| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] question | | Date: | Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:01:54 (+1300) | | From: | William Hugh McGunnigle <wmcgunn @.........nz>
|
| In reply to: | Message 5058 (written by Peter) |
With respect the sinking of the Lusitania
The Lusitania was definitely hit by one torpedo from the U20. In itself
this torpedo has never been considered to have inflicted sufficient damage
to have sunk the ship. A second explosion occurred almost immediately after
the torpedo hit. This explosion was extremely heavy and was of a slow
rumbling nature similar to a coal dust or boiler explosion (Testimony of
eyewitnesses). It was certainly NOT an explosion of the sharp nature
associated with military weaponry.
There is no doubt that the ship was carrying small arms ammunition,
and empty shell casings. This sort of military hardware does not lend itself
to spontaneous detonation by shock. This has been verified by an examination
of the ships manifest avaiable in the USA. These details have been embargoed
in the UK by government order until beyond 2025.
There are seveal ideas proposed to explain the second explosion that
caused the damage that sank the ship in 18 minutes. These include:-
1) A coal dust explosion in the longitudinal bunkers on the starboard side
on the liner. This would have been sufficient to cause a substancial breach
in the ship's hull. The fact that the ship listed very quickly to the
starboard side indicates there was severe damage to that side of the ship.
This type of damage occurred on a British hospital ship in the Aegean when
she struck a mine. Prof Picard's investigations of the wreck confirmed this
when he discovered large quantities of coal on the sea bed on the ships
track as she sank.
2) An explosion of the steam generating plant in No 1 boiler room that would
conceivably have blown a substancial hole in the hull at that point in the
forward boiler room. (see later explanation of ship design that would have
exacerbated the flooding problem)
3) The rapid listing of the vessel submerged open portholes on the starboard
side that allowed rapid flooding of the vessel on that side. Recent study
indicates that the damage by the torpedo alone could have been sufficient to
cause a big enough list to submerge those open portholes.
What has been established beyond any doubt is that the ammunition in the
forward holds of the Lusitania did not explode. Such an explosion would have
caused significant deck damage or even have blown the bow off the ship. This
did not occur.
The ship design is also quoted as a contributary factor to the sinking.
Lusitania had longitudinal bulkheads seperating the coal bunkers from the
boilers. These ran the length of the ship. Any damage to the forward bunkers
could have established the rapid listing of the ship and the flooding would
have been restricted to the bunkers on the outside of the longitudinal
bulkhead. For obvious reasons the watertight doors would not have been
closed because the stokers would have needed access to the coal for the
ships furnaces. The list would have been aggravated by this restriction
causing the ship to capsize. All of this was observed by both survivors and
observers on the shore.
Unfortunately the ship lies on her starboard side and so the extent of
the damage to that side of the ship cannot be examined by divers at present,
and so the whereabouts of the hull damage responsible for the sinking of the
ship has still to be determined.
I trust this clarifies some of the details about the Lusitania sinking.
Bill Mc Gunnigle
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter" <cymric@xtra.co.nz>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 9:31 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] question
>I have come across that several times. That ship was allegedly a means of
>transporting munitions between the US and Britian which was illegal.
> It has also been claimed that the wreck shows evidence of an explosion
> from within the ship rather than a torpedo from without.
> Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Martin Hattersley" <hattersleyjm@interbaun.com>
> To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 12:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] question
>
>
>>I think the sinking of the "Lusitania" in 1916 (which involved some
>>behaviour by her captain that defied orders designed to protect against
>>U-boats, and involved also an unexplained explosion that sent her to the
>>bottom in record time - information on this comes from Google) is also an
>>element in the involvement of the United States in WWI on the Allied
>>side - because of the substantial German population in the U.S., it took a
>>"Pearl Harbour" or "9/11" type of event to bring public opinion around on
>>the "proper" side.
>>
>> Martin Hattersley
>> 5929 - 189 St., NW
>> EDMONTON AB CANADA T6M 2J1
>> (780)483-5442
>> jmartinh@shaw.ca
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Joe Thomson" <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
>> To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
>> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 1:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] question
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (Peter wrote:-) . I never knew about the German navy in China. Western
>>> Samoa was given as a trust territory for NZ to administer after the
>>> fall of Germany. The US has Eastern Samoa. Western Samoa is
>>> independant
>>> now but have NZ citizenship as of right.
