martial law , this is america

[golden arhat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBAQ6m696to
this guy is nearly arrested 3 times just for filming
he exposes michael moor for what he is and that is a fraud watch if u consider yourself a patriot

[golden arhat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx4-joipwmU

[Black Jack II]

Ahhh just to let you know. Alec Jones is considered pretty fringe dude. Some would say worse.

He is the guy who basically snuck into a historic private social club called the bohemian grove and took undercover footage of activities. He fans the flames of left wing conspiracy nuts for the most part. The whole start with the twin towers burning is often a well used sign that the docu-heh-mentry is going to be down hill from there.

[Mas Judt]

on the left and the right.

I have no doubt that there are serious consitutional issues at play, and most people are not educated enough to even know what they are. I'd even wager that some of the things we now find acceptable were things we fought against in WW2 and the Cold War.

However, I do not think the fringe element clearly groks any of this. They are just as busy trying to 'scare' people into action: On the right it was the 'patriot' movement, convinced we would all be hearded into camps because FEMA dedicated staging areas for people in a mass crisis. On the left it has been global cooling, global warming and now somehow blaming a thousand years of islamic inspired hatred and war on us. Don't forget Thomas Jefferson created the US marines to fight Islamic haters.

I'm far more concerned about the erosion of civil liberties due to political correctness, the need for a national ID by May 08, and the prospect of living in a nanny state. Oh, and George Bush going down in history as the man who surrended the U.S. to Mexico. (NAFTA Super Highway anyone?).

I'm tired of being called a racist for opposing illegal, immoral and criminal acts. I'm tired of our politicians on the left and right selling us out to international institutions. I'm tired of losing soveriegnty to the WTF. (Although I do support free trade.)

Anyone with any experience with the Islamic world knows how deeply ingrained hating the 'other' is built into the religous practice. I strongly suggest anyone who is still foolish enough to beleive the US government was behind 9/11 go read the book on this subject by the guys from Popular Mechanics. Oh, and put the Kool-Aid down.

[Black Jack II]

I'm far more concerned about the erosion of civil liberties due to political correctness, the need for a national ID by May 08, and the prospect of living in a nanny state. Oh, and George Bush going down in history as the man who surrended the U.S. to Mexico. (NAFTA Super Highway anyone?).

I'm tired of being called a racist for opposing illegal, immoral and criminal acts. I'm tired of our politicians on the left and right selling us out to international institutions. I'm tired of losing soveriegnty to the WTF. (Although I do support free trade.)-

Excellent paragraphs. Could not agree more on those points.

But what if the koolaid is grape flavored....?

But on this part below you stated something I also find interesting.

On the right it was the 'patriot' movement, convinced we would all be hearded into camps because FEMA dedicated staging areas for people in a mass crisis.-

I totally remeber that. Actually Alec Jones was one of the peeps fanning those flames about FEMA camps, NATO secret train prisons and such which got some of the peeps on the right a tad flushed.:cool:

[Becca]

Don't forget Thomas Jefferson created the US marines to fight Islamic haters.

Where did you get that piece of malarky? The Marines was formed in October 1775, modled after every other naval infantry. And it has always had the same function as every other naval infantry... ship-board defence, boardings, and amphibious landings.

[Water Dragon]

You know what I'm tired of? I'm tired of some Megalomaniac in office deciding he is greater than my Country. I'm tired of someone who keeps making things worse by covering up his mistakes instead of fixing him. I'm tired of being told I'm not a good American because it makes me sick to see my Freedoms being exchanged for Security. I'm tired of hearing story after story about how many Irai's were killed while there's no mention of the atrocities occurring in our own ghetto. I'm tired of billions of dollars going to foreign countries as "Humanitarian Aid" while across my own countries, babies cry out from hunger.

I want my f*cking Country back.

[SevenStar]

Where did you get that piece of malarky? The Marines was formed in October 1775, modled after every other naval infantry. And it has always had the same function as every other naval infantry... ship-board defence, boardings, and amphibious landings.

you sure?

"There is no doubt Ellison was right about Jefferson believing wisdom could be "gleaned" from the Muslim Quran. At the time Jefferson owned the book, he needed to know everything possible about Muslims because he was about to advocate war against the Islamic "Barbary" states of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Tripoli."

http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan07/jeff_quran.htm

http://virginiavirtucon.wordpress.com/2007/01/03/thomas-jefferson-and-islam/

And how does the song go? From the halls of montezuma to the shores of tripoli...

tripoli at the time was largely controlled by muslims. They pirated the waters during those times and extorted money from those who tried to travel them.

[Mas Judt]

Becca,
a quick look into any decent history of the forming of the U.S. Marines will show you a few things:

1.) They were created to fight the Barbary pirates
2.) The Barbary pirates were Muslims who beleived it was thier duty to Islam to attack 'infidels' and sell them into slavery (The ambassador frm Libya (I think) to London at the time explained this to the Americans. That it was a RELIGOUS duty to wage war on Infidels. FWIW - the same words used from the founding of Islam to today - if you bother to read what they actually say to each other.)
3.) The peace treaty was crafted very carefully to state that the U.S. was based on no particular religion - so muslims should not have any reason to attack our ships. This was the only way to get around the religous duty of muslims since the reigions founding.

Not malarky. Education. I suggest you go get one. The Muslims have been attacking thier neighbors from day 1. Only a fool would think this is recent history.

[SevenStar]

And we still paid them when we made the peace treaty - like $60,000 - to release sailors they were holding hostage.

[Mas Judt]

Money that could have gone to help the ghetto folks. (I'm not being funny here, just using context my friends on the left can see.)

[lunghushan]

Whaddever. Politics is like the weather. Now let's all go back to watching Friends reruns.

[Black Jack II]

Can you even picture the uproar certain pc folks would have if some big military type mentioned on tv that piece of trivia that the marines were actually formed to fight off muslim terrorists.

Wow. It would be brutal for the poor soul.

[lunghushan]

Can you even picture the uproar certain pc folks would have if some big military type mentioned on tv that piece of trivia that the marines were actually formed to fight off muslim terrorists.

Wow. It would be brutal for the poor soul.

Or that the first corporation was started to raise funds for an army so they could go attack people. LOL

Bottom line is the military people at the lower end (and and a lot of civilians) die so the people at the top can enrich themselves. Yet the military people are so brainwashed that most of them never realize that fact.

Whatever. Status quo. (... ante ... semper)

[Shaolinlueb]

You know what I'm tired of? I'm tired of some Megalomaniac in office deciding he is greater than my Country. I'm tired of someone who keeps making things worse by covering up his mistakes instead of fixing him. I'm tired of being told I'm not a good American because it makes me sick to see my Freedoms being exchanged for Security. I'm tired of hearing story after story about how many Irai's were killed while there's no mention of the atrocities occurring in our own ghetto. I'm tired of billions of dollars going to foreign countries as "Humanitarian Aid" while across my own countries, babies cry out from hunger.

I want my f*cking Country back.

I agree with you.

[SanHeChuan]

Actually Becca is Right.

Only It was November 10 1775. However these first marines were Continental Marines, because if you look at the date there was no United States yet. They were disbanded in 1783, and reformed in 1798 as United States Marines for war with France which didn't turn into much of a conflict. They were reformed by President John Adams. The Barbary wars wasn't until 1801.

And saying someone is Brain washed for holding an opinion or belief contrary to yours is faulty. That's like saying that Christan's are Brain washed into believing in God, or that you are Brain washed into thinking that Kung fu has value. :rolleyes:

[Mas Judt]

"I want my f*cking Country back."

What does this mean, and WHEN did you have it in the first place?

Just a question, as I'm not sure what people mean when they say this.

[Black Jack II]

No matter what the view point it seems that people may want to start looking at the inescapable truth that we might be getting ready for war with Iran at some point. A country which was always a much bigger threat than Iraq if they become a nuclear power. A nuclear Iran is something not many of a sound mind want to think about as there are not many sound minds sitting over in that neck of the woods to begin with.

Something short of military action may yet prevail on Iran. Perhaps sanctions will turn their leadership from its doomsday ambitions. Maybe Russia can somehow be persuaded to give them an incentive to think again. But we can’t count on this optimistic scenario anytime soon.

Just stating that the topic of Iraq may go with the way of the birds at some point.

[Mas Judt]

Ir reminds me of a quote by PJ O'Rourke:

"America is a great country. Wherever there is evil and tyranny in the world, we invade the country next door."

Unfortunately, we do face an actual, compelling threat. Unfortunately, the situation, as we are approaching both on right and left is truly Orwellian - the war on terror is a war without end - unless we do some truly horrible things to put an end to the hateful ideology that drives it.

Just remember, Nancy Pelosi voted to invade a country that never attacked us, and many other things that are frankly, just wrong. The right and left are the same in this regard, with the difference that the left seems uninterested in self-defence, while the right is willing to defend the U.S.

George Bush has done some great things domestically - the economic turnaround was remarkable. However, the Iraq war was certainly ill-advised, although I do not beleive it is unwinnable. We are in fact double-f@cked as just ducking out will leave s highly vulnerable against an emboldened enemy. Unfortunately, many Americans won't realize the extent of the threat until we lose a city.

And GB is sure to be the President to go down in history as the guy who surrendered the SouthWest to Mexico. (Although in the long run, economic merger between Canada, USA, and Mexico could be a very good thing for all involved. I enjoy Latin culture a great deal, so my only reservations are economic and policy based.)

[bodhitree]

The Iraq war was a horrible mistake, that had nothing to do with terrorism or 9/11. Many factors led up to the Iraq war, a struggle between the CIA and Pentagon (with **** Cheney and Don Rumsfeld on the Pentagon side), Oil, Sadam's terrible dictatorship (although I don't believe this was a crutial factor, just a selling point), revenge from the first gulf war, amoung others. THe war in Iraq has diminished our capabilities in Afghanistan, where Al Quieda was before the Iraq war (now it is much easier for Al Quieda to congrigate in Iraq due to the chaos, not like the days of Sadam's Iron rule) and has made the world less safe because the Taliban and Al Quieda have been allowed to regroup. Osama Bin Laden is probably in the Sudan or Pakistan by now.

Is the world more safe now than before the war? No. Ask any Iraqi. You may say "there hasn't been another terrorist attack since 9/11, well increased security measures have something to do with that, the removal of Sadam Husein on the other hand has less than nothing to do with that.


Oh, and weren't we supposed to find WEAPONS, where the hell are those? The gas he used on the Kurds he got from us during the 8 year war.

Support our troops, bring them our of harms way, especially for purposes that don't protect freedom, democracy, and safety.

Instead the Bush administration has them fighting for lies, curruption, chaos, in a poorly planed war with a poorly planned peace. The troops answered the call of duty, we must elect leaders who will make sure their call of duty is the wise, rightous, and necessary one.

[Chief Fox]

The left and the right aren't that much different.

They both have their agendas, many are in the pockets of big business. All are influenced by lobbyists.

Neither party is totally inocent.

I don't support GW but I don't hate him or think that he is evil.

I believe that he honestly thinks that he is doing the right thing.

I respect the fact that he is now taking credit for what ever happens in Iraq. He has no choice really seeing how Rumsfeld is gone. There's no one left to blame.

