Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on March 26, 2007, 02:33:01 PM
-
Take a stance, people.
Answer, then explain your position.
-
Take a stance, people.
Answer, then explain your position.
how can anyone trust everything the government says? Both sides are scoundrels for the most part.
-
how can anyone trust everything the government says? Both sides are scoundrels for the most part.
My follow-up question will be to ask those who say "No" the following question:
What is the biggest thing you believe the govt would lie about, and why do you believe that is the cutoff?
In other words, would some people in power steal $1000 and lie about it? $10,000? At what number would their conscious stop them?
-
No, once a man has power his conscious knows no boundries.
-
google the The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment and you'll know my answer
-
My follow-up question will be to ask those who say "No" the following question:
What is the biggest thing you believe the govt would lie about, and why do you believe that is the cutoff?
In other words, would some people in power steal $1000 and lie about it? $10,000? At what number would their conscious stop them?
If you ask me, every time they take money from a Lobbiest, they are stealing.
-
Next question -
Would those in power allow ONE MAN to die if it meant his death would provide the justification for actions leading to world energy supremacy? In other words, would they let one innocent man die, if it meant it would put them in a position to remain a superpower?
Yes or No?
-
Next question -
Would those in power allow ONE MAN to die if it meant his death would provide the justification for actions leading to world energy supremacy? In other words, would they let one innocent man die, if it meant it would put them in a position to remain a superpower?
Yes or No?
are you kidding?
-
are you kidding?
Dude, they have sworn to protect us. The law says that even for $50 trillion in oil (well, currently that value, but it will rise), they wouldn't let one man die.
mm69 and beach bum, I await your answers.
-
never!!!
-
never!!!
I agree. The law is the law, and our leaders would follow it no matter what.
mm69 and beach bum, wouldn't you agree?
-
Dude, they have sworn to protect us. The law says that even for $50 trillion in oil (well, currently that value, but it will rise), they wouldn't let one man die.
mm69 and beach bum, I await your answers.
you posed the question as "those in power" which I assume is the current administration.
Do you think they give a shit about ONE human or ten, one hundred, etc... How many died in Katrina while Bush strummed a guitar not to mention certain CT's surrounding 9-11
-
NO, you shouldn't believe everything anybody tells you, even your mom.
-
The Republicans seem to think "yes" these days.
-
no
but neither should we believe everything that the media tells us.
-
no
but neither should we believe everything that the media tells us.
Media changes their focus based upon public opinion. After 9/11 and anthrax, Bush walked on water and NO ONE questioned him. After iraq mess, they criticize everything he does.
Prob is, people who get mad about the hard left bias today, weren't so upset with the hard right bias from 01 to 03.
-
Next question -
Would those in power allow ONE MAN to die if it meant his death would provide the justification for actions leading to world energy supremacy? In other words, would they let one innocent man die, if it meant it would put them in a position to remain a superpower?
Yes or No?
Hello, we fight wars to remain a superpower..and I'm not talking about just oil...we sacrifice lives to remain the big dog on the porch everyday.
-
actually you're pretty good to go if you take the opposite of what the gov says to be closer to reality. It most often turns out that way.
-
Hello, we fight wars to remain a superpower..and I'm not talking about just oil...we sacrifice lives to remain the big dog on the porch everyday.
Would they let TWO innocent people die, if it meant taking control of the world's greatest resource, and remaining the largest superpower?
-
Would they let TWO innocent people die, if it meant taking control of the world's greatest resource, and remaining the largest superpower?
they didn't kill thousands in 9/11 to get oil....stop with the fishing expedition
-
they didn't kill thousands in 9/11 to get oil....stop with the fishing expedition
Who said "kill"?
The premise of this thread was "let innocents die".
And, no offense, but just like everyone else, neither you nor me have the answers to this one. For EITHER of us to believe we know everyhting about 9/11 is fcking asinine.
-
Who said "kill"?
The premise of this thread was "let innocents die".
And, no offense, but just like everyone else, neither you nor me have the answers to this one. For EITHER of us to believe we know everyhting about 9/11 is fcking asinine.
Intelligent americans "know" the government wouldn't "let innocent people die" for oil....
-
Intelligent americans "know" the government wouldn't "let innocent people die" for oil....
If this is truly your position and your belief, I am not sure you and I will ever reach anything near a consensus on this topic.
Good day mate.
