damnit, bush is still alive

We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms

Originally posted by reckedracing@May 11 2005, 01:40 PM
Its all about how many suckers will be sucked in and eat up every word that they say, just like Michael Moore.



that should read GEORGE BUSH...
yes, saddam was behind the 9/11 attacks, saddam has WMD's, saddam is a svere threat to the US, we must attack NOW...
yea, you bought it sucker...

or how about the proven accounts of the administration using journalists to push their propraganda on SS, or the no child left behind?
those are proven accounts...
journalists were paid to push the gov'ts plans...

and the american people(ie: YOU) buy into it all... thats a true definition of suckers...
[post=497921]Quoted post[/post]​


"I support our dupes."
 
I'm actually in favor of what was done, if only because I would rather they handle individual events like this in a secure manner, rather than strip away the rights of every american citizen to 'protect' us.

In the grand scheme of things, I'm willing to accept a few bad things that affect Americans, even if it would affect myself or my family, if it ensures that the freedoms, rights and liberties of every American are safeguarded. Removing any freedom in any way shape or form to protect oneself is absolutely abhorrent in any and all situations.

I'm guilty of reciting Benjamin Franklins quote: "They that would give up essential liberty to attain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" all too much, but I was quoting it well before it was the popular thing to do. :)
 
Originally posted by Sabz5150+May 11 2005, 01:29 PM-->
New2TheCarScene
@May 11 2005, 01:19 PM
And big guy, what do you do at work when you meet someone "cool" that seems to relate with you? You trust them. Do you let the cool guy that came to the register that was off 5 cents slide and say, "yeah whatever"

Will there always be poor workers of course there will. Are there poor workers everywhere? Of course there is... How can you expect there to be 100% amazing, effective workers for a government agency then? Just because its government they're supposed to overcome all odds and human nature?

You're a moron. So a guy let you threw, for every guy thats let through another guy is harassed...like my father or grandfather who fly frequently and are asked to open up their cameras or bags or do extra stuff that the common person who breazes by doesn't have to.
[post=497911]Quoted post[/post]​


I'm a moron because I proved that the system is flawed? You're funny as hell!

Just think... I could have been a real-deal terrorist.

Yes, I let people slide. But when it comes to something like THAT, I do not. I can't board a plane with my zippo, but my "laptop" is all good? Like I said... a little C4, a little circuitry and that plane would have been a fireball. Funny thing is... nobody would know who it was or why it happened.

And the "cool guy" would still let people through.

You are the moron for not realizing that a fuck up like that could cost many lives. What if I had a pistol (or two, was a big ol laptop) in there? Hey! I've got a plane... what building should I smash it into?

But hey, I'm a moron... its not like I could tell you how to hijack a plane with a fake laptop or anything.
[post=497913]Quoted post[/post]​




If its so easy to be a terrorist then how come we have not had any more hijackings/plane crashes/explosions in 4 years??

The system is working - thank God
 
Originally posted by Cashizslick@May 11 2005, 08:36 PM
If its so easy to be a terrorist then how come we have not had any more hijackings/plane crashes/explosions in 4 years??

The system is working - thank God
[post=497939]Quoted post[/post]​

[sarcasm]Can't you read? It's because the terrorist don't want to, geez idiot[/sarcasm]
 
Originally posted by Sabz5150@May 11 2005, 01:29 PM
I'm a moron because I proved that the system is flawed? You're funny as hell!




No you're a moron for even eluding to the fact that theres the possibility of having a flawless system. Why would you, in your ignorance, believe your expectations are reasonable or even achieveable? They're not.

Every system is flawed. You pointed out there was a flaw in the system, so you pointed out the obvious. I pointed out that its unreasonable to expect the system to be perfect.


Me = reasonable, You = not is all you've proved.

Of course we all want to better the system and with time and experience knowledge will be gained and the system will be bettered but on the same token the 'bad guys' will have bettered their technology as well. Its like batteling bacteria.
 
i don't expect it to be perfect-- it can't.

but i do expect it to be executed in the BEST INTREST OF AMERICA. unfortunately, i don't think thats the case.
 
Originally posted by pissedoffsol@May 11 2005, 02:57 PM
i don't expect it to be perfect-- it can't.

but i do expect it to be executed in the BEST INTREST OF AMERICA. unfortunately, i don't think thats the case.
[post=497958]Quoted post[/post]​



Oh, the system isn't in the best interest of America now? Why do the people who created the system have it out for their fellow Americans? Do they want the nation to be attacked again and suffer the horriffic tragedies that we already have in the past?