Does everyone remember the economy when Clinton was president. Now I don't want to get into a comparison flame war here but I believe that the economy was good because we had a democratic president that was forced to work with a republican senate and house. This created a balance and the country benefitted from it.

The past 6 years with republicans contolling both houses and the white house, hasn't been balanced. The system of checks and balances suffered, and A LOT of things happened that A LOT of people weren't happy about.

Now that we have a republican president and a democratic house and senate we can get back to a balanced state.

GW has an opportunity here to be remembered for something other than the war in Iraq.

The question is, will he "stay the course" or will he attempt to work with congress. For all our sakes, I hope he decides to work with congress. But I've got a gut feeling that he won't.

And yes, a war in Iran seams to be on the horizon. This, however, would be a somewhat legitimate war in my opinion and not a personal vendetta. I do hope that progress can be made with sanctions but it's not looking good.

Does anyone remember the joke of about a year ago or so. George Bush's new exit strategy from Iraq. Through Iran. Scary how right on this was.

[Chief Fox]

"I want my f*cking Country back."

What does this mean, and WHEN did you have it in the first place?

Just a question, as I'm not sure what people mean when they say this.

Well for the past 6 years a large percentage of the population has been made to feel like they were radical leftists.

If you go back to the Gore vs. Bush election. There is reason to believe that some shady deals went down with votes in Florida. Some people say that when all was said and done, Gore got more votes and GW was appointed president by the supreme court. Now that is water under the bridge so I don't want to argue about it. Probably one of the closest presidential races in american history.

Then of course there was 9/11. After 9/11 the country was never more united. We went to war in Afganistan then we were lead to war in Iraq under what a lot of people considered to be false pretences. Again, water under the bridge, I don't want to argue about this.

Then we had the Kerry vs. Bush election. And the country was divided again with another exteremly close election. The word on the street was morals and values are what won the deciding votes for Bush. Some would say, what morals, and what values?

Then there was Katrina. Where our governement was acused of knowing what was wrong and doing nothing about it. Then not responding in a timely fashion.

Now we are being asked to spend even more money on this war in Iraq. A war that many people feel is unjust and should be over by now. In addition to that, there is the ongoing threat of Iran and the potential for another war.

I've discussed with friends about how I am proud to be an American but I've lost faith in our leadership and at times I'm alomst ashamed. I feel like I'm being lied to and I just want some straight answers and I don't think we are getting them.

So I can completely understand why someone would say "I want my f*cking country back".

These are the words of a person that is fed up with their government and wants to feel proud to be an American again.

[SanHeChuan]

Whatever you may think about going to war in Iraq in the first place, doesn't matter now, it's done.

Those were the choices made, and now there are consequences. If we leave Iraq now we will be abandoning our responsibilities. We will be proving every naysayer right, everyone who wants to see us fail.

All I hear is "the price is too high." When what they are really thinking is "I don't want this constant reminder of a mistake."

Think really hard about what could happen in Iraq if we left, and maybe you'll stir up enough clarity to find a little truth. What are those consequences? When the bleeding hearts have saved the US Soldier where will the love for the Iraqi people be.

We can't win the War in Iraq! This is no longer a War against Iraq, but a War for Iraq. If we leave, Iraq loses, and ten years from now we will be right back where we started or worse. Who are we fighting in Iraq? Do you really know? And what do you think would happen if we stopped fighting them?

A new strategy great, but leaving should not be an option. Is this a war we can even win with guns? No, but one we would surely lose with out them.

A political with draw or not the US will have a physical force presence in Iraq for the next 50 years.

And I've almost stirred up enough senitment to turn around and go back to Iraq myself.

[bodhitree]

Think really hard about what could happen in Iraq if we left


There just might be a civil war or chaos:rolleyes:

[SanHeChuan]

Until someone takes power. My money is on Iran, but maybe someone like bin ladin. And if there would be no diffence if we left why not see it through to a profitable end.

[Royal Dragon]

I have been wondering of late, maybe we are in Iraq, so we have an accessible front to Iran?

[SanHeChuan]

True Dat :eek:

[Black Jack II]

Regarding your main above post. Excellent man. Could not agree more.

[Becca]

you sure?

"There is no doubt Ellison was right about Jefferson believing wisdom could be "gleaned" from the Muslim Quran. At the time Jefferson owned the book, he needed to know everything possible about Muslims because he was about to advocate war against the Islamic "Barbary" states of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Tripoli."

http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan07/jeff_quran.htm

http://virginiavirtucon.wordpress.com/2007/01/03/thomas-jefferson-and-islam/

And how does the song go? From the halls of montezuma to the shores of tripoli...

tripoli at the time was largely controlled by muslims. They pirated the waters during those times and extorted money from those who tried to travel them.

Posative... Unless you are assuming the second President formed the Continantal Army and Navy for that same reason, 20 something years before he was even president, as they were formed by the same action as the Marines.

1775 was the time our founding fathers were building up to the Revolution. "The Halls of Trippoli" was part of a war that came along about 25 years later.

[Becca]

Actually Becca is Right.

Only It was November 10 1775. However these first marines were Continental Marines, because if you look at the date there was no United States yet. They were disbanded in 1783, and reformed in 1798 as United States Marines for war with France which didn't turn into much of a conflict. They were reformed by President John Adams. The Barbary wars wasn't until 1801.

And saying someone is Brain washed for holding an opinion or belief contrary to yours is faulty. That's like saying that Christan's are Brain washed into believing in God, or that you are Brain washed into thinking that Kung fu has value. :rolleyes:
Ok, I guess our resident Active Duty Marine jumped in before me on this. Thanks!

[NJM]

watch if u consider yourself a patriot

I lol'd at that sentence. I didn't watch it, I guess I'm not a patriot :(.

[rogue]

Whatever you may think about going to war in Iraq in the first place, doesn't matter now, it's done.

Those were the choices made, and now there are consequences. If we leave Iraq now we will be abandoning our responsibilities. We will be proving every naysayer right, everyone who wants to see us fail.

All I hear is "the price is too high." When what they are really thinking is "I don't want this constant reminder of a mistake."

Think really hard about what could happen in Iraq if we left, and maybe you'll stir up enough clarity to find a little truth. What are those consequences? When the bleeding hearts have saved the US Soldier where will the love for the Iraqi people be.

We can't win the War in Iraq! This is no longer a War against Iraq, but a War for Iraq. If we leave, Iraq loses, and ten years from now we will be right back where we started or worse. Who are we fighting in Iraq? Do you really know? And what do you think would happen if we stopped fighting them?

A new strategy great, but leaving should not be an option. Is this a war we can even win with guns? No, but one we would surely lose with out them.

A political with draw or not the US will have a physical force presence in Iraq for the next 50 years.

And I've almost stirred up enough senitment to turn around and go back to Iraq myself.

Well said Marine. :cool:


This is no longer a War against Iraq, but a War for Iraq. SanHeChuan

Read that again folks. You have to look at what's going on in the entire region, and there are a lot of players with agendas that are being intentionally ignored. It's not about Iran having nukes but about Iran (a badly run country as you will find anywhere) gaining direct control over the Persian Gulf and the Saudi oil fields. It's about Syria and Iran overtly supporting terrorists groups who aren't your daddy's two bit tangos, these state sponsored thugs can not only destabilize a country but actually gain control of parts of it. We cut and run and you'll see land grabs, war and puppet regimes that none of us will like.

[Mas Judt]

Well, I stand corrected.

Buut it does not change the fact that Marines were mustered to fight Islamic haters hundreds of years ago, spouting the same cr@p that we here today, and we read in the koran and the hadith.

Ultimately, my point is that this is not a 'new' war, just one that we have avoided until we had forgotten it existed. And it is not with a country or nation, it is with a virus-like idea that produces evil wherever it goes.

For example:

More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.

Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years.

More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland.

19 Muslim hijackers killed more innocents in two hours on September 11th than the number of American criminals executed in the last 65 years.

While in the Mosques, things are preached that would be considered hate speech if they were said about Muslims.


There is something horribly wrong here. The daily newslisting of people murdered in cold blood around the world just for bbeing Buddhist, Christian, a woman, or 'insulting' islam is obscene.

This is madness.

If you think the religion isn't full of hate, join an islamic school (especially one funded by Saudi Arabia). Express interest in being 'pure' and your dislike for infidels. Then watch what happens. There are groups here in the US that carry a bag with a burial cloth and a machete just in case they need to behead an unbeliever.

Now all this being said, people will say 'oh your just predujiced.' Well, yes, technically, if not liking those who preach killing and hating me is wrong - explan to me why this is the case.

San He Chuan - your the man.

FWIW - One of my students just joined the Navy Seal program. Very honored by knowing that young man.

[FuXnDajenariht]

You know what I'm tired of? I'm tired of some Megalomaniac in office deciding he is greater than my Country. I'm tired of someone who keeps making things worse by covering up his mistakes instead of fixing him. I'm tired of being told I'm not a good American because it makes me sick to see my Freedoms being exchanged for Security. I'm tired of hearing story after story about how many Irai's were killed while there's no mention of the atrocities occurring in our own ghetto. I'm tired of billions of dollars going to foreign countries as "Humanitarian Aid" while across my own countries, babies cry out from hunger.

I want my f*cking Country back.

A-****ing-men bro

[rogue]

I have been wondering of late, maybe we are in Iraq, so we have an accessible front to Iran?

Care to take a guess who is on one of Iran's other borders?

[Mas Judt]

Yes, but Pakistan is more unstable than Iraq, and we DON'T have bases there.

Most of the fighting in Iraq is isolated to a few areas, especially the capitol.

Northern Kurdistan is stable and thriving. So are many other regions.

Pakistan on the other hand has large swaths of land that are 'autonomous' and essentially in a constant state of islamoinspired war and killing. wether it is tribes vs. tribes, tribes vs. government or just the good old fashioned killing of non-beleivers or thier daughters... mmmm the peace of islam. (my apologies to the more sensitive out there, but I ran into another islamohater last night. It's like running into Nazi's or Klansmen. They tick me off. I'm intolerant of the intolerant.)

Of course, I'm sure if Ted Kenndey looks hard enough, he'll find a way to blame us.

[Fei jiao]

...these state sponsored thugs can not only destabilize a country but actually gain control of parts of it...

hmmm, destabilize a country, gain control of parts of it....
Sounds familiar. :rolleyes:

[Fei jiao]

More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.

Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years.

More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland.

19 Muslim hijackers killed more innocents in two hours on September 11th than the number of American criminals executed in the last 65 years.

While in the Mosques, things are preached that would be considered hate speech if they were said about Muslims.


There is something horribly wrong here. The daily newslisting of people murdered in cold blood around the world just for bbeing Buddhist, Christian, a woman, or 'insulting' islam is obscene.

This is madness.

Now THIS is also madness!

Since WW2 all these countries have been bombed by the United States:

China 1945-46
Korea 1950-53
China 1950-53
Guatemala 1954
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-60
Guatemala 1960
Congo 1964 Peru 1965
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1964-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Guatemala 1967-69
Grenada 1983
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1980s
Nicaragua 1980
Panama 1989
Iraq 1991-99
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999

And you can add the more recent ones...