-
If this is truly your position and your belief, I am not sure you and I will ever reach anything near a consensus on this topic.
Good day mate.
No shit dummy....we can't reach a consensus on anything because you don't want to hear both sides of the story on any topic.
-
No shit dummy....we can't reach a consensus on anything because you don't want to hear both sides of the story on any topic.
well, you resort to name calling immediately. Which shows you're frustrated.
Okay, both sides. Let's do it!
My side: All world govts are utilitarian govts. They do what is of the greatest value for the greatest # of people.
7000 people die daily in america from various causes. If letting 3,000 more die on 9/11/01 meant that the US would get the world and domestic blank check to secure oil and position in the most valuable region on earth - checking the Rus and China advances for at least another 20+ years while keeping our fuel dependency checked, and 300 mil people would live safer better lives because of it, I think they would do it.
That is one side. Please tell me why it's unrealisitic.
-
well, you resort to name calling immediately. Which shows you're frustrated.
Okay, both sides. Let's do it!
My side: All world govts are utilitarian govts. They do what is of the greatest value for the greatest # of people.
7000 people die daily in america from various causes. If letting 3,000 more die on 9/11/01 meant that the US would get the world and domestic blank check to secure oil and position in the most valuable region on earth - checking the Rus and China advances for at least another 20+ years while keeping our fuel dependency checked, and 300 mil people would live safer better lives because of it, I think they would do it.
That is one side. Please tell me why it's unrealisitic.
I'm not even close to frustrated, I just think you are crazy....it isn't worth my time typing because unless I change my name to Alex Jones you won't listen. The American government isn't going to stage an attack like 9/11 for oil.....
-
I'm not even close to frustrated, I just think you are crazy....it isn't worth my time typing because unless I change my name to Alex Jones you won't listen. The American government isn't going to stage an attack like 9/11 for oil.....
Your time isn't an issue, I believe. You spend hours here every day tossing things around. So one post explaining your beliefs here won't kill ya.
You didn't answer my question:
Please tell me why it's unrealisitic that we'd let a mere 3000 die if it meant the other 300 million would live SO much better.
-
Your time isn't an issue, I believe. You spend hours here every day tossing things around. So one post explaining your beliefs here won't kill ya.
You didn't answer my question:
Please tell me why it's unrealisitic that we'd let a mere 3000 die if it meant the other 300 million would live SO much better.
Because this is America and that shit doesn't happen here...I didn't say I don't have time, just don't like wasting it trying to talk to a brick wall
-
Because this is America and that shit doesn't happen here...I didn't say I don't have time, just don't like wasting it trying to talk to a brick wall
Okay.
Your reasoning is "because I said so".
We can ignore Operation Northwoods, a declassified document showing we almost did fake hijackings in 1962 - approved by joint chiefs and DoD - and aomost happened, if JFK hadn't said no.
We can ignore the Gulf of Tonken, as we now know the viet never attacked us as reported, and that we went to battle based upon fake attacks.
So, I have those two historically proven events where yes - that shit DOES happen here.
You have "that shit doesn't happen here".
-
Okay.
Your reasoning is "because I said so".
We can ignore Operation Northwoods, a declassified document showing we almost did fake hijackings in 1962 - approved by joint chiefs and DoD - and aomost happened, if JFK hadn't said no.
We can ignore the Gulf of Tonken, as we now know the viet never attacked us as reported, and that we went to battle based upon fake attacks.
So, I have those two historically proven events where yes - that shit DOES happen here.
You have "that shit doesn't happen here".
mm69?? dude? ya there? Declassified documents, 40 years after the fact, show that in 1962 and 1964, we DID the exact shit you just said we didn't do.
So are you amending your statement? "We don't do that shit anymore?"
-
Okay.
Your reasoning is "because I said so".
We can ignore Operation Northwoods, a declassified document showing we almost did fake hijackings in 1962 - approved by joint chiefs and DoD - and aomost happened, if JFK hadn't said no.
We can ignore the Gulf of Tonken, as we now know the viet never attacked us as reported, and that we went to battle based upon fake attacks.
So, I have those two historically proven events where yes - that shit DOES happen here.
You have "that shit doesn't happen here".
LMAO saying almost isn't a very good arguing point.....but neither of those compare to 9/11
-
mm69?? dude? ya there? Declassified documents, 40 years after the fact, show that in 1962 and 1964, we DID the exact shit you just said we didn't do.
