991. The incidence of cancer there is eight to 10 times the rate anywhere else in the world.

I want to end by addressing my fellow journalists. I have been a journalist for many years. The media is more powerful than it has ever been. Propaganda now is more powerful than it has ever been. Censorship by omission is more powerful than it has ever been.

This great ns in a new adventure.

I watched ABC news last night and there was an item about an Australian warship back from the Gulf. There were the familiar scenes that press all the right emotional buttons. Someone draped a sign over the ship, saying, “I will marry you”, and the fresh-faced sailors were reunited with their wives and children. All very touching. But what were they really doing in the Gulf?

The ABC didn't tell us. Instead, there was manufactured pride about Australia being given the leadership of the naval blockade of Iraq. Don't they understand — those sailors and the journalists who echo propaganda — exactly what is being blockaded? The Royal Australian Navy is blockading men, women and children, vulnerable human beings, a stricken nation.

For example, Iraq cannot import equipment that would decontaminate the southern battlefields, where depleted uranium — a genuine weapon of mass destruction — was used against the Iraqis by the Americans in 1991. The incidence of cancer there is eight to 10 times the rate anywhere else in the world.

I want to end by addressing my fellow journalists. I have been a journalist for many years. The media is more powerful than it has ever been. Propaganda now is more powerful than it has ever been. Censorship by omission is more powerful than it has ever been.

This great event today apparently was not important enough to appear in the Sydney Morning Herald, the pre-eminent newspaper of this city or to be reported in advance by the ABC, the national broadcaster. I attended a press conference on November 28. It was virtually boycotted.

The media in the end will have blood on their hands. I don't say that rhetorically. Only public opinion and the collective action of the public can safeguard humanitarian issues around the world.

But the public can only know about the issues — the truth about Iraq, for example — if journalists and broadcasters tell them. And I appeal to the many good people that there are in the media, who feel strongly about this form of censorship, but often don't know what to do. I appeal to them to reject this excluding and manipulative system and to start telling the truth.

I congratulate you all for coming today. Never lose heart. You are the opposition and the hope of many who do not demonstrate. You are at the heart of a huge new movement for which every rally like this one today is a victory.

[This speech was presented to the 20,000-strong Walk Against the War rally in the Sydney Domain on November 30.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The true reason why the US wants to attack Iraq is strategic control of a country that is of pivotal importance to the US. Iraq is the only oil producing country in the world that can increase its production. Oil is running out. In five to 10 years, oil production will decline by about 5 billion barrels of oil per day. According to the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, Iraq is the only oil-producing country whose known reserves will increase. The Americans want that oil.

kind of scary if this is the truth....but i doubt it....after Sept. 11th the world changed.....like i said....the oil is the icing on the cake...but not the absolute definitive reason that we are going to go in there....we are taking out our biggest threats before they have the opportunity to kill more of our people.....get with the times or get left behind....after our sweet victory we will probably bleed iraq dry of its oil....but i am sure by us making their country under the rule of its people they will benefit....they will finally get to share and reap the benifit of their oil reserves....it will no longer be held in the control of just one man...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by sassa

Cronkite warns of Armageddon

Walter Cronkite, once the most trusted man in America, is now warning World War III is around the corner.

what corner and how far away??? because i want this shit to happen already... im tired of every toms dick is hairy spouting this shit around already... this is all ive been hearing for the past ten years... along with beware Y2K is the next armageddon... blah blah blah... quite frankly ill be quite happy when we all get nuked and we get to start over... in fact i think this thread has just stimulated a wonderful idea in my head... im going to run up the largest amex platinum bill ever recorded in history and say fuck you to my career and my future since we're all going to die anyway and i wont and have to pay a cent... whos with me? drinks on me... here we gooooooo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by dgmodel

what corner and how far away??? because i want this shit to happen already... im tired of every toms dick is hairy spouting this shit around already... this is all ive been hearing for the past ten years... along with beware Y2K is the next armageddon... blah blah blah... quite frankly ill be quite happy when we all get nuked and we get to start over... in fact i think this thread has just stimulated a wonderful idea in my head... im going to run up the largest amex platinum bill ever recorded in history and say fuck you to my career and my future since we're all going to die anyway and i wont and have to pay a cent... whos with me? drinks on me... here we gooooooo...

LET'S GO.....:laugh: ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by dgmodel

what corner and how far away??? because i want this shit to happen already... im tired of every toms dick is hairy spouting this shit around already... this is all ive been hearing for the past ten years... along with beware Y2K is the next armageddon... blah blah blah... quite frankly ill be quite happy when we all get nuked and we get to start over... in fact i think this thread has just stimulated a wonderful idea in my head... im going to run up the largest amex platinum bill ever recorded in history and say fuck you to my career and my future since we're all going to die anyway and i wont and have to pay a cent... whos with me? drinks on me... here we gooooooo...

fly me to NYC i and will take u up on that offer...and wtf? is Walter all of a sudden NOSTRADAMUS??? PLEASE!!! STFU!!!!:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by mrmatas2277

fly me to NYC i and will take u up on that offer...and wtf? is Walter all of a sudden NOSTRADAMUS??? PLEASE!!! STFU!!!!:rolleyes:

he never said he was...he's trying to make a rational argument...

dgmodel...that's not a bad idea...and i'm seriously contemplating it... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by dgmodel

what corner and how far away??? because i want this shit to happen already... im tired of every toms dick is hairy spouting this shit around already... this is all ive been hearing for the past ten years... along with beware Y2K is the next armageddon... blah blah blah... quite frankly ill be quite happy when we all get nuked and we get to start over... in fact i think this thread has just stimulated a wonderful idea in my head... im going to run up the largest amex platinum bill ever recorded in history and say fuck you to my career and my future since we're all going to die anyway and i wont and have to pay a cent... whos with me? drinks on me... here we gooooooo...

I'll have a glass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by dgmodel

lets go... you and me lets paint this town red... and then we'll fly back toghether (first class no doubt) and paint your town red...

lol..i've painted my town red too many times already...but sounds good...i wouldn't mind doing the same in nyc...has been a while...(august).

but seriously, i would love to just buy an island somewhere in the pacific and just chill there..let the world screw itself up...while i sit on the beach and drink milk from coconuts...:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×