Wha?

[Parker2112]

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=69784

[Shastafarian]

I'm just trying to figure out what I want to point out first...

The fact that this is over 2 years old
The fact that it's from World Net Daily (lol)
The fact that he's not talking about a single national security force as the article implies
The fact that Obama hasn't been too good about keeping his other promises

Where should I begin?

[Parker2112]

Start Here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h111-5741 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-5741)

[Shastafarian]

Start Here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h111-5741 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-5741)




GovTrack.us is currently having some down time. Either the website is undergoing maintenance, or the site was shut down because of an error or high load.

Please try reloading the page in just a few moments.

If the problem persists, please bookmark this page and return in a few hours. Thanks for visiting!

[Shastafarian]

Are you trying to say that they're trying to pass that bill so Obama can require everyone age 18-42 to be in his Big Brother program?

:rollin

[Parker2112]

obama aint runnin shit.

[Shastafarian]

obama aint runnin shit.

So what is the point of your thread then?

[Parker2112]

hes following the same gameplan bush was following

[Shastafarian]

hes following the same gameplan bush was following

What gameplan is that?

[Parker2112]

big govt, imperialist policies, and more powerful and invasive govt reach into the lives and rights of citizens here at home

[Shastafarian]

big govt, imperialist policies, and more powerful and invasive govt reach into the lives and rights of citizens here at home

So basically you posted a 2 year old article from World Net Daily (lol again) with no comments of your own to put forth the *novel* idea that Obama is more similar to Bush than he is different? That about the size of it?

[Wild Cobra]

hes following the same gameplan bush was following
I see you just added 10 stupidity points to yourself.

Please show me what Bush tried to do, else be proven stupid.

[Wild Cobra]

What gameplan is that?
I am all but certain he is talking about the liberal propaganda given to their lemmings that Bush wanted a draft, when it was Rangle who sponsored the bill, and only democrats cosponsored it.

Democrats wanted to reinstate the draft Parker... Not Bush.

You are a total demonrat tool. Fucking super libtard.

My God... You have surpassed every other libtard here now in my eyes. You are a very devoted Kool-Aid drinker, aren't you.

[Wild Cobra]

So basically you posted a 2 year old article from World Net Daily (lol again) with no comments of your own to put forth the *novel* idea that Obama is more similar to Bush than he is different? That about the size of it?
Like I said....

He's a super-libtard.

[Parker2112]

So basically you try to dismiss the article as being old and from a distrusted source, even with hard evidence, right in front of you, that the policy the article highlighted is being debated in comittee as we speak?

The point of this article is to spark conversation, and shed light on the origins of the current bill in that link. Your dismissive take was premature.

[Nbadan]

Worldnut Daily!

:lol

[Parker2112]

Like I said....

He's a super-libtard.

The point of this post is the continuity of policy that we have seen from Bush to Obama...which says everything you need to know really. Did Obama repeal the Patriot Act or get us out of Iraq? He ran on those promises, and yet he did a 180 in office.

[Nbadan]

So basically you try to dismiss the article as being old and from a distrusted source, even with hard evidence, right in front of you, that the policy the article highlighted is being debated in comittee as we speak?

The point of this article is to spark conversation, and shed light on the origins of the current bill in that link. Your dismissive take was premature.

Its a spun article Parker....Obama wants kids to get out and work in the community....he was a community organizer, duh!

The Draft bill put out by the Democrats is more symbolic than anything legit...its put out there to make people think if they would send other people's kids to war so easily if there kid could be next.....its a lame attempt by Rangel, but he's lame..

.Obama haters have put these two together and gotten mud - you know, like their economic policies

[Shastafarian]

So basically you try to dismiss the article as being old and from a distrusted source, even with hard evidence, right in front of you, that the policy the article highlighted is being debated in comittee as we speak?So you do think that bill is an attempt to give Obama the power to start a non-military national security force :rollin


The point of this article is to spark conversation, and shed light on the origins of the current bill in that link. Your dismissive take was premature.No it wasn't. The article implies something that isn't the case. Try understanding something before following it.

[Nbadan]

The point of this post is the continuity of policy that we have seen from Bush to Obama...which says everything you need to know really. Did Obama repeal the Patriot Act or get us out of Iraq? He ran on those promises, and yet he did a 180 in office.


Many provisions of the Patriot act have been repealed, and yes, there is a plan being implemented for getting out of Iraq, and hopefully soon, Afghanistan too...

[Wild Cobra]

The point of this post is the continuity of policy that we have seen from Bush to Obama...which says everything you need to know really.
No it wasn't. You lie.

Did Obama repeal the Patriot Act or get us out of Iraq? He ran on those promises, and yet he did a 180 in office.
I'm not going to try to find it, but in a thread during the 2008 elections, I predicted that Obama would do just that when confronted with the reality of intelligence he didn't know before.

[Nbadan]

I'm not going to try to find it, but in a thread during the 2008 elections, I predicted that Obama would do just that when confronted with the reality of intelligence he didn't know before.

....if you mean wing-nut logic...well, that sentence speaks for itself...

[Parker2112]

So you do think that bill is an attempt to give Obama the power to start a non-military national security force :rollin

No it wasn't. The article implies something that isn't the case. Try understanding something before following it.

Mistpoke. Replace article with thread. Sorry I'm busy with something else while posting

[Parker2112]

misspoke

[Parker2112]

Many provisions of the Patriot act have been repealed, ...

Any specifics here?



and yes, there is a plan being implemented for getting out of Iraq, and hopefully soon, Afghanistan too

and getting us into Iran?

[spursncowboys]

Any specifics here?


and getting us into Iran?
do you think we should do nothing in regards to iran?

[Parker2112]

do you think we should do nothing in regards to iran?

Do you think we should continue our imperial endevours even when we see the warning signs of our own permanent economic demise at hand? Even with history's warnings about what happens to empires who seek perpetual conquest?

[spursncowboys]

Do you think we should continue our imperial endevours even when we see the warning signs of our own permanent economic demise at hand? Even with history's warnings about what happens to empires who seek perpetual conquest?
I guess we'll just keep asking questions in response to a question. So your inaction towards iran would lead to them getting nukes. That means you are ok with iran having nukes. What other countries are you ok with having nukes? any of them? Is there a line you would think sending in troops to stop the building of WMD's is just?

[Parker2112]

I guess we'll just keep asking questions in response to a question. So your inaction towards iran would lead to them getting nukes. That means you are ok with iran having nukes. What other countries are you ok with having nukes? any of them? Is there a line you would think sending in troops to stop the building of WMD's is just?

Do you understand the diplomatic power a country wields when they have the srongest economy in the world? Do you understand that our economy used to occupy that spot...now it slips into the pack because of our arrogance abroad? Do you understand how readily we could avoid military conflict if we simply strengthen our economy, and wield dipomacy?

Why are we to be the police force for the globe? You, as a conservative, would despise a government that picked up citizens who could not pick up themselves...why would you applaud us sticking our nose in other countries affairs? Solely in the name of national defense?