[Black Jack II]

What you seem to fail to grasp Fei Jaio is that those were military actions against military targets based on carefully considered policy. Not a holy war on civilians.

Muslims could care less if its child, woman, civilan or military, to them there are no blue or red states, its all the same target. A lot of the data he put down is true as the air you breath. Some peeps are just to wrapped up in a pc condom to realize it.:rolleyes:

[Fei jiao]

Yeah, a lot of people are under the impression that US bombs never touch women, children, innocent civilians. whether it's intentional or "casualties", I see no difference. But that's my opinion. Everybody's entitled to their own opinions, right?

[rogue]

Yes, but Pakistan is more unstable than Iraq, and we DON'T have bases there.

Most of the fighting in Iraq is isolated to a few areas, especially the capitol.

Northern Kurdistan is stable and thriving. So are many other regions.

Pakistan on the other hand has large swaths of land that are 'autonomous' and essentially in a constant state of islamoinspired war and killing. wether it is tribes vs. tribes, tribes vs. government or just the good old fashioned killing of non-beleivers or thier daughters... mmmm the peace of islam. (my apologies to the more sensitive out there, but I ran into another islamohater last night. It's like running into Nazi's or Klansmen. They tick me off. I'm intolerant of the intolerant.)

Of course, I'm sure if Ted Kenndey looks hard enough, he'll find a way to blame us.

Close, but no ceegar! Look a bit north. Map of Ayatollahstan (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/asie/images/iran-map.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/asie/irancarte.htm&h=689&w=706&sz=66&tbnid=6Dw_M5hnL5Bj-M:&tbnh=137&tbnw=140&prev=/images%3Fq%3Diran%2Bmap&start=2&sa=X&oi=images&ct=image&cd=2) aka Iran.

Let's take over a country and make Uncle Teddy it's leader. Now that'd be fun to watch.

[Dark Knight]

"Does everyone remember the economy when Clinton was president. Now I don't want to get into a comparison flame war here but I believe that the economy was good because we had a democratic president that was forced to work with a republican senate and house. This created a balance and the country benefitted from it."

The economy under Clinton was driven by new technology. The IT world took off at that time.

But spending under Clinton was lower because of the split.

Republicans are supose to be small government and limited spending. The current republicans forgot that. With Dems and republicans together spending will come down.

Put all Democrats in and we will go to big spending. (Just like the Republicans did.)

[Merryprankster]

Yeah, a lot of people are under the impression that US bombs never touch women, children, innocent civilians. whether it's intentional or "casualties", I see no difference. But that's my opinion. Everybody's entitled to their own opinions, right?


Yeah, but that doesn't make them equally valuable or valid.

Whether it's intentional or not makes a world of difference, or perhaps you think a person who causes death via a poorly secured piano being lowered to the ground is as morally culpable as somebody who hires a hitman to kill his wife?

[rogue]

Hurray for GRIDLOCK! :D

[Fei jiao]

Yeah, but that doesn't make them equally valuable or valid.

Whether it's intentional or not makes a world of difference, or perhaps you think a person who causes death via a poorly secured piano being lowered to the ground is as morally culpable as somebody who hires a hitman to kill his wife?

You misunderstood what I meant. When the US drops a bomb on a city, claiming to target military or "terrorists", do they really care about all the civilians that die in the process? What do you consider Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Military actions against military targets based on carefully considered policy? See the double standards there?

My point is, a human life is a human life. An American life isn't more important than any other nationality, including Iraq, Iran and whatever.

[Merryprankster]

You misunderstood what I meant. When the US drops a bomb on a city, claiming to target military or "terrorists", do they really care about all the civilians that die in the process? What do you consider Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Military actions against military targets based on carefully considered policy? See the double standards there?



No, I didn't misunderstand what you meant. I just reject your opinion as being quite a bit less valid.

The U.S. military has taken great pains to develop low yield, precision weapons for the express purpose of reducing civilian casualties. They could flatten the entire city, sure. But they don't. So, yeah, I'd say reducing civilian casualties is a goal.

I consider Hiroshima and Nagasaki completely irrelevant examples from a totally different type of war of national mobilization, where you really were at war with a whole populace, during a time frame in which such precision was not possible.

But hey, keep retrofitting 21st century moral standards onto technological impossibilities as well as what amount to post Victorian, pre-modern, 19th century standards of jus in bello.

Now that we HAVE precision weapons, it would be immoral not to use them. But citing a WWII example, where carpet bombing was a legitimate war tactic and radar barely functional is just stupid.


My point is, a human life is a human life. An American life isn't more important than any other nationality, including Iraq, Iran and whatever.

Who was suggesting lives aren't equivalent? I certainly wasn't. Did somebody say that?

Your arguments are baseless. The only thing they demonstrate is that in war, people die, and that is tragic, and the best we can hope for during war is to perform with the utmost precision possible at the time, and to keep developing new and improved ways to kill the right people and destroy the right targets, without harming the wrong ones.

I am also encouraged by the new generation of possible non-lethals. That would revolutionize the nature and moral conduct in war, if it becomes truly feasible.

[Fei jiao]

Ok then, don't mind me. I'm just stupid. :rolleyes:

[rogue]

You know what we need in this thread? A little Clinton getting wound up and going off on a rant! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2OBBkA7Aq0&mode=related&search=)

[Mas Judt]

Rogue - I was talking about the other side of Iran. Another unstable country - with Nuclear weapons and 1950's missle technology.

[FuXnDajenariht]

i wonder if a million Iraqi casualties will be enough for some people.... :rolleyes:

falling piano = "precision" missiles now?

did they develop precision shrapnel or precision heat and blast damage yet?


not jumping at every chance to meddle in foreign affairs is also pretty non-lethal too you know? but that would make much too much sense.

i'm sure Ali the shop owner understands that the loss of his entire family was unavoidable, just casualties in another rich politicians (fraudulent) war. im also positive he's comforted by the fact that the "precision" missile worked 100% to specifications. its just too bad that the drop coordinates were off by a couple meters and landed in his sleeping families home....

**** happens though buddy. ;) just keep that anger to yourself and dont get outta line. we're liberating you remember?

[Royal Dragon]

The lives of insane, hate mogering lunatics whos RELIGON **REQUIRES** them to kill, and destroy all those not in thier group (Labeled as infidels) ARE less valuable than peaceful, moral individuals who are tolerant for other cultures, religions and ways of life.

I'd go to say they are very much less valuable.

If an evil person is trying to destroy a good person, even when the good does not believe in killing or taking another's life, the understanding that a life will be lost either way, reguardless of what he does, causes him to realise it is better for the world if it is the evil life that ceases, and not thier own.

If a life must be lost no matter what, make sure it is the one propegateing evil.

[David Jamieson]

Rogue - I was talking about the other side of Iran. Another unstable country - with Nuclear weapons and 1950's missle technology.

Iran is not unstable and their missile technology is not antiquated either. Not sure where you got that information, but look at Jane's for what they have militarily speaking and in recent news, you'll find that the democratically elected president of Iran was recently censured by the people who voted him in.

This censuring is not the actions of an unstable country.
And they are not a "cake walk" but then, neither is Iraq.

[Fu-Pow]

See this documentary NOW:

http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Fight-John-McCain/dp/B000FBH3W2/sr=8-1/qid=1169965239/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/105-6182023-8704445?ie=UTF8&s=dvd

[Shaolin Wookie]

...soveriegnty to the WTF. .

:D had to read that twice......:D

[Merryprankster]

Ok then, don't mind me. I'm just stupid.

I didn't say you were stupid. I said your argument(s) is(are) faulty, and that you are therefore wrong.

[Mas Judt]

I'm doomed to be misunderstood:

David - The OTHER side of Iran from Iraq - PAKISTAN.

And I'm being funny in regards to thier missle tech.

[Fei jiao]

I didn't say you were stupid. I said your argument(s) is(are) faulty, and that you are therefore wrong.

My bad, I must have misread.


... But citing a WWII example, where carpet bombing was a legitimate war tactic and radar barely functional is just stupid.

[Merryprankster]

Yes, you did misread it.

Citing that example is stupid. That does not mean YOU are stupid.

We've all done things that are a bit dim.

That doesn't make our default setting "stupid."

Although at this rate, you might want to quit now and save yourself some trouble.

[Fei jiao]

Citing that example is stupid.

That's a question of opinion.

[golden arhat]

ok if the twin towers wasnt an inside job ?
how come they stated the source for its internal collapse as the steel giving way ?
steel needs 3000 degrees centigrade to melt at 2000 it becomes red hot and at 2500 it starts to bend
another sky scraper in spain burned for 2 days and didnt fall dowen even tho it was built from the same stuff
how come u can see from the pictures that it imploded
it was a perfect excuse to have a go at the middle east
bush's bro marvuin resigned from his post of running tower 1 and 2 on the same day they fell
it fell inward all at once instead of outward bit by bit
there was a 3 billion insurance policy on the towers
it fell even tho the architect designed it to withstand plane attacks
building 7 was torn down (as admitted by the authorities later) but was claimed to have fallen down from the tremors even tho most other buildings that wer closer were left unscathed ??????

the evidence is overwelming

[golden arhat]

The Iraq war was a horrible mistake, that had nothing to do with terrorism or 9/11. Many factors led up to the Iraq war, a struggle between the CIA and Pentagon (with **** Cheney and Don Rumsfeld on the Pentagon side), Oil, Sadam's terrible dictatorship (although I don't believe this was a crutial factor, just a selling point), revenge from the first gulf war, amoung others. THe war in Iraq has diminished our capabilities in Afghanistan, where Al Quieda was before the Iraq war (now it is much easier for Al Quieda to congrigate in Iraq due to the chaos, not like the days of Sadam's Iron rule) and has made the world less safe because the Taliban and Al Quieda have been allowed to regroup. Osama Bin Laden is probably in the Sudan or Pakistan by now.

Is the world more safe now than before the war? No. Ask any Iraqi. You may say "there hasn't been another terrorist attack since 9/11, well increased security measures have something to do with that, the removal of Sadam Husein on the other hand has less than nothing to do with that.


Oh, and weren't we supposed to find WEAPONS, where the hell are those? The gas he used on the Kurds he got from us during the 8 year war.

Support our troops, bring them our of harms way, especially for purposes that don't protect freedom, democracy, and safety.

Instead the Bush administration has them fighting for lies, curruption, chaos, in a poorly planed war with a poorly planned peace. The troops answered the call of duty, we must elect leaders who will make sure their call of duty is the wise, rightous, and necessary one.

all very true however like you say sadams terrible regime wasnt crucial it was just a very good selling point
the same applies to 9/11

[rogue]

ok if the twin towers wasnt an inside job ?
how come they stated the source for its internal collapse as the steel giving way ?
steel needs 3000 degrees centigrade to melt at 2000 it becomes red hot and at 2500 it starts to bend
another sky scraper in spain burned for 2 days and didnt fall dowen even tho it was built from the same stuff
how come u can see from the pictures that it imploded
it was a perfect excuse to have a go at the middle east
bush's bro marvuin resigned from his post of running tower 1 and 2 on the same day they fell
it fell inward all at once instead of outward bit by bit
there was a 3 billion insurance policy on the towers
it fell even tho the architect designed it to withstand plane attacks
building 7 was torn down (as admitted by the authorities later) but was claimed to have fallen down from the tremors even tho most other buildings that wer closer were left unscathed ??????

the evidence is overwelming

Good Lord, are you simple minded and easily led.

Merry, what was the name of that thread where we already went over this nonsense?

[Black Jack II]

D@mn Rogue,

What happened to this forum. At one time you had a good sized amount of granola which was fine. But there were people could actually put something down that could be hashed out.

Now, this place is overrun by a bunch of really feebleminded people.:cool:

It's like instead of stating a viewpoint, there is always some kind of sneaky one line value attack hidden in the paragraph, which we are supposed to look over or a world point which they automatically think everyone should claim as fact.

lmao

[FuXnDajenariht]

as opposed to your simpleminded conservative viewpoints?

[Black Jack II]

as opposed to your simpleminded conservative viewpoints-


It's like instead of stating a viewpoint, there is always some kind of sneaky one line value attack hidden in the paragraph-- my point to a t.

Thanks for making it.:)

btw-feebleminded stands for anyone still alive who thinks 9/11 was a attack by our own government. keeee-rist that is old.

[FuXnDajenariht]

and i quote: "Now, this place is overrun by a bunch of really feebleminded people"

yea well keep trying to play the victim.... :rolleyes: maybe it'll work for you again one day.

you know you still didn't define liberal for me, and please dont quote that nonsense you hear on Fox News.

i guess i should give up on having intelligent debate with you though.... i think i might be asking too much. ;)

[FuXnDajenariht]

oh yea and simpleminded stands for anyone who thinks President Bush is still doing a good job and that conservative views are actually working.

[Black Jack II]

I find arguing with internet peeps like you Fux can be a meaningless and inane exercise. It's like I have to abandon all logic. Certain people on this forum seem not to allow anything rational to handicap them.:rolleyes:

Here is an example: you know you still didn't define liberal for me, and please dont quote that nonsense you hear on Fox News.

Why? I can't use that definition just because you don't like it.:D

When I was in that main Iraq thread it was like being in a arguement with a chick who randomly insults you with something that has no relevance to the argument at hand. It's a liberal way to try and wear you down and push you off-topic.

[FuXnDajenariht]

still avoiding the question as usual.

but quoting the integrity-less Fox News would only drop your creditability even lower than it is now. i was trying to help you out bro. ;)

you wanna quote a "news" organization that tried to smear a black Presidential candidate by stating he was schooled at a radical Islamic madrassa then be my guest.

also trying to compare him to the Iranian President and basically to terrorism because of his name, i would say is borderline racist. but be my guest like i said.

[Black Jack II]

LoL man, this is what I am talking about, learn to comprehend what someone writes.

This is what I am talking about. I did not quote FOX News at all.:rolleyes:

but quoting the integrity-less Fox News would only drop your creditability even lower than it is now. i was trying to help you out bro-

Did not say I quoted Fox News, but even if I did you already have your inane standpoint on it waiting in hand.:cool:

Following your below statement, was my original response and not the made up one.

Here is an example: you know you still didn't define liberal for me, and please dont quote that nonsense you hear on Fox News.-Fux

Why? I can't use that definition just because you don't like it.-Me

But, I do watch FOX News and consider it the only decent news channel out there, light years above most of the other junk.

[FuXnDajenariht]

since you dont have the capacity to answer the question i found a perfect site for you.

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-score/liberal-whatliberal-define.html

Liberal. [n] a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties. -- HyperDictionary.com

A person who believes it is the duty of government to ameliorate social conditions and create a more equitable society. Liberals favor generous spending on the welfare state; they exhibit a concern for minorities, the poor, and the disadvantaged and often see these conditions as a product of social injustices rather than individual failings. Liberals also tend to be concerned about environmental issues, the defense of civil liberties, and do not favor excessive military spending. -- iAmericanSpirit Political Dictionary

"Liberal" signifies an openness to change and respect for individual liberties within a societal framework in which all have equal opportunity. -- Mike Silverman (<), TurnLeft.com

Liberals tend to favor greater federal power to remedy social inequities, and to support freedom of personal choice and behavior. Liberals are described as being left of center on the political spectrum. Of the two major political parties, the Democratic Party is generally regarded as being more liberal. -- Election Glossary, Public Broadcasting System (PBS)

[Liberals] generally believe in some form of income redistribution, a social safety net, universal health care, progressive values, and a multilateral foreign policy. -- Harvard University Institute of Politics Glossary of Political Terms

[Liberals are] people who believe in individualism, freedom, equality, the social contract, and rational evidence-based (as opposed to morality-based) public policy. -- Liberal Forum

In today's world, the liberals are the idealists, the people who still believe, in spite of everything that has happened, that they can make the world a better place for everybody. They believe that government is inherently good, that it can make the human condition better. They believe that we have some obligation to our fellow human beings. They believe in personal freedom, in freedom of speech and religion. They believe in the common good, the things people cannot do alone. -- Henrietta Hay, Grand Junction Daily Sentinel



Liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves. -- Sen. John F. Kennedy (>), September 14, 1960

The following views could be considered typical of American liberalism today: Support for government social programs such as welfare, medical care, unemployment benefits, and retirement programs. Support for trade unions and strong regulation of business. Support for the rights of women and minorities, particularly racial and religious minorities, the disabled, and ****sexuals. Support for strong environmental regulations. Support for public transit. Opposition to the death penalty. Support for abortion rights. Support for animal rights. Support for gun control. -- Word iQ

A liberal is someone who strives for individual freedom and liberty. He believes in enforcing laws, free enterprise, and worker protection. She believes in quality education, nondiscrimination, and environmental protections. Liberals try to use the government to improve the quality of life of American citizens. -- Amy Schley, The Missouri Miner

from the worlds smallest political quiz: http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

[rogue]

For FuXnDajenariht, golden arhat.

Black Jack you may find this entertaining.

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42550&highlight=9&#37;2F11

[David Jamieson]

Pakistan gets kid glove treatment because they are a nuclear power.

But here is an interesting thing.

When interviewed by the Candian Press, the sitting president of Pakistan was asked about how he thought Canadians would feel about the problems in Afghanistan and what was he going to do to stem the insurgents who kept moving back and forth across his border.

His response to the Canadian press was more or less:

How many have you lost? 50 or so? My country has lost almost a 1000 good soldiers to this effort. If you engage in war, expect casualties.

I don't think I've heard much about it since. Although, I think as a country, a lot of Canadians are uncertain as to our purpose in the area. We would probably all be more comfortable if it fell under a neat little UN banner and was framed as a police action carried out by an international coallition.

However, it is not regarded that way and it isn't that way as we all know. there was a pre-emptive strike on iraq that isn't untied from the situation in Afghanistan.

My personal view is that western powers should withdraw entirely from the region and maintain support to those countries that are friendly and want to do business with us, but as far as physical presence goes, we don't need to be there.
Why should we be there? to protect them from themselves? We don't do that for Africa why should we do it for those nations?

[rogue]

D@mn Rogue,

What happened to this forum. At one time you had a good sized amount of granola which was fine. But there were people could actually put something down that could be hashed out.

Now, this place is overrun by a bunch of really feebleminded people.:cool:

It's like instead of stating a viewpoint, there is always some kind of sneaky one line value attack hidden in the paragraph, which we are supposed to look over or a world point which they automatically think everyone should claim as fact.

lmao

A lot of yunguns living at home and listening to this kind of thing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N6GvGM9_XE&mode=related&search=)

[FuXnDajenariht]

For FuXnDajenariht, golden arhat.

Black Jack you may find this entertaining.

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42550&highlight=9%2F11

lol ooooookay. i see where this is going

i dont need to read past 3 posts. i skimmed through that thread when it was active. i dont have or need conspiracy theories for what happened on 9/11. i know the aftermath and i know who took responsiblity for it. theres no need to debate it unless new serious empirical evidence is presented. and thats my opinion for the record. the past is in the past

i also know more importantly that its shamelessly being exploited for political gain by the white house and exploited for profit by companies who have no business in Iraq. thats the present that everyone should be concerned about.

[FuXnDajenariht]

i wont even get into why the real people and nations connected to 9/11 aren't dead or in jail yet.

i wonder how cold hell would hafta be before a Saudi prince got put on trial or even questioned for ties to Al Quaida?

[FuXnDajenariht]

A lot of yunguns living at home and listening to this kind of thing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N6GvGM9_XE&mode=related&search=)


the last recourse of simpleminds.

pointing out irrelevancies, ie: music, grammar, age....

well on the reverse side i've seen alot of incredibly dense old men in my 20 years on earth and you 2 aren't bucking the trend. :p

[Black Jack II]

Rogue,

Its posts like the 9/11 conspiracy junk, that always remind me of what a massive dsyfunctional psychosis the far left have. It's such a chronicle of failure that its funny to watch. A bunch of misguided Jeneane Garofalo clones running around on to much flower power.;)

“We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society":rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

-Hildabeast Clinton

[BoulderDawg]

I wonder how cold hell would hafta be before a Saudi prince got put on trial or even questioned for ties to Al Quaida?

Hey isn't one of those guys Bush's big buddy? Hasn't he been to the ranch and all that good stuff...:D

I find SA an interesting place. It appears you are either living in a palace dining off of gold plates (about .0001 of the population) or begging in the streets for food(the rest of the people).

[Merryprankster]

In fairness to the conspiracy nuts, Kymus makes some valid points with respect to argumentation on that thread.

It's just that by that time, I was sick of it, and I was/am tired of the conspiracy nuts not recognizing their OWN flaws. It was more fun to poke the paranoid tiger at that point.

Fundamentally, the 9/11 conspiracy theorists are executing a "god of the gaps" argument - any time anybody says "well, we're not sure yet," or "we don't know" or "there are several possibilities, we're investigating" the lunatics use it as proof that the government must have been involved.

This is precisely the argument creationists use. Evolution has gaps in it, and those gaps must be filled with the power of God!

If you can't see the analogy here, I can't help you.

Incidentally, the evidence for AQ committing 9/11 is overwhelming, and the "counterarguments" such as they are, are so flimsy the only thing they will ever be good for is bad websites and late-night Discovery channel specials.

Regarding WWII use of nuclear weapons in the previous argument, you'll have to do better than snide one-liners to make a convincing argument. Which will be impossible. Because using it is stupid.

[AJM]

This entire thread should be used as text in high school social studies to explain how we've got the government we now have.

[Merryprankster]

This entire thread should be used as text in high school social studies to explain how we've got the government we now have.

You're right. Free and open debate of ideas, concepts and governance have led to the government we now have.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHH... I see.... you're talking about the current ADMINISTRATION.... not our government.

Well, on that one, that's just the way the chips fall.

[FuXnDajenariht]

i think he means how everyone is split between the left vs right dichotomy. instead of using common sense, people blindly follow extreme leftist or far right party hardliners. letting their political masters think for them, as if its the gospel from G-ds own mouth. ie: Black Jack

as a result reason and rationality falls to the way side and this has led directly to the government we deserve.

read the education thread. stupid kids lead to ignorant unimformed voters.