So are you amending your statement? "We don't do that shit anymore?"
Sorry I didn't get back to you soon enough! Life you know.....that shit doesn't happen in America.....Almost doesn't count
-
LMAO saying almost isn't a very good arguing point.....but neither of those compare to 9/11
Wow... so small incidents like Northwoods plan to switch planes and blow them up and set off bombs in Miami to terrorize people - you concede we strongly considered those? (joint chiefs and DoD approved them!)
-
Wow... so small incidents like Northwoods plan to switch planes and blow them up and set off bombs in Miami to terrorize people - you concede we strongly considered those? (joint chiefs and DoD approved them!)
I didn't concede nothing, but when you throw in the word ALMOST, I kind of lose interest......
-
I didn't concede nothing, but when you throw in the word ALMOST, I kind of lose interest......
Did the joint chiefs and Dept of Defense approve a plan for false flag terror operations?
Yes or no?
-
Did the joint chiefs and Dept of Defense approve a plan for false flag terror operations?
Yes or no?
look I have never looked at the documents, but could care less if they approved it...did this plan happen? NO so why talk about it?
-
look I have never looked at the documents, but could care less if they approved it...did this plan happen? NO so why talk about it?
Pretty funny to see your position unraveling.
Earlier you said "Because this is America and that shit doesn't happen here..."
Now, we have a 1962 plot that large groups of govt approved, and the 1964 attack which DID happen. You don't argue this stuff.
And we talk about it because it shows there are large groups in the govt who are a-okay with self-attacks and false flag terror operations, something you said we don't do.
-
Pretty funny to see your position unraveling.
Earlier you said "Because this is America and that shit doesn't happen here..."
Now, we have a 1962 plot that large groups of govt approved, and the 1964 attack which DID happen. You don't argue this stuff.
And we talk about it because it shows there are large groups in the govt who are a-okay with self-attacks and false flag terror operations, something you said we don't do.
My position? we will see I guess.....it will be nice to never see you post on here again after an investigation is done and nothing is found....
-
My position? we will see I guess.....it will be nice to never see you post on here again after an investigation is done and nothing is found....
I'll apologize, of course.
Based upon the huge pile of holes in the 911 story, a second investigation will be something incredible.
-
I'll apologize, of course.
Based upon the huge pile of holes in the 911 story, a second investigation will be something incredible.
HAH! Apologize..I doubt it. I guarantee that if they investigate a second time and show nothing you and Alex Jones will call for a 3rd.
-
HAH! Apologize..I doubt it. I guarantee that if they investigate a second time and show nothing you and Alex Jones will call for a 3rd.
oh ok.
you doubt something.
what a great post.
-
oh ok.
you doubt something.
what a great post.
Are you telling me that if they investigate again and find nothing that you will drop it then and there and never mention 9/11 CT again? I KNOW that won't happen
-
Are you telling me that if they investigate again and find nothing that you will drop it then and there and never mention 9/11 CT again? I KNOW that won't happen
If they address every question put forth, then yes.
If they test metal for explosive residue, then yes.
If they show us the missing 85 pentagon videotapes, then yes.
I know you like to call names and spell 'semen' wrong, but hoenstly, all I want is a real investigation. I love America just as much as you do - I just have less of a trusting nature and I am more about justice than you, it seems.
-
If they address every question put forth, then yes.
If they test metal for explosive residue, then yes.
If they show us the missing 85 pentagon videotapes, then yes.
I know you like to call names and spell 'semen' wrong, but hoenstly, all I want is a real investigation. I love America just as much as you do - I just have less of a trusting nature and I am more about justice than you, it seems.
I never called you a bad american...if you were you wouldn't care about anything. I care about justice, but admittedly am more trusting. If something turns up and the government knew, I will be first in line asking for their hanging. I just don't think anything is going to be found.
-
I never called you a bad american...if you were you wouldn't care about anything. I care about justice, but admittedly am more trusting. If something turns up and the government knew, I will be first in line asking for their hanging. I just don't think anything is going to be found.
We want teh same things, man. And I used to compeltely mock the CTers.
I think you should watch some of those documentaries you consider crazy. A lot of them are made by diehard republicans who set out to prove the CTers wrong, and ended up looking at things and realizing something doesn't add up.
That's my position - we need an independent, complete investigation. The first one was 9/10 members former Bush 1 oil employees or relations, and even 4/10 of them want a new one. All these people - every day more and more - what evidence are they looking at, that makes them believe such a HORRIBLE fcking thing? And the holes in the story and investigaiton are way too many to list.
mm69, you're at war so i feel bad already, arguing with you. I've tried repeatedly to stop, but you're here so damn much lol... when you get home, look at a few of these documentaries, and realize the goal of most of these filmmakers isn't to discredit Bush - it's to get people to support a real investigation. that's all i care about - I honestly think a small group - under 100 - here in ties were involved. And if not, let's fill in the holes and clear up the confusion. Cause the doubt is growing very very fast.
-
We want teh same things, man. And I used to compeltely mock the CTers.
I think you should watch some of those documentaries you consider crazy. A lot of them are made by diehard republicans who set out to prove the CTers wrong, and ended up looking at things and realizing something doesn't add up.
That's my position - we need an independent, complete investigation. The first one was 9/10 members former Bush 1 oil employees or relations, and even 4/10 of them want a new one. All these people - every day more and more - what evidence are they looking at, that makes them believe such a HORRIBLE fcking thing? And the holes in the story and investigaiton are way too many to list.
mm69, you're at war so i feel bad already, arguing with you. I've tried repeatedly to stop, but you're here so damn much lol... when you get home, look at a few of these documentaries, and realize the goal of most of these filmmakers isn't to discredit Bush - it's to get people to support a real investigation. that's all i care about - I honestly think a small group - under 100 - here in ties were involved. And if not, let's fill in the holes and clear up the confusion. Cause the doubt is growing very very fast.
I am home 240, I got back last fall. I would like to see an investigation also. Lets clear this up one way or the other...and don't stop fighting, where else am I going to let out my competitive side?? lol
-
I am home 240, I got back last fall. I would like to see an investigation also. Lets clear this up one way or the other...and don't stop fighting, where else am I going to let out my competitive side?? lol
lol... yeah, we're both some competitive fuckers.
-
lol... yeah, we're both some competitive fuckers.
I love to debate, I wish we could do it in person more, I am a hunt and peck typer so I get tired of it real fast!!
-
I am home 240, I got back last fall. I would like to see an investigation also. Lets clear this up one way or the other...and don't stop fighting, where else am I going to let out my competitive side?? lol
biggest problem is that america is seriously divided. If anywhere near 1/3 of americans believe inside job... that is some serious national division.
And it's growing. it's no longer 'crazy' to believe 911 was an inside job (as labeled by cable news). Now, it's unamerican to even look at the evidence. They don't want us looking at it. That's weird. THey don't want us looking at the BBC reporting stuff before it happened. that's weird.
Dennis kuscinish wants a new investigation now. Obama is open to foreknowledge investigation. Gore was PISSED that bush was warned and didn't act, in a Dec interview i posted here. And the billionaires - cuban and walters. And the celebrities - too many to name. And the scientists. And the CIA/military/NYPD/NYFD, etc.
Why are all these people believing such a horrible thing?
-
biggest problem is that america is seriously divided. If anywhere near 1/3 of americans believe inside job... that is some serious national division.
And it's growing. it's no longer 'crazy' to believe 911 was an inside job (as labeled by cable news). Now, it's unamerican to even look at the evidence. They don't want us looking at it. That's weird. THey don't want us looking at the BBC reporting stuff before it happened. that's weird.
Dennis kuscinish wants a new investigation now. Obama is open to foreknowledge investigation. Gore was PISSED that bush was warned and didn't act, in a Dec interview i posted here. And the billionaires - cuban and walters. And the celebrities - too many to name. And the scientists. And the CIA/military/NYPD/NYFD, etc.
Why are all these people believing such a horrible thing?
In all honesty, for many adults, if they hear something enough times they will eventually start to believe it. I am all for an investigation though and like with the Gonzales thing, if there is nothing to hide why run from it.
-
Intelligent americans "know" the government wouldn't "let innocent people die" for oil....
I don't believe everything gov or media say.
And innocent people are dying everyday for oil.
That is why we are in Iraq.
I don't know whether some military personnel are innocent and just doing their jobs.
Maybe some believe it is about....what is the concept these days? Still Iraqi freedom?
Anyway innocents people of all nations of the coalition are dying daily along wiht innocent iraqis
-
it doesnt matter anymore.
we gave the white house the blank check and they cleared out the account.
teaches us for next time.
-
it doesnt matter anymore.
we gave the white house the blank check and they cleared out the account.
teaches us for next time.
Yeah!! Next time we should run the war by public opinion
-
Yeah!! Next time we should run the war by public opinion
cheney said public opinion could be 99% against, and nothing they do would change. Bush said he'd continue the war if only Barney and Laura supported him.
it's either strong beliefs, or an inability to accept the facts. you'll never convince the far right and left of anything else.
-
"I think we should believe everything and just trust everything the pResident tells us" -- Britney Spears
-
cheney said public opinion could be 99% against, and nothing they do would change. Bush said he'd continue the war if only Barney and Laura supported him.
it's either strong beliefs, or an inability to accept the facts. you'll never convince the far right and left of anything else.
I agree with Cheney, fuck the public. If you want a say in how to run a war there is probably a recruiter nearby. There are 6 Opinions that matter below Cheney, Mr. Gates, General Pace, General Moseley, General Schoomaker, General Hagee and Admiral Mullen. If those guys say we are making progress, why would Bush/Cheney care what others say?
-
I agree with Cheney, fuck the public. If you want a say in how to run a war there is probably a recruiter nearby. There are 6 Opinions that matter below Cheney, Mr. Gates, General Pace, General Moseley, General Schoomaker, General Hagee and Admiral Mullen. If those guys say we are making progress, why would Bush/Cheney care what others say?
This is a democracy. You know, the leaders are supposed to act upon the will of the people. They're not supposed to get elected, then say "thanks for voting us in, now fck off while we do what we want for 4 years".
-
This is a democracy. You know, the leaders are supposed to act upon the will of the people. They're not supposed to get elected, then say "thanks for voting us in, now fck off while we do what we want for 4 years".
show me one succesful military that is run as a demorcacy
-
Well in all fairness, the current group of idiots have run the war miserably. But you are right, the military should be run as it is.
We just need to replace the idiots who are responsible for getting us into this mess.
-
show me one succesful military that is run as a demorcacy
You're confusing the military with the government. Different things.
The military is an efficient machine whose purpose is to beat bad guys. They are not a democracy. They are a highly structured dictatorship.
The government is a democracy. People are elected to do what the people wish.
To lump the two together discourages healthy debate and prospects for change.
-
Well in all fairness, the current group of idiots have run the war miserably. But you are right, the military should be run as it is.
We just need to replace the idiots who are responsible for getting us into this mess.
do people really think that the JCS, goes into the oval office with every decision to get permission? The JCS is running the war,, not bush
-
You're confusing the military with the government. Different things.
The military is an efficient machine whose purpose is to beat bad guys. They are not a democracy. They are a highly structured dictatorship.
The government is a democracy. People are elected to do what the people wish.
To lump the two together discourages healthy debate and prospects for change.
I think you are the confused one. You said Cheney won't change war plans even if 99% disagree. Well the Pres is #1 in the military. Public opinion should weigh in on issues like gay marriage, abortion etc...but not on how to run a war
-
I think you are the confused one. You said Cheney won't change war plans even if 99% disagree. Well the Pres is #1 in the military. Public opinion should weigh in on issues like gay marriage, abortion etc...but not on how to run a war
So the govt should be able to declare a 12-year war and the people of the country should have no say in when the war ends?
I am not sure you understand how democracy works. Suppose we had a warmongering president who wanted to make his friends rich by starting 3 long drawn out wars. Is there no set of checks in place to prevent this?
-
So the govt should be able to declare a 12-year war and the people of the country should have no say in when the war ends?
I am not sure you understand how democracy works. Suppose we had a warmongering president who wanted to make his friends rich by starting 3 long drawn out wars. Is there no set of checks in place to prevent this?
That's what I'm saying, the country doesn't know how to fight a war from it's collective couch. I understand how Democracy works, we vote in a president, he goes to war, his JCS tell him to keep going because they think it can work. Now if Bush was in there and everyone in the JCS said we can't win this war, I would expect Bush to give up.
-
You're confusing the military with the government. Different things.
The military is an efficient machine whose purpose is to beat bad guys. They are not a democracy. They are a highly structured dictatorship.
The government is a democracy. People are elected to do what the people wish.
To lump the two together discourages healthy debate and prospects for change.
His lumping the 2 together is merely a reflection of how far from the path people have strayed.
It's not the whole disease, just one of it's many symptoms.