War Protest Pictures

[@PLUGO]

Noooo...

He's obviously saying Invading Iraq is about Oil!!!

[KC Elbows]

No, he's saying that leader's take what they desire, under any justification necessary. It's not really that far fetched. Most of the conquests in history have been about taking what the conqueror wants, and the political justifications are generally not given undo relevance in history books, though they certainly play into it.

[@PLUGO]

WHATAMINUTE!!!!

whose sider are YOU on KC!!?!?!

[firepalm]

R5A The protests are just one of the outcomes of the 'surface' scenario & predictable (but at least they are doing what they feel is right & taking action, unlike the others that tune out to 'reality' programming like 'Survivor' dumbing down scenario as I like to think of it). There will always be the element that will not fall into line with 'authorities' way of thinking. But that is not the gist of what I am pointing to, which most of this is the 'wool that's being pulled over our eyes to blind us from what's really going on' (ie; terrorism is not the true issue).

Scenario again; I created the 'Black Knight' so I as the 'White Knight' can save the day & ultimately expand my empire / further my hidden agendas.

[red5angel]

Ok, now I see where you are getting at. Basically if I understand correctly you are proposing that America has 'created' an evil empire out of Saddams regime so that those at the top can get their oil?

[firepalm]

R5A Personally I think it encompasses much more then that, but in part that is correct. I think they are also after something more fundamental; control. Oust the guy that doesn't think like you, paint him to be whatever you like; tyrancial ruler, terrorist supporter, potential nuclear threat, etc... so I am justified in sweeping in & destroying him & his support system (Saddam may well be all those things but is he really the threat that he is being protrayed to be or is he being painted to be much more then he really is so I have justification to do what I like).

In the end I remain the guy with the biggest guns, controlling things and after all my way of thinking is the right way, God's way. Something like that.

[red5angel]

firepalm I think there is some truth in what you say and some paranoia as well. Saddam is all those things, no doubt in my mind. He should be removed from power, no doubt in my mind. However I have always maintained that while these things are on the agenda as to why he should be removed, there are other motivations as well that make it 'convenient' for us to do so. I do not believe that this situation was created or made by our government. The middleeast has been a hot area for along time and without someone to police it, it could eventually be the downfall of our civilization. Too many extremists and too much potential for power mad warmongers to get in control.
Basically, I think 9/11 put a bug up the US governments butt. Now they realize they can't just sit back and let it do its own thing anymore they have to step in. Saddam gave us a good excuse to go ahead an step in.

[dnc101]

KC, you also posted at a time when I'm out most of the time. And I said as much when I left. But, instead of whining and accusing you of intentionally posting while I'm otherwise occupied (we havn't exchanged itineraries, so this is unlikely on either of our parts), I'm going to reply when I have time. This is just a note to say I havn't forgot. Later.

['MegaPoint]

You fools are funny! Where is the trace of one inkling of an iota of a truth, clue?

I have the most compelling argument, Period!

[ZIM]

Wow, firepalm said something that really resonated:

America is just playing 'Survivor' with the planet! "I vote Saddam off the planet!" Who's next?? Tune in next week! [now THAT'LL make NASA pay off! I was wondering what we were gonna do with that space station! yay its a game]

Now it all makes sense...whew! and here I was thinking it was a war or something..

...personally, I'd rather see "Survivor: Monster Island" with a lot of japanese kids running around yelling "GODZILLAAAHHH!!!" but that's me...

[dnc101]

KC, your serries of posts on this thread are a good example of the paranoid, fearful mindset I was talking about. They were one long whine that 'I don't wike dnc, not won widdle bit!' Fine. I really don't care. So I'm not going to respond to all the personal attacks. But there were several allegations that need answered.

"...dnc and the small group of members who faithfully follow him from thread to thread in an attempt to dictate content and direction for the forum they do not run,...

This is a blatant lie, as anyone here can verify. There were several threads running at that time which members of this 'group' were defending the conservative position on that I did not get involved in. Easily verified by anyone interested. But a good bit of paranoia on yur part.
It did put a couple of the named posters on the defensive, though, and I have to give you credit- you siezed the opportunity to try to divide and conquer.

Quotes from KC posts:

Then why is it that it is endlessly you, dnc, eWallace, and Braden on each of these threads, never just one of you, and why is it that each dnc post is addressed to Braden to give a condascending viewpoint of the opposition...

The point is, if you let good members get rolled over because the person doing the rolling is on your side, then what good are you as a member to this forum?

R5, As for yours and dnc's feelings, you just said they might be similar, yet they are not at all. EVERY dnc post on here has been about liberals. On this entire thread. You said you didn't work on such arguments. How are they similar? And how are you not reflexively falling into a 'unit' when you say you have similar views to someone whose views are entirely different to yours?

Note that each dnc post, with very few exceptions, is actually addressed to Braden. That alludes to a group dynamic at work, even if Braden did not consciously make the connection to dnc, dnc has made clear that this discussion is about an 'us', by solely addressing an 'us' that he has created. Now, when that 'us' comes to include others, and those others make no distinction, odds are they are involved in a group dynamic.

The common thread in those examples is that we should be disagreeing with or arguing with ourselves. Particularly, they shouldn't agree with me. You attempt to create dissention within our ranks. It won't work. One, it assumes some conspiracy on our part. There is none. There is no common strategy. You assume some unity, where none exists. We do disagree sometimes on some things. We all know that, and I don't think any of us feels threatened by that fact.

dnc seems to think that all anti war sentiment is just sour grapes from the liberals, in some sweeping conspiracy. He was making unsubstantiated connections a given in his early discussion, re the taliban and Iraq, and only later had his keister pulled out of the fire by press releases of the Iraqi village that may have served as a terrorist training camp,...

I'm not the one talking about conspiracies on this thread, KC. And, as for me making an assumption that there was a connection with the terrorists and Saddam, that was old news long before I posted it. Bush had said it, among others. This little whine should read "dnc was wrong, but unfortunately we found out he was right, but we all know he should have been wrong, so he must have been wrong...".

You accuse me, several times, of speaking against liberals. Who do you suggest I speak against? These anti US sentiments are not being splattered all over this forum by conservatives. It is the liberal side of the discussion that is verbally attacking the US and conservatives. So they are the object of my comments.

While we are talking about my dealing with liberals, Where do you get the idea I lump all liberals into one group? I clearly divided them into three broad groups on this thread alone. And you could obviously sub divide that as many times as you want.

Your posts accuse me hating liberals, blaming them for all the worlds problems, etc. You also accuse me of simply wanting what the govt. wants. Let me point out that in the past, and not too long ago at that, it was me that tried to organize a cooperative effort on this forum concerning opposition to the Patriot Act. This was to be a bipartisan letter of protest. I responded to a liberal post and a liberal poster, using a liberal source, and asked if we could work together on this one. If you are interested, check it out:

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/foru...threadid=19839

That ocured a week or so before your posts here, and sort of puts the lie to your rant, wouldn't you say? (Of course, you wouldn't. But most reasonable readers would.)

I might also point out that I didn't ask any one to change their views, or go against their principles. I did ask that they consider the direction their leadership is taking them and the consequences of their actions. I also suggested that if their was some unity against Saddam we might be able to resolve the situation without a war.

Well, I am about out of time here. I'd have prefered to have spent this time perusing some of the more interesting looking threads that were recently started. But, this was fun too. I do want to end by thanking you for validating my point that the radical libs are runnin scared. Your posts were a wonderful illustration of this. And, if you don't like me, it's ok. Listen, if you need the approval of a bunch of annonymous posters on a forum to validate your existance, that is a pretty pathetic state. I asure you, I don't. So post your attacks. I don't usually get into an exchange of ad hominems. But I'll be more than happy to point out your petty improprieties if you choose to do so.

I have to go, as I have a life and it has recently gotten busy.

[eulerfan]

dnc101,

Put down the club. The horse is dead already!

[dnc101]

Eulerfan,

I'd told kc I'd reply, and as soon as I got (could make) time, I did. KC did not answer, so I left it. Last time I checked this thread was 2 pages back, I believe near the end of page two. And I wasn't the last poster then. You brought it back up. So, if the horse is really dead, quit trying to ride it!