[BoulderDawg]

stupid kids lead to ignorant unimformed voters.

What does it matter how informed you are as a voter? When you go into the booth you are usually given a choice between Dumb and Dumber. If you're truly informed about the issues you can't vote for anybody.

I think it's time all people had a voice in government. You should not vote for a person but for a party and ideology. Let's say an election is held and an extremely liberal party gets 15% of the vote....Then they should make up 15% of the government. Same with any party.

[Black Jack II]

letting their political masters think for them, as if its the gospel from G-ds own mouth. ie: Black Jack-

Listen, when you step outside of the far left pattern for how to argue then you will start to make more sense son. I mean everyone knows arguments are supposed to be emotional, not cold and rational,:rolleyes:

Remember your last post to me, you stated something I did not say, I brought it up, then you went to something else.........got to love the pattern.

[AJM]

i think he means how everyone is split between the left vs right dichotomy. instead of using common sense, people blindly follow extreme leftist or far right party hardliners. letting their political masters think for them, as if its the gospel from G-ds own mouth. ie: Black Jack

as a result reason and rationality falls to the way side and this has led directly to the government we deserve.

read the education thread. stupid kids lead to ignorant unimformed voters.
Thank you for understanding. Polarization is usually two sides of the same coin. This one is greed.

[SifuAbel]

Here's an open challenge to anyone who can find the laws that require citizens to pay federal income tax.

Below is a "nutless" movie created by Aaron Russo. Note that this movie is by an acclaimed movie producer, not some conspiracy nut with no credibility. The subjects in this film are from various positions in govenment. AND NOT ALL ARE IN AGREEMENT.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=zsZO6G7dfpI

Watch it, believe it, don't believe it, talk about it, disect it, make real arguements about it, debunk it, but watch it. Find the codes and you will win $50,000.

[Merryprankster]

Since when does being a movie producer make you:

1. A tax expert.
2. Make you credible on the rhetorical front.

Incidentally, the 16th amendment is all you need to know.

[SifuAbel]

Have you watched it? If you haven't , stfu until you do. "HE" isn't making any claims.

"HE" is reporting what he has uncovered.

[SifuAbel]

Incidentally, the 16th amendment is all you need to know.

watch the movie, even if its hard looking up through the sand. :rolleyes:

[Merryprankster]

Screw off.

My point is that a Movie Producer, respected or not, in a documentary is free to interview OR NOT interview, whomever he chooses.

I don't have to watch it to know it's already crap.

The Congress has the power to levy income tax. It has the power to distribute it in a non-apportioned way.

It's that simple. Anybody who disagrees has a hard time parsing written ****ing language.

[Merryprankster]

It's bull**** Abel.

[SifuAbel]

Fine, you can ignore what is proposed here. Ignorance is bliss.

[SifuAbel]

Whats BS? Can you even formulate an opinion about something you haven't even seen? Oh man, no wonder this site is so full of "opinions", Straight blasted from the under hole.

watch it, I double dog dare you to watch it.

[Merryprankster]

Christ Abel, the thing opens with Orwellian quotations and is titled freedom to fascism.

I'm supposed to take this as something other than a propaganda piece.

And how do I know it's crap? Because I've been REPEATEDLY exposed to morons who make all kinds of stupid arguments about the federal reserve and the income tax - that are fundamentally flawed because they can't actually parse a sentence, apparently.

[SifuAbel]

Screw off.

My point is that a Movie Producer, respected or not, in a documentary is free to interview OR NOT interview, whomever he chooses.

I don't have to watch it to know it's already crap.

The Congress has the power to levy income tax. It has the power to distribute it in a non-apportioned way.

It's that simple. Anybody who disagrees has a hard time parsing written ****ing language.


Ok, the you wouldn't mind doing what no one else seems to be able to do. Find the law that says so. Find where the supreme court overturned their descision of the unconstitution position of the 16th amendment.

[SifuAbel]

Did you watch it?

[Black Jack II]

This help?


16th Amendment

In 1895, in the Supreme Court case of Pollock v Farmer's Loan and Trust (157 U.S. 429), the Court disallowed a federal tax on income from real property. The tax was designed to be an indirect tax, which would mean that states need not contribute portions of a whole relative to its census figures. The Court, however, ruled that the tax was a direct tax and subject to apportionment. This was the last in a series of conflicting court decisions dating back to the Civil War. Between 1895 and 1909, when the amendment was passed by Congress, the Court began to back down on its position, as it became clear not only to accountants but to everyone that the solvency of the nation was in jeopardy. In a series of cases, the definition of "direct tax" was modified, bent, twisted, and coaxed to allow more taxation efforts that approached an income tax.

Finally, with the ratification of the 16th Amendment, any doubt was removed. The text of the Amendment makes it clear that though the categories of direct and indirect taxation still exist, any determination that income tax is a direct tax will be irrelevant, because taxes on incomes, from salary or from real estate, are explicitly to be treated as indirect. The Congress passed the Amendment on July 12, 1909, and it was ratified on February 3, 1913 (1,302 days).

[Merryprankster]

You mean what nobody else on a clearly propagandist video has been able to do, don't you?

Incidentally, the 16th amendment, by definition, cannot be unconstitutional. :rolleyes:

And exactly what BlackJack said. The RULING YOU ARE REFERRING TO was PRE-****ING
16th amendment. After the 16th amendment, it doesn't matter.

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

It doesn't matter whether the income tax is direct or indirect. The amendment doesn't address that because it doesn't have to. If it is an income tax, it can be levied, collected, and distributed by the Congress, without regard to where it came from or census data.

Pretty ****ing cut and dry.

[SifuAbel]

Did you watch it?
.................................

[Merryprankster]

That's going to be your default? Just proving you're a loser.

I've educated myself quite well on this issue. I don't NEED to watch the video.

Here's a quick recap of what they are going to say:

1. The IRS bureaucracy is unhelpful.
2. The Federal Reserve Bank is a privately run, criminal/illegal enterprise
3. The federal income tax is illegal/unconstitutional, because it is a direct tax, not apportioned by census data.

Sprinkle in some sort of populist, mercantilist mystery, masquerading as serious investigative journalism, and you've got your movie.

Although the first is true, the next two are patently false, and in the case of the 3rd, you need go no further than the 16th amendment.

It's bull**** Abel, and making a documentary about it doesn't make it any more true.

Here - two can play at your game...

"Have you read the decisions abel? have you? Have you read the 16th amendment? How can you have an opinion on something you haven't bothered to check out?"

I've read some of the decisions and the 16th amendment. I'll take that over an attention-whoring documentary any day.

[Black Jack II]

All of these illegal taxes are still being used to pay off the moon landing hoax......what, you can't deal with it.......:mad:

We all know we can't land on the moon. Its made of some sort of cheese. Maybe French cheese of some sort.....****in French.

[SifuAbel]

Interesting, people will not accept any criticizm of their world if it violates the fabric of their belief.

Without even seeing what this guy has to say you have in one fell swoop judged and sentenced the whole affair. That is ignorance based on fear.

Did you watch it? I can't argue with you if you don't even know what we are arguing about.

The 16th amendment, Ah yes, the one that was ratified by a woefully too few of the states on chritmas 1913 after being knocked down by congress 8 times before. The one that was deemed unconstituion by the supreme court of the time.

There are too many questions asked about your perfect little normal world that ridicule will not answer. Watch it, debunk it, or continue ****ing in the wind. Thats your choice. Its not surprising that the likes of you knee jerked on this one.

[rogue]

Around this time someone usually starts calling MP a shill for the Republicans. ;)

[FuXnDajenariht]

blah whatever... no one is saying anything about MP being Republican. :rolleyes:

[FuXnDajenariht]

letting their political masters think for them, as if its the gospel from G-ds own mouth. ie: Black Jack-

Listen, when you step outside of the far left pattern for how to argue then you will start to make more sense son. I mean everyone knows arguments are supposed to be emotional, not cold and rational,:rolleyes:

Remember your last post to me, you stated something I did not say, I brought it up, then you went to something else.........got to love the pattern.


lol ok good to know you think arguments aren't supposed to have a rational basis. it makes sense with the way you argue. ;)

and i never quoted you in my last post, so stop it already. it was just an observation.

besides i dont recall you asking me any questions or bringing anything to the "debate". i do recall alot of assinine statements though.

they were entertaining before but now its kinda old. that FOX "News" chip feeding you your talking points musta got wet in the shower. i think its stuck on repeat. get that checked out. :p

[golden arhat]

ok if the twin towers wasnt an inside job ?
how come they stated the source for its internal collapse as the steel giving way ?
steel needs 3000 degrees centigrade to melt at 2000 it becomes red hot and at 2500 it starts to bend
another sky scraper in spain burned for 2 days and didnt fall dowen even tho it was built from the same stuff
how come u can see from the pictures that it imploded
it was a perfect excuse to have a go at the middle east
bush's bro marvuin resigned from his post of running tower 1 and 2 on the same day they fell
it fell inward all at once instead of outward bit by bit
there was a 3 billion insurance policy on the towers
it fell even tho the architect designed it to withstand plane attacks
building 7 was torn down (as admitted by the authorities later) but was claimed to have fallen down from the tremors even tho most other buildings that wer closer were left unscathed ??????

the evidence is overwelming



Good Lord, are you simple minded and easily led.

Merry, what was the name of that thread where we already went over this nonsense?


simple minded and easily led ??
you are the one who has ignored all i have said and still bothers to quote me without adressing the quotes AT ALL thats simple minded
as for easily led HOW ??? i read into the sublect and made up my own mind
so now im easily led for having my own opinions that i happen to share with a few other people


lol u also think that george bush is saving our asses which demonstrates perfectly how what you said applies more to u than me

for once just once could you use the part of your brain that is rational ??

[rogue]

blah whatever... no one is saying anything about MP being Republican. :rolleyes: Oh they will, they always do.:D

Fred/Arhat,
Read the link to the thread I gave you, and you'll see we've been over this ground before. Kymus was making the same arguments as you, but better. There's no point for me to repeat myself.

One thing you liberal/anarchist/free thinker or whatever you guys are claiming to be should do, lighten up. Lifes too short.

[AJM]

I hope someone is paying you for this garbage.

[Li Kao]

To anyone who is certain that the Trade Center towers must have been imploded by a secret government plot, with the planes simply being a diversion: when was the last time builders have crashed 2 passenger jets into a building to test it's structural integrity? Everyone seems to be an expert in architecture, engineering, construction, and the physical properties of steel, etc.

Remember what happened to the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in Washington? When it was opened in 1940, it was the 3rd longest suspension bridge in the world, costing millions to dollars to plan, design, and build. The experts built it to withstand winds of 120 mph. However, it collapsed in winds of 42 mph, shocking the engineering and architectural worlds (thanks to a little resonance). The point I'm trying to make -- you can theorize and come up with conspiracies and obviously whoever came up with these arguments in the first place has some knowledge of physics, but as has been shown, the experts have been wrong before.

[Chief Fox]

There are some interesting theories about the the "plane" that hit the Pentagon as well as the "plane crash" in Pensylvania from 9/11.

Do a search on Google.