There have always been dangerous regimes abroad. Why all of a sudden are we so ready to risk our freedoms, the freedoms that come from a strong fiscal condition, in order to stamp out what we find threatening? There has never been a time in history without threat abroad, why do we need to dictate such now? And ask the bigger question: how would we ever afford it?

I say those that want perpetual war are traitors, they betray our country for personal interest, and they need to be cast out as such.

[Parker2112]

So inaction towards iran would lead to them getting nukes.

Only their own pursuit and someone else's delivery would directly lead to them "getting nukes."

You put neo-conservative control-freak/"USA World Police Fuck Yeah!" philosophy on full display here. Neo-con small-dick syndrome as well.

[Winehole23]

I say those that want perpetual war are traitors, they betray our country for personal interest, and they need to be cast out as such.wino seel of approvl :sleep

[Parker2112]

wino seel of approvl :sleep

Yeah I know I got a little overzealous there...when I said "cast out," I meant snc :lol

[spursncowboys]

Do you understand the diplomatic power a country wields when they have the srongest economy in the world? Do you understand that our economy used to occupy that spot...now it slips into the pack because of our arrogance abroad? Do you understand how readily we could avoid military conflict if we simply strengthen our economy, and wield dipomacy?
i think morons who think we can live safely while other countries are building weapons which can hit us and destroy us need only look to 9-11. Oh no I brought up 9-11. I'm fear mongering.

I never said military action towards countries attaining wmd's. I asked if you were ok with any country having them.


Why are we to be the police force for the globe? You, as a conservative, would despise a government that picked up citizens who could not pick up themselves...why would you applaud us sticking our nose in other countries affairs? Solely in the name of national defense? solely in the name of national defense. I think wmd's need a better term than national defense. maybe national survival. You generalizing us sticking our noses in other countries' affairs for this instance is naive. you are ok with any country building or just having wmds because it's none of our business? Really? What about citizens of obama's world. Like Osama? Can he have WMDs? Is that our affairs?


There have always been dangerous regimes abroad. Why all of a sudden are we so ready to risk our freedoms, the freedoms that come from a strong fiscal condition, in order to stamp out what we find threatening? There has never been a time in history without threat abroad, why do we need to dictate such now? And ask the bigger question: how would we ever afford it?

I say those that want perpetual war are traitors, they betray our country for personal interest, and they need to be cast out as such.
Weren't you for socialized healthcare? How does that stengthen our fiscal condition? Same goes for extending unemployment while not have any way of having the private sector add employment.

Once again dipshit, I never said war. I think people who are willing to allow our enemies to build up for war and only think us able to fight said enemies after we are attacked are ignorant of the situation or just filled in their propaganda led beliefs. They are dangerous especially when they put their same formula into weapons that can destroy entire countries before one counterattack.

[spursncowboys]

mutual assured destruction

[spursncowboys]

Do we really want something like that with Iran, N. Korea, etc.?

[ChumpDumper]

do you think we should do nothing in regards to iran?What did Bush do about Iran?

[spursncowboys]

What did Carter do about Iran?

[boutons_deux]

Iran wasn't ever a threat to USA. Destroying a US embassy is not a threat to USA. The Repugs/Reagan secretly undercut Carter by negotiating with the Iranians to hold the hostages until after the election. Then the Repugs/Reagan did fuck all about punishing Iran, because their priority was putting Movement Conservatism into practice by deregulating finance (lead directly to S&L disaster), cutting taxes on the rich, and raising payroll taxes, primarily hitting the poor.

Of course, the Iranian revolution was prepared by the CIA overthrowing the democratically elected Iran govt that was going to national Anlgo-Iranian Oil company and Britain's oil investments.

Wonder why Iranians hated the CIA's puppets of the Shah's family, why they hated USA?

[ChumpDumper]

What did Carter do about Iran?He authorized a military mission to free the hostages that failed due to mechanical issues with helicopters. It was aborted on the recommendation of a Delta Force colonel.

Now tell us what Bush did about Iran, or are you going to try to change the subject again?

[Parker2112]

i think morons who think we can live safely while other countries are building weapons which can hit us and destroy us need only look to 9-11. .

We had intelligence that 9-11 was going to happen and BUSH/CHENEY did shit. The president was briefed on that shit a month or two before and we let it happen. So we didnt need to be in Afghanistan before 9-11 to stop 9-11...snc argument fail.

And isnt it funny how we had SOLID intelligence about al queida operatives, planes and new york and did shit...LET OUR CITIZENS DIE AND EVERYTHING.

but we didnt have squat tying Saddam to the situation and spent trillions to take em out.

BUSH... what a fucking winner that guy was.

I think folks like you, folks who keep a raging hard on for violence conducted through our military abroad, and who are willing to lie and distort the truth at every turn in order to get 'er done, should have their mouths stapled shut so they will no longer be able to spread thier vile logic to gullible folks and children.

Fuck a neo-con with Dick Cheney's walking stick. Then drop em off in a taliban hut somewhere and let them get their just due.

Im just sayin.

[Blake]

I see you just added 10 stupidity points to yourself.



how many more does he need to catch up with you?

[Ignignokt]

You all are a bunch of morons.

Bush fucked up in Iraq. He should have never sold the war on WMD. Everything else is messed up.

Do we want a nation of actual theocrats holding nukes? THe simple awnser is no. That's idiotic, and we cannot afford to think that a nation that has mysticism as it's way of will act rational.

Do we need to invade other countries? No, that's idiotic. We can always do that tough he mann shit like in Bosnia and conduct a bunch of airstrikes over their facilities.

As far as Obama's plan to force kids into national service, get that bullshit out of here. We're a nation with a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We shouldn't have to sacrifice ourselves with out the individual consent of every person. We are a nation of individuals, and not a nation of a collective spirit.

Is Obama continuing some of the same Bush doctrine shit, yes. Was Bush wrong for it, ofcourse. We don't need to be spying on our citizens, and we should uphold the constitution at all costs.

And that means nullifying Obamacare too.

[Parker2112]

Bush fucked up in Iraq. He should have never sold the war on WMD. Everything else is messed up.

Do we want a nation of actual theocrats holding nukes? THe simple awnser is no. That's idiotic, and we cannot afford to think that a nation that has mysticism as it's way of will act rational.

Do we need to invade other countries? No, that's idiotic. We can always do that tough he mann shit like in Bosnia and conduct a bunch of airstrikes over their facilities.

As far as Obama's plan to force kids into national service, get that bullshit out of here. We're a nation with a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We shouldn't have to sacrifice ourselves with out the individual consent of every person. We are a nation of individuals, and not a nation of a collective spirit.

Is Obama continuing some of the same Bush doctrine shit, yes. Was Bush wrong for it, ofcourse. We don't need to be spying on our citizens, and we should uphold the constitution at all costs.

And that means nullifying Obamacare too.

Dont underestimate the usurpment of power to the federal government through this whole national service thing. That is not good. The federal gov is too big, and its power is too broad as we speak. The beauty of our nation is that the states can dictate their own fortune, just like individual citizens were intended to. And to put such a focus on increasing the scope and breadth of the fed gov is to take power away from the states and to remove protections in place to prevent us from living under a totalitarian machine.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. And at the national level it has essentially corrupted both parties. We need to reaffirm the power of the states, let some of them fuck up, let their citizens move to other states over if they are invested in the home state let them change their circumstances for the better. But to let the fed govt step in at every juncture is to promote the possibility that we become something our founding fathers never intended...a homogenized nation living under centralized rule and subject to power centralized in a single body.

The diversity of the United States (the name says it all, by the way) has always been respected, all the way back. But it is being eroded as we speak. And not for the better. And one of the key ways is through the imperialist policies of the recent and current administrations. WAKE UP SMALL-DICKED NEO-CONS. Your advocating for the same big govt that you dread. You are advocating for the diminishment of states rights for a national agenda. you;re arm of conservatism has become the shining example of sheepish public. you are being led by your collective short dicks at every turn.

MISSLE ATTACKS DONT = PERSONAL WORTH, folks!

[Ignignokt]

Dont underestimate the usurpment of power to the federal government through this whole national service thing. That is not good. The federal gov is too big, and its power is too broad as we speak. The beauty of our nation is that the states can dictate their own fortune, just like individual citizens were intended to. And to put such a focus on increasing the scope and breadth of the fed gov is to take power away from the states and to remove protections in place to prevent us from living under a totalitarian machine.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. And at the national level it has essentially corrupted both parties. We need to reaffirm the power of the states, let some of them fuck up, let their citizens move to other states over if they are invested in the home state let them change their circumstances for the better. But to let the fed govt step in at every juncture is to promote the possibility that we become something our founding fathers never intended...a homogenized nation living under centralized rule and subject to power centralized in a single body.

The diversity of the United States (the name says it all, by the way) has always been respected, all the way back. But it is being eroded as we speak. And not for the better. And one of the key ways is through the imperialist policies of the recent and current administrations. WAKE UP SMALL-DICKED NEO-CONS. Your advocating for the same big govt that you dread. You are advocating for the diminishment of states rights for a national agenda. you;re arm of conservatism has become the shining example of sheepish public. you are being led by your collective short dicks at every turn.

MISSLE ATTACKS DONT = PERSONAL WORTH, folks!

Did you read what i wrote?

I condemned the National Service agenda. It's anti individualism.

[Parker2112]

Did you read what i wrote?

I condemned the National Service agenda. It's anti individualism.

Did you read what I wrote? You called me a moron, and I agreed with everything you said. :hat

[Parker2112]

Something more recent, from a radical source:


Rep. Charles Rangel may be in trouble because he is your standard corrupt district of criminals opportunist, but that has not killed his mandatory slavery bill. On July 15, Rangel introduced H.R. 5741 (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=184325), the Universal National Service Act, and it was referred to the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel on July 23. Even though the bill does not have co-sponsors, it is currently under debate.

“I have introduced legislation to reinstate the draft and to make it permanent during time of war. It is H.R. 5741, and what this does is to make everyone between the ages of 18 and 42 – whether they’re men or women, whether they’re straight or gay – to have the opportunity to defend this great country whenever the president truly believes that our national security is threatened,” Rangel said from the floor of the House.

Rangel specifically said the legislation is designed to be used “during time of war.” On the day before Rangel’s slavery bill went to the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel, Texas Rep. Louis Buller Gohmert introduced House Resolution 1553 (http://news.suite101.com/article.cfm/us-house-resolution-supports-israeli-action-against-iran-a266789). It has since been referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

“Expressing support for the State of Israel’s right to defend Israeli sovereignty, to protect the lives and safety of the Israeli people, and to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the use of military force if no other peaceful solution can be found within reasonable time to protect against such an immediate and existential threat to the State of Israel,” Gohmert’s resolution states (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.RES.1553:).

Language contained in the resolution condemns Iran “for its threats of annihilating the United States and the State of Israel” (threats Iran has never issued) and supports the use of “all means of persuading the Government of Iran to stop building and acquiring nuclear weapons” (nuclear weapons Iran does not have and does not possess the capability to produce). Gohmert’s bill supports Israel’s “right” to use “all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by Iran.”
In 2007, Mohamed El Baradei (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/14/iraq/main540690.shtml), at the time the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Iran did not have nuclear material and also stated that the country did not have a weaponization program.

Also in 2007, the National Intelligence Council (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/10/official-stands-by-iran-nuke-report/), where U.S. mid-term and long-term strategic policy is formulated for the intelligence community, stated “with moderate-to-high confidence… Iran does not currently have a nuclear weapon.”
“There is no evidence that Iran has made a decision to produce nuclear weapons,” said Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=119597&sectionid=351020104) while speaking out against sanctions on Iran.
In July 21, the day before Gohmert introduced House Resolution 1553, Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani (http://www.news.az/articles/19553) said the U.S. and Russia know that Iran does not have any nuclear weapons.

Despite the fact there is no evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program and no indication Iran plans to attack Israel, let alone the absurd notion it will attack the United States, Israel and the United States are preparing to attack Iran. The claim Iran plans to attack the United States is ironically reminiscent of the neocon accusation that Saddam Hussein planned to attack the U.S., one of several obvious falsehoods used as an excuse to invade.

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak of Israel have been shuttling between Washington and Tel Aviv, pushing for crippling economic sanctions that even they concede will not change Iran’s nuclear policy. These sanctions are being put in place, both by the United States and its allies. The open prediction that they will fail is meant to indicate just one thing — military attacks are inevitable,” writes Muhammad Sahimi (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2010/07/the-drumbeats-of-war-with-iran-are-getting-louder.html) for PBS. “The rhetorical rationale for attacking Iran keeps coming out of Washington. Most astonishingly, there is a resolution before the U.S. Congress, signed by one-third of the Republican caucus, that urges support for Israeli military attacks on Iran…. The resolution, H. Res. 1553, represents a green light for a bombing campaign. It provides explicit support for military strikes.”
The bomb Iran consensus was underscored late last month when former CIA director Michael Hayden (http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/hayden-iran-cia-strike-likely-homegrown-terrorism/2010/07/25/id/365566) told CNN’s State of the Union that a military attack against Iran “seems inexorable.” Hayden added that in his “personal thinking, I have begun to consider that that may not be the worst of all possible outcomes.” In other words, for Hayden, mass murder is preferable to diplomacy.

“The next step is tough sanctions, economic sanctions. Frankly it’s a last chance for Iran to avoid giving the rest of the world, including the United States, a hard choice between allowing Iran to go nuclear and using military power to stop them from doing that,” said Sen. Joe Lieberman (http://www.thedailybell.com/966/Lieberman-US-Must-Plan-to-Attack-Iran.html) in April.

“We have to contemplate the final option,” said Sen. Evan Bayh (http://www.thedailybell.com/966/Lieberman-US-Must-Plan-to-Attack-Iran.html), D-Ind., “the use of force to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.”

