Stupid People like this are as big a danger to this country as any racist

Quote:

---

“I think as a country you have a right to free speech,” said Boston resident Beth Chandler, “but there’s a difference to me with hateful speech and free speech. And a lot of what the separatists are saying is hateful speech and there’s not a place for that in our country.”

---

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...-rally-n794156

“but there’s a difference to me with hateful speech and free speech.

---


I'll just bet there is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thread

“but there’s a difference to me with hateful speech and free speech.

---


I'll just bet there is.

---

In the other thread, you were okay with communist speech being taken down and marginalized.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightpulp

In the other thread, you were okay with communist speech being taken down and marginalized.

---

& so?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thread

& so?

---

Communist speech offends you in the same manner as racist hate speech offends this girl. Two sides of the same coin, no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightpulp

Communist speech offends you in the same manner as racist hate speech offends this girl. Two sides of the same coin, no?

---

I can never win arguments with you, Midst. Leave me alone. I'm trying to enjoy my Saturday morning. + I'm gettin' my bell rung as soon as Girl rises & shines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thread

I can never win arguments with you, Midst. Leave me alone. I'm trying to enjoy my Saturday morning. + I'm gettin' my bell rung as soon as Girl rises & shines.

---

No. I agree. Hard line commies should be marginalized, as their ideology also results in genocidal endgames. But marginalization shouldn't come via government, It should come via us socially shunning their idiocy.

who'd a thought boston was full of pussy neo-wankers.


wouldn't even show.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clambake

who'd a thought boston was full of pussy neo-wankers.


wouldn't even show.

---

Were you itching for a bit of the ol' ultraviolence again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Were you itching for a bit of the ol' ultraviolence again?

---

http://i2.wp.com/replygif.net/i/101.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pavlov

http://i2.wp.com/replygif.net/i/101.gif

---

Wouldn't expect you to get a Kubrick reference. Sad!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Wouldn't expect you to get a Kubrick reference. Sad!

---

I would expect you to misuse and mis-attribute the term.

You did not disappoint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trainwreck2100

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...-rally-n794156

---

where's the danger is that position?

free speech absolutism is not a civil policy, isn't you ignorant, hateful, dangerous motherfucker. :)

Defending the free speech rights of those you disdain used to be a liberal tenant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

Defending the free speech rights of those you disdain used to be a liberal tenant.

---

Yep, and used to drive me to distraction.

I said it some time ago - you don't protect the 2nd, you'll lose the 1st. Liberals think the 1st Amendment is sacred but their ilk on the fringe are ok with restricting that one as well, as long as they get their people into power.

Don't want to hear the bitching when you lose your right to free speech. On 2nd thought, you'll not be able to tell me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

Defending the free speech rights of those you disdain used to be a liberal tenant.

---

Bash the fash. Who's the fash? Everyone who disagrees with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

where's the danger is that position?

free speech absolutism is not a civil policy, isn't you ignorant, hateful, dangerous motherfucker. :)

---

:lol a claim you make based on absolutely nothing.

Those idiots have the right to say whatever they want, just like they have the right to assemble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

Defending the free speech rights of those you disdain used to be a liberal tenant.

---

Still is. I don't see any reasonable liberals calling for the restrictions of the 1st amendment. In fact, slate (a liberal rag) disagreed with how tech companies reacted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightpulp

Still is. I don't see any reasonable liberals calling for the restrictions of the 1st amendment. In fact, slate (a liberal rag) disagreed with how tech companies reacted.

---

How it works on both sides of the fence now is you find these irrelevant microcosms of really outrageous behavior and try to characterize the whole movement as being like that. Like today with the peaceful demonstrations in Boston if you're right wing you find the handful of people who acted retarded and ignore the other 99%.

It's like a daily battle of largely irrelevant microcosms for the most part

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronY

How it works on both sides of the fence now is you find these irrelevant microcosms of really outrageous behavior and try to characterize the whole movement as being like that. Like today with the peaceful demonstrations in Boston if you're right wing you find the handful of people who acted retarded and ignore the other 99%.

---

Indeed. Social media is the culpit here. You can make a situation look more relevant than it actually is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bonnerific

They have the right to freedom of speech. What they don't have, is the right to freedom of consequences from exercising that right The problem is while stupid weak scared fuckers like yourself cry about somehow people are infringing on your right to your own opinion, you're worthlessness derives from gaining those opinions by using lies to make up what you try to pass as fact.

I think it's fairly obvious, how scared you girls are of any and all things different. Quit ruining the country because you know you are a bitch

---

I'm a minority you dumbfuck, and not a "white minority" but an actual minority. I don't have a dog in this fight.

Quote:

---

They have the right to freedom of speech. What they don't have, is the right to freedom of consequences from exercising that right

---

Where is that even mentioned in what i said

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thread

I can never win arguments with you, Midst. Leave me alone. I'm trying to enjoy my Saturday morning. + I'm gettin' my bell rung as soon as Girl rises & shines.

---

He wiped the fuckin floor with your fuckin ass

http://i66.tinypic.com/x51gkl.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bonnerific

you projected that they had the right to assemble. I actually agreed with you, you dumb fuck. But there are consequences in this world for actions

why, if you have no dog in the fight, are you defending people that hate you out of fear? Another self loathing poc. A true modern Republican Party wet dream. Jesus that's Worse as the racists hating you

---

Really, where have i defended their arguments? All i've defended is their right to say whatever they want. It has nothing to do with self loathing, i'm not afraid of white supremacists.

Quote:

---

you projected that they had the right to assemble. I actually agreed with you, you dumb fuck

---

never said you didn't i only wrote 2 sentences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monostradamus

He wiped the fuckin floor with your fuckin ass

---

I'm a trend setter.

I set trends.

92% of millennials favor free speech: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...s-now-n2320713

40,000 counter-protesters

33 arrests

0.0825% rabid leftist urine rioters

0 car murders

/sadpepe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

Defending the free speech rights of those you disdain used to be a liberal tenant.

---

Dont worry Snake.
The ACLU is already in tune with the cause.
Im sure that makes you happy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thread

I'm a trend setter.

I set trends.

---

Your repeat yourself constantly.

You repeat yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightpulp

Still is. I don't see any reasonable liberals calling for the restrictions of the 1st amendment. In fact, slate (a liberal rag) disagreed with how tech companies reacted.

---

The leader of your party

Pelosi Calls For Permit To Be Revoked For Rally Of Pro-Trump Prayer Group In San Francisco
https://jonathanturley.org/2017/08/1...san-francisco/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bonnerific

They have the right to freedom of speech. What they don't have, is the right to freedom of consequences from exercising that right

---

Only ask this because of what has happened the past week. Are you excusing violence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightpulp

Still is. I don't see any reasonable liberals calling for the restrictions of the 1st amendment. In fact, slate (a liberal rag) disagreed with how tech companies reacted.

---

most liberals must not be reasonable then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aztecfan03

most liberals must not be reasonable then.

---

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...s-now-n2320713

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

The leader of your party

Pelosi Calls For Permit To Be Revoked For Rally Of Pro-Trump Prayer Group In San Francisco
https://jonathanturley.org/2017/08/1...san-francisco/

---

I'm not a (d) and Pelosi has never been reasonable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monostradamus

http://i66.tinypic.com/x51gkl.jpg

---

:lol xkcd is awesome

I'll engage in some whataboutism here.

Dear leader once suggested mosques be closed (violation of 1st amendment)

In June of last year, dear leader suggested Mosques be surveilled (violation of the 4th amendment).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bonnerific

Of course not. Are you excusing white supremacy?

---

nope, but them being racist isn't an excuse for the violence from the left. thats the main consequence right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thread

I'm a trend setter.

I set trends.

---

lmemulatedao!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightpulp

I'll engage in some whataboutism here.

Dear leader once suggested mosques be closed (violation of 1st amendment)

In June of last year, dear leader suggested Mosques be surveilled (violation of the 4th amendment).

---

Obama did that? Wow!!!

But seriously, Trump is an idiot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pavlov

/sadpepe

---

Libtards triggered by a cartoon frog :lol Top kek

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quadzilla99

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...s-now-n2320713

---

They support there own free speech, but not those they disagree with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Libtards triggered by a cartoon frog :lol Top kek

---

Chirs is extra sad. Has to fantasize about other people shooting antifa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quadzilla99

92% of millennials favor free speech: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...s-now-n2320713

---

See the comments beneath the article here are perfect here for what I was saying. People see this stat but instead of learning something they just stick to their prejudices re-inforced by videos of left wing extremists and antifa retards like they represent the majority of Democrats and you cant tell them any different. Same thing with liberals who insist every Trump voter is a fucking nazi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pavlov

Chirs is extra sad. Has to fantasize about other people shooting antifa.

---

Hitler did nothing wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Hitler did nothing wrong.

---

Sad Chris is trying to be edgy again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pavlov

Sad Chris is trying to be edgy again.

---

Is it Mueller time yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Is it Mueller time yet?

---

The time Mueller is spending in your head rent free?

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pavlov

The time Mueller is spending in your head rent free?

Yes.

---

Do you think Mueller has a big bush Pav?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Do you think Mueller has a big bush Pav?

---

You're thinking about him right now.

Rent free.

Fascists hate free speech.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pavlov

40,000 counter-protesters

33 arrests

0.0825% rabid leftist urine rioters

0 car murders

/sadpepe

---

So, 33 arrests is a victory for you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aztecfan03

nope, but them being racist isn't an excuse for the violence from the left. thats the main consequence right now.

---

1. We don't know who was the instigator in the Charlottesville debacle.

2. Nazism isn't a point-of-view that you can sanitize down to a "difference of opinion." One problem is that we've become so desensitized to Nazism over the years through the countless movies, books, video games, and History channel retrospectives that it seems to have lost its ability to unnerve us. So instead of viewing it as the murderous ideology that it is, we kind of shrug our shoulders at it, hand-waving it away as "someone else's beliefs" that are as equally valid (under 1st amendment protection) as anything else.

Voltaire once said, "I may not agree with you what you say, but I'll defend to the death for your right to say it."

We have to ask ourselves, does Nazism deserve that defense? I would consider someone spouting Nazi ideology at me something of a pseudo-death threat, since his plan for me is extermination. Death threats are not protected by the 1st amendment.

That said, I would not be in favor of banning Nazi "speech." Not because I really care about a genuine Nazi's freedom of speech, but because I would want to protect those who use Nazism in a creative way (i.e. for artistic, satirical, or creative purposes). I don't buy into slippery slope fallacies, but a full ban on everything Nazi most likely wouldn't allow something like Monty Python's Mr. Hitler sketch.

My primary point here is you can't really be surprised when someone responds to Nazism with violence. It's very much a "psychological" punch to the face (indeed, anything can be a psychological punch to the face, especially to an overly sensitive person) so I can't necessarily blame someone when they do punch a Nazi. Do I condone it? No. Just like I don't condone binge drinking, but I wouldn't blame you for binge drinking on the weekend after a stressful week at school or work. Nor do I think the Nazi puncher is the villain in that scenario. Nazism is an idea that triggers violence everywhere it goes, thus I consider the Nazi the primary instigator(s) in situations like Charlottesville.

"So, we're just gonna start punching people whose ideas we disagree with?"

Slippery Slope fallacy. And again, Nazism isn't an innocuous point-of-view that can EVER be maturely discussed in the marketplace of ideas. It's devoid of all intellectual merit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

So, 33 arrests is a victory for you?

---

It's invariable when that many people get together, especially during a politically charged event, you'll have a few knuckleheads. Yes, 33 arrests for only disorderly conduct is a "victory." No injuries, deaths, fires set, property damage, etc.

-BOTH SIDES- remains.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightpulp

It's invariable when that many people get together, especially during a politically charged event, you'll have a few knuckleheads. Yes, 33 arrests for only disorderly conduct is a "victory." No injuries, deaths, fires set, property damage, etc.

---

That's a pretty low bar you have. Arrests typically mean that people were f'ing with persons or property in ways that can often lead to death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thread

-BOTH SIDES- remains.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightpulp

1. We don't know who was the instigator in the Charlottesville debacle.

---

We do know who the enablers were. The police didn't follow the law and created a violence corridor. Has anyone been fired yet? Has anyone even been suspended?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

We do know who the enablers were. The police didn't follow the law and created a violence corridor. Has anyone been fired yet? Has anyone even been suspended?

---

...No. & that will not happen here. & Trump failed to cite police (motive) & incompetence here.

But, he ain't gonna touch it. Cops goodPERIOD He can only praise them.:rolleyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

So, 33 arrests is a victory for you?

---

There were 40,000 people there you impossible moron

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

So, 33 arrests is a victory for you?

---

It's a statistic. Is 33 arrests a victory for you? I guess you were hoping for antifa to murder an innocent woman to take some heat off your side. Given the circumstances and the total crowd size, I'm glad you sad pepes can only try to gin up fear about a few piss grenadiers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monostradamus

http://i66.tinypic.com/x51gkl.jpg

---

This came up in the context of the Google Diversity Memo, but its applicable here too:

Quote:

---

Some are tempted to call this a "First Amendment" issue. Let me be clear, it is not. The government is not involved, and thus this is not a violation of anyone's constitutional rights. But, one of the pillars that holds up our First Amendment is the "marketplace of ideas" theory -- that ideas should compete in the free market, and that through wide-open and robust debate, we will advance.

In ideology-driven authoritarian regimes, locking someone out of the labor market because you don't like their ideas is a common approach. Behind the Iron Curtain, for instance, if you weren't sufficiently Marxist, it didn't necessarily mean a trip to the gulag. You would just find that you were out of a job. Of course, the blowback against this Google employee is not top-down authoritarianism or orthodoxy enforced by the state. No, in America when you violate the PC code of conduct, a small cadre of people will dust off the outrage machine -- and millions of people will fuel it.

---

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/07/opinio...zza/index.html

There is no question that being boycotted, or having your show canceled, or being banned from the internet is not a First Amendment violation because the government ostensibly isn't involved. But the idea that doing those things to someone who you disagree with squares with the values enshrined in the First Amendment is beyond stupid. Those values are open/free debate where stupid ideas like Nazism are discredited -- not censored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vy65

This came up in the context of the Google Diversity Memo, but its applicable here too:



http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/07/opinio...zza/index.html

There is no question that being boycotted, or having your show canceled, or being banned from the internet is not a First Amendment violation because the government ostensibly isn't involved. But the idea that doing those things to someone who you disagree with squares with the values enshrined in the First Amendment is beyond stupid. Those values are open/free debate where stupid ideas like Nazism are discredited -- not censored.

---

If someone keeps yelling a stupid opinion and drowns out healthy discussion, you tell him to shut the fuck up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quadzilla99

There were 40,000 people there you impossible moron

---

So, 40,000 people can't peaceably assemble?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pavlov

It's a statistic. Is 33 arrests a victory for you? I guess you were hoping for antifa to murder an innocent woman to take some heat off your side. Given the circumstances and the total crowd size, I'm glad you sad pepes can only try to gin up fear about a few piss grenadiers.

---

It's a statement of how little you expect in the way of civility from people whom you have sympathy for and apparently side with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

So, 40,000 people can't peaceably assemble?

---

39,967 of them did you inbred mongoloid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronY

39,967 of them did you inbred mongoloid.

---

No. There were plenty who engaged in violence who weren't arrested.

This is a nuanced treatment of the complexities around "free" speech, so all y'all simple-minded KKK/Nazis should skip it

https://medium.com/@juliaserano/free...e-e0547aefe538

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

This is a nuanced treatment of the complexities around "free" speech, so all y'all simple-minded KKK/Nazis should skip it

https://medium.com/@juliaserano/free...e-e0547aefe538

---

I'll just bet it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

This is a nuanced treatment of the complexities around "free" speech, so all y'all simple-minded KKK/Nazis should skip it

https://medium.com/@juliaserano/free...e-e0547aefe538

---

Quote:

---

I grew up during the 1970s and ’80s, during a time when transgender people were extremely stigmatized and not tolerated by society at large. As a child, I saw how gender-variant people were openly and relentlessly mocked, so I decided not to tell anyone about what I was experiencing. As a young adult, I continued to remain quiet about my identity. Colloquially, we call this being “in the closet,” but that’s just a fancy way of saying “hiding from hate speech and harassment.” Of course, I technically had free speech, but that doesn’t count for much if speaking your mind is likely to result in you being bombarded with epithets, losing your job, being ostracized by your community, and possibly other forms of retribution. When I attended my first transgender support group in the early ’90s, we held our meetings in a secret location because, despite our First Amendment right to peaceably assemble, it was simply not safe for us to meet in public or be discovered by others.

---

Lol nuanced. This tranny is critiquing what's being done to the nazis. Politics and bedfellows and whatnot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thread

-BOTH SIDES- remains.

---

How about that time -BOTH SIDES- took down the World Trade Center?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

No. There were plenty who engaged in violence who weren't arrested.

---

Like less than 1% dumbass

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quadzilla99

Like less than 1% dumbass

---

If you actually believe there were actually 40,000 counter protesters crowding that small area. At any rate, it's still pathetic that you think the numbers are something to be proud of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

How about that time -BOTH SIDES- took down the World Trade Center?

---

You should study 9/11. If you think it was just a score of muslim terrorists then you're in the dark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

You should study 9/11. If you think it was just a score of muslim terrorists then you're in the dark.

---

It was also Bush?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

It was also Bush?

---

Look at how much power/money the govt. and their benefactors got from 9/11. Look at the various evidence that we've been given false narratives. You really believe that 9/11 was just about a small terrorist organization pulling the wool over our eyes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

Look at how much power/money the govt. and their benefactors got from 9/11. Look at the various evidence that we've been given false narratives. You really believe that 9/11 was just about a small terrorist organization pulling the wool over our eyes?

---

So Bush did 9/11?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

So Bush did 9/11?

---

Why is it so important that I say Bush did it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

Why is it so important that I say Bush did it?

---

Most Truthers claim Bush + Cheney were the ones who took down the towers. So what happened on 9/11?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Most Truthers claim Bush + Cheney were the ones who took down the towers. So what happened on 9/11?

---

I think it's obvious that there were some high ranking players in on it. I think that Bush/Cheney were in on it or to what degree they were involved or not involved is distracting of that reality. Personally, I think Cheney/Bush are very shady characters. Bush is charismatic and people don't tend to want to doubt someone like that. Well, OJ is very charismatic, and look at what he did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

I think it's obvious that there were some high ranking players in on it. I think that Bush/Cheney were in on it or to what degree they were involved or not involved is distracting of that reality. Personally, I think Cheney/Bush are very shady characters. Bush is charismatic and people don't tend to want to doubt someone like that. Well, OJ is very charismatic, and look at what he did.

---

So Bush is charismatic is what happened on 9/11?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

So Bush is charismatic is what happened on 9/11?

---

What? I'm saying that he's generally likeable and in a high position and people don't tend to want to doubt a person like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

What? I'm saying that he's generally likeable and in a high position and people don't tend to want to doubt a person like that.

---

So you say Bush/Cheney were in on it. You should expand there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

So you say Bush/Cheney were in on it. You should expand there.

---

I already said that I don't think that me speculating on it lends itself to the obvious reality that there were many in on 9/11. Have you at least spent time studying this, or do you just buy what you're told?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

I already said that I don't think that me speculating on it lends itself to the obvious reality that there were many in on 9/11. Have you at least spent time studying this, or do you just buy what you're told?

---

Why can't you just say what happened?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Why can't you just say what happened?

---

2deep4u

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Why can't you just say what happened?

---

Cos I'm not an arrogant prick that pretends he knows all the answers. Have you studied this in any meaningful way?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

Cos I'm not an arrogant prick that pretends he knows all the answers. Have you studied this in any meaningful way?

---

The idea that Bush and Cheney were in on 9/11 is the stupidest thing ever said on this forum, even worse than you were ragging on the Spurs for cutting Jimmer.

Like Chomsky said, the idea of Bush being involved in 9/11 is retarded because it could never be kept secret and would have been the death of the Republican party. I don't know what's so outlandish about Islamic terrorists coming from Saudi Arabia, taking classes in flight school, and hijacking planes and flying them into buildings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

The idea that Bush and Cheney were in on 9/11 is the stupidest thing ever said on this forum, even worse than you were ragging on the Spurs for cutting Jimmer.

---

I figured that's why you kept asking the question. Why can't you answer whether you've studied this in any meaningful way? Is it just too hard for you to believe that people in high ranking positions would fuck people over? It happens every day, dude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

I figured that's why you kept asking the question. Why can't you answer whether you've studied this in any meaningful way? Is it just too hard for you to believe that people in high ranking positions would fuck people over? It happens every day, dude.

---

I'm trying to study it by asking you what happened on 9/11 and you keep stonewalling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

The idea that Bush and Cheney were in on 9/11 is the stupidest thing ever said on this forum, even worse than you were ragging on the Spurs for cutting Jimmer.

---

I think it's possible that Machiavellian dickhead was passively complicit in 9/11 by not pushing dubya and law-enforcement/natsec people much harder to handle the "red flags of summer".

I'm SURE dickhead was thrilled, "not let a crisis go to waste", when OBL handed dickhead a pretext to invade Iraq for oil, aka, his "national energy plan"

And then dickhead pushed dozens of lies about Saddam to justify dickhead's geopolitical war crime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

I'm trying to study it by asking you what happened on 9/11 and you keep stonewalling.

---

You're trying to mock and ridicule. So, you haven't studied it is what you're saying?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

I think it's possible that Machiavellian Cheney was passively complicit in the 9/11 by not pushing dubya and law-enforcment/natsec people much harder to handle the "red flags of summer".

I'm SURE dickhead was thrilled, "not let a crisis go to wasite", when OBL handed dickhead a pretext to invade Iraq for oil.

And then dickhead pushed dozens of lies about Saddam to justify dickhead's geopolitical war crime.

---

Being shitty at running the nation isn't being complicit.