The hole in the side of the Pentagon was not big enough for a plane. Not to mention that there is no photographic evidence of a plane crash. (no wings, no tail section, no fuselage, no engines, no bodies)

The county coronor in the PA crash was quoted as saying that he stopped being the coronor after 2 minutes from arriving at the scene. Because there were no bodies and there was no blood.

[rogue]

The county coronor in the PA crash was quoted as saying that he stopped being the coronor after 2 minutes from arriving at the scene. Because there were no bodies and there was no blood.

Here is a picture from the crash site. This is what a large jet airliner looks like when it hit's the ground at speed. Care to imagine what would happen to a person in that same plane? How far into the ground some of it would go, how far parts could be thrown into the surrounding woods and meadow?
http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_2.html


The hole in the side of the Pentagon was not big enough for a plane. Not to mention that there is no photographic evidence of a plane crash. (no wings, no tail section, no fuselage, no engines, no bodies)
Go here
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=6

[Chief Fox]

Here is a picture from the crash site. This is what a large jet airliner looks like when it hit's the ground at speed. Care to imagine what would happen to a person in that same plane? How far into the ground some of it would go, how far parts could be thrown into the surrounding woods and meadow?
http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_2.html


Go here
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=6

So are you saying that every single piece of evidence of human life was incinerated on impact?

[SifuAbel]

No, here are real plane crashes.

http://www.middle-east-online.com/pictures/big/_8850_sharjah-plane-crash-11-2-2004.jpg

http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/photos/plane_2crash041014.jpg

http://www.mobile-review.com/articles/2002/image/plane/crash.jpg

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20070114/i/r2329899270.jpg

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/Newsbriefs/9509/9-10/plane_crash.jpg

http://sq006.netfirms.com/capt_taiwan_plane_crash_45z.jpg

http://english.cri.cn/mmsource/image/2005-9-6/jet-crash.gif

http://www.ardmoreite.com/images/111501/jet_crashLR.jpg

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060125/images/metro_crash.jpg

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2005/09/05/6n_crash_wideweb__430x286.jpg

Notice anything about them? Like pieces of the freakin airplanes? Since when do you get crashs where a plane turns into a pile of miscellaneous trash ? In dirt , no less.

[lunghushan]

No, here are real plane crashes.


Exactly ... there's not enough wreckage, and not a hole big enough for all the wreckage to have gone through to be inside the building.

Therefore there are two likely hypotheses: a) This wasn't really a big plane that crashed into the building, but rather a cruise missile or something. b) The Pentagon actually has some sort of defensive shield like missile defenses that obliterated most of the plane before it struck.

I'm guessing (b). Because (a) doesn't make sense ... if it was a cruise missile there wouldn't be engine parts and stuff like that on the lawn, would there be?

[Chief Fox]

Don't want to argue.

I don't know what happened, I wasn't there.

But for every link that you come up with, I can come up with one that questions it.

All I'm saying is, there are a lot of theories out there and some of them make sense.

Here's an interesting read: http://www.nofadz.com/~serendip/wot/pentagon/spencer05.htm

[Black Jack II]

**** Abel,

When did you get so crazy?

I remeber a tool, yeah that I remeber, but what is with this weird no-federal tax, 9/11 conspiracy, I was abducted by a martian sex worker trainwreck.

wtf:rolleyes:

[rogue]

So are you saying that every single piece of evidence of human life was incinerated on impact?

Nope, there were plenty of body parts, the were just shredded, burned and crushed into little parts.

Nice pictures Abel, but none were of a large jet going into the side of a massive building at speed.

Here's Shanksville.
http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_7.html

[Chief Fox]

Exactly ... there's not enough wreckage, and not a hole big enough for all the wreckage to have gone through to be inside the building.

Therefore there are two likely hypotheses: a) This wasn't really a big plane that crashed into the building, but rather a cruise missile or something. b) The Pentagon actually has some sort of defensive shield like missile defenses that obliterated most of the plane before it struck.

I'm guessing (b). Because (a) doesn't make sense ... if it was a cruise missile there wouldn't be engine parts and stuff like that on the lawn, would there be?

Actually the pictures of the engine parts at the pentagon were too small for the AA jet that allegedly hit it.

http://www.nofadz.com/~serendip/wot/pentagon/spencer/photorotor.jpg

[lunghushan]

**** Abel,

When did you get so crazy?

I remeber a tool, yeah that I remeber, but what is with this weird no-federal tax, 9/11 conspiracy, I was abducted by a martian sex worker trainwreck.

wtf:rolleyes:

Yeah, George Bush is actually an alien from a planet orbiting Sirius. It is a little known fact that Sirians (not to be confused with Syrians) are a vampiric species that requires a certain type of hemoglobin to be ingested due to too much inbreeding over the years.

They go out and start up compatible species on other planets (in this case Earth), and then when the planets reach maturity, they then send big ships to harvest and freeze-dry the blood to send back to their home planet.

Once the world population reaches 12 billion it will be ready for harvest.

[lunghushan]

Actually the pictures of the engine parts at the pentagon were too small for the AA jet that allegedly hit it.

http://www.nofadz.com/~serendip/wot/pentagon/spencer/photorotor.jpg

So then where did the AA jet go? Was there really an AA jet? Or maybe the Sirians abducted those people in secret to test their hemoglobin to see how close humans are ready for harvesting?

Who knows ... whatever.

[SifuAbel]

**** Abel,

When did you get so crazy?

I remeber a tool, yeah that I remeber, but what is with this weird no-federal tax, 9/11 conspiracy, I was abducted by a martian sex worker trainwreck.

wtf:rolleyes:

Do I know you? :confused: As far as I know, you are some flag waving sheep numbnutz that would gladly put his own child on the great american alter to be carved up for yet another pork project.

[rogue]

Chief, what do you know about airliners? Ever see up close what they are made from?

Here's a picture of Flight 800 after it was put back together. It broke in half and then crashed into the water off of Long Island at a slower speed than 88 hit the Pentagon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TWA800reconstruction.jpg

Here's Avianca 52. It's fuel tanks were empty and they were trying to land it.

http://www.atlanticsteamer.com/images/images/avianca1.jpg
http://www.atlanticsteamer.com/images/images/avianca3.jpg

A friend of mines house was used as a staging area for the removal of the bodies.

[SifuAbel]

Right and how does any of that compare to the landfill looking pictures you produced earlier?

You know, things may or may not be a as totally wound up as the bulk of the conspiracy buffs would project. But to sit there and believe the GOV has nothing to hide, and it has your best interests in mind, and that all is normal, everyday, humdrum and uneventful is just stupid. Truth is ALWAYS way stranger than fiction.

[rogue]

A B-25 went through that hole? Where's the wreckage?
http://www.evesmag.com/empirestatebldgcrash.jpg

Pay attention to what happened of a plane running into a granite building at 300 miles an hour.
http://www.cosmik.com/aa-april02/dj82.html


The 78th floor was involved, as well, and there were other problems. On impact, the plane's fuel had exploded, sending a fireball down the side of the building and through the inside via hallways and stairwells. The fireball reached all the way to the 75th floor. One of the plane's engines, broken loose from the wreckage, shot through the building, tearing through several walls and finally out a south side window, finally coming to rest on the roof of a 12-story building across 33rd Street. Miraculously, none of the tragedy's victims were killed by the giant engine.

The saga of engine number two is just as dramatic. It, too, broke loose from the plane on impact, but instead of exiting the building it flew directly into an elevator shaft and on top of an elevator car, which began to fall rapidly with two terrified women inside. Even in 1945 elevators were equipped with hydraulic "slowing" devices for emergencies like... well, nobody ever dreamed of emergencies like this one, but for emergencies, nonetheless. When a rescue crew finally reached what was left of the elevator car at the bottom of the shaft, they were amazed to find living, breathing women with one hell of a story to tell their grandchildren.

[FuXnDajenariht]

Oh they will, they always do.:D



well if he is then great. atleast one Republican has sum sense. i was beginning to wonder about you guys. :p

[Chief Fox]

Chief, what do you know about airliners? Ever see up close what they are made from?

Here's a picture of Flight 800 after it was put back together. It broke in half and then crashed into the water off of Long Island at a slower speed than 88 hit the Pentagon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TWA800reconstruction.jpg

Here's Avianca 52. It's fuel tanks were empty and they were trying to land it.

http://www.atlanticsteamer.com/images/images/avianca1.jpg
http://www.atlanticsteamer.com/images/images/avianca3.jpg

A friend of mines house was used as a staging area for the removal of the bodies.

Rogue, I don't want to argue. All I know about airliners is from sitting in them.

The pictures you show are interesting. They show very large pieces of aircraft. What happened to the aircraft on 9/11 is different. These planes were both completely incinerated. Very little evidence of a plane left. I don't think we can find any aircraft that has been completely incinerated as a result of a plane crash other than the two on 9/11.

Even the story about the bomber that crashed into the Empire State Building. The article describes how an engine broke off, went through the building, out the other side and landed on the roof of another building. A complete full engine!

An airplane engine is made from Aluminum, Steel and Titanium. In order to completely incinerate something like this would take an incredible amount of heat.

I'm not saying that it didn't happen. I'm just saying A LOT of questions are left unanswered.

[lunghushan]

The only comment that I have about 9/11 is that it's pretty cool that the buildings (WTC) just pancaked rather than going over.

Otherwise it would have caused a lot more collateral damage. It was pretty amazing that they just flattened out like that.

Anyways, whatever. While I would like to believe that George Bush is really an alien or something trying to prepare humans for food or something, the most likely explanation is that in 9/11 the planes were in fact mostly burned up by the fuel and crushed by debris when the buildings fell, and the Pentagon one likely was blown up by a secret missile shield or a missiles fired from a plane, and that's why they confiscated the video footage. (Nobody would like to think of all those civilians dying before the impact, and if there is a missile shield they probably don't want everybody knowing about it).

IMHO what is a far more pressing question is why billions of people follow 2 religions, Christianity and Islam, without any proof whatsoever for the assertions of either religion ... that IMHO is a far more important question, but nobody seems to be asking that one.

[Black Jack II]

IMHO what is a far more pressing question is why billions of people follow 2 religions, Christianity and Islam, without any proof whatsoever for the assertions of either religion ... that IMHO is a far more important question, but nobody seems to be asking that one.

Easy answer. It's called faith.

[lunghushan]

Easy answer. It's called faith.

??? So you're saying they don't really believe it -- in other words, they have no proof, no impirical evidence, so they decide to lie to themselves and to others ???

Or more like they are hoping it really is true ???

[Chief Fox]

Easy answer. It's called faith.
What's so easy about that? If you ask me, faith is what makes most things more difficult.

[Chief Fox]

??? So you're saying they don't really believe it -- in other words, they have no proof, no impirical evidence, so they decide to lie to themselves and to others ???

Or more like they are hoping it really is true ???

No, faith is something that you believe with all of your heart to be true but you just can prove it to be true.

[lunghushan]

but you just can prove it to be true.

How does a Christian know then that their religion is true over say Islam?

[rogue]

Rogue, I don't want to argue. All I know about airliners is from sitting in them.

The pictures you show are interesting. They show very large pieces of aircraft. What happened to the aircraft on 9/11 is different. These planes were both completely incinerated. Very little evidence of a plane left. I don't think we can find any aircraft that has been completely incinerated as a result of a plane crash other than the two on 9/11.

Even the story about the bomber that crashed into the Empire State Building. The article describes how an engine broke off, went through the building, out the other side and landed on the roof of another building. A complete full engine!

An airplane engine is made from Aluminum, Steel and Titanium. In order to completely incinerate something like this would take an incredible amount of heat.

I'm not saying that it didn't happen. I'm just saying A LOT of questions are left unanswered.

I don't think we're arguing and I'm sorry if I sounded like I was, I just wanted to point out that there isn't a lot of substance relative to it's size in a modern jet.
Here's a site with some pretty good pictures of the surviving wreckage and some spot on commentary.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1


Notice the thickness of this wreckage...
http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-flight77-lg.jpg

There really aren't many unanswered questions once you look at the evidence the conspiracy folks don't show you. :cool:

[lunghushan]

I don't think we're arguing and I'm sorry if I sounded like I was, I just wanted to point out that there isn't a lot of substance relative to it's size in a modern jet.
Here's a site with some pretty good pictures of the surviving wreckage and some spot on commentary.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1


Notice the thickness of this wreckage...
http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-flight77-lg.jpg

There really aren't many unanswered questions once you look at the evidence the conspiracy folks don't show you. :cool:

I still think they probably shot it with a missile before it impacted. Otherwise there would have been a lot more broken windows and damage around that hole in the building.

I mean, gimme a break, a building as important and as major a target as the Pentagon, without any sort of defenses? That beggars belief, especially after the Oklahoma bombing incident.

[rogue]

I still think they probably shot it with a missile before it impacted. Otherwise there would have been a lot more broken windows and damage around that hole in the building.

I mean, gimme a break, a building as important and as major a target as the Pentagon, without any sort of defenses? That beggars belief, especially after the Oklahoma bombing incident.

We went though this before on the other thread too. The plane had already hit some light poles, a fence and hit the ground, so a missile wasn't needed to cause the damage to the plane before it hit the building. The Pentagon did not have defenses other than blast proof windows and it's reinforced concrete outer walls. Some of those walls and windows were even stronger because of the fear that an airliner landing at Reagan Int'l Airport (which is right next to the Pentagon) could accidentally hit the building. What kind of defenses do you think it should have?

About those windows...

"A blast-resistant window must be designed to resist a force significantly higher than a hurricane that's hitting instantaneously," says Ken Hays, executive vice president of Masonry Arts, the Bessemer, Ala., company that designed, manufactured and installed the Pentagon windows. Some were knocked out of the walls by the crash and the outer ring's later collapse. "They were not designed to receive wracking seismic force," Hays notes. "They were designed to take in inward pressure from a blast event, which apparently they did: [Before the collapse] the blinds were still stacked neatly behind the window glass."

[lunghushan]

What kind of defenses do you think it should have?

About those windows...

That's a good quote about those windows.

It seems like the Pentagon should have anti-aircraft and ground to ground missiles, anti-personnel mines, automated machine guns, vehicle barriers so that vehicles won't even make it to the building, its own private army of security personnel, along with underground tunnels for escape and underground bomb shelters.

[rogue]

Here's a picture of the Pentagon the day after, that gives a good idea of what it's location is like.
http://www.spaceimaging.com/gallery/9-11/Pentagon/Pentagon_9_12_01.jpg

It's a very big place. It's one of the worlds largest office buildings. It has a metro stop, people coming and going, food vendors, heavy air traffic, heavy ground traffic, boat traffic, other office buildings close by and many other things that make security like you describe impossible. Alternative exits and bunkers may exist but I don't know what kind of bargain they are with all the rats in the joint, or how you'd get the thousands of people who are in the building into them. Here's the website of Pentagon Security. http://www.pfpa.mil/

[lunghushan]

Here's a picture of the Pentagon the day after, that gives a good idea of what it's location is like.
http://www.spaceimaging.com/gallery/9-11/Pentagon/Pentagon_9_12_01.jpg

It's a very big place. It's one of the worlds largest office buildings. It has a metro stop, people coming and going, food vendors, heavy air traffic, heavy ground traffic, boat traffic, other office buildings close by and many other things that make security like you describe impossible. Alternative exits and bunkers may exist but I don't know what kind of bargain they are with all the rats in the joint, or how you'd get the thousands of people who are in the building into them. Here's the website of Pentagon Security. http://www.pfpa.mil/

It wouldn't be impossible. It would just be hard.

As a country we focused for a long time on threats from without, with the cold war. As a country we have to start thinking of threats from within, with terrorism.

[rogue]

Sometimes a thing can become so hard to do it no longer is practical to do. I don't know if they are still there, but there were mobile missile launchers around DC for awhile.

And I agree that we have to be alert from threats from within. I would just guess that we are doing things to protect ourselves from within, but we won't hear about them.

[lunghushan]

Sometimes a thing can become so hard to do it no longer is practical to do. I don't know if they are still there, but there were mobile missile launchers around DC for awhile.

And I agree that we have to be alert from threats from within. I would just guess that we are doing things to protect ourselves from within, but we won't hear about them.

Well they don't do a lot about security. When things change they do more. For example, after all the protests at U.C. Berkeley, they designed U.C. Santa Cruz around crowd control, so there are fewer large areas where people can congregate.

So they just need to do more. I guess we'll see if things get as bad here as in Israel. So far they haven't been very bad.

[Chief Fox]

I don't think we're arguing and I'm sorry if I sounded like I was, I just wanted to point out that there isn't a lot of substance relative to it's size in a modern jet.
Here's a site with some pretty good pictures of the surviving wreckage and some spot on commentary.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1


Notice the thickness of this wreckage...
http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-flight77-lg.jpg

There really aren't many unanswered questions once you look at the evidence the conspiracy folks don't show you. :cool:
I don't think we're arguing either. I do know that many people have very strong thoughts and opinions about the events of 9/11 and I wanted to make it clear that I wasn't trying to disrespect anyone.

Oh yes, I understand that the outer skin of a jet airliner is very thin but that picture raises a question in my mind. How did an un-chared piece of reckage get that far away from the crash point and yet, we see no bodies?

lunghushan, I also suspect that the plane over PA was shot down. I believe that we will never know that whole truth about the events of that day.

[golden arhat]

Do I know you? :confused: As far as I know, you are some flag waving sheep numbnutz that would gladly put his own child on the great american alter to be carved up for yet another pork project.

that is the single best sentence in the history of mankind

[golden arhat]

IMHO what is a far more pressing question is why billions of people follow 2 religions, Christianity and Islam, without any proof whatsoever for the assertions of either religion ... that IMHO is a far more important question, but nobody seems to be asking that one.


whats really strange is that they both worship the same god

and using him as the reason they are fighting each other

[golden arhat]

And I agree that we have to be alert from threats from within. I would just guess that we are doing things to protect ourselves from within, but we won't hear about them.



dont even get me fukin started on the patriot act

[rogue]

Oh yes, I understand that the outer skin of a jet airliner is very thin but that picture raises a question in my mind. How did an un-chared piece of reckage get that far away from the crash point and yet, we see no bodies?

lunghushan, I also suspect that the plane over PA was shot down. I believe that we will never know that whole truth about the events of that day.

Chief why do you think that the plane was shot down?

I think we do know the truth and the evidence is available. Now if people want to ignore that evidence then that's up to them, but that still doesn't change the facts.

I don't think most people would want to see the remains of the people that were in those crashes. There are pictures but I doubt that they will be released to the public.

[rogue]

dont even get me fukin started on the patriot act

Why, are you an American? Do you have a problem with rounding up terrorists before they strike?

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1249593,00.html

[Black Jack II]

Not one of you can name a single right of yours that has been hampered by the Patriot Act. It's just another impotent comment by Arhat that is stock and trade with the other crap his kind spits out.:cool:

[AJM]

Pretty much like what you just did.

[Black Jack II]

Pretty much like what you just did

Wow. Nice one linear.:rolleyes:

Name one personal right that has been taken away from you????

[rogue]

Awww give Ahrat a break BJ, he's just a 16 year old kid and doesn't know any better. ;)

[Black Jack II]

Rogue,

LMAO,

That states everything in a nutshell.:D

[rogue]

Don't it now. :D

[SifuAbel]

LOL @ the fools that actually trust politicians.

[rogue]

LOL @ the fools that actually are just.... well fools.:p

[golden arhat]

what does being 15 have to do with anything
u are both far more childish and ignorant than me


black jack
no i am not american (thank god) but i think the pariot act is wrong because if they wanted to (not that they have yet) they could take alot of rights away from you suh as privacy

besides which what has george bush done for anyone

how has he helped you in a way that a democrat couldnt ??

[rogue]

Why do "they" have to take it away, people freely give away information about themselves on their MySpace pages. Maybe MySpace is a plot by "them" to gather information.

[Yao Sing]

Interesting observation that goes to the heart of the matter. The difference between giving and taking. Point being having the decision making authority.

If peeps want to give out their personal info that's fine, as long as they're the ones deciding if it's surrendered to the public. When it's gathered without their consent then it becomes a problem.

Spying is bad, m'kay?

[Merryprankster]

Its not surprising that the likes of you knee jerked on this one.


The "likes of me" actually bother to research issues before developing firm opinions, rather than rely on propagandist visual literature from a lop-sided documentary loaded with theatrics (fade ins, ominous voice overs from deep voiced narrators, orwellian quotations) designed to distract from, rather than focus on the subject at hand.

I know law and court cases are sometimes dry, and use big words, but perhaps you should consider doing the same.

I ask again - have you READ any of the cases involved? Can you cite ANY standing precedent challenging the validity of the 16th amendment, or was YOUR knee-jerk, default reaction to assume that the documentary was right, without considering any of the other evidence?

I don't have a problem with having my conclusions challenged, when those challenges pass muster.

As I've said on another thread "I only disagree with you when what I think you have to say is stupid."

You have some vague historical objections to the 16th amendment. Well, I've got news for you. IT'S RATIFIED.

Cut and dry, simple as can be. Whatever arguments people might try and muster, whatever thorn in their side the income tax is, it's ratified, according to the courts of the United States, according to Congress, which passes legislation, and according to that giant bureaucracy called the IRS.

It hasn't been overturned - either on procedural grounds from some Supreme Court order (although I wonder if they have the power to, incidentally), or by a new amendment. And until it is, Congress has the power to levy, collect and distribute those taxes, regardless of what anybody would like to think.

People can scream till they are blue in the face about it, but the 16th amendment language is quite clear, and the amendment is in the constitution.

In the meantime, feel free to exercise some civil disobedience, get tossed in jail, challenge the income tax, get shot down by every court of appeal, (except maybe the 9th circuit. Bunch of nutters) probably not make it to the Supreme Court at all, and spend more time in jail.

I'm tired (today) of arguing about 9/11. Again, the great news is that the 9/11 conspiracy theories will be relegated to the scrapheap of history, where they belong.

[rogue]

Interesting observation that goes to the heart of the matter. The difference between giving and taking. Point being having the decision making authority.

If peeps want to give out their personal info that's fine, as long as they're the ones deciding if it's surrendered to the public. When it's gathered without their consent then it becomes a problem.

Spying is bad, m'kay?

Then don't cry if someone uses that information, that you freely posted, against you.

[Chief Fox]

Chief why do you think that the plane was shot down?

I think we do know the truth and the evidence is available. Now if people want to ignore that evidence then that's up to them, but that still doesn't change the facts.

I don't think most people would want to see the remains of the people that were in those crashes. There are pictures but I doubt that they will be released to the public.
Because it was toatlly destroyed. Not even pieces big enough to put it back to gether again like the other pictures you've shown.

The fact is, when a plane crashes, there is evidence of a plane left. In some cases, there is so much evidence that investigators can put the plane back together again like in some of the pictures you've shown.

In this case, the plane was completely destroyed. No evidence of bodies or even blood at the scene.

This is why I think it was shot down in mid air and it fell to earth creating the unordinary crash scene.

I don't think we will know that truth because nobody wants to believe that our own government would shoot down a passenger jet filled with Americans. Had I been president, I would have ordered it shot down if the WTC and Pentagon had already been attacked.

If there are pictures they should be made public. Plain and simple.

[rogue]

When planes are hit with a missile, especially a big airliner, the pieces are rather large. When a plane hit the ground and then goes through a stand of trees it gets shredded. The picture of the plane that I linked to had blown up in the air, broke into several pieces and fell into the waters off of southern Long Island.

[Merryprankster]

I might also point out that most plane crashes don't involve the entire body of the plane entering an enclosed space.

This is important. It would create a kiln like environment as the jet fuel burned.

My point: Planes - especially big ones are made of aluminum and composites. As petroleum products, composites ash at low temperatures, and aluminum melts at low temperatures.

I wouldn't expect to see large plane pieces, because of that.

Now, if the thing had been made of titanium, it'd be different.

But it wasn't.

[David Jamieson]

The problem with threads like these is the void of information taht gets filled with noise.

the noise either supports the tin foil hat crowd, or it supports the government story.

they're both just stories ultimately and for most people it's obvious that the tin foil hats are making stuff up and so is the governement. anyway, it's pretty irrelevant now seeing as nobody will do anything about anything anyway.

[Merryprankster]

the noise either supports the tin foil hat crowd, or it supports the government story.

David,

Evidence is not noise. It's not an issue of supporting one story or the other. It's an issue of actually doing research and determining what is plausible, possible and likely.

My objections to the conspiracy theorists aren't as much about the idea that the government did or didn't do something. My objections are that the pure science of the situation, as over and over again checked and verified by entities like popular science, and supported by the vast majority of experts in the physical sciences tells a particular tale.

So I object when the tin foil hat crowd says things like "but steel doesn't melt at *insert temperature here*" OOooookkkkk.... but that's not what the researchers are saying happened. They are saying that the temperatures softened the steel, which led to a structural failure.

Huge difference. I strongly object to mischaracterizing the scientific data/facts simply to suit an agenda.

Believe whatever you want about the motivations, whodunit, etc. I personally think it was a bunch of ****ed off Muslims, and I have my reasons for believing that, but let's let the science speak for itself, as opposed to spouting half-truths from a body of laymen.

By way of example, of the folks who are "eminent" within the 9/11 conspiracy movement, there are only a couple or three "natural philosopher" types, and of them, I'm pretty sure they're physicists and not structural engineers.

The vast majority of the experts in these areas not only conclude that the planes COULD have caused the damage patterns, but that such scenarios were highly likely outcomes, given the circumstances.

Now, it's possible that the majority is wrong, and the dissenters are correct. But the strength of the majority argument - as it relates to the physical forensics - is quite robust.

[SifuAbel]

The crash itself is just the tip of the iceberg.

The fact that the plane even reached the pentagon is another story. The contingincy plans developed SPECIFICALLY for this scenario went unused.

There may not be a direct american connection to the attack. But they sure just let it happen.

Either that or 911 was the "katrina" of terrorism. :rolleyes:

[Merryprankster]

But they sure just let it happen.

Spoken like somebody who doesn't have a career in crisis response:rolleyes:

I will grant that they done ****ed up. But that's different than "just let it happen."

One is incompetence, the other willful, purposeful neglect.

[rogue]

The crash itself is just the tip of the iceberg.

The fact that the plane even reached the pentagon is another story. The contingincy plans developed SPECIFICALLY for this scenario went unused.

There may not be a direct american connection to the attack. But they sure just let it happen.

Either that or 911 was the "katrina" of terrorism. :rolleyes:

Abel, can you provide a link to the contingency plan that you are talking about? I have heard that there was one for an airliner to crash into the Pentagon as it's right next to Reagan Int'l.

[SifuAbel]

Google FAA, sport.

And for the love of pete, It Washington freaking DC. It supposed to be the most secure airspace in the nation!!!

[SifuAbel]

One is incompetence, the other willful, purposeful neglect.

I guess you didn't get the katrina joke.

[Merryprankster]

I took it to mean that you think the gov't "let it happen on purpose."

Did I misinterpret it?

[SifuAbel]

Dude, you can try to peice meal every point people make into the ground. What was, was. It was either a giant collosal set of circumstances that proved that every system in place from both the militarily and through the FAA had failed unilaterally. Or not.

Rogue is alluding to it all being just sitting ducks for a terrorist group. Like BILLIONS havn't been spent over the years to have these things not happen in the US.

BTW the flight came from Washington Dulles International Airport.

[Yao Sing]

Then don't cry if someone uses that information, that you freely posted, against you.

??? Who said I was crying about it? I don't post anything I don't want known to the public. Nothing hard about that. What's your problem?

[Merryprankster]

Like BILLIONS havn't been spent over the years to have these things not happen in the US.


Actually, in truth, billions hadn't been spent on asymmetric threats like this. Incidentally, that is precisely the point of Richard Clarke's testimony and his first book. That billions WEREN'T spent...that the priority WASN'T set.

The United States enjoyed an unusual geographic security, which the latest round of globalization has ended, and our systems were actually mostly designed to deal with strategic, near-peer threats, vice tactical, asymmetric ones.

Here's a question for you - have you ever travelled outside the U.S. to a country that deals with these types of threats often, like Turkey or Israel? Their airline security makes ours look dumb, and it makes our pre-9/11 security look absolutely pathetic.

As far as watching a bureaucracy fail, I've seen it countless times in emergency response. Overlapping agencies.....unclear lines of communication and control....unclear chains of command....

We actually relied on our geography to protect us from stuff like this, to be honest.

You are free to believe whatever you like of course.

[SifuAbel]

"the Pentagon sits inside the P-56-A restricted air space section that extends 17 miles in all directions from the Washington Monument, and that activated air defenses from a joint FAA/Secret Service radar and air traffic control at Langley, VA for many years prior to 9/11. Interceptor fighter jets in that area, which is separate from and more restricted than FAA commercial air space, as well as much better defended, were regularly scrambled when small or commercial planes went off course or were not on scheduled routes within a larger Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) that extends 50 miles out to give time for the response. Andrews Air Force base, within 10 miles of the city as well as the 113th Air Wing of the National Guard at Anacostia NAS have provided consistent scramble-ready defenses for the P-56 sector, which protects the most important government buildings.... Commercial pilots have also long complained about the difficult curving maneuvers necessary to land or take off at Washington National Airport (now Reagan) to avoid entering P-56-B, the three-mile inner restricted zone above the White House, Capitol and Pentagon."

Here, tell me how this is BS.

[rogue]

Ever been to DC? You really should go and see what it's like. Quite nice, quite busy.

Here's where Abel's quote comes from.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/P56A.html


Rogue is alluding to it all being just sitting ducks for a terrorist group.
Oiy vay! Such a big subject. In a nutshell the terrorists ran a great operation and we dropped the ball. Supposedly we weren't hunting terrorists and killing them as hard as we should have been during the years proceeding 9/11. At least that's what I've been told.


We actually relied on our geography to protect us from stuff like this, to be honest.
On the money.

[SifuAbel]

. At least that's what I've been told.



By santa claus.

[rogue]

That's right, Santa.

[SifuAbel]

I just posted what was most concisely written .

What?, its not true? DC isn't a freaking No fly zone? Put down the pipe, boy. :rolleyes:

[rogue]

The only "no fly zone" with two major airports in the middle of it. I'm not sure how close BWI is. And it's not actually a no fly zone, it's restricted airspace.

A little bit of digging and we find info on the current zone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Defense_Identification_Zone

[SifuAbel]

"The neutrality of this article is disputed." :rolleyes:

I wish it were as simple as all that. The plane went AWOL way outside the DC air space. They saw it coming. They scramble jets for a duck ****ing too close but a jet liner veering wildly off course and back to the capitol isn't "fishy"?

Please, dream of the 50's on your own time.

This country stopped being an episode of "leave it to beaver" a long time ago.

[lunghushan]

"The neutrality of this article is disputed." :rolleyes:

I wish it were as simple as all that. The plane went AWOL way outside the DC air space. They saw it coming. They scramble jets for a duck ****ing too close but a jet liner veering wildly off course and back to the capitol isn't "fishy"?

Please, dream of the 50's on your own time.

This country stopped being an episode of "leave it to beaver" a long time ago.

I'm telling you ... for the last darn time. Bush is a vampire from a planet orbiting Sirius ... they are preparing all the humans for freeze-drying so that they can get the hemoglobin.

This stopped being a leave it to Beaver episode a long time ago. Now it's a bad sci fi novel. ;)

(The truth is more horrifying which is that they're a bunch of dumb-sh*tes).

[SifuAbel]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, politicians aren't capable of evil. They're just beauty pagent contestants.

Yeah, I believe it. The FFA are dumb. NORAD was dumb. The GOV is just dumb. The CIA is dumb. We have nothing but dummies running it all. Steel melts at temperatures way below than what we thought. Buildings don't tople they just fold in on themselves. And anyone that says otherwise is a loon. So if anything is written, questioned, proposed etc its automatically insane and is need of a correction. Regardless that there are THOUSANDS of questions regarding this, the simple answer is to just call that person a liberal and send him on his way with a nice neat little package of feel good pills. Why bother trying to answer the questions? Ridicule and belittling works much better. Don't worry. None of this will affect you in the future. No american citizen will be hauled off to guantanamo as an enemy of the state with no rights. We have a bill of rights. Despotism can't happen in america. Our constitution will make sure of that.

Good luck on your way to the meat grinder, fellas.

BTW, have you decided where you are going to get your RFID tag implanted? I hear the arm is more comfortable but the forehead will get you read faster. :rolleyes:

[rogue]

"The neutrality of this article is disputed." :rolleyes:

I wish it were as simple as all that. The plane went AWOL way outside the DC air space. They saw it coming. They scramble jets for a duck ****ing too close but a jet liner veering wildly off course and back to the capitol isn't "fishy"?

Please, dream of the 50's on your own time.

This country stopped being an episode of "leave it to beaver" a long time ago.

Abel, Who is this "they" you keep speaking of? Do a little research, get a small grasp of what happened that day and then come back. And BTW, I do appreciate that your "facts" came from an unbiased source. :rolleyes: