Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Our President
Wednesday, April 28, 2004 11:21 AM
GHOULMAN
Quote:Originally posted by BrownCoat1: Ghoulman wrote: Quote:... it just goes to show how hurtful, incestuous, and insane, American culture is. Reading certain posts above I gotta wonder if lobotomies are dirt cheap below the 49th. Isn't this statement the same type of stereotypical nonsense you are opposed to from some Americans about the French above? Seems to me that maybe the U.S. has not cornered the market on stereotypes. Just sayin'.
Quote:... it just goes to show how hurtful, incestuous, and insane, American culture is. Reading certain posts above I gotta wonder if lobotomies are dirt cheap below the 49th.
Wednesday, April 28, 2004 1:03 PM
CONNORFLYNN
Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Oh sure, I see your point. I'm of the opinion that this anti-french thing is so rediculous it demonstrates the insanity of American cultural currents (and assumes I'm correct about the origins of the 'joke' I mention). American cultural hegomany worldwide is not what I'm on about in this case... though I could!
Wednesday, April 28, 2004 1:21 PM
HERO
Quote:Originally posted by Ruxton: When I moved into my dream house, I naturally expected to breathe good air and experience good health in the latter part of my sixth decade. Instead, after a hike in fine, blue-sky weather that was marred by criss-crossed persistent contrails, I got deathly sick in my upper respiratory tract. I came to the inescapable conclusion that these aerosols seemed to be a prime cause of my health problems. I have all the symptoms of barium poisoning, and it has been determined by other researchers (Note well: RESEARCHERS, not conspiracy theorists) that barium salts are part of the aerosols. There is no doubt these aerosols exist.
Wednesday, April 28, 2004 1:59 PM
SIGMANUNKI
Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Please, don't make me talk about Canadian culture because it's smug crap! Upper Cans anyho, we Maritimers actually do have a culture unlike the wonks in Ontario. Take that Globe and Mail!
Wednesday, April 28, 2004 2:25 PM
Quote:Originally Posted by Nervouspete: And by the way, I am English, and I feel very strongly about America. You kicked our arses back in 1776, but we look to you to find your way to the first true ideal of a country. Even though we are cynics and disagree with you frequently, even though we laugh at you and mock you, we secretly are fascinated by you and want you to become something as noble as your heroes wanted it to be, badly. And cheers for putting yourselves on the line in World War II. And never dismiss me as a liberal. God, that really annoys me.
Wednesday, April 28, 2004 2:49 PM
Quote:Originally posted by richardecheandia: Refuses to obey the Geneva convention in our completely lawless treatment of Afghan POWs (many American former POWs fear how nations will treat our soldiers in the future because we've invented something called enemy combatants (whatever the f*ck that is)
Wednesday, April 28, 2004 2:58 PM
JASONZZZ
Quote:Originally posted by Connorflynn: Quote:Originally posted by richardecheandia: Refuses to obey the Geneva convention in our completely lawless treatment of Afghan POWs (many American former POWs fear how nations will treat our soldiers in the future because we've invented something called enemy combatants (whatever the f*ck that is) to answer this question, taken from Wikipedia of all places..hehe. Hope this clarifies things :) The term was first introduced in 1942 by a United States Supreme Court decision in the case ex parte Quirin. In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the jurisdiction of a U.S. military tribunal over the trial of several German saboteurs in the US. This decision states (emphasis added and footnotes removed): ...
Thursday, April 29, 2004 9:57 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Connorflynn: Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Oh sure, I see your point. I'm of the opinion that this anti-french thing is so rediculous it demonstrates the insanity of American cultural currents (and assumes I'm correct about the origins of the 'joke' I mention). American cultural hegomany worldwide is not what I'm on about in this case... though I could! I normally just laugh and shrug these things off, but thought otherwise in this case, because it's usage was in such poor elitist taste. If you are going to use words please: A)Know how to properly spell them B)know what they mean and use them properly. hegemony \He*gem`o*ny\, n. [Gr. ?, fr. ? guide, leader, fr. ? to go before.] Leadership; preponderant influence or authority; -- usually applied to the relation of a government or state to its neighbors or confederates. --Lieber. Since America is a Leading Member in the UN,by leading I mean a Nation with Veto power and the ability to back itself up (unlike some nations who cower in fear and capitulate to terrorists), I would have to say America is indeed a Hegemony in a good way. When lightning strikes, someone gets sick, someone stubs their proverbial toes in another part of the world, what country is asked first for Aid? Answer: The U.S. What country gets condemned when they don't give "enough" Aid? Answer: The U.S. Our American culture is indeed a Hegemony, built upon freedom and democracy, with one of the World's largest economies, largest free press, most liberal media/entertainment forum on the face of the planet,also a good thing. This is hardly something to scoff at or condemn. Normally "Hegemony" is used in a negative sense by socially embittered Socialists (this normally falls into the middle to upper class elitists) who find it politically correct to portray a "farcical Socially Conscious, anti-establishment anti-economist" front, when they sit back and reap the benefits of it's very existence.
Quote:ELITIST - e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-ltzm, -l-) n. 1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources. 2. 1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class. 2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.
Thursday, April 29, 2004 11:03 AM
DORAN
Thursday, April 29, 2004 11:05 AM
SHINYENDER
Thursday, April 29, 2004 11:49 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Hey spelling Nazi... when you call people names why don't YOU look up the meaning? Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ELITIST - e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-ltzm, -l-) n. 1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources. 2. 1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class. 2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And I love how you basically rationalized yourself into labeling me an embittered Socialist. You're a real nut. Still - your kind can only attack people by calling them names while the rest of us post actual facts, opinions, and knowledge.
Thursday, April 29, 2004 12:45 PM
Quote:Originally posted by ShinyEnder: A war on terrorists isn't a terrible, but when did they become Iraq. There were terrorists in Iraq sure, but come on, it was not a threat. In the whole country they couldn't even get one fighter into the air to fight us off. As for WMD's, yeah there bad, but so isn't a carving knife in the wrong hands. I was on the bandwagon with all the it's a "new" kind of war. I feel like they bait and switched this "new warfare" for Iraq.
Thursday, April 29, 2004 3:05 PM
HKCAVALIER
Thursday, April 29, 2004 8:22 PM
RUXTON
Thursday, April 29, 2004 11:55 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Ruxton: However, the phone calls from any of the hijacked planes are, for me, big problems. I have a close friend who installs cell phone towers and I specifically asked him if it was possible for those calls to have been made from aircraft at low altitudes going at the reported speeds they were traveling. He said it was impossible. I have read that from other sources also. .......Ruxton
Friday, April 30, 2004 2:04 AM
LTNOWIS
Friday, April 30, 2004 2:16 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Ruxton: HKCavalier, I have no doubt the Pennsylvania plane was in fact shot down, based on many apparent facts, such as large pieces of it being found miles away from the main wreckage, and many witnesses having seen a second plane near it. Exactly why it was, is open to many interpretations. However, the phone calls from any of the hijacked planes are, for me, big problems. I have a close friend who installs cell phone towers and I specifically asked him if it was possible for those calls to have been made from aircraft at low altitudes going at the reported speeds they were traveling. He said it was impossible. I have read that from other sources also. If the calls were phony, why were they hoaxed? Were they part of a ploy to grab people's sympathy, along with the "Let's roll" quote? Some other reason? I have no idea. I'd like to know more about your friend's received phone call, what was said, etc., if that's possible. Seven or eight of the 19 alleged hijackers are alive and well in other countries, and had nothing to do with the events. But no one has gone to interview even one of them. Why don't the alleged hijackers appear on the airport security videos of that day? Why aren't there credit card records of their ticket purchases? Why were there no Arab names on the passenger lists of any of the aircraft? Why did FBI director Robert Mueller say very publicly to the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco that nothing on paper connected Arab terrorists to 9/11? And on and on, no answers to hard questions, just repeats of the same rhetoric you are expected to believe without question. The bottom line of all this seems to be money: "Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed." -Abraham Lincoln, letter to William Elkins, Nov 21, 1864. "The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.." President Franklin D. Roosevelt, November 21, 1933 .......Ruxton
Friday, April 30, 2004 2:19 AM
ZORIAH
Friday, April 30, 2004 2:38 AM
Friday, April 30, 2004 3:09 AM
Quote:I cannot believe that the attacking forces would have had the stomach to do a prolonged and bloodthirsty attack aiming at survivors.