>>>
>>>
>>> (Joe replies:-) Pre-WW I China had been carved up into various 'spheres
>>> of
>>> influence' by the European powers of the day, and the USA and Japan.
>>> The
>>> Germans were based on the T'sientsin Peninusula, (spelling of that might
>>> differ in some records).
>>>
>>> Germany was late getting into the 'colonial' game. The best pickings
>>> were
>>> gone by the time they got going. I think Tanganyika (Tanzania, now),
>>> was
>>> the only thing they had other than their Chinese concession that was
>>> really
>>> of any value.
>>>
>>> They also had what's now Namibia, some possessions in West Africa, and
>>> Papua
>>> New Guinea, as well as what you mentioned. Samoa and some smaller
>>> islands
>>> in the south Pacific. Trying to dislodge them from Tanganyika took the
>>> British quite a while.
>>>
>>> Luckner was the German naval commander that had such success in the
>>> Indian
>>> Ocean, in between India and Africa. A very chivalrous sort, he made
>>> sure
>>> all the crews and passengers were safely off any Allied ship he sank
>>> before
>>> sending it to the bottom. Hardly the archtypical, ruthlessly barbaric,
>>> baby-bayonetting Hun of Allied propaganda. He eventually made it back
>>> to
>>> Germany.
>>>
>>> Their main Pacific naval force was commanded by Admiral Graf Spee. He
>>> gave
>>> the Royal Navy quite a drubbing off the coast of Chile. He met his end
>>> in a
>>> naval battle off the Falklands after rounding the Cape.
>>>
>>> Ironically, not that far from where the German battleship named after
>>> him,
>>> the "Graf Spee" opened her seacocks and scuttled early in World War Two.
>>> Rather than fight it out with the British Commonwealth warships that had
>>> her
>>> cornered.
>>>
>>> The other irony in all of this was the Japanese coming to the defence of
>>> British Columbia. Where, seven years earlier, a mob led by goons from
>>> the
>>> racist Asiatic-Exclusion League had gone on a rampage against the
>>> Chinese
>>> and Japanese that had settled here. The spillover of the American
>>> financial
>>> panic of 1907, and a genuine 'white' fear that more 'Asiatics' would be
>>> brought in to displace higher waged 'white' workers with lower waged
>>> 'yellow' ones was exploited by this group, who wanted to expell all
>>> non-whites from the Province.
>>>
>>> They smashed up businesses in Vancouver's Chinatown and Japtown areas.
>>> The
>>> Chinese 'turned the other cheek', so to speak. But the Japanese, when
>>> attacked, gave as good as they got. Or maybe better.
>>>
>>> It must have been a bit hard to swallow for some of these people that,
>>> seven
>>> years later, all that was keeping them from a possible attack by their
>>> fellow "white Europeans" was a Navy of little "yellow Asiatics". (And,
>>> of
>>> course, our two subs, one obsolete cruiser, and a couple of 'pop-guns'
>>> on
>>> shore.)
>>>
>>>
>>> (Peter continues:-) Douglas says in the same section ("The Big Idea" ~
>>> Joe) that it was the US which pressured Britiain to end the Treaty with
>>> Japan in 1922. A couple of pages earlier he mentioned that
>>> the B of E was put under a US advisor and appears to be 1917. I suspect
>>> that this coinsides with the US agreeing to come into the war after the
>>> same
>>> international banker deligation from Britian visited the US which would
>>> be
>>> the fulfillment of the promise made to Lloyd George the new Prime
>>> Minister
>>> in 1916, whom just happned to be also the British Zionist organisations
>>> solicitor, that if he should spare the unsparable troops from the war
>>> against Germany and do service breaking up the Ottoman Empire to free
>>> Palestine for- you can guess, they will be repaid by US assistence in
>>> the
>>> war.
>>>
>>> (Joe replies:-) I have yet to see a complete accounting anywhere else
>>> of
>>> the things Douglas mentions in that whole section, from the point where
>>> he's
>>> quoting the British Ambassador to Washington, Sir Cecil Spring-Rice,
>>> right
>>> through to the visit of Rufus Isaacs, and the change of sympathy of the
>>> German-American-Jewish financiers of Wall Street.
>>>
>>> We know that Douglas must have been very well-connected. He seemed to
>>> move
>>> in circles which definitely included the 'movers and shakers' of the
>>> post-WW
>>> I era. And he certainly must've had many private conversations with
>>> these
>>> people, in which they would likely be telling him many things which
>>> might
>>> have bearing on what he would be telling them.