“The administration needs to expand its approach and make clear to the Iranian regime and the American people: If diplomatic and economic pressures do not compel Iran to terminate its nuclear program, the U.S. military has the capability and is prepared to launch an effective, targeted strike on Tehran’s nuclear and supporting military facilities,” former senator Charles S. Robb and retired general Charles Wald wrote for the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/08/AR2010070805070.html) on July 9.Slaughtering innocents is a “terrible thing,” said Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., but “sometimes it is better to go to war than to allow the Holocaust to develop a second time.”

Graham made this ludicrous statement regardless of the fact Iran has never threatened to attack Israel. It is based on a mistranslation (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm) of a speech delivered by Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad published in the New York Times.
The Times played a big role in the Iraq invasion when Judith Miller published neocon lies about aluminum tubes and other such patently fallacious nonsense. Neocon lies ultimately resulted in the murder of more than a million Iraqis, a total approaching Nazi war crimes.

As should be expected, the neocons figure big in the Iran attack plot now unfolding. “If military force is ever employed, it should be done in a decisive fashion. The Iran government’s ability to wage conventional war against its neighbors and our troops in the region should not exist. They should not have one plane that can fly or one ship that can float.” Danielle Pletka (http://www.thedailybell.com/966/Lieberman-US-Must-Plan-to-Attack-Iran.html) of the American Enterprise Institute wrote earlier this year.

In other words, according to neocons over at the criminal organization largely responsible for mass murder in Iraq, Iran should be reduced to a parking lot in order to prevent it from responding to an attack.

Neocon Reuel Marc Gerecht (http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/should-israel-bomb-iran) explains how the United States will be sucked into an Israeli-launched attack against Iran. “What is important to understand about this campaign is that the aim of Gerecht and of the right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu is to support an attack by Israel so that the United States can be drawn into direct, full-scale war with Iran,” writes historian Gareth Porter (http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/62619).

That has long been the Israeli strategy for Iran, because Israel cannot fight a war with Iran without full U.S. involvement. Israel needs to know that the United States will finish the war that Israel wants to start.
Gerecht openly expresses the hope that any Iranian response to the Israeli attack would trigger full-scale U.S. war against Iran. “If Khamenei has a death-wish, he’ll let the Revolutionary Guards mine the strait, the entrance to the Persian Gulf,” writes Gerecht. “It might be the only thing that would push President Obama to strike Iran militarily….”
Self defense is not an option. If Iran responds to an attack — and its leadership has stated repeatedly it will (http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2008/0620/p07s04-wome.html) — the U.S. will become directly involved.
“Gerecht’s argument for war relies on a fanciful nightmare scenario of Iran doling out nuclear weapons to Islamic extremists all over the Middle East. But the real concern of the Israelis and their lobbyists, as Gerecht’s past writing has explicitly stated, is to destroy Iran’s Islamic regime in a paroxysm of U.S. military violence,” writes Porter.
This “paroxysm of U.S. military violence” will undoubtedly call for adding a fresh crop of bullet-stoppers and that is where H.R. 5721 comes into play. As Rangel noted, his bill will provide under government imposed mandate that “everyone between the ages of 18 and 42 – whether they’re men or women, whether they’re straight or gay – to have the opportunity to defend this great country” from imaginary and trumped-up enemies.

Rangel’s bill may never make it out of committee. The attack on Iran, however, is all but a foregone conclusion.

[Cry Havoc]

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Shocking. Did you write that yourself? :lol

[TeyshaBlue]

I dunno, Parker. This doesn't sound security-force-ish.



"We'll send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods. We'll enlist veterans to help other vets find jobs and support, and to be there for our military families. And we'll also grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy."

[Parker2112]

I dunno, Parker. This doesn't sound security-force-ish.

The Bill gives details. Its domestic service UNTIL President declares times of war. Then they get a uniform. Deceptive methods to implement a draft.

[spursncowboys]

We had intelligence that 9-11 was going to happen and BUSH/CHENEY did shit. The president was briefed on that shit a month or two before and we let it happen. So we didnt need to be in Afghanistan before 9-11 to stop 9-11...snc argument fail.:lmao
I guess if getting vague intel that terrorists were trying to attack america, then clinton did nothing as well. Your logic fail


And isnt it funny how we had SOLID intelligence about al queida operatives, planes and new york and did shit...LET OUR CITIZENS DIE AND EVERYTHING.

but we didnt have squat tying Saddam to the situation and spent trillions to take em out. what are you tlking about exactly, conspiracy nut?




I think folks like you, folks who keep a raging hard on for violence conducted through our military abroad, and who are willing to lie and distort the truth at every turn in order to get 'er done, should have their mouths stapled shut so they will no longer be able to spread thier vile logic to gullible folks and children.

Fuck a neo-con with Dick Cheney's walking stick. Then drop em off in a taliban hut somewhere and let them get their just due.

Im just sayin.It seems you are the one distorting truth. Either that or you are believing someone elses distorted truth. Good job making assumptions and then have a witty comment to cover the assumption. I bet you had that get er done thing waiting for a good week. The only vile i notice is from liberals, with your posts as great examples.

[SnakeBoy]

Why are we to be the police force for the globe?

They call it WWII. I'm not sure what it stands for but apparently it killed the ideology you think you believe in.

[Parker2112]

:lmao
I guess if getting vague intel that terrorists were trying to attack america, then clinton did nothing as well. Your logic fail

what are you tlking about exactly, conspiracy nut?


It seems you are the one distorting truth. Either that or you are believing someone elses distorted truth. Good job making assumptions and then have a witty comment to cover the assumption. I bet you had that get er done thing waiting for a good week. The only vile i notice is from liberals, with your posts as great examples.

Clueless? Or stubborn? Well, here is a cure for one of them, from the Independent in UK: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/america-had-12-warnings-of-aircraft-attack-607393.html


America had 12 warnings of aircraft attack

</EM>
By Rupert Cornwell

Thursday, 19 September 2002

American intelligence received many more clues before the 11 September attacks than previously disclosed, that terrorists might hijack planes and turn them into weapons, a joint congressional committee was told yesterday.

American intelligence received many more clues before the 11 September attacks than previously disclosed, that terrorists might hijack planes and turn them into weapons, a joint congressional committee was told yesterday.
In a 30-page report, Eleanor Hill, staff director of the joint House and Senate intelligence committee investigating the terrorist strikes, cited no less than 12 examples of intelligence information on the possible use of airliners as weapons. They stretch from 1994 to August 2001, when word came of a plot by Osama bin Laden to fly a plane into the US embassy in Nairobi, Kenya.
Other information, in autumn 1998, warned that "a group of unidentified Arabs" planned to fly an explosive-laden plane from a foreign country into the World Trade Centre. That report was given to the Federal Aviation Administration and FBI.
The report disclosed that the National Security Agency, which specialises in electronic eavesdropping, had intercepted no less than 33 messages between May and July 2001, warning of a "possible imminent terrorist attack". US intelligence also received word from a source just back from Afghanistan in summer 2001, that "everyone is talking about an impending attack".
Perhaps most frustrating of all in hindsight, a briefing for senior government officials just two months before the attacks concluded that on the basis of a review of intelligence over five months, "we believe that he [Mr bin Laden] will launch a significant terrorist attack against US and/or Israeli interests in the coming weeks". It would be "spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against US facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. The attack will occur with little or no warning."

[Parker2112]

Here's some more for your reading pleasure:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB116/index.htm,

Including the Presidents Brief:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB116/pdb8-6-2001.pdf

Which mentions al queada, Bin Laden, Hijackings, attack, New York...all within two paragraphs!

VERY FUCKING VAGUE, I'D SAY! And your FOS, something I would also say.

[Parker2112]

:lmao
I guess if getting vague intel that terrorists were trying to attack america, then clinton did nothing as well. Your logic fail

what are you tlking about exactly, conspiracy nut?


It seems you are the one distorting truth. Either that or you are believing someone elses distorted truth. Good job making assumptions and then have a witty comment to cover the assumption. I bet you had that get er done thing waiting for a good week. The only vile i notice is from liberals, with your posts as great examples.

SNC, I would say these news bits have been posted here before, ad nauseum..which probably makes you a repug apologist and a repug liar simultaneously. but dont get the big head...your not the only one! :lol

[Wild Cobra]

What did Carter do about Iran?
He made it possible for the overthrow of the former head of state.

[Wild Cobra]

Iran wasn't ever a threat to USA. Destroying a US embassy is not a threat to USA. The Repugs/Reagan secretly undercut Carter by negotiating with the Iranians to hold the hostages until after the election.

Revisionist history at it['s finest people.

I was already past drinking age then. There definitely was not any indication of that in 1980.

Bouton's...

You are a total fool if you believe that.

Were you at least of voting age back then?


Then the Repugs/Reagan did fuck all about punishing Iran, because their priority was putting Movement Conservatism into practice by deregulating finance (lead directly to S&L disaster), cutting taxes on the rich, and raising payroll taxes, primarily hitting the poor.

Bullshit.

The Carter administration was appalled by the very harsh measures of the Pahlavi dynasty. However, they knew how to squelch those who were serious Jihadist type troublemakers. The Carter administration allowed the overthrow of Iran. Iran used to be a model country in the Middle east. Iraq was just behind them before Saddam took power they had great universities, hospitals, etc. the change in power in both nations not only lead to a war between them, but the new leaders were far more totalitarian than the former. We can thank President Carter for that.




Of course, the Iranian revolution was prepared by the CIA overthrowing the democratically elected Iran govt that was going to national Anlgo-Iranian Oil company and Britain's oil investments.

If anything, with 20/20 hindsight, they realized they fucked up in helping the Carter administration.


Wonder why Iranians hated the CIA's puppets of the Shah's family, why they hated USA?

They didn't. The populous of Iran loves western ways. At least those who remember the 70's.
[QUOTE=boutons_deux]

[Wild Cobra]

The Bill gives details. Its domestic service UNTIL President declares times of war. Then they get a uniform. Deceptive methods to implement a draft.
At least Rangel hasn't been able to get any co-sponsors on the bill yet. He's still flying solo.

H.R. 5741 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h5741ih.txt.pdf)

[ChumpDumper]

He made it possible for the overthrow of the former head of state.By not getting involved in the losing side of a civil war?

Seeing as no president really ever did anything about Iran afterward -- as SnC tacitly confessed -- that was probably a good move.

[CosmicCowboy]

Bouton's...

You are a total fool if you believe that.

Were you at least of voting age back then?


Hell, is even old enough to vote now? Most of his posts sound like a Sophomore in High School.

[spursncowboys]

Clueless? Or stubborn? Well, here is a cure for one of them, from the Independent in UK: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/america-had-12-warnings-of-aircraft-attack-607393.html
:lol
Rupert Cornwell? Not going specificially against his writing. Even though he is a complete liberal hack and anti-Bush even on the MSM curve.

[Parker2112]

:lol
Rupert Cornwell? Not going specificially against his writing. Even though he is a complete liberal hack and anti-Bush even on the MSM curve.

The official doc released by the Bush admin is right there man. Open it. Read it. Or is Bush a Liberal Hack Too?

It must be great to live in a world that you and only you possess the key too SNC...a world where you can discredit anyone who disagrees with your POV, and where you are always right and everyone opposing you is wrong. And where the facts mean shit, even if they are from Bush himself.

Oh, wait, your repug! That says it all...

[Wild Cobra]

Most of his posts sound like a Sophomore in High School.
You give him more credit than i do.

But then, a Sophomore today is probably like a 7th grader when I was in school for education.

[spursncowboys]

Parker. You put out this propaganda with no real evidence. just some conspiracy theory that bush and cheney knew 911 was coming and did nothing. this is the type of crap freshmen in college regurgitate w/o doing any homework. i read the memo. Like I said it was the same intel clinton was getting in late 2000's. I think both parties were willing to live with uss cole attacks. That type of shit pisses me off.
I'm not trying to discredit you because I disagree with you. However you have made a name for yourself so far of pushing this propaganda.

I'm not a republican.

[Wild Cobra]

But then, a Sophomore today is probably like a 7th grader when I was in school for education.
In defense of this remark, but I shouldn't have to...

When you get government involved, you end up with lowest common denominator results.

I'll bet no one can claim otherwise.

[Parker2112]

Parker. You put out this propaganda with no real evidence. just some conspiracy theory that bush and cheney knew 911 was coming and did nothing. this is the type of crap freshmen in college regurgitate w/o doing any homework. i read the memo. Like I said it was the same intel clinton was getting in late 2000's. I think both parties were willing to live with uss cole attacks. That type of shit pisses me off.
I'm not trying to discredit you because I disagree with you. However you have made a name for yourself so far of pushing this propaganda.

I'm not a republican.

SNC...

Regardless of how you want to couch this brief (Clinton didnt do anything, so Bush was exempt), this is proof that they knew about it and did nothing. Remind me when the air marshall's hit the scene. remind me when security got ramped up.

Its no longer conspiracy theory when the document is in your hands. It becomes IRREFUTABLE FACT. Even when those facts are inconvenient, you and the entire fucking fox news brigade cant fucking wish them away. they are the whole story.

It was Bush's job, as the head of the executive branch to make sure we the people were protected based on that intelligence. AND HE FAILED MISERABLY. Just like your logic. You or Bush can run and hide from the facts. Thats why they call them facts.

You can try and spin shit like Bill O all you fucking want (he's liberal, you wear a tin hat, Clinton was weak) but ALL THE FUCKIN NAME CALLING IN THE WORLD DOESNT CHANGE THE FACTS.

Of course your getting pissed, because the shit spots on your arguments are on full display for everyone in the neighborhood to see.

For the record: do I think 9/11 was an inside job? No. DO I THINK BUSH IS A FUCKING C STUDENT WHO CANT FIND HIS ASS WITH BOTH HANDS, AND BOTCHED HIS ENTIRE PRESIDENCY? Well, yeah....I do. I think if he was on the fucking ball 9/11 doesnt happen. AND DONT EVEN TRY THAT SHIT ABOUT CLINTON BECAUSE HE WASNT IN OFFICE ON MAY 2001, fucker. Your boy was, and he had intel. and he fucking laid down like a two dollar whore in the backseat of a civic on Broadway. Except the American people took the fucking.

Fact.

[spursncowboys]

SNC...

Regardless of how you want to couch this brief (Clinton didnt do anything, so Bush was exempt), this is proof that they knew about it and did nothing. Remind me when the air marshall's hit the scene. remind me when security got ramped up.

Its no longer conspiracy theory when the document is in your hands. It becomes IRREFUTABLE FACT. Even when those facts are inconvenient, you and the entire fucking fox news brigade cant fucking wish them away. they are the whole story.

what fact exactly?

[spursncowboys]

in reference to bush: what are you saying exactly and where in that memo do that facts prove that? I honestly could find it and maybe i misread your statement.

[spursncowboys]

SNC...

Regardless of how you want to couch this brief (Clinton didnt do anything, so Bush was exempt), this is proof that they knew about it and did nothing. Remind me when the air marshall's hit the scene. remind me when security got ramped up.

Its no longer conspiracy theory when the document is in your hands. It becomes IRREFUTABLE FACT. Even when those facts are inconvenient, you and the entire fucking fox news brigade cant fucking wish them away. they are the whole story.

It was Bush's job, as the head of the executive branch to make sure we the people were protected based on that intelligence. AND HE FAILED MISERABLY. Just like your logic. You or Bush can run and hide from the facts. Thats why they call them facts.

You can try and spin shit like Bill O all you fucking want (he's liberal, you wear a tin hat, Clinton was weak) but ALL THE FUCKIN NAME CALLING IN THE WORLD DOESNT CHANGE THE FACTS.

Of course your getting pissed, because the shit spots on your arguments are on full display for everyone in the neighborhood to see.

For the record: do I think 9/11 was an inside job? No. DO I THINK BUSH IS A FUCKING C STUDENT WHO CANT FIND HIS ASS WITH BOTH HANDS, AND BOTCHED HIS ENTIRE PRESIDENCY? Well, yeah....I do. I think if he was on the fucking ball 9/11 doesnt happen. AND DONT EVEN TRY THAT SHIT ABOUT CLINTON BECAUSE HE WASNT IN OFFICE ON MAY 2001, fucker. Your boy was, and he had intel. and he fucking laid down like a two dollar whore in the backseat of a civic on Broadway. Except the American people took the fucking.

Fact.

[Parker2112]

INDISPUTABLE Facts:

This Presidents Brief:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/...db8-6-2001.pdf (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/...db8-6-2001.pdf)

shows that on Aug 6 2001, President Bush was informed that:
1) Al Queida operatives inside th US, some US citizens
2) possessed the necessary support structure,
3) were known to have been recruiting in New York
4) and were known by the FBI to have been surveilling buildings in NY
5) with other suspicious activity observed by FBI consistent with plans for airplane hijacking.

President Bush never acted on this briefing. Next month, it all came to pass.

[Ignignokt]

This is where i disagree with parker.

Bush had very vague intelligence, but if he had to protect us from 911, he didn't have the legal power to do anything to the hijackers, and he would have had to resort to violating civil liberties to stop the hijackers. There would have had to have been racial profiling, wiretapping, and arrests w/o warrants to stop that because the memo didn't contain who the highjackers were. And there were probably many terror cells in the US who would have been just as suspect, how do you go about rounding them all?


So, I can't take conspiracy hacks srsly. Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.

[Ignignokt]

INDISPUTABLE Facts:

This Presidents Brief:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/...db8-6-2001.pdf (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/...db8-6-2001.pdf)

shows that on Aug 6 2001, President Bush was informed that:
1) Al Queida operatives inside th US, some US citizens
2) possessed the necessary support structure,
3) were known to have been recruiting in New York
4) and were known by the FBI to have been surveilling buildings in NY
5) with other suspicious activity observed by FBI consistent with plans for airplane hijacking.

President Bush never acted on this briefing. Next month, it all came to pass.

Bush doesn't have to act on it, the agencies are equipped to handle those things. Do you think bush has to arrest the criminals himself?

I have an open mind, tell me what Bush could have done to stop those acts?

[Ignignokt]

Aug 6, that's only a month's notice. Do you really think he could have done something in the nick of time by obeying the constitution?

[Parker2112]

Bush doesn't have to act on it, the agencies are equipped to handle those things. Do you think bush has to arrest the criminals himself?

I have an open mind, tell me what Bush could have done to stop those acts?

Air marshalls. increased security at boarding. increased cockpit security protocols. Increased info exchange between agencies. Walk onto an aircraft carrier in an oversized codpeice and declare victory. Increase code yellow to code burnt orange terror alert, or whatthefuckever. Everything they implemented after the fact essentially.

Bush isnt responsible for arresting them, but as the head of the executive branch, he could demand that our intelligence and enforcement agencies (who answer to him ultimately) (which you should know) 1. report fully what they knew 2. orchestrate a plan of defense from such an attack, and 3. do EVERY DAMN THING IN THEIR POWER TO MAKE SURE 9-11 never happens.

Thats what never happened but could've.

[Parker2112]

long story short...do his damn job and keep the country safe.

[SnakeBoy]

Self proclaimed libertarian bitching about how the president should have excercised more power to keep him safe...priceless.

[TeyshaBlue]

Air marshalls. increased security at boarding. increased cockpit security protocols. Increased info exchange between agencies. Walk onto an aircraft carrier in an oversized codpeice and declare victory. Increase code yellow to code burnt orange terror alert, or whatthefuckever. Everything they implemented after the fact essentially.

Bush isnt responsible for arresting them, but as the head of the executive branch, he could demand that our intelligence and enforcement agencies (who answer to him ultimately) (which you should know) 1. report fully what they knew 2. orchestrate a plan of defense from such an attack, and 3. do EVERY DAMN THING IN THEIR POWER TO MAKE SURE 9-11 never happens.

Thats what never happened but could've.
None of those things you listed stood a chance in hell of being initiated in a month. Let's look at Air Marshalls for example. Great idea. The Air Marshall system is already in place, so no ramp up. Now, all we have to do is

a. Determine which flight and what day the hijackers will strike, or..
b. Put an Air Marshall on every plane in the US every single day.

Neither option will be valid in a 30 day time frame.
As far as orchestrating a plan of defense, who's to say that wasn't done. It's possible there was a plan but it was either poorly executed or just a completely shitty plan. Either way, a President can ask/demand all he wants. But, no President can deliver what the agencies cannot provide.
Our governmental system was set up to prevent rapid, executive actions. I was done that way on purpose. Bush wasn't gonna change that in a month.

Yeah, there's lots of things that could've been done prior to the event that may or may not have helped mitigate the disaster. That's very clear.....now.

Just like going to Afghanistan now seems like a waste of lives and resources. That's becoming clear.....now.

[Parker2112]

Self proclaimed libertarian bitching about how the president should have excercised more power to keep him safe...priceless.

Do you understand how govt works, boy? Do you understand the duties of the chief executive? Your take is miserable fail. Go back to the drawing boards.

[Parker2112]

None of those things you listed stood a chance in hell of being initiated in a month. Let's look at Air Marshalls for example. Great idea. The Air Marshall system is already in place, so no ramp up. Now, all we have to do is

a. Determine which flight and what day the hijackers will strike, or..
b. Put an Air Marshall on every plane in the US every single day.



Sorry, but you had already failed miserably by this point...I quit reading here. The problem you ask?

The intel clearly states New York. "every plane every day" is a miserable overstatement. You guys really need to think things through before you show your ass in a post.

[Parker2112]

Neither option will be valid in a 30 day time frame.
As far as orchestrating a plan of defense, who's to say that wasn't done.


Actually its a matter of record that there was no effort to stave off such an attack. The effort came after the fact. I'll leave that to you to research further. You damn sure have some gaps to fill in in your knowledge base.

[Wild Cobra]

Self proclaimed libertarian bitching about how the president should have excercised more power to keep him safe...priceless.
After reading his response to this, he has the right idea, but just wants the protection implemented his authoritarian way. Not the method the CiC believes in.

[Parker2112]

Our governmental system was set up to prevent rapid, executive actions. .

Anything that can be done by executive order goes 0-100 in no time.

That doesnt even take into to account what can be done covertly through CIA/FBI under the guise of national security. Which the Bush admin mastered very early on in the first term.

Not even close, Tay.

[Wild Cobra]

Do you understand how govt works, boy? Do you understand the duties of the chief executive? Your take is miserable fail. Go back to the drawing boards.
Our last CiC did perform his duties pretty good in this regard in my view. I'm glad Obama realized his promises were a bad idea.

[Parker2112]

Yeah, there's lots of things that could've been done prior to the event that may or may not have helped mitigate the disaster. That's very clear.....now.

Just like going to Afghanistan now seems like a waste of lives and resources. That's becoming clear.....now.

By analogy: one day your at work, and you get a phone call saying there is a big shipment of french fries and onion rings that will be in sometime during the day. You know that you need to clear the boxes at the back door, because you wont be able to open it when the truck arrives, and the driver may just drop your stuff in the sun and let it melt.

Its your job to keep the fries frozen, tay. lets say you fail at your job. you werent ready...fries are lost. Now how far is your "there's lots of things that could've been done prior to the event that may or may not have helped mitigate the disaster. That's very clear.....now..." excuse going to go with your boss?

Well, Bush answers to the people. His job, as the Commander in Chief, is to ensure that we are are safe from attacks by foriegn agents. and with this info in his hands, and with history showing he never acted before the fries melted, his failure is clear.

UNLIKE YOUR IMPLICATION: He didnt need to be able to fortell the future, just to read at the level of a middle schooler, and make sure that the agencies under his command were on the job.

[ChumpDumper]

Sorry, but you had already failed miserably by this point...I quit reading here. The problem you ask?

The intel clearly states New York. "every plane every day" is a miserable overstatement. You guys really need to think things through before you show your ass in a post.The hijacked flights originated in Newark, Boston and DC and were all originally bound for the west coast.

[Parker2112]

The hijacked flights originated in Newark, Boston and DC and were all originally bound for the west coast.

Makes it all the more suspicious when the flight path deviates towards...

NY.

[ChumpDumper]

Makes it all the more suspicious when the flight path deviates towards...

NY.Yes, in hindsight, one could save the world at any given time or location before the impacts. If only things had been that clear on the date in question.

[Wild Cobra]

Makes it all the more suspicious when the flight path deviates towards...

NY.
That's a different topic, all worn out years ago. Yes, they responded, just too late.

[ChumpDumper]

The military had all of six minutes to respond after they were informed flight 11 had been hijacked.

[Parker2112]

The hijacked flights originated in Newark, Boston and DC and were all originally bound for the west coast.

And are you saying that it was beyond the Fed gov capabilities to scrutinize who was boarding these planes, all of which admittedly took off from Northeastern airports?

What about cabin security? Never touched. Could have easily been modified within a month's time.

[ChumpDumper]

And are you saying that it was beyond the Fed gov capabilities to scrutinize who was boarding these planes, all of which admittedly took off from Northeastern airports?

What about cabin security? Never touched. Could have easily been modified within a month's time.As I said, it's easy to save the world in hindsight. 9/11 was the result of multiple failures on multiple levels of government. That isn't at issue.

Military contingencies for hijackings before 9/11 were based on the assumption that the hijacking would occur on a foreign flight coming into the US, not a domestic flight. That's just the way it was.

[Wild Cobra]

And are you saying that it was beyond the Fed gov capabilities to scrutinize who was boarding these planes, all of which admittedly took off from Northeastern airports?

What about cabin security? Never touched. Could have easily been modified within a month's time.
There was a process in place during the Clinton years that identified many of those hijackers planning action. They ignored it.

[ChumpDumper]

There was a process in place during the Clinton years that identified many of those hijackers planning action. They ignored it.Who is the "they" in this sentence?

[TeyshaBlue]

Sorry, but you had already failed miserably by this point...I quit reading here. The problem you ask?

The intel clearly states New York. "every plane every day" is a miserable overstatement. You guys really need to think things through before you show your ass in a post.

I'm not one of "those guys", Parker. And, I'll show my ass whether I think things through or not.:lol

[SnakeBoy]

Do you understand how govt works, boy?

Of course I do. It works by oppressing all of us, stealing our wealth just to line the pockets of of the traitorous politicians we elect and their coporate masters. Any attempt to break free of this oppression will be crushed by the industrial military complex. Someday when Ron Paul is president all of this will change.

When Ron Paul becomes president we can all rest easy because if he recieves a report that al qaeda operatives are in the US with no other actionable information he will immediately jump into action and begin arresting and deporting all muslims like any good libertarian would...And he won't even let the french fries thaw out.

See, I've been paying attention to your efforts to edjumacate us because the future of our country depends on it.

[Parker2112]

Of course I do. It works by oppressing all of us, stealing our wealth just to line the pockets of of the traitorous politicians we elect and their coporate masters. Any attempt to break free of this oppression will be crushed by the industrial military complex. Someday when Ron Paul is president all of this will change.

When Ron Paul becomes president we can all rest easy because if he recieves a report that al qaeda operatives are in the US with no other actionable information he will immediately jump into action and begin arresting and deporting all muslims like any good libertarian would...And he won't even let the french fries thaw out.

See, I've been paying attention to your efforts to edjumacate us because the future of our country depends on it.

More specifically, are you clear on the responsibilities of the Executive Office?

I'll grant you that Bush's lapse would have been the same under many other presidents. But that doesnt excuse.

Its like trying to use the excuse that everyone else is doing something, so Im excused when I fail for the same lapse.

If you are the last one holding the ball, you are "it." Bush was "it."

He had a job to do and he blew it. And the corruption in government, the partisanship, the tendency to cover up anything that would encourage the voting public to wake from their slumber led both the executive and the legislative branches to gloss over those mistakes, both in testimony and investigations, and the final report on 9/11.

AND BOTTOM LINE: PEOPLE DONT REALLY GIVE A FUCK.

[Wild Cobra]

If you are the last one holding the ball, you are "it." Bush was "it."

So you agree that Obama is "it" now.

[Parker2112]

So you agree that Obama is "it" now.

He was it on fucking up the gulf oil spill, amongst other things.

Dude, your fucking partisanship overpowers your reasoning on most every issue. Your blatantly partisan. Its ridiculous. You and those like you are sinking this country

[spursncowboys]

By analogy: one day your at work, and you get a phone call saying there is a big shipment of french fries and onion rings that will be in sometime during the day. You know that you need to clear the boxes at the back door, because you wont be able to open it when the truck arrives, and the driver may just drop your stuff in the sun and let it melt.

Its your job to keep the fries frozen, tay. lets say you fail at your job. you werent ready...fries are lost. Now how far is your "there's lots of things that could've been done prior to the event that may or may not have helped mitigate the disaster. That's very clear.....now..." excuse going to go with your boss?

Well, Bush answers to the people. His job, as the Commander in Chief, is to ensure that we are are safe from attacks by foriegn agents. and with this info in his hands, and with history showing he never acted before the fries melted, his failure is clear.

UNLIKE YOUR IMPLICATION: He didnt need to be able to fortell the future, just to read at the level of a middle schooler, and make sure that the agencies under his command were on the job.

Im sure it was a typo and you meant freedom fries.

[spursncowboys]

Of course I do. It works by oppressing all of us, stealing our wealth just to line the pockets of of the traitorous politicians we elect and their coporate masters. Any attempt to break free of this oppression will be crushed by the industrial military complex. Someday when Ron Paul is president all of this will change.

When Ron Paul becomes president we can all rest easy because if he recieves a report that al qaeda operatives are in the US with no other actionable information he will immediately jump into action and begin arresting and deporting all muslims like any good libertarian would...And he won't even let the french fries thaw out.

See, I've been paying attention to your efforts to edjumacate us because the future of our country depends on it.

you did the typo too. pure accident I'm sure.

[jack sommerset]

Im sure it was a typo and you meant freedom fries.

Freedom fries! Boycotting France was as stupid as boycotting Arizona! That was funny.

[Wild Cobra]

He was it on fucking up the gulf oil spill, amongst other things.

Dude, your fucking partisanship overpowers your reasoning on most every issue. Your blatantly partisan. Its ridiculous. You and those like you are sinking this country
You don't get it yet.

I don't like the republicans, but I hate the democrats.

Keep that in mind please.

[Wild Cobra]

Freedom fries! Boycotting France was as stupid as boycotting Arizona! That was funny.
Yes, and I was one of us who said that then. You don't make the people suffer for the actions of their government.

[Parker2112]

You don't get it yet.

I don't like the republicans, but I hate the democrats.

Keep that in mind please.

Your continual tendency to frame everything in terms of the two party system is why the US fails.

Divide and conquer. That is what is being done to us in a nutshell.

WC, you are a prime example.

As for me, I generally despise self-serving politicians. But I do hate Bush apologists more. I hate corruption. I hate neocons. I hate racists. I hate liars. I hate how any political will can be defeated by injecting bullshit like race, abortion and religion into the mix (this is always done by design, by the way, to keep any voter uprising at bay).

Notice that the two party mentality doesnt appear in my value system?

Because to resort to the us/them is to fail miserably.

Congrats WC!

[Wild Cobra]

Because to resort to the us/them is to fail miserably.

Congrats WC!
You are wrong. I generally spoil my vote rather than voting republican, and almost always vote third party. I know they won't win, but hope I'm wrong. At the same time, I accept the fact that they are the lesser of two evils. I will offer reasons why the republicans are better than democrats because third parties have no future, until we have runoff elections, where the winners must have a majority of 50%+1 or more.

I continue to offer reasons why you are wrong, but you choose to take your bigoted stance of bias against me.

Your bad, not mine.

[Parker2112]

You are wrong. I generally spoil my vote rather than voting republican, and almost always vote third party. At the same time, I accept the fact that they are the lesser of two evils. I will offer reasons why the republicans are better than democrats because third parties have no future, until we have runoff elections, where the winners must have a majority of 50%+1 or more.

I continue to offer reasons why you are wrong, but you choose to take your bigoted stance of bias against me.

Your bad, not mine.

The repub traditional party line may be more responsible, but the actions of repugs are more dishonest because they generally preach one thing and do another. They are vanilla to the democrats' french vanilla.

The current movement in republican party is to talk tough and spend like dems. They have betrayed the party base for $. They no longer represent the conservative in this country.

Thats why until you and others vote responsibly, vote on your conscience (rather than the lesser of two evils) WE ARE HEADED TO HELL :devil IN A HANDBASKET. Congrats again!

[DarkReign]

Slow news day, huh?

[Parker2112]

Slow news day, huh?

that obvious?

it always devolves to the fundamentals.

[Wild Cobra]

The repub traditional party line may be more responsible, but the actions of repugs are more dishonest because they generally preach one thing and do another. They are vanilla to the democrats' french vanilla.

The democrats are worse at not honoring campaign promises.


The current movement in republican party is to talk tough and spend like dems.
Oh...

So you can see the future?

They have betrayed the party base for $. They no longer represent the conservative in this country.

The established ones I agree are not conservative. I agree they don't represent us.


Thats why until you and others vote responsibly, vote on your conscience (rather than the lesser of two evils) WE ARE HEADED TO HELL :devil IN A HANDBASKET. Congrats again!

Again,I usually spoil my vote by voting third party.

When will you start paying attention to my words instead of your prejudiced opinion of me?

[Parker2112]

The democrats are worse at not honoring campaign promises.

Oh...

So you can see the future?

The established ones I agree are not conservative. I agree they don't represent us.

Again,I usually spoil my vote by voting third party.

When will you start paying attention to my words instead of your prejudiced opinion of me?

hopefully if more of us "spoil" our vote, we will become "spoilers" of the current two party system.

My view of you stems from the stone-cold frame framework with which you view everything. You are either trying to condemn dems, or trying to stick up for repubs. They are both equally culpable in the mess we currently find ourselves in.

[Wild Cobra]

hopefully if more of us "spoil" our vote, we will become "spoilers" of the current two party system.

My view of you stems from the stone-cold frame framework with which you view everything. You are either trying to condemn dems, or trying to stick up for repubs. They are both equally culpable in the mess we currently find ourselves in.
I wish that were so, but I believe we got the worse of two evils in 1992 when 18% voted for Perot.