Friday, April 30, 2004 5:27 AM
Friday, April 30, 2004 5:33 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Ruxton: HKCavalier, I have no doubt the Pennsylvania plane was in fact shot down
Quote: However, the phone calls from any of the hijacked planes are, for me, big problems.
Quote: Seven or eight of the 19 alleged hijackers are alive and well in other countries, and had nothing to do with the events. But no one has gone to interview even one of them.
Quote: Why don't the alleged hijackers appear on the airport security videos of that day? Why aren't there credit card records of their ticket purchases? Why were there no Arab names on the passenger lists of any of the aircraft? Why did FBI director Robert Mueller say very publicly to the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco that nothing on paper connected Arab terrorists to 9/11?
Friday, April 30, 2004 6:42 AM
Quote:Originally posted by HKCavalier: P.S: to connorflynn--I'm sorry this discussion has become so painful to you. It is painful to me as well. No one here is arguing that the events of 9/11 were not devastatingly horrible or that 3000+ people did not lose their lives. We all just want to know why and how it actually happened, if that's possible. Don't you believe the truth is worth investigating? Don't you think that if there is but the slightest chance that anything ruxton has printed is true, that it should be examined?
Quote:Originally posted by HKCavalier: Hey Ruxton, ... The "cell phone hoax" is very troubling to me, because it really would have been an absolute stroke of genius, and if there were anyone with that kind of vision behind the Bush administration I think they would have handled a whole lot of things so much better than they have. It's really too imaginative for me to buy. Seriously, if Evil is really that clever and imaginative, we're doomed.
Friday, April 30, 2004 7:07 AM
POPEBOB
Friday, April 30, 2004 9:43 AM
Friday, April 30, 2004 10:42 AM
Friday, April 30, 2004 11:02 AM
Friday, April 30, 2004 11:06 AM
Friday, April 30, 2004 12:05 PM
Friday, April 30, 2004 12:23 PM
TALLGRRL
Quote:Originally posted by howdyrockerbaby1: Who thinks that our President needs to get his butt out of the White House? I certainly do. EDIT: CLARIFICATION: I don't think the war in Iraq was necessary at all, and so far Bush has given no reason for going, I think its great that those people are now free, but Bush shouldn't have been so cocky as to think that we could fix that entire country all on our own without the help of the UN. Besides, we have our own problems in our country to worry about before we try fixing everybody elses. Besides his Anti-Kerry commercials are just rediculous, almost all of the information (especially on the GAS TOPIC) that he says is at least 10 years old, for instance the 50 cent gas tax information(11 years old!) Plus his speeches annoy the hell out of me The reason why i have asked this question is because i just wanted to know the general consensus of all my wonder browncoat friends, i'm not trying to start any debate or anything. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* "Here's to Jayne, the box dropping man-ape-gone-wrong-thing" *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Friday, April 30, 2004 3:10 PM
Friday, April 30, 2004 3:16 PM
Saturday, May 1, 2004 1:53 AM
Saturday, May 1, 2004 1:55 AM
Quote:The Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational institute dedicated to promoting a strong, just and free America that ensures opportunity for all Americans.
Quote:Every day we challenge conservative thinking that undermines the bedrock American values of liberty, community and shared responsibility.
Saturday, May 1, 2004 2:43 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Zoriah: Wow that claim vs fact site is hi-larious. It's pretty interesting to see the claims that various people in the govt have made, vs the facts. It shows them up as either severely memory impaired officials, or worse prevaricators of the worst degree. Example: Topic: Weapons of Mass Destruction Speaker: Bush, George - President Date: 9/26/2002 Quote/Claim: “The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons…And according to the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes.” Fact: “Iraq did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled chemical weapons program after 1991… Iraq's large-scale capability to develop, produce, and fill new CW munitions was reduced - if not entirely destroyed - during Operations Desert Storm and Desert Fox, 13 years of UN sanctions and UN inspections.” - Bush Administration Weapons Inspector David Kay, 10/2/03
Quote:Let me turn now to chemical weapons (CW). In searching for retained stocks of chemical munitions, ISG has had to contend with the almost unbelievable scale of Iraq's conventional weapons armory, which dwarfs by orders of magnitude the physical size of any conceivable stock of chemical weapons. For example, there are approximately 130 known Iraqi Ammunition Storage Points (ASP), many of which exceed 50 square miles in size and hold an estimated 600,000 tons of artillery shells, rockets, aviation bombs and other ordinance. Of these 130 ASPs, approximately 120 still remain unexamined. As Iraqi practice was not to mark much of their chemical ordinance and to store it at the same ASPs that held conventional rounds, the size of the required search effort is enormous. While searching for retained weapons, ISG teams have developed multiple sources that indicate that Iraq explored the possibility of CW production in recent years, possibly as late as 2003. When Saddam had asked a senior military official in either 2001 or 2002 how long it would take to produce new chemical agent and weapons, he told ISG that after he consulted with CW experts in OMI he responded it would take six months for mustard. Another senior Iraqi chemical weapons expert in responding to a request in mid-2002 from Uday Husayn for CW for the Fedayeen Saddam estimated that it would take two months to produce mustard and two years for Sarin. We are starting to survey parts of Iraq's chemical industry to determine if suitable equipment and bulk chemicals were available for chemical weapons production. We have been struck that two senior Iraqi officials volunteered that if they had been ordered to resume CW production Iraq would have been willing to use stainless steel systems that would be disposed of after a few production runs, in place of corrosive-resistant equipment which they did not have. We continue to follow leads on Iraq's acquisition of equipment and bulk precursors suitable for a CW program. Several possibilities have emerged and are now being exploited. One example involves a foreign company with offices in Baghdad, that imported in the past into Iraq dual-use equipment and maintained active contracts through 2002. Its Baghdad office was found looted in August 2003, but we are pursuing other locations and associates of the company. Information obtained since OIF has identified several key areas in which Iraq may have engaged in proscribed or undeclared activity since 1991, including research on a possible VX stabilizer, research and development for CW-capable munitions, and procurement/concealment of dual-use materials and equipment. Multiple sources with varied access and reliability have told ISG that(this is the part you left off) Iraq did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled CW program after 1991. Information found to date suggests that Iraq's large-scale capability to develop, produce, and fill new CW munitions was reduced - if not entirely destroyed - during Operations Desert Storm and Desert Fox, 13 years of UN sanctions and UN inspections. (you left this off as well)We are carefully examining dual-use, commercial chemical facilities to determine whether these were used or planned as alternative production sites. We have also acquired information related to Iraq's CW doctrine and Iraq's war plans for OIF, but we have not yet found evidence to confirm pre-war reporting that Iraqi military units were prepared to use CW against Coalition forces. Our efforts to collect and exploit intelligence on Iraq's chemical weapons program have thus far yielded little reliable information on post-1991 CW stocks and CW agent production, although we continue to receive and follow leads related to such stocks. We have multiple reports that Iraq retained CW munitions made prior to 1991, possibly including mustard - a long-lasting chemical agent - but we have to date been unable to locate any such munitions.