If you can't come up with a better, more effective plan yourself, why then is it reasonable to piss, moan and complain about the system because it doesn't live up to your expectations. Maybe your expectations are impossible to meet? Maybe, even if your expectations are possible to meet, there's people out there working to be able to meet those expectations and meet their impossible expectations of not allowing the loss of another life on their watch?

If you can't do any better then don't knock it.
 
Originally posted by New2TheCarScene+May 11 2005, 09:02 PM-->
pissedoffsol
@May 11 2005, 02:57 PM
i don't expect it to be perfect-- it can't.

but i do expect it to be executed in the BEST INTREST OF AMERICA. unfortunately, i don't think thats the case.
[post=497958]Quoted post[/post]​



Oh, the system isn't in the best interest of America now? Why do the people who created the system have it out for their fellow Americans? Do they want the nation to be attacked again and suffer the horriffic tragedies that we already have in the past?


If you can't come up with a better, more effective plan yourself, why then is it reasonable to piss, moan and complain about the system because it doesn't live up to your expectations. Maybe your expectations are impossible to meet? Maybe, even if your expectations are possible to meet, there's people out there working to be able to meet those expectations and meet their impossible expectations of not allowing the loss of another life on their watch?

If you can't do any better then don't knock it.
[post=497964]Quoted post[/post]​

Problem is, it's thier interpretation of best interest, not everyones, or even a suitable medium. I mean really, my mother hates The Department of Homeland Security, the whole idea behind it is criminal to her, and shes about as conservitive as can be.
 
Originally posted by Blanco@May 11 2005, 03:05 PM

Planning? I mean, how many years was it between attacks on the WTC? C'mom now. That's like saying the bullet proof vest is the reason why you haven't been shot at in four years. Yeah, the security is going to help protect you from great damage if you get hit, but it's not the reason why nobody's trying. There's a lot more than that, that goes into it.


You're kidding, right? Of course there's planning and plotting, its been ongoing since the creation of terrorist groups but to act as if they didn't attempt to attack us numerous times? Bullshit. They try to attack at every opportunity they get. Sitting back and just simply planning goes against the idea of terrorism, if you're not attacking you're not striking terror and fear into your victims.

There's been so many raids and captures that you nor I have no idea occured.

No major attacks have occured since 9/11 and there have already been some attacks that were prevented and spoken of openly. The system is working, because thats the definition of effective - accomplishing what you intended.

+1 for the good guys. No one can argue that. You can argue that it could be more effective but not whether or not its working because until an event occurs that allows us to know its not working, we'll have no idea.


And that means that we shouldn't strive for one? A wise man once said, "aim for the stars and you just might hit the moon." That means, set your sights higher than your realistic goals.



Wherein did I say not to continue to strive? Is he making personal efforts that I'm unaware of to better this system?

I said with experience comes knowledge, with that knowledge will come the implentation of better defenses. Unless you know how to do better or provide something useful its best if you keep your mouth shut and allow the experts to work on it.

I stated that the expectations of many, even in the defense agencies, is not to lose another man on their watch. Thats the best case scenario, worse case scenario is to minimize losses as best you could.

You have to be realistic, but in being realistic it doesn't mean that you can't continue to try to perfect it just means its frivalous to complain about something you can't add to or change.
 
Originally posted by pissedoffsol@May 11 2005, 12:21 PM
but you would think that our intel would be a little better at discovering a prop plane VS a war threat....


Anyone for Pearl Harbor? cough cough...
 
Originally posted by 92b16vx@May 11 2005, 03:06 PM

Problem is, it's thier interpretation of best interest, not everyones, or even a suitable medium. I mean really, my mother hates The Department of Homeland Security, the whole idea behind it is criminal to her, and shes about as conservitive as can be.




I understand this but when broken down to the most simplistic form what is the best interest of the people? Protection, first and foremost... The system is currently providing that.
 
Originally posted by civicious@May 11 2005, 03:19 PM

Anyone for Pearl Harbor? cough cough...




Pearl Harbor was a bumfuck as well.

We had broken the Japanese code a week earlier but simply didn't believe that the attack was actually coming.
 
Originally posted by New2TheCarScene+May 11 2005, 04:20 PM-->
@May 11 2005, 03:06 PM

Problem is, it's thier interpretation of best interest, not everyones, or even a suitable medium. I mean really, my mother hates The Department of Homeland Security, the whole idea behind it is criminal to her, and shes about as conservitive as can be.




I understand this but when broken down to the most simplistic form what is the best interest of the people? Protection, first and foremost... The system is currently providing that.
[post=497976]Quoted post[/post]​



no, they want to once again, save their ass.

how come I didn't hear about it until 3 hours AFTER the event took place?

Don't we have those scrolling text test of the Emergency Broadcast such and such on the TV at 2AM tests for a fucking reason?

If we're under attack, Why wasn't I alreted about it?

why? cuz they don't care about us-- they want to get THEIR asses out and run for cover.

I understand the whole panic situation, and that it probably wasn't called for in this event... but i live less than an hour and a half from the WTC... and i didin't hear about it until i saw it on the news at the bar at work. WTF? a plane could have been to my place in less than 15 min probably...

and then #1 fell

and then #2 fell

and then the pentagon

and then the shootdown in Pa somehwere....

and still, no emergency broadcast on the TV or radio.

where was bush? reading a book to some kids....
 
Originally posted by New2TheCarScene+May 11 2005, 09:20 PM-->
@May 11 2005, 03:06 PM

Problem is, it's thier interpretation of best interest, not everyones, or even a suitable medium. I mean really, my mother hates The Department of Homeland Security, the whole idea behind it is criminal to her, and shes about as conservitive as can be.




I understand this but when broken down to the most simplistic form what is the best interest of the people? Protection, first and foremost... The system is currently providing that.
[post=497976]Quoted post[/post]​

Right, except that the bills in circulation right now are passing off "protection" from a almost none existant threat, but at the same time, making the agencies enforcing them the threat, and cutting off the support and protection we have from them at the same time.
 
Originally posted by pissedoffsol+May 11 2005, 09:31 PM-->
Originally posted by New2TheCarScene@May 11 2005, 04:20 PM
92b16vx
@May 11 2005, 03:06 PM

Problem is, it's thier interpretation of best interest, not everyones, or even a suitable medium. I mean really, my mother hates The Department of Homeland Security, the whole idea behind it is criminal to her, and shes about as conservitive as can be.




I understand this but when broken down to the most simplistic form what is the best interest of the people? Protection, first and foremost... The system is currently providing that.
[post=497976]Quoted post[/post]​



no, they want to once again, save their ass.

how come I didn't hear about it until 3 hours AFTER the event took place?

Don't we have those scrolling text test of the Emergency Broadcast such and such on the TV at 2AM tests for a fucking reason?

If we're under attack, Why wasn't I alreted about it?

why? cuz they don't care about us-- they want to get THEIR asses out and run for cover.

I understand the whole panic situation, and that it probably wasn't called for in this event... but i live less than an hour and a half from the WTC... and i didin't hear about it until i saw it on the news at the bar at work. WTF? a plane could have been to my place in less than 15 min probably...


[post=497979]Quoted post[/post]​

I live in Germany and was watching it on CNN about half an hour after it started.
 
Originally posted by New2TheCarScene@May 11 2005, 02:20 PM
I understand this but when broken down to the most simplistic form what is the best interest of the people? Protection, first and foremost... The system is currently providing that.
[post=497976]Quoted post[/post]​


And you just pointed out the problem. Protection should be the #2 priority. Freedom should be #1. When you get the two switched is when you get things like RealID that do nothing to protect us and take away our freedom.
 
Originally posted by New2TheCarScene+May 11 2005, 02:02 PM-->
If you can't come up with a better, more effective plan yourself, why then is it reasonable to piss, moan and complain about the system because it doesn't live up to your expectations. ... If you can't do any better then don't knock it.
[post=497964]Quoted post[/post]​
:blink:


Blanco
@May 11 2005, 02:40 PM
Seriously, it's your duty as an American citizen to question what's going on.
[post=497985]Quoted post[/post]​
I can't agree more with this. Saying not to question the government because you can't do any better is one of the most unamerican statements I can concieve of.
 
Originally posted by New2TheCarScene@May 11 2005, 02:02 PM
If you can't come up with a better, more effective plan yourself, why then is it reasonable to piss, moan and complain about the system because it doesn't live up to your expectations. ... If you can't do any better then don't knock it.
[post=497964]Quoted post[/post]​




isn't that one of our ammendments?

something like "if the government fails at producing such results, a new one can be put in its place..."
 
Basically, through time, the current American government has turned away from almost everything previous governments have strived to give the people. There's no freedom anymore.

The nail that sticks out is the first to be hammered down.
 
Check it out, Bush Jr. alone has commited most of the acts in the Declaration of Independence that were the reasons for our seperation:

Here they all are, I've bolded the similar ones:

The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. Not Indians this time, but Iraqis and other Middle Easterners who now hate us even more than before.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
 
Back
Top