>>>
>>> I think it's highly unlikely that what he wrote in that section would
>>> all be
>>> 'made-up', or the product of an 'anti-semitic' imagination. Yet that
>>> whole
>>> period, and beyond, seems to have an aura of mystery about it. There
>>> are
>>> things that happened that do not seem to make sense. They may be
>>> co-incidences, but it still seems strange that there are so many
>>> co-incidences. It's definitely an area in which there should be further
>>> research done, and especially if the passage of time has now unsealed
>>> much
>>> of what might have earlier been 'classified' information.
>>>
>>>
>>> (Peter continues:-) . The Americans need to look very closely
>>> at the series of building up war machines to be used and then destroyed
>>> because there have been very unhealthy signs appearing since the year
>>> 2000.
>>>
>>> (Joe replies:-) That certainly wouldn't hurt, though I doubt it would
>>> really change anything. The other night there was a documentary on the
>>> American PBS TV station we receive from Seattle about the growing
>>> political
>>> influence of those Americans who have convinced themselves that
>>> modern-Israel is composed of "God's Chosen People". And that America
>>> and
>>> Americans must do its bidding to achieve eternal Salvation.
>>>
>>> I believe those currently following this idea was stated to be something
>>> like 60 million people. About one fifth of the American population, in
>>> other words. We could probably expect a similar ratio here in Canada,
>>> though hopefully it would be less.
>>>
>>> These are certainly not 'evil' people, even though they are, in my
>>> opinion,
>>> hopelessly deluded. The problem is not so much with their belief, and
>>> those
>>> who take great pains to re-inforce its veracity, but that they are, at
>>> present, certainly a very pliable 'putty' in the hands of 'evil'
>>> people.
>>> And therein lies great danger for America and the world.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Joe Thomson" <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
>>>> To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
>>>> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 8:18 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] question
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > (Peter wrote:-) "....the Bank of England lent such a huge amount
>>>> > of
>>>> > credit to Japan that it was kept a secret."
>>>> >
>>>> > (Joe replies:-) I don't know about the Bank of England's secret
>>>> > lending
>>>> > to
>>>> > Japan, Peter, but it's plausible. Japan must have needed
>>>> > considerable
>>>> > international credit to go in the short time that it did from feudal
>>> state
>>>> > to a modern, industrialised country complete with a modern,
>>> well-equipped
>>>> > military, I would think.
>>>> >
>>>> > There's no question pre-WW I Japan was quite useful to Britain to
>>>> > have
>>> as
>>>> > an
>>>> > ally. The Japanese directly checked Russian military expansionism in
>>> the
>>>> > Far East and northern China by being the victors in the
>>>> > Russo-Japanese
>>> War
>>>> > in 1905. (With considerable covert British assistance.) Indirectly,
>>> the
>>>> > weakening of Russia would have removed a threat from that direction
>>>> > towards
>>>> > British interests in India and Persia (Iran).
>>>> >
>>>> > After the outbreak of war in Europe in 1914 the Japanese were able
>>>> > to
>>>> > wrest control over the 'sphere of influence' that Germany had
>>> established
>>>> > in
>>>> > China. The Germans had a substantial millitary prescence there,
>>> including
>>>> > a
>>>> > powerful fleet of modern warships. Evidence of the importance the
>>> Kaiser
>>>> > attached to what he reportedly stated to be Germany's most important
>>>> > overseas possession. (Quite likely not so much for what 'goods'
>>>> > China
>>>> > could
>>>> > provide Germany, but as a substantial peace-time 'captive' outlet
>>>> > for
>>>> > German manufactured goods.)
>>>> >
>>>> > This German Pacific Fleet based in China was considered to be a prime
>>>> > menace
>>>> > to British Columbia, since the British Empire's main ship-repair
>>>> > facilities
>>>> > in the entire Pacific were then located at Esquimalt, outside
>>>> > Victoria,
>>>> > B.C.
>>>> > Destruction of the large graving dock there, ( one of the few in the
>>> world
>>>> > that could accomodate a ship the size of the original Queen
>>>> > Elizabeth ~
>>>> > and
>>>> > did, during WW II), would have been quite a military accomplishment.
>>>> >
>>>> > At the outbreak of war in 1914, the Royal Canadian Navy had but one
>>>> > obsolete cruiser to defend this facility, and the entire BC coast.
>>>> > Fortunately, for us, the Japanese Imperial Navy quickly sent modern
>>> ships
>>>> > to
>>>> > take up station and defend against what was feared would be an
>>>> > imminent
>>>> > attack. (Prior to that, to bolster the shamefully inadequate
>>>> > defences,
>>>> > the
>>>> > BC Government secretly purchased two submarines made for the Chilean
>>> Navy
>>>> > from their US builders. An act completely 'ultra vires' of its
>>>> > Constitutional powers. 'Constitutions', it would seem, CAN be
>>>> > circumvented
>>>> > when circumstances warrant it, and there's a clear indication of
>>>> > public
>>>> > support. )
>>>> >
>>>> > As it turned out, the anticipated attack never came. The German
>>>> > Pacific
>>>> > fleet divided, with one small group going into the Indian Ocean,
>>>> > where
>>> it
>>>> > wreaked havoc on Allied shipping for quite some time. I believe some
>>>> > of
>>>> > those German sailors were later captured, and interned as POWs in
>>>> > New
>>>> > Zealand. Before escaping, I believe, and somehow making it back to
>>>> > Germany.
>>>> >
>>>> > The main German force made for home via Cape Horn. Along the way
>>>> > annihilating a Royal Navy task force that intercepted it off the
>>>> > coast
>>> of
>>>> > Chile. The Royal Navy later turned the tables off the Falklands, and
>>>> > removed that menace entirely.
>>>> >
>>>> > I believe the Japanese also sent destroyers to patrol in the
>>>> > Mediterranean,
>>>> > where the Austro- Hungarian Empire's Navy posed a enemy submarine
>>> threat
>>>> > for some time.
>>>> >
>>>> > After the war, Hirohito was an honoured guest of King George V at
>>>> > the
>>>> > Royal
>>>> > Family's Balmoral estate, an indication of British appreciation for
>>>> > his
>>>> > country's war effort, and that Japan had achieved a unique status as
>>>> > an
>>>> > non-white world power. It must have been somewhat of a slap in the
>>>> > face
>>>> > when their alliance was not renewed by Britain a short time later.
>>>> >
>>>> > I think it's quite within the realm of possibility, as Douglas
>>>> > indicated
>>>> > in
>>>> > "The Big Idea", that the influence of 'International' Finance over
>>>> > post-war British policy had a hand in that.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > ----- Original Message -----
>>>> > From: "Peter" <cymric@xtra.co.nz>
>>>> > To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
>>>> > Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 3:54 AM
>>>> > Subject: Re: [socialcredit] question
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >> Douglas was explaining the conflict between the prestege of
>>>> >> character
>>> and
>>>> >> the prestege of money power. Both Japan and Britain were the
>>>> >> victims
>>> of
>>>> > the
>>>> >> latter at the expense of the former.
>>>> >> In the early part of the century, I am not sure if it was pre-world
>>>> >> war
>>>> > one
>>>> >> or immediately after that the Bank of England lent such a huge
>>>> >> amount
>>> of
>>>> >> credit to Japan that it was kept a secret. It would be inevitable
>>>> >> that
>>>> >> in
>>>> >> the thirties Japan would have been subject to the banks directions
>>>> >> and
>>>> > thus
>>>> >> the policy outside their control- doing the opposite to what Douglas
>>>> >> would
>>>> >> advise.
>>>> >> This circmstance may have had an influence of Japan's decision to go
>>>> >> to
>>>> > war
>>>> >> upon the US ( some neutral policy!) cutting off her oil supplies.
>>>> >> Peter
>>>> >>
>>>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> >> From: "Joe Thomson" <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
>>>> >> To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
>>>> >> Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 12:23 PM
>>>> >> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] question
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> > "....but gave evidence at
>>>> >> > countless official inquiries in Great Britain, Japan,
>>>> >> > Canada, New Zealand and Australia."
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> > (Bill Ryan:-) Question: What "official inquiries" did Douglas
>>>> >> > give
>>>> >> > evidence to in Japan and Australia?
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > (Joe replies:-) I think Rowbotham might have phrased that a bit
>>> better.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > The "official enquiries" certainly weren't "countless". At least
>>>> >> > not
>>>> >> > if
>>>> >> > we're using "official enquiries" in terms of Douglas's
>>>> >> > presentation
>>> of
>>>> >> > evidence under that designation as it applies to the various
>>>> > Committees
>>>> >> > he
>>>> >> > appeared before in Ottawa, Alberta, New Zealand, and the MacMillan
>>> one
>>>> >> > we've
>>>> >> > been discussing most recently. There are four, by my count.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > In Japan in 1929, following the presentation of his paper at the
>>> World
>>>> >> > Engineering Conference Douglas was attending in Tokyo, I believe
>>>> >> > it
>>>> >> > would
>>>> >> > have been more correct to state that he was interviewed by
>>> "officials"
>>>> > of
>>>> >> > that country's Finance Ministry.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > And, over the period of a week apparently, must have answered
>>>> >> > many
>>> of
>>>> >> > their "inquiries" as to his ideas.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > I think this would most likely have been the nature of any
>>> "inquiries"
>>>> > he
>>>> >> > received from "officials" during his visit to Australia also.
>>>> >> > Doubtless
>>>> >> > there must have been "countless" conversations where various
>>>> >> > "officials"
>>>> >> > in
>>>> >> > various places made their own "inquiries" regarding his ideas in
>>>> >> > conversation with him over the years.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > It is interesting to note that Douglas, despite his evidence
>>>> >> > before
>>> the
>>>> >> > Alberta Agricultural Committee in 1934 where he speaks of the
>>> Japanese
>>>> >> > using
>>>> >> > "the reverse" of his ideas, still seems to be quite favourably
>>> disposed
>>>> >> > towards the Japanese.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > This is also touched on in his more 'political' writings in "The
>>>> >> > Big
>>>> >> > Idea",
>>>> >> > where he seems to indicate that Japan, a staunch and effective
>>> British
>>>> >> > ally
>>>> >> > throughout World War One from start to end, was subjected to a
>>>> >> > "loss
>>> of
>>>> >> > face" when their alliance was terminated after World War One.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > We have not discussed what is implied in "the reverse" of his
>>>> >> > ideas,
>>> as
>>>> >> > the
>>>> >> > Japanese applied them during the pre-WWII years. Any comments on
>>> that?
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Do you suppose "the reverse" of Douglas's ideas on national credit
>>> also
>>>> >> > implies the "the reverse" of his philosophy regarding the
>>> relationship
>>>> >> > between the State and the individual as regards the Japan of
>>>> >> > that
>>>> >> > era?
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > ----- Original Message -----
>>>> >> > From: <william_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
>>>> >> > To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
>>>> >> > Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 10:24 AM
>>>> >> > Subject: [socialcredit] question
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >> The current issue of "The Social Crediter" contains
>>>> >> >> this statement from Michael Rowbotham's book, *The
>>>> >> >> Grip of Death*:
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> "...Douglas was a massive political influence in his
>>>> >> >> day, and a major figure on the world stage. He not
>>>> >> >> only had a world-wide following, but gave evidence at
>>>> >> >> countless official inquiries in Great Britain, Japan,
>>>> >> >> Canada, New Zealand and Australia."
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Question: What "official inquiries" did Douglas give
>>>> >> >> evidence to in Japan and Australia?
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >
>>>> >
>>> ____________________________________________________________________________
>>>> >> > ________
>>>> >> >> Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel
>>>> >> >> today!
>>>> >> > http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >> >> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list
>>>> >> >> are
>>>> >> >> at
>>>> >> >> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
>>>> >> >> You're subscribed to this list with the email thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
>>>> >> >> For more information, visit
>>>> >> >> http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >> > Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list
>>>> >> > are
>>> at
>>>> >> > http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
>>>> >> > You're subscribed to this list with the email cymric@xtra.co.nz
>>>> >> > For more information, visit
>>>> >> > http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>>>> >> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are
>>>> >> at
>>>> >> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
>>>> >> You're subscribed to this list with the email thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
>>>> >> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>>>> >
>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> > Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are
>>>> > at
>>>> > http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
>>>> > You're subscribed to this list with the email cymric@xtra.co.nz
>>>> > For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
>>>> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
>>>> You're subscribed to this list with the email thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
>>>> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
>>> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
>>> You're subscribed to this list with the email hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
>>> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.5/1058 - Release Date:
>>> 08/10/2007 4:54 PM
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
>> It has removed 18806 spam emails to date.
>> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
>> Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
>> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
>> You're subscribed to this list with the email cymric@xtra.co.nz
>> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
> You're subscribed to this list with the email wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message