Saturday, May 1, 2004 4:16 AM
FLYINFREE
Saturday, May 1, 2004 4:46 AM
Saturday, May 1, 2004 5:18 AM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Saturday, May 1, 2004 8:25 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Connorflynn: Quote:Originally posted by Ghoulman: Hey spelling Nazi... when you call people names why don't YOU look up the meaning? Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ELITIST - e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-ltzm, -l-) n. 1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources. 2. 1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class. 2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And I love how you basically rationalized yourself into labeling me an embittered Socialist. You're a real nut. Still - your kind can only attack people by calling them names while the rest of us post actual facts, opinions, and knowledge. It seems that I have struck a nerve by posting actual facts, opinion and well rounded knowledge. I also believe that you did indeed act and post in an embittered elitist fashion, while speciously misusing AND mispelling words outside your vocabulary.
Saturday, May 1, 2004 8:34 AM
MAUGWAI
Quote:Originally posted by FlyinFree: I am posting this but did not write it or research it, take it as you will... George W. Bush - Resume
Saturday, May 1, 2004 9:29 AM
Quote:Originally posted by maugwai: Where did you get it?
Saturday, May 1, 2004 12:16 PM
DARKJESTER
Saturday, May 1, 2004 1:08 PM
Saturday, May 1, 2004 1:30 PM
Quote:Liar. You didn't post one little fact. I made a FRICKIN' LIST. What's your problem?
Quote:I'll tell ya. You are a liar! If someone says GWB is bad, you will disagree without hesitation. Does that sound rational? No, but it does sound familiar.
Quote:I didn't call anyone names but you jumped right up and called me an ELITIST. Dead giveaway as using that word in this context is only found comming from the mouth of GWB and other White House language police. Oh, and elitist doesn't mean that as I've already demonstrated above... which you still ignored just like everything else everyone else posted.
Quote:Rush Limbaugh called and he wants his rhetoric back!
Quote:And I noticed Connerflynn is far more fast and loose with facts than anyone here and he refuses to offer any facts that he can stand behind. Worse, he childishly side steps issues as if that's an Ok thing to do in a debate. Well, it isn't.
Quote:For example - When Connerflynn states that 9/11 has been investigated in detail, why would anyone believe that?
Quote:We all recently know that the families of the 9/11 Attacks are trying desperately to get the White House to stop CENSORING THAT VERY INFORMATION!
Quote:Then Connerflynn states he's very close to these victems because he is in New York. Well, if he's so close why did he say this? Wild guess - He's not in New York. He's not close to anyone related to the 9/11 Attacks. He is a liar.
Saturday, May 1, 2004 1:43 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Darkjester: And as a final note, I learned a LOT about politics in the Bush-Gore election of 2000. Gore's camp insisting that certain areas of Florida be recounted, Bush's camp insisting that the votes had been "counted, re-counted, and counted again" I believe the phrase was. But I then realized that, had the count gone the other way and put Gore on top, he would have been using the EXACT SAME ARGUEMENTS to stop any further re-counting, and Bush would have been shouting JUST AS LOUDLY that the re-counts were essential to the democratic process. Robert A. Heinlein wrote that politics are only slightly less important to a human being than breathing. I just wish that politics didn't leave such an ugly, noxious taste in the back of my mouth........
Saturday, May 1, 2004 1:54 PM
Quote:Originally posted by HKCavalier: Hey connorflynn, I don't really see any substantive difference between the short quotation ("they don't got any") and the long quotation ("we really looked hard and a lot of folks said they might have something, there's still a lot of places that they might hide stuff, but as far as we know, they don't got any"). And what I mean by "substantive" is anything that would take use from "don't and might" to "they do." And there's still a big difference between 45 minutes and 2 years. HKCavalier Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
Saturday, May 1, 2004 2:17 PM
Saturday, May 1, 2004 2:23 PM
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL