US government fears it's people..as it should be

[Ziegler]

31000 troops in Afghanistan (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/20/afghanistan-could-see-300_n_152580.html)


32000 troop in Washington DC (http://www.monitor.co.ug/artman/publish/america/Obama_celebratory_solemn_as_he_nears_ina uguration_78449.shtml)

This doesnt inlcude the 40ooo elite republican guard assigned to personally protect the first Arabic to hold the office of president.

This tells me....I am still living in the right country. Obviously the Government considers the people of the US a greater threat than the people of afghanistan.

FUCK YEAH BABY...exactly how it should be.

Oh..and I really so wrong for wanting just a little bit for someone to succeed...just to show how the government cant stop one american with intent and a plan?

[Korverone]

Yhea, they need those troops so they can take more people to the FEMA concentration camps.

[holychicken]

Arabic?

He is Kenyan and Irish.

[Yobaj]

eh yeah.. arabic. Idiot.

[Morthor]

This whole thing is such a huge waste of money. When Gordon Brown became PM, I didn't even hear about it until a week later. As for a huge celebration with millions of people? pah.

[Largion]

Arabic?

He is Kenyan and Irish.

Hes a Arabic muslim terrorist!
Do not try your fancy logic here.

[stalwart]

wow. they are prepared for fucking russia to invade...

[Aragoni]

wow. they are prepared for fucking russia to invade...

No American can stop the Putintank. The only one that can stop it is Anders Borg (Swedish minister of finance) and Silvio Berlusconi. :D

[BlacklistedL33t]

i fucking hate Gordon brown.
when i was in the sand, myself and the blokes came off a 5 day patrol,as soon as we got to the F.O.B we were told to drop our kit and get ready for a visitor,
we just wanted to get our admin squared away but nooooo "there was a visitor"

2 hours.......2 HOURS LATER that cyclops cunt arrives, 2 hours late, and wearing a suit in fucking Afghanistan ......a suit. he didnt hang around long tho
as people started asking awkward questions. like

why are there not enough helicopters ?
why are we traveling in snatch landrover that were shit in northern ireland and are shit here.

[chewbaccasdad]

No American can stop the Putintank. The only one that can stop it is Anders Borg (Swedish minister of finance) and Silvio Berlusconi. :D

That made me laugh :)

[Largion]

i fucking hate Gordon brown.
when i was in the sand, myself and the blokes came off a 5 day patrol,as soon as we got to the F.O.B we were told to drop our kit and get ready for a visitor,
we just wanted to get our admin squared away but nooooo "there was a visitor"

2 hours.......2 HOURS LATER that cyclops cunt arrives, 2 hours late, and wearing a suit in fucking Afghanistan ......a suit. he didnt hang around long tho
as people started asking awkward questions. like

why are there not enough helicopters ?
why are we traveling in snatch landrover that were shit in northern ireland and are shit here.


Stop typing in red you retard.

[holychicken]

This whole thing is such a huge waste of money. When Gordon Brown became PM, I didn't even hear about it until a week later. As for a huge celebration with millions of people? pah.
If you don't recognize the historical significance of this election for the US, and even the entire Westernized world to an extent, then there isn't much hope for you.

However, I suspect you do see the significance, it just pains you to admit it.

[holychicken]

Stop typing in red you retard.
Give him a break. He is a sheep who cannot differentiate himself from the herd with actual words. It is the only way he can pretend to be different.

[chewbaccasdad]

If you don't recognize the historical significance of this election for the US, and even the entire Westernized world to an extent, then there isn't much hope for you.

However, I suspect you do see the significance, it just pains you to admit it.

He also overlooked the fact that Gordon Brown is a cycloptic bumblefuck that nobody cares about.

[BlacklistedL33t]

Give him a break. He is a sheep who cannot differentiate himself from the herd with actual words. It is the only way he can pretend to be different.

ram it right up your shit box

[holychicken]

ram it right up your shit box
Sorry, man, it is a fact.

There is no reason to write in red letters other than intentionally trying to be different. If you knew you were able to differentiate yourself without blatant attempts to do so, you wouldn't bother going out of your way to do so.

It is pathetic, plain and simple. Not to mention that it is also annoying to read. So really, the only differentiating you are doing is annoying other people.

Congrats, you are "different" than the other sheep, you are more annoying.

[Niles]

ram it right up your shit box

Burn the witch!

[Warhawk]

If you don't recognize the historical significance of this election for the US, and even the entire Westernized world to an extent, then there isn't much hope for you.

However, I suspect you do see the significance, it just pains you to admit it.

There are several ways which this election has historical significance. However, just to achieve one of those it wasnt a good idea to involve the others.

1. Afican American (half by the way..more on that later) as President. I am all for it if it is the right guy. This guy isnt. He is a manipulative, self serving, pompous leftist...far more left than he makes himself out to be. You have been duped if you think he is going to "restore the US to what our Forefathers envisioned".

2. Socialistic ideas. This historically significant proposal is not worth having this guy in office, just so we can finlaly have a black guy in there. This is similar to cutting off your hand to get rid of a wart.

3. For the first time in American history, the general popultion is acting like a bunch of brainwashed robots. Seriously, watch the people standing around wide eyed chanting Obama....Hope...Change...yes we can...

It is sickening. He never says anything REAL. I could stand up in front of you, assuming I impressed you with Charisma first, and just say shit like he does.

He tells people what they want to hear, like 'I have a vision we can restore America to the greatness the Forefathers envisioned'. It is a totally empty fucking statement. He will be taking steps to do the EXACT OPPOSITE. More government intereference, tax, spending, etc...that is the opposite of the Forefathers ideas.

It is also funny how during the campaigning, Obamanites repeat over and over "oh but he is only half black". Now it's "a black man is President YAY!"

[Marrik]

Arabic?

He is Kenyan and Irish.

but hes brown, and his middle name is HUSSEIN!!!


hes obviously some turban-wearing camel jockey with his sandals fulla BOMBS!!!1

[DocGonzo]

Oh..and I really so wrong for wanting just a little bit for someone to succeed...just to show how the government cant stop one american with intent and a plan?

yes, yes it is fucking wrong of you on so many levels it's ridiculous

after all that's gone on in the last 8 years, rather than wanting the two criminals who are leaving taken out, you want the new guy killed

there's so much wrong with you that yer old Doc can't even begin to write you an Rx without starting by giving you a complete lobotomy and quad amputation

[Warhawk]

yes, yes it is fucking wrong of you on so many levels it's ridiculous

after all that's gone on in the last 8 years, rather than wanting the two criminals who are leaving taken out, you want the new guy killed

there's so much wrong with you that yer old Doc can't even begin to write you an Rx without starting by giving you a complete lobotomy and quad amputation

Nothing is punishable by amputation, even plotting to take out a President. I wouldnt be shocked though that some have recieved a chemical labotomy though, heh.

The opinion that the '2 guys leaving' are criminals is a fairly bold statement. I'm glad that you are able to say such things here, without getting a chemical labotomy or some jailtime.

[Marrik]

if they didnt commit any crimes, then why did Bush need to pass legislation making him and his colleagues immune from prosecution?

[DocGonzo]

Nothing is punishable by amputation, even plotting to take out a President. I wouldnt be shocked though that some have recieved a chemical labotomy though, heh.

The opinion that the '2 guys leaving' are criminals is a fairly bold statement. I'm glad that you are able to say such things here, without getting a chemical labotomy or some jailtime.

first...you mistake me for the rule of Law, such is not the case...no chemical lobotomy, i use an icepick and a rusty spork

second, tell it to the fuckers in gitmo, or who have been renditioned...i have said such things for years in various media...but i'm silly like that


i am so completely amused that the same cowards like the OP who are whining about Barry were the one's cheerleading W and crew as they each took a shit on the Constitution and pissed on the Bill of Rights...hence my properly referring to them as criminals

not that it matters to either side's partisan fucktards

[Evillor]

Sorry, man, it is a fact.

There is no reason to write in red letters other than intentionally trying to be different. If you knew you were able to differentiate yourself without blatant attempts to do so, you wouldn't bother going out of your way to do so.

It is pathetic, plain and simple. Not to mention that it is also annoying to read. So really, the only differentiating you are doing is annoying other people.

Congrats, you are "different" than the other sheep, you are more annoying.

If he types in red, it gets skipped. Im not making the effort to read text that blends into the background just so he can be different.

Barrack Obama, ugh. I still find it amusing, after all that has happened, Americans vote in an (ex?) Muslim president with a name like Obama (A Bomber).

[Ludo]

There are several ways which this election has historical significance. However, just to achieve one of those it wasnt a good idea to involve the others.

1. Afican American (half by the way..more on that later) as President. I am all for it if it is the right guy. This guy isnt. He is a manipulative, self serving, pompous leftist...far more left than he makes himself out to be. You have been duped if you think he is going to "restore the US to what our Forefathers envisioned".

2. Socialistic ideas. This historically significant proposal is not worth having this guy in office, just so we can finlaly have a black guy in there. This is similar to cutting off your hand to get rid of a wart.

3. For the first time in American history, the general popultion is acting like a bunch of brainwashed robots. Seriously, watch the people standing around wide eyed chanting Obama....Hope...Change...yes we can...

It is sickening. He never says anything REAL. I could stand up in front of you, assuming I impressed you with Charisma first, and just say shit like he does.

He tells people what they want to hear, like 'I have a vision we can restore America to the greatness the Forefathers envisioned'. It is a totally empty fucking statement. He will be taking steps to do the EXACT OPPOSITE. More government intereference, tax, spending, etc...that is the opposite of the Forefathers ideas.

It is also funny how during the campaigning, Obamanites repeat over and over "oh but he is only half black". Now it's "a black man is President YAY!"

Just like any other fucking president that has won the election or ever ran for president you mean?

I mean, come on, you were able to elect bush... TWICE

[Chankeen]

The opinion that the '2 guys leaving' are criminals is a fairly bold statement. I'm glad that you are able to say such things here, without getting a chemical labotomy or some jailtime.

I knew of a farmer in Hungary who went to jail for naming his two pigs Stalin and Lenin. Story came to me via prosecutor, who said -"either I sentenced him to jail, or I go to jail for not sentencing him."

[holychicken]

There are several ways which this election has historical significance. However, just to achieve one of those it wasnt a good idea to involve the others.

1. Afican American (half by the way..more on that later) as President. I am all for it if it is the right guy. This guy isnt. He is a manipulative, self serving, pompous leftist...far more left than he makes himself out to be. You have been duped if you think he is going to "restore the US to what our Forefathers envisioned".

2. Socialistic ideas. This historically significant proposal is not worth having this guy in office, just so we can finlaly have a black guy in there. This is similar to cutting off your hand to get rid of a wart.

3. For the first time in American history, the general popultion is acting like a bunch of brainwashed robots. Seriously, watch the people standing around wide eyed chanting Obama....Hope...Change...yes we can...

It is sickening. He never says anything REAL. I could stand up in front of you, assuming I impressed you with Charisma first, and just say shit like he does.

He tells people what they want to hear, like 'I have a vision we can restore America to the greatness the Forefathers envisioned'. It is a totally empty fucking statement. He will be taking steps to do the EXACT OPPOSITE. More government intereference, tax, spending, etc...that is the opposite of the Forefathers ideas.

It is also funny how during the campaigning, Obamanites repeat over and over "oh but he is only half black". Now it's "a black man is President YAY!"
First and foremost, I am not being duped into anything. I didn't even vote for the guy.

Second, disagreeing with his policies and being blind to what he has said doesn't change the historical significance of a black man being elected president.

Third, and possibly most significantly, your last comment, that he isn't even really black, shows either an intentional disregard for or complete ignorance of race relations in America.

Honestly, all you are doing is further proving to me that the only people that are more ridiculous, sheep-like and blindly partisan than "Obamanites" are the "anti-Obamanites."

[Chankeen]

Honestly, all you are doing is further proving to me that the only people that are more ridiculous, sheep-like and blindly partisan than "Obamanites" are the "anti-Obamanites."

Isn't that the 2 party system of representative democracy?

[Ziegler]

While concentrating on my obvious troll....you missed the point.

50K +......why? When Bush "stole" the election....wouldnt there have been mass concern for riots and what not? ...certainly if you lok at the net, there should have been.

And yet...I can barely find bad stuff to be said about obama and yet all this concern by our government.


You know the reason why?

Cause the detractors of Obama...believe in the 2nd amendment..and that scares the government.
While the detractors of Bush...well, they'd never think of doing harm to their government.

[Warhawk]

if they didnt commit any crimes, then why did Bush need to pass legislation making him and his colleagues immune from prosecution?

Let's start with:
1. Show some non-anecdotal evidence that they passed any law specifically to cover themselves vs. a specific crime they've comitted.

2. I never said they did or did not, just that I am glad things like the quoted poster said, can be said. There are places where that cant be done.



first...you mistake me for the rule of Law, such is not the case...no chemical lobotomy, i use an icepick and a rusty spork

second, tell it to the fuckers in gitmo, or who have been renditioned...i have said such things for years in various media...but i'm silly like that

Old school, I like that, especially rusty tools. is that a Tetanal Labotomy?

Motherfuckers at Gitmo are not citizens, and I'd have to see some pretty hardcore evidence that any suffered amputation of 4 limbs for no apparent reason.

As far as labotomy goes, how does one undo indoctrination of hatred, if it were present? Until the very recent modern era, these people wouldnt even be in a jail cell. They'd have been shot or hung. Just saying, when you're captured by the people you've vowed to kill, you should be thankful to be in a cell with 3 square halal meals a day, with the possibility of being released at some point.

[Scully]

31000 troops in Afghanistan (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/20/afghanistan-could-see-300_n_152580.html)


32000 troop in Washington DC (http://www.monitor.co.ug/artman/publish/america/Obama_celebratory_solemn_as_he_nears_ina uguration_78449.shtml)

This doesnt inlcude the 40ooo elite republican guard assigned to personally protect the first Arabic to hold the office of president.

This tells me....I am still living in the right country. Obviously the Government considers the people of the US a greater threat than the people of afghanistan.

FUCK YEAH BABY...exactly how it should be.

Oh..and I really so wrong for wanting just a little bit for someone to succeed...just to show how the government cant stop one american with intent and a plan?

I'm sure they fear your nerd rage very much...

[Ziegler]

I'm sure they fear your nerd rage very much...

That...was nerd rage? :lmao:
Barely a 100 word post...I thought nerd rages had to be TLDR to even qualify?.....and wow...this felt nothing near as good as actual rage.

[Ludo]

Or just supressing you more then you know. It can be interpreted both ways.

[holychicken]

Barrack Obama, ugh. I still find it amusing, after all that has happened, Americans vote in an (ex?) Muslim president with a name like Obama (A Bomber).
So, you find it amusing that we didn't choose a president based on his name and your misconception about his religious affiliations?

[DocGonzo]

Cause the detractors of Obama...believe in the 2nd amendment..and that scares the government.
While the detractors of Bush...well, they'd never think of doing harm to their government.


ah..the problem here is that it appears you conflate the "government" with the whores we elect to run it...

big difference

i loathed W/Cheney et al, but did not blame it on the collective "government"... rather i placed responsibility on the Individuals

one would think most could easily see the difference, but the rhetoric form some partisans says differently

[Largion]

Most of the posts in this thread makes me a sad panda!
Thanks holychicken for the replyes that saved me from crying blood.

[holychicken]

While concentrating on my obvious troll....you missed the point.

50K +......why? When Bush "stole" the election....wouldnt there have been mass concern for riots and what not? ...certainly if you lok at the net, there should have been.

And yet...I can barely find bad stuff to be said about obama and yet all this concern by our government.


You know the reason why?

Cause the detractors of Obama...believe in the 2nd amendment..and that scares the government.
While the detractors of Bush...well, they'd never think of doing harm to their government.
You aren't serious, are you?

The fact of the matter is that there is a ton of security because Obama is black. Face the facts. There is a large segment of American population that is openly racist and for that fact alone Obama has a bigger bullseye on his back than any president that has preceded him.

To say it is because his detractors "believe in the second amendment" is just so absurd I question how much you actually get out in the world.

[Rilman]

Come on guys surely you realise prime ministers and presidents are just puppets, look who funded them and youll see whos pulling the strings, theyr'e just there to make you think you have a say in what goes on, don't be so gullible.

[Stromdur]

First and foremost, I am not being duped into anything. I didn't even vote for the guy.

Second, disagreeing with his policies and being blind to what he has said doesn't change the historical significance of a black man being elected president.

Third, and possibly most significantly, your last comment, that he isn't even really black, shows either an intentional disregard for or complete ignorance of race relations in America.

Honestly, all you are doing is further proving to me that the only people that are more ridiculous, sheep-like and blindly partisan than "Obamanites" are the "anti-Obamanites."

Aye, its noy much different here you got 3 sides

Haters
Fanboys
everyone else

[Agrathan]

First and foremost, I am not being duped into anything. I didn't even vote for the guy.

Second, disagreeing with his policies and being blind to what he has said doesn't change the historical significance of a black man being elected president.

Third, and possibly most significantly, your last comment, that he isn't even really black, shows either an intentional disregard for or complete ignorance of race relations in America.

Honestly, all you are doing is further proving to me that the only people that are more ridiculous, sheep-like and blindly partisan than "Obamanites" are the "anti-Obamanites."

Actually let people think he's 1/2 maybe it will keep him alive longer alot of people around here were I live speculate some1 will shoot him or try to.

[Chankeen]

To say it is because his detractors "believe in the second amendment" is just so absurd I question how much you actually get out in the world.

I took that to mean -they are armed!

[holychicken]

Actually let people think he's 1/2 maybe it will keep him alive longer alot of people around here were I live speculate some1 will shoot him or try to.
Those who are openly racist and would shoot him because he is black consider him black.

It is only those who want to downplay the significance of this election or are completely clueless when it comes to race relations in America that argue it isn't a big deal because he isn't 100% black.

[DocGonzo]

Old school, I like that, especially rusty tools. is that a Tetanal Labotomy?

Motherfuckers at Gitmo are not citizens, and I'd have to see some pretty hardcore evidence that any suffered amputation of 4 limbs for no apparent reason.

As far as labotomy goes, how does one undo indoctrination of hatred, if it were present? Until the very recent modern era, these people wouldnt even be in a jail cell. They'd have been shot or hung. Just saying, when you're captured by the people you've vowed to kill, you should be thankful to be in a cell with 3 square halal meals a day, with the possibility of being released at some point.


as for gitmo, "all Men are created equal"...heard of that one?

either we are a nation under the Rule of Law, or we are not...there are procedures for war crimes and procedures for criminals, pick one and go with it...but simple habeus corpus and the right to be charged for any crimes in a timely fashion remains one of the bedrock principles of our Republic...now, add what happened to Padilla ( A us CITIZEN HELD WITHOUT BEING CHARGED FOR OVER 3 YEARS) into the mix...and you might begin to see why that shit is fucked up for our Republic

as for "vowed to kill"..it has yet to be fucking proven that any of them are anything besides incarcerated...where's the proof, where's the trial...hell, where's the arraingment?

i am all for punishing those who deserve it..(where's bin Laden and Mullah Omar?)...but the Rule of Law should be followed or we are no better than those we fight against...;

[holychicken]

I took that to mean -they are armed!
I understood what he meant, it was still ridiculous.

On two levels it is absurd.

First and foremost, it is only the "elite" liberals who really are in favor of strong gun control. You get into any liberal group that has significant traitorous intent, and they are going to be armed.

Second, if it were the case, security would be ramped up for ALL liberal presidents. Obama's protection is unprecedented and make no mistake about it and that is because he is black and not because he is liberal.

[5%Luck]

Gun Sales sky rocketed this past months. Its a good call for all we know most of those guns contain bullets with obamas name on them

[Carl Ragadamn]

as for gitmo, "all Men are created equal"...heard of that one?

either we are a nation under the Rule of Law, or we are not...there are procedures for war crimes and procedures for criminals, pick one and go with it...but simple habeus corpus and the right to be charged for any crimes in a timely fashion remains one of the bedrock principles of our Republic...now, add what happened to Padilla ( A us CITIZEN HELD WITHOUT BEING CHARGED FOR OVER 3 YEARS) into the mix...and you might begin to see why that shit is fucked up for our Republic

as for "vowed to kill"..it has yet to be fucking proven that any of them are anything besides incarcerated...where's the proof, where's the trial...hell, where's the arraingment?

i am all for punishing those who deserve it..(where's bin Laden and Mullah Omar?)...but the Rule of Law should be followed or we are no better than those we fight against...;

I agree with you mostly Doc, the bill of rights does not grant rights to people, but recognizes inherent rights of all men, to decide that they are only for citizens of the US is a betrayal of the intent.

My question is what do we do with the 50 people who we would release, but they cannot go back to their country. (ie. the Chinese guys who would be executed immediately upon their return home)

[Warhawk]

First and foremost, I am not being duped into anything. I didn't even vote for the guy.

By 'you', I meant 'one'....like 'one has been duped', not you specifically but the defensiveness here is telling.


Second, disagreeing with his policies and being blind to what he has said doesn't change the historical significance of a black man being elected president.

I said, iin a nutshell, that the historic significance of this election was not worth the other historaically significant issues, not that the election wasnt historically significant.


Third, and possibly most significantly, your last comment, that he isn't even really black, shows either an intentional disregard for or complete ignorance of race relations in America.

I didnt say he wasnt black, what the hell did you read? Were you reading 2 threads at once? I said right there, is is half black, or African American..whatever. If i get called a white guy and take no offense then I'm going to say black guy and mean no offense. He is half black.

Honestly, all you are doing is further proving to me that the only people that are more ridiculous, sheep-like and blindly partisan than "Obamanites" are the "anti-Obamanites."

I dont stare gazingly at anyone and chant shit, especially their name, and empty words like hope, change, and yes we can. They are robotic and disgusting to me. I am not anti-Obama, I just dont like the that he's portrayed himself to be what he is not, and half the nation bought into it.

[DocGonzo]

I agree with you mostly Doc, the bill of rights does not grant rights to people, but recognizes inherent rights of all men, to decide that they are only for citizens of the US is a betrayal of the intent.

My question is what do we do with the 50 people who we would release, but they cannot go back to their country. (ie. the Chinese guys who would be executed immediately upon their return home)

put then through due process, imo

sort it out afterwards...if not guilty and we release them they either go back to where we found them, or where they choose to go on their own

each case has to be handled based on it's own merits

[Ziegler]

Gun Sales sky rocketed this past months. Its a good call for all we know most of those guns contain bullets with obamas name on them

Nope....not a chance. :ninja:
put then through due process, imo

sort it out afterwards...if not guilty and we release them they either go back to where we found them, or where they choose to go on their own

each case has to be handled based on it's own merits

Then ultimately...they are POW's...they were taken as part of a War, meaning that 3 things can happen.
1) returned to their country of origin...especially the chinese ones.
2) kept for the duration of this unending war ( I dont support this)
3) tried and executed by the military...not the civilian justice system. Our Soldiers dont get that privilage, neither should the enemy.

[DocGonzo]

Then ultimately...they are POW's...they were taken as part of a War, meaning that 3 things can happen.
1) returned to their country of origin...especially the chinese ones.
2) kept for the duration of this unending war ( I dont support this)
3) tried and executed by the military...not the civilian justice system. Our Soldiers dont get that privilage, neither should the enemy.

objection your honor...

according to the 1973 War Powers Act, only Congress has the authority to declare War...this has NOT been done, so legally there is no "War"

1)see previous
2)what "war" , see objection
3)see the Geneva conventions

nuff said?

[Warhawk]

as for gitmo, "all Men are created equal"...heard of that one?

either we are a nation under the Rule of Law, or we are not...there are procedures for war crimes and procedures for criminals, pick one and go with it...but simple habeus corpus and the right to be charged for any crimes in a timely fashion remains one of the bedrock principles of our Republic...now, add what happened to Padilla ( A us CITIZEN HELD WITHOUT BEING CHARGED FOR OVER 3 YEARS) into the mix...and you might begin to see why that shit is fucked up for our Republic

as for "vowed to kill"..it has yet to be fucking proven that any of them are anything besides incarcerated...where's the proof, where's the trial...hell, where's the arraingment?

i am all for punishing those who deserve it..(where's bin Laden and Mullah Omar?)...but the Rule of Law should be followed or we are no better than those we fight against...;

I think I've seent hat somewhere before yeah. That is also exactly why they are being fed 3 times a day, and afforded the food and religious articles per their beliefs. Also the reason they havent just been shot or hung like WE would be in their custody. Or had our heads sliced off with a popcket knife, while we gurgle and squirm.

You are forgetting that different sets of rules apply to enemy combatants. I know that term was over used, im sick of talking about it too, but that is exactly what the deal is. Maybe Obama can change the circumstances that term is applied to those captured.

Of those brought to the camp, more than half were released without charge. a fifth of the remaining have been cleared for release as soon as a destination is determined. Three have been convicted of crimes and sentence pending. These were as of mid 2008.

If you are part of al-Qaeda, you've made that vow. Same for Taliban fighters. These are the vast majority of detainees. I dont have the energy to debate Gitmo all day.

Padilla was charged with 3 counts: conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals, conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists and providing material support to terrorists.

Considering the charges, he's lucky to not face a military tribunal and be summarily executed (if found guilty), all within a week or two of arrest.

Here is a tip: If you dont want to go to Gitmo, dont have terroristic ideas or terrorists as friends.

[Evillor]

So, you find it amusing that we didn't choose a president based on his name and your misconception about his religious affiliations?

That, and the fact theres still question as to whether hes even a US citizen or not. Plus all the other questions surrounding him. (like his stupidity during public address'). "I would like to present to you, the president of the united states, Bill Clinton". The guy doesnt do himself any favors. Saying that all people in small towns are too stupid to understand what goes on at government level. Yeah, hes awesome!

[Carl Ragadamn]

put then through due process, imo

sort it out afterwards...if not guilty and we release them they either go back to where we found them, or where they choose to go on their own

each case has to be handled based on it's own merits

That is the crux of the problem for the 50, we are ready to release them but no country wants them, and if we send them to their home countries they are likely to be tortured and/or shot.

[Wickfield]

Why the hell were actors speaking at his inauguration party? Its not like they know anything...

[Evillor]

Why the hell were actors speaking at his inauguration party? Its not like they know anything...

Because people are stupid enough to believe what they say based on *i like their movies*. Makes you wonder what promises he made Hollywood under the table to get their total support like that.

[lordofkarma]

It always amazes me that republicans are so affraid of socialism. They are majorly christians after all.

How can you call yourself a christian and not be socialist.

[Evillor]

It always amazes me that republicans are so affraid of socialism. They are majorly christians after all.

How can you call yourself a christian and not be socialist.

Did you just bring religion into a political debate?

*watches the can of worms spill out all over the thread*

[Warhawk]

objection your honor...

according to the 1973 War Powers Act, only Congress has the authority to declare War...this has NOT been done, so legally there is no "War"

1)see previous
2)what "war" , see objection
3)see the Geneva conventions

nuff said?

The only exception to the War Powers Act was Clintons use of US forces for 78 days in Bosnia.

It is really splitting hairs to make the claim that Congress authorizing the use of force to topple the Saddam regime is not a war. It's referred to as a quasi-war, yet it is still a war, hence the letter w a r in the title. It was a major military offensive and land campaign in a foreign land. That is a war. You can call it whatever you want but, Congress authorized an invasion of a foreign land and no matter how you want to break it down, that is a war.

By this logic, Japan wasn't at war with the US until some hours after pearl Harbor was attacked?

That is literally insane to suggest.

[DocGonzo]

You are forgetting that different sets of rules apply to enemy combatants. I know that term was over used, im sick of talking about it too, but that is exactly what the deal is. Maybe Obama can change the circumstances that term is applied to those captured. enemy combatant?..oh you mean the legally meaningless term that W's lawyers created from thin air? fuck that...Geneva conventions if you consider them POWs, or our legal system for anything else...either require being charged in a timely fashion, the evidence shown and a speedy trial

Of those brought to the camp, more than half were released without charge. a fifth of the remaining have been cleared for release as soon as a destination is determined. Three have been convicted of crimes and sentence pending. These were as of mid 2008. "released without charge"...after being held illegally for how long?...and so on, look it up for yourself and you will find a complete clusterfuck that violates all the Law we hold dear

If you are part of al-Qaeda, you've made that vow. Same for Taliban fighters. These are the vast majority of detainees. I dont have the energy to debate Gitmo all day. show the proof...charge them, show the evidence, all we have is a dictator's word that they are what he said they were...that's why we have Laws and courts and trials...are you being deliberately obtuse, or did the kool-aide just taste that good?

Padilla was charged with 3 counts: conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals, conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists and providing material support to terrorists. he was charged by a Florida court # years after being illegally incarcerated, NEVER arrainged before a judge until released from Fed custody to Florida...look up the facts for yourself...because you are fucking wrong...he was accused, but not charged by the Feds...EVER

Considering the charges, he's lucky to not face a military tribunal and be summarily executed (if found guilty), all within a week or two of arrest.

Here is a tip: If you dont want to go to Gitmo, dont have terroristic ideas or terrorists as friends.

i am a US citizen, fuck that and fuck all fascists who think that way...

[Warhawk]

It always amazes me that republicans are so affraid of socialism. They are majorly christians after all.

How can you call yourself a christian and not be socialist.

LOL So there are no Christian Socialists? How the fuck does Chrsitianity have anything at all to do with socialistic ideas? obabma isnt a pure socialist, but he is pretty damned far down that path in his thinking.

"Spread it around" ...lol

[lordofkarma]

If you fail to see and understand the relation of religion and politic you fail to understand why it was written in your constitution to separate them.

[Ziegler]

If you fail to see and understand the relation of religion and politic you fail to understand why it was written in your constitution to separate them.

care to link me where it states in the Constitution...
.....seperation of church and state...

The actual document, and not some letter from TJ.

[Carl Ragadamn]

It always amazes me that republicans are so affraid of socialism. They are majorly christians after all.

How can you call yourself a christian and not be socialist.

Because socialism when taken beyond a small group format, stops being the charitable helping of others and becomes a dependent soulless society.

[Ziegler]

objection your honor...

according to the 1973 War Powers Act, only Congress has the authority to declare War...this has NOT been done, so legally there is no "War"

1)see previous
2)what "war" , see objection
3)see the Geneva conventions

nuff said?

You need to take that up with Osama Bin Laden, I guess he forgot to introduce the bill to the congress before he declared war on us.....

Which is no suprise, since he doesnt abide by any of the other geneva conventions or US laws.......go figure. :bang:

[Warhawk]

i am a US citizen, fuck that and fuck all fascists who think that way...

Nobody is suggesting a single party state with a dictator as firgurehead, so you can put your over used term of endearment away now. Personally I'd like to see a few more 'official' political parties, but the media wont give any of them equal exposure yet.


Are you friends with any terrorists?

Are you planning any terrorist activities?

Then dont worry about it. You're not going to Gitmo.

Personally, the world as a whole needs to deal with this shit very seriously. Maybe set up permanent world terror courts, and jail system. Then as suspects are brought there, the cases can be judged with a worldwide aspect, and the resources shared?

I can see though that since Country X has not been directly attacked yet, they may hold it all in the same serious light as nation's that have been attacked do. Country X may not want to share in the burden (financial) and may take it all too lightly.

[Warhawk]

If you fail to see and understand the relation of religion and politic you fail to understand why it was written in your constitution to separate them.

Show me how christianity and socialism are realted, or not related. What the fuck are you talking about?

[Capricious]

Socialism is forced sharing whereas Christianity wants you to make the choice for yourself.

Thus, socialism != Christianity.

[Bissen]

This whole thing is such a huge waste of money. When Gordon Brown became PM, I didn't even hear about it until a week later. As for a huge celebration with millions of people? pah.

Since you're britsh I think it's rather embarrassing that I have to point out that Gordon Brown wasn't elected to be the leader of your nation, but was appointed after Tony Blair resigned and thus he doesn't get a electoral celebration.

[Carl Ragadamn]

Socialism is forced sharing whereas Christianity wants you to make the choice for yourself.

Thus, socialism != Christianity.

I thought you died or were granted mod powers (this is what I told Villa).

[jonyak]

Socialism is forced sharing whereas Christianity wants you to make the choice for yourself.

Thus, socialism != Christianity.

Socialism is not forced sharing.

in a true socialist system everyone would want to share, and not be forced.

[Bissen]

Here is a tip: If you dont want to go to Gitmo, dont have terroristic ideas or terrorists as friends.

And when black becomes white and vice versa, then what? If you get my drift.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a330/getprepaid/911%20Chronicles/1984-movie-bb_large.jpg

[shadowy]

You need to take that up with Osama Bin Laden, I guess he forgot to introduce the bill to the congress before he declared war on us.....

Which is no suprise, since he doesnt abide by any of the other geneva conventions or US laws.......go figure. :bang:

One man can't declare a war on a country and country can't declare a war on one man, he's merely a criminal.

[Zinsane]

I'm waiting for our new president to legalize the greens.
I've tried to find someting positive about him and that so far is it.

[Warhawk]

Socialism is not forced sharing.

in a true socialist system everyone would want to share, and not be forced.

That is like Utopia Socialism, not even really a possibility.

it is against human nature to live that way. Think about it.


Would you give my 30k to pay my bills because you make 300k and 30k wont really kill ya? Just because you want to?

[jonyak]

That is like Utopia Socialism, not even really a possibility.

it is against human nature to live that way. Think about it.


Would you give my 30k to pay my bills because you make 300k and 30k wont really kill ya? Just because you want to?

yes. I would give it up if I meade that much and had all of my needs taken care of.

that is true communism. its an ideal.

[Carl Ragadamn]

Socialism is not forced sharing.

in a true socialist system everyone would want to share, and not be forced.

plz cite an example of this working in a group larger than 10k people. When used in large group, you need a system to ensure "fairness", and that system will be abused.

[Warhawk]

One man can't declare a war on a country and country can't declare a war on one man, he's merely a criminal.

LOL Hitler for one. let's make a list of some not as easy as that.

[jonyak]

plz cite an example of this working in a group larger than 10k people. When used in large group, you need a system to ensure "fairness", and that system will be abused.

its an ideal.. not a reality.

just like anarcho capitalism.

[Capricious]

I thought you died or were granted mod powers (this is what I told Villa).

Can it be both?

Socialism is not forced sharing.

in a true socialist system everyone would want to share, and not be forced.

The "true socialist" system you speak of is 100% impossible.

[Warhawk]

yes. I would give it up if I meade that much and had all of my needs taken care of.

that is true communism. its an ideal.

PM me, i'll give you my address. Forward me as much as you can without dippipng into what you require for your needs. Im really strapped over here. I barely have food even.

[jonyak]

PM me, i'll give you my address. Forward me as much as you can without dippipng into what you require for your needs. Im really strapped over here. I barely have food even.

good for you...

sucks that I don;t make anywhere near that and I am strapped just paying the bills I do have.

[shadowy]

That is like Utopia Socialism, not even really a possibility.

it is against human nature to live that way. Think about it.


Would you give my 30k to pay my bills because you make 300k and 30k wont really kill ya? Just because you want to?

Would you as a christian give out 30k just because you want to?

People are greedy but in socialism it isn't really about giving someone else stuff, it's working towards the same goals and taking care of each other as a collective.

[jonyak]

The "true socialist" system you speak of is 100% impossible.

so is a true anarcho capitalist system.

[Capricious]

good for you...

sucks that I don;t make anywhere near that and I am strapped just paying the bills I do have.

But socialism is an ideal; you should give him as much as you can so you 2 are living the same standard of life. He can barely feed himself, so give him what he requires.

[DocGonzo]

You need to take that up with Osama Bin Laden, I guess he forgot to introduce the bill to the congress before he declared war on us.....

Which is no suprise, since he doesnt abide by any of the other geneva conventions or US laws.......go figure. :bang:

a criminal cannot "declare war"...it takes a state to do that...try not to conflate some criminal fuckhead with a country and perhaps you will begin to understand the logical fallacies our government has been operating under for the last 8 years

simple enough?

[Poacher]

I think the 32,000 soldiers will be to lock the place down incase someone tries to assassinate Obama, 'cause let's face it I bet there are a lot of backward people who would want to.

The US government can't possibly fear their population these days. They could fear their populace when the country was de-centralised, sparsely populated, not well mapped and armies were only effective in major battles and not in a guerilla war, but today?

A weak collection of militias and armed civilians wouldn't even last a week against the US Armed Forces.

[Jezrith]

What disturbs me the most about this inauguration, is just the massive amounts of people it is drawing. Whenever I see that many people getting that excited over any politician, it makes me a bit nervous.

[holychicken]

That, and the fact theres still question as to whether hes even a US citizen or not.
No, there isn't.

Plus all the other questions surrounding him. (like his stupidity during public address'). "I would like to present to you, the president of the united states, Bill Clinton".
ZOMG! A guy talking in public all the time, made a mistake? That hasn't happened pretty much 5 times a week for the past 8 years or anything.

The guy doesnt do himself any favors. Saying that all people in small towns are too stupid to understand what goes on at government level. Yeah, hes awesome!
He said that? And how can you say he doesn't do himself any favors? He got himself elected to the most powerful position in the world. How on earth does one do that if they don't do themselves any favors?

You, sir, are a clueless moron.

[Bissen]

You need to take that up with Osama Bin Laden, I guess he forgot to introduce the bill to the congress before he declared war on us.....

Which is no suprise, since he doesnt abide by any of the other geneva conventions or US laws.......go figure. :bang:


I declare war on the US. Come get me bitch.

[Carl Ragadamn]

A weak collection of militias and armed civilians wouldn't even last a week against the US Armed Forces.

You are assuming that the majority of the military would fight the US populace, I would contend that this is highly unlikely.

[Warhawk]

Would you as a christian give out 30k just because you want to?

People are greedy but in socialism it isn't really about giving someone else stuff, it's working towards the same goals and taking care of each other as a collective.

You are assuming I am Christian.

I donate plenty annually, mostly to research for cancer and to a lesser degree the community I live in.

In socialism, it isnt even yours to fucking give. The goals you work toward are not even yours either, they are what the system wants those to be. High on that list is the fattening up of the wallets of those at the top at the expense of your freedoms and personal wealth.

With capitalism you gain and keep a decent portion of what you produce, and if you want to, you can give it away. You get to give it away to who/where you want, though.

Say I feel strongly that cancer research is imooprtant, but you feel AIDs research is...we are free to decide for ourselves where we give.

[DocGonzo]

LOL Hitler for one. let's make a list of some not as easy as that.

and he was the properly elected head of state...read the War declaration, it was Germany, not Hitler

learn2history, imo

[Poacher]

You are assuming that the majority of the military would fight the US populace, I would contend that this is highly unlikely.

I wouldn't be so sure, a civilian uprising intending to overthrow the government could easily be shown in an extremely bad light with propaganda (which the government could easily distribute to soldiers), I'd think enough of the police, national guard and armed forces would remain loyal to force down the uprisings.

They'd have no central command, armour or air power, it would be a cakewalk for even a severely weakened professional force to defeat.

[Jezrith]

They'd have no central command, armour or air power, it would be a cakewalk for even a severely weakened professional force to defeat.

The same has been said about several superior military forces that have fought and lost wars against rag-tag militias. I think you need to study military history a bit closer.

[Warhawk]

and he was the properly elected head of state...read the War declaration, it was Germany, not Hitler

learn2history, imo

Properly...lol Man, read one little essay on how Hitler took power. TOOK power. 70% of Germans voted AGAINST Hitler.

It was a dicatorship, so when he launched on Poland, it was in efect him declaring war. So yeah, one man CAN and has, many times in histroy, declared war.

Dont be so pretentious.

[jonyak]

In socialism, it isnt even yours to fucking give. The goals you work toward are not even yours either, they are what the system wants those to be. High on that list is the fattening up of the wallets of those at the top at the expense of your freedoms and personal wealth.


Go learn what socialism is before you talk about it please.

[Poacher]

The same has been said about several superior military forces that have fought and lost wars against rag-tag militias and ended up losing. I think you need to study military history a bit closer.

There's a difference here, actually. In Vietnam, there was a jungle to hide in and the locals had experience fighting in it. What other wars were like that? Vietnam is the only modern one I can think of.

Armed American civilians fighting armed American soldiers in America are going to lose. The US government has plenty of bases on home soil, they have local police who know their own ground, the civilian populace does not have the advantage of prepared positions nor would they have the room to build them, spy satellites can see onto city streets and fields unlike dense jungle, there is a fundamental psychological difference between US and Vietnamese people, the average US citizen is not as fanatical as the average Vietnamese citizen was, the US citizens cannot count on universal local support as the US armed forces are not an invading power, there are no major powers that could covertly supply the rebels with weaponry or technology.

A civil war (and that is what it would be) is a radically different type of war than a war between states. Vietnam vs US? Totally different. Boers vs British? Totally different. Even today, Afghanistan vs Coalition is totally different to the way a civil war would run.

[jonyak]

But socialism is an ideal; you should give him as much as you can so you 2 are living the same standard of life. He can barely feed himself, so give him what he requires.

Thats a very ignorant and simplistic way of looking at socialism.

If he is willing to work hard and help improve the general good he would have no trouble feeding himself.

socialism is not about haveing the same standard of living. you are talking about communism.

[Carl Ragadamn]

I wouldn't be so sure, a civilian uprising intending to overthrow the government could easily be shown in an extremely bad light with propaganda (which the government could easily distribute to soldiers), I'd think enough of the police, national guard and armed forces would remain loyal to force down the uprisings.

They'd have no central command, armour or air power, it would be a cakewalk for even a severely weakened professional force to defeat.

The thing about it is, that it will not happen until there is a unifying event that solidifies at least 3-5% of the population. These would be the most freedom loving of the people, which would be a portion of the military and former military, also air poser and armor are not good against a spread and diverse enemy. It is not like they are going to start bombing infrastructure in the US, due to that move aiding in the recruiting of more rebels. If you have 3% of Americans moving in one direction you would find it hard to stop 9mil armed and pissed off people, especially when they can blend easily into the rest of the populace.

[Warhawk]

I wouldn't be so sure, a civilian uprising intending to overthrow the government could easily be shown in an extremely bad light with propaganda (which the government could easily distribute to soldiers), I'd think enough of the police, national guard and armed forces would remain loyal to force down the uprisings.

They'd have no central command, armour or air power, it would be a cakewalk for even a severely weakened professional force to defeat.

It isnt a cakewalk for at best 250,000 soldiers to walk over what could amount to 100 million armed people. If it was a true revolt, something more than "wow we dont like that guy", the loyalties of most police forces and guard units would be in question.

LOL a cakewalk, wow, yeah. Simple.

[Ziegler]

I declare war on the US. Come get me bitch.

Just as soon as you get a couple of your followers to fly a few planes into a few of our buildings, and we elect an american president again....we'll do that.
And if your satellite group happens to run a country and you hide within that country, we'll illegally invade them looking for you, so long as they dont have nuclear weapons.

[Evillor]

No, there isn't.


ZOMG! A guy talking in public all the time, made a mistake? That hasn't happened pretty much 5 times a week for the past 8 years or anything.


He said that? And how can you say he doesn't do himself any favors? He got himself elected to the most powerful position in the world. How on earth does one do that if they don't do themselves any favors?

You, sir, are a clueless moron.

Are you really that naive to how politics work?. There were some states that majority voted Mccain and the electoral college overruled the majority and voted obama (which is illegal, and is anything happening about it?). Oh and most powerful position in the world? the worlds doesnt start and end with America you know.

If anything, it shows the stupidity of the common American more than anything. If their leader blatantly insults 25-50% of the country, and they STILL vote for him, They're dumber than you are. Before you think this is a Republican bash on Democrats, it isnt. Im not affiliated with either party. Also Im happy there finally is a black president, if only to stop the "white man keeping us down" bullshit.

Heres a snippet :

"The main contentions have been that Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate is a fake because he was born in Kenya, and because Obama's father was Kenyan, which was British at the time, Obama has dual citizenship, which isn't native-born American."

source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/12/obama-birth-1.html

The supreme court threw it out. The supreme court is supposed to uphold your constitutional rights as an American. Yet it was thrown out EVEN THOUGH there is evidence that he holds dual-citizenship (and therefore, cannot become president). Wow they really are looking out for the people right, not taking a kickback to sweep it under the carpet.

You deny evidence presented, and call me a clueless moron. Im not even American, yet i seem to know more about it than you do.

[Warhawk]

Go learn what socialism is before you talk about it please.

I know what it is. If you are referring to an abstract socialism, for example Sweden, then I am aware of what that is too.

In pure socialism what is yours is not yours. It is all controlled too centrally, and a very unhealthy environment for growth past a certain point.

It is government controlled workforce, government controlled industry, and government allocated assests.

The right of the individual to excel, or to improve himself or his condition is denied, along with all other individual rights, in favor of one single individual right.

There is your pure socialism.

[Warhawk]

PS: THese threads are fun. I hope no one takes things too seriously. Varying ources of information and viewpoints are useful to truely making yourself aware and complete. So many people these days are not open to any sort of debate, but rather "OMG NO! its my or nothing". They cant see a Devil's Advocate approach to debate.

[Poacher]

I doubt 100 million people would stand up in firefights against the Forces but I see your point. I still don't think victory could be achieved by the populace, unless they did organise and coordinate the Army (who would be organised and coordinated) could maintain enough of a presence in major centres to give them superiority whilst special forces would bring down individual cells/militias etc area by area.

PS: I agree with Warhawk, such threads are good.

[Warhawk]

I doubt 100 million people would stand up in firefights against the Forces but I see your point. I still don't think victory could be achieved by the populace, unless they did organise and coordinate the Army (who would be organised and coordinated) could maintain enough of a presence in major centres to give them superiority whilst special forces would bring down individual cells/militias etc area by area.

PS: I agree with Warhawk, such threads are good.

Well i didnt say it would be 100 million, but it could reach that level in a hurry. Special Forces would be atrited rapidly, there arent that many of them. I dont take them lightly, I am WELL aware of their capabilities, but you have to realize in a situation like this, loyalty issues would approach 50%.

So now these units are 50% weaker, and the 50% they lost are opposed to them.

[Bissen]

PS: THese threads are fun. I hope no one takes things too seriously. Varying ources of information and viewpoints are useful to truely making yourself aware and complete. So many people these days are not open to any sort of debate, but rather "OMG NO! its my or nothing". They cant see a Devil's Advocate approach to debate.


But according to yourself, some of the ideas brought to light here is actually small peeks into the mind of an enemy combatant.

[shadowy]

...
In socialism, it isnt even yours to fucking give. The goals you work toward are not even yours either, they are what the system wants those to be. High on that list is the fattening up of the wallets of those at the top at the expense of your freedoms and personal wealth.

With capitalism you gain and keep a decent portion of what you produce, and if you want to, you can give it away. You get to give it away to who/where you want, though.

...

Socialism doesn't equal totalitarian socialism, socialism is simply "collectivism" where people work towards the general good or the goals of society or group they belong to rather than solely for their own gain.

As for the fattening up the wallets of those above you, that's exactly what capitalism does, not socialism.

If you work in a factory the guys on the top make the big bucks and pay only what they must for the workforce, workforce is forced to keep on working in the factory because they don't have any options if they want their family to have food on the table.

Now tell me how socialism takes away your freedom and wealth and capitalism doesn't?

Just to make it clear i don't advocate complete socialism but rather the mix of capitalism and socialism because both extremes suck.

[Warhawk]

But according to yourself, some of the ideas brought to light here is actually small peeks into the mind of an enemy combatant.

'Some of these ideas is peeks into minds'....I dont understand what you mean.

[Bissen]

Socialism doesn't equal totalitarian socialism

This. Just like real capitalism doesn't equal the corporatist capitalism we're currently experiencing.

[Poacher]

Well i didnt say it would be 100 million, but it could reach that level in a hurry. Special Forces would be atrited rapidly, there arent that many of them. I dont take them lightly, I am WELL aware of their capabilities, but you have to realize in a situation like this, loyalty issues would approach 50%.

So now these units are 50% weaker, and the 50% they lost are opposed to them.

Military defections would depend entirely on the situation causing the uprising in the first place, there are examples in history of both the military splitting over such issues and the military remaining almost entirely loyal to the government.

If it was more of a civil uprising kind of civil war then perhaps not, if it was a war between cultural groups or ideology (such as your own civil war or the English civil war) then certainly the military would be split, but so too would the civilians and thus both sides would be on similar footing.

[Bissen]

'Some of these ideas is peeks into minds'....I dont understand what you mean.

Well in regards to patriot act 1 and 2, there's quite a bit in this thread that would be criminalizing "ideas". And you said it yourself. Don't think terrorist thoughts.

The term "thought criminal" comes to mind.

[Treyguard]

if they didnt commit any crimes, then why did Bush need to pass legislation making him and his colleagues immune from prosecution?

This sounds like sedition to me! Why do you hate freedom so much?


:p

[praxeology]

How can you call yourself a christian and not be socialist.

Remember the parable where Jesus smites anyone who doesn't give his toys to a central planner?

I don't either.

[jonyak]

I know what it is. If you are referring to an abstract socialism, for example Sweden, then I am aware of what that is too.

In pure socialism what is yours is not yours. It is all controlled too centrally, and a very unhealthy environment for growth past a certain point.

It is government controlled workforce, government controlled industry, and government allocated assests.

The right of the individual to excel, or to improve himself or his condition is denied, along with all other individual rights, in favor of one single individual right.

There is your pure socialism.

that is not pure socialism. you are wrong. what you are talking abotu is communism.

[Warhawk]

Socialism doesn't equal totalitarian socialism, socialism is simply "collectivism" where people work towards the general good or the goals of society or group they belong to rather than solely for their own gain.

As for the fattening up the wallets of those above you, that's exactly what capitalism does, not socialism.

Socialism (pure, as was suggested somewhere above)does, without a doubt, require total authoritarianism. Otherwise, no one would accept that we are all just going to be the same and have no chance to excel personally.

Socialism fattens wallets, too, and a far smaller percentage of the population. if capitalism only fattens the wallets of those on top, why do UAW's make in upwards of 70$ an hour? Guys at Verizon, guys out plugging in wires, make $40+ per hour and have more time-and-a-half and doubletime days than i've ever heard anyone else getting?

yeah the exec's at those companies make more, but no socialist auto worker is going to be making 70 bucks an hour lol.

[Warhawk]

that is not pure socialism. you are wrong. what you are talking abotu is communism.

It is collectively 'owned', but who controls it, in a socialist system?

That is what I said. IE controlled by bureaucratic elite.

[praxeology]

Socialism fattens wallets, too

Totally untrue, Stalin was paid just as much as a factory worker.

His private subway, mansions and palace were just necessary for the tough job he had.

[Nafelos]

Berlusconi is EPIC.

[holychicken]

Are you really that naive to how politics work?. There were some states that majority voted Mccain and the electoral college overruled the majority and voted obama (which is illegal, and is anything happening about it?). Oh and most powerful position in the world? the worlds doesnt start and end with America you know.
Which states exactly did this happen in?

And I know that the world does not start and end with America, but anyone who isn't blinded by their own bias knows that America is the most powerful country in the world (for now) and thus its highest office is the most powerful position in the world. It is not like I just came up with this term right now, it is pretty widely used both in and out of America.

If anything, it shows the stupidity of the common American more than anything. If their leader blatantly insults 25-50% of the country, and they STILL vote for him, They're dumber than you are. Before you think this is a Republican bash on Democrats, it isnt. Im not affiliated with either party. Also Im happy there finally is a black president, if only to stop the "white man keeping us down" bullshit.
He didn't insult 25-50% of the country, you moron. He said something questionable about a segment of the population that was probably not going to be voting for him anyway.

Heres a snippet :

"The main contentions have been that Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate is a fake because he was born in Kenya, and because Obama's father was Kenyan, which was British at the time, Obama has dual citizenship, which isn't native-born American."

source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/12/obama-birth-1.html

The supreme court threw it out. The supreme court is supposed to uphold your constitutional rights as an American. Yet it was thrown out EVEN THOUGH there is evidence that he holds dual-citizenship (and therefore, cannot become president). Wow they really are looking out for the people right, not taking a kickback to sweep it under the carpet.
First and foremost, there is no question. Sure, there are people arguing that there is a question, but the SCOTUS threw it out because at least 4 of the SCOTUS judges deemed it unworthy of their time.

Of course, to the tin-foil hat people, this is because they are being paid off and not because the case is ridiculous.

You deny evidence presented, and call me a clueless moron. Im not even American, yet i seem to know more about it than you do.
You READ that the case was thrown out because it was deemed not worthy of being heard by the court and you say I am denying evidence?

Wake up, dude, just because some crack-pot says he isn't a citizen and a bunch of people buy into it because it is political agreeable for them doesn't mean that there was a legitimate case.

[Rourke]

ram it right up your shit box

Dude that color is fucking stupid....can't even read your posts. Not that you say anything worth a shit.

[Jezrith]

A civil war (and that is what it would be) is a radically different type of war than a war between states. Vietnam vs US? Totally different. Boers vs British? Totally different. Even today, Afghanistan vs Coalition is totally different to the way a civil war would run.

You are correct that it is totally different, but the difference doesn't really support your position. The fact that these soldiers and police officers would be destroying their own cities, neighborhoods, etc. effectively means the state forces would end up fighting with one hand tied behind their back. This can easily cripple a fighting force and cost them victories. Look at the Vietnam war again, if you actually study it you will notice that it was Washington's unwillingness to wage total war against the NVA that lost the war more than anything else.

[Warhawk]

Totally untrue, Stalin was paid just as much as a factory worker.

His private subway, mansions and palace were just necessary for the tough job he had.

haha i like that reply a lot.

[Carl Ragadamn]

Look at the Vietnam war again, if you actually study it you will notice that it was Washington's unwillingness to wage total war against the NVA that lost the war more than anything else.

Seems we suck at anything other than total war. Sherman model of warfare FTW.

[Warhawk]

Seems we suck at anything other than total war. Sherman model of warfar FTW.

Because was should be total or not at all. You cant half-ass it, but we keep trying.

[shadowy]

It is collectively 'owned', but who controls it, in a socialist system?

That is what I said. IE controlled by bureaucratic elite.

The people who belong to the group/collective own the stuff, thus in an auto-plant that's owned by socialistic group the workers might for an example own the whole thing and elect the board members for some set time period who would then manage it. Socialism and democracy also don't exclude each other.

[Carl Ragadamn]

Because was should be total or not at all. You cant half-ass it, but we keep trying.

I agree, if it is not worth doing something right, then it is not worth doing.

[Rourke]

You are correct that it is totally different, but the difference doesn't really support your position. The fact that these soldiers and police officers would be destroying their own cities, neighborhoods, etc. effectively means the state forces would end up fighting with one hand tied behind their back. This can easily cripple a fighting force and cost them victories. Look at the Vietnam war again, if you actually study it you will notice that it was Washington's unwillingness to wage total war against the NVA that lost the war more than anything else.

I think it would be hard to really say how anything that scary would play out. America is a HUGE country, it's civilians are heavily armed already, and most likely would be able to aquire some bigger weapon in short order if it was well planned.

Just as an example of 1 person. I have 600 rounds of 9mm, plus another 100 of shotgun ammo. That's what I have just for plinking down at the range. Now imagine how many guns and ammo a million civilians currently own.

I can't see own local military, or police attacking thier own families either. It would be an awful scenario either way though, and I would hope that could be avoided. The US is going through big changes atm....I say let it ride for a while.

[Jezrith]

The people who belong to the group/collective own the stuff, thus in an auto-plant that's owned by socialistic group the workers might for an example own the whole thing and elect the board members for some set time period who would then manage it. Socialism and democracy also don't exclude each other.

That still leaves you with a bureaucratic elite controlling everything...

[DocGonzo]

Are you really that naive to how politics work?. There were some states that majority voted Mccain and the electoral college overruled the majority and voted obama (which is illegal, and is anything happening about it?). Oh and most powerful position in the world? the worlds doesnt start and end with America you know.

If anything, it shows the stupidity of the common American more than anything. If their leader blatantly insults 25-50% of the country, and they STILL vote for him, They're dumber than you are. Before you think this is a Republican bash on Democrats, it isnt. Im not affiliated with either party. Also Im happy there finally is a black president, if only to stop the "white man keeping us down" bullshit.

Heres a snippet :

"The main contentions have been that Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate is a fake because he was born in Kenya, and because Obama's father was Kenyan, which was British at the time, Obama has dual citizenship, which isn't native-born American."

source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/12/obama-birth-1.html

The supreme court threw it out. The supreme court is supposed to uphold your constitutional rights as an American. Yet it was thrown out EVEN THOUGH there is evidence that he holds dual-citizenship (and therefore, cannot become president). Wow they really are looking out for the people right, not taking a kickback to sweep it under the carpet.

You deny evidence presented, and call me a clueless moron. Im not even American, yet i seem to know more about it than you do.

for the first paragraph...show your fucking proof...not a blog full of shit, but proof...there isn't any...the electorals voted as their states did and hteir state laws required...pure ignorance and agitprop to say otherwise

as for the "citizenship" issue...it got thrown out because the state of Hawaii validated the birth certificate (not to mention finding an archived newspaper that also showed a record of birth)....the evidence proved citzenship, the accusers proved NOTHING...as was ruled on by lower courts as well, and upheld by SCOTUS not even taking the case

[shadowy]

That still leaves you with a bureaucratic elite controlling everything...

You already have a bureaucratic elite controlling everything with senate, president and corporate co's.

[Jezrith]

You already have a bureaucratic elite controlling everything with senate, president and corporate co's.

But the state doesn't own everything, big difference.

[shadowy]

But the state doesn't own everything, big difference.

State doesn't own anything if the people own everything.

[Jezrith]

State doesn't own anything if the people own everything.

Who represents the people?

[Warhawk]

The people who belong to the group/collective own the stuff, thus in an auto-plant that's owned by socialistic group the workers might for an example own the whole thing and elect the board members for some set time period who would then manage it. Socialism and democracy also don't exclude each other.

""Imagine that you are factory owner manufacturing cars. Under communism, your factory would be confiscated by the dictatorship of the proletariat and its production managed by a centralized bureaucracy. The difference between a communist and a socialist, however, is that the socialist does everything in half-measures. Under socialism, you may well be allowed to keep your factory on the conditions that you do not earn an "excessive" profit and that you provide well-paying, spiritually-fulfilling jobs to your employees, allowing each of them a vote in all of your decisions.""

Business that doesnt strive to make profit will ultimately fail once a certain point is reached. With no chance of excelling personally, the desire to work hard is crush, and creativity stifled.

Do you want a heart surgeon that hates going to work for a mere 100k per year because in h is system that's what he is paid, through collective decision?

Dont try the arguement of "but a real surgeon does it to help mankind", that's true but not in a very high percentage. A lot of people aspire to medicine because they have the brainpower for Med school, and know all that hard work of 12+ years of training and school will reward them not only through helping people, but financially, and prestige.

[Warhawk]

Now imagine you want to make a new car. In your mind, it's a perfect vehicle.

In capitalism, your company makes the car and markets it. It may fail in the consumer market but it may spark or lead to other cars that succeed.

in socialism, you have to get the opinion of all your employees, down to the fucking janitor, before the comnpany is allowed to make the car.

Why have design teams, just have everyone get boxes of crayons and throw shit on paper, then vote which one to make?

Socialism only looks good on paper, and only when you use best case scenarios as example.

[Ziegler]

as for the "citizenship" issue...it got thrown out because the state of Hawaii validated the birth certificate (not to mention finding an archived newspaper that also showed a record of birth)....the evidence proved citzenship, the accusers proved NOTHING...as was ruled on by lower courts as well, and upheld by SCOTUS not even taking the case

Got a link for the archived newpaper ?
And the court threw out the case because the complaintant....wasnt being denied his rights or was not...I forget the legalese....but basically...he didnt have enough rights as a plain ol citizen to demand that actual proof be shown. :eek:

Hawaii...did NOT show his actual birth certificate...and here is the part that really made me wonder about the whole thing...the kenyan government refused to release any records as well....how the fuck do they have birth records in kenya of his american birth?

[Treyguard]

care to link me where it states in the Constitution...
.....seperation of church and state...

The actual document, and not some letter from TJ.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I do hope you're not going to try and claim that the First Amendment isn't part of the Constitution. :)


Remember the parable where Jesus smites anyone who doesn't give his toys to a central planner?

I don't either.

No but I can show you bits of the bible which feature the faithful acting decidedly communist if that'll help you:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts%202:44-45;&version=31;

All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.

[shadowy]

Who represents the people?

Elected representatives in the hypothetical scenario i outlined, as i said socialism doesn't exclude democracy.

""Imagine that you are factory owner manufacturing cars. Under communism, your factory would be confiscated by the dictatorship of the proletariat and its production managed by a centralized bureaucracy. The difference between a communist and a socialist, however, is that the socialist does everything in half-measures. Under socialism, you may well be allowed to keep your factory on the conditions that you do not earn an "excessive" profit and that you provide well-paying, spiritually-fulfilling jobs to your employees, allowing each of them a vote in all of your decisions.""

Business that doesnt strive to make profit will ultimately fail once a certain point is reached. With no chance of excelling personally, the desire to work hard is crush, and creativity stifled.

Do you want a heart surgeon that hates going to work for a mere 100k per year because in h is system that's what he is paid, through collective decision?

Dont try the arguement of "but a real surgeon does it to help mankind", that's true but not in a very high percentage. A lot of people aspire to medicine because they have the brainpower for Med school, and know all that hard work of 12+ years of training and school will reward them not only through helping people, but financially, and prestige.

Hmm, did you even read what i posted or did you stop when you saw the word socialism and proceeded to write this rant?

I agree that not being rewarded for the work you do sucks but your rant is only related to my post thru the use of word socialism in both.

[Carl Ragadamn]

Got a link for the archived newpaper ?
And the court threw out the case because the complaintant....wasnt being denied his rights or was not...I forget the legalese....but basically...he didnt have enough rights as a plain ol citizen to demand that actual proof be shown. :eek:

Hawaii...did NOT show his actual birth certificate...and here is the part that really made me wonder about the whole thing...the kenyan government refused to release any records as well....how the fuck do they have birth records in kenya of his american birth?
You forgot to bring up that Obama had his Grandmother murdered so that she couldnt be questioned (this one is for you Doc).

I do hope you're not going to try and claim that the First Amendment isn't part of the Constitution. :)
The literalist impression of that line is that the state must stay out of the churches, not the other way around... As in no declaring Catholicism the official religion, nor the state telling preachers what to say from the pulpit (yet somehow they cannot talk about politics????)

[StainlessSteelRat]

objection your honor...

according to the 1973 War Powers Act, only Congress has the authority to declare War...this has NOT been done, so legally there is no "War"

1)see previous
2)what "war" , see objection
3)see the Geneva conventions

nuff said?

No. They are now enemy combatants to be treated like PoWs. Congress passed this law. War is not necessary.

Torture is another story, but as far as treating them like PoWs, that was passed by Congress.

[Jezrith]

Elected representatives in the hypothetical scenario i outlined,


A.K.A - The State.


as i said socialism doesn't exclude democracy.


Not sure why you keep bringing this up, I haven't noticed anyone claim otherwise.

[DocGonzo]

Got a link for the archived newpaper ?
And the court threw out the case because the complaintant....wasnt being denied his rights or was not...I forget the legalese....but basically...he didnt have enough rights as a plain ol citizen to demand that actual proof be shown. :eek:

Hawaii...did NOT show his actual birth certificate...and here is the part that really made me wonder about the whole thing...the kenyan government refused to release any records as well....how the fuck do they have birth records in kenya of his american birth?

factcheck.org has the linkage for the newspaper

and the state of Hawaii stated the certificate is valid, Barry supplied a properly signed and sealed copy (which you can also see on factcheck.org), and the Sec of State for Hawaii certified the validity of the document

the burden of proof is on the accuser, the defendant supplied all the required proof...the accusers supplied nothing..nada...bupkis...

/end tinfoil plz...

[Treyguard]

Got a link for the archived newpaper ?
And the court threw out the case because the complaintant....wasnt being denied his rights or was not...I forget the legalese....but basically...he didnt have enough rights as a plain ol citizen to demand that actual proof be shown. :eek:

Hawaii...did NOT show his actual birth certificate...and here is the part that really made me wonder about the whole thing...the kenyan government refused to release any records as well....how the fuck do they have birth records in kenya of his american birth?

Yes.
Left column, 4th from the bottom.
http://wikileaks.org/leak/obama-1961-birth-announcement-from-honolulu-advertiser.pdf

Further, the actual birth certificate itself:
http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate

Of course this could all still be a massive conspiracy. But then, thats what the shadowy overlords behind Al-Qaeda, the US right wing lunatic fringe as personified by the WingNut Daily and the Teletubbies want you to think. And why would you not willingly run into the arms of that conspiracy if you'll run the this one?

Finally, Kenya. And just why the fuck should Kenya open any records whatsoever on the so of some random nutcases? Would you? If so, I don't think you exist, I require your full bank and identity details to confirm your existence. Many thanks!
(NB In case you really are that stupid, no don't send them, don't send them to anyone. Log off the internet and return to bed, it'll be for the best.)

[jonyak]

Now imagine you want to make a new car. In your mind, it's a perfect vehicle.

In capitalism, your company makes the car and markets it. It may fail in the consumer market but it may spark or lead to other cars that succeed.

in socialism, you have to get the opinion of all your employees, down to the fucking janitor, before the comnpany is allowed to make the car.

Why have design teams, just have everyone get boxes of crayons and throw shit on paper, then vote which one to make?

Socialism only looks good on paper, and only when you use best case scenarios as example.

hey your capitalism thing has worked out real good for you guys.

[DocGonzo]

No. They are now enemy combatants to be treated like PoWs. Congress passed this law. War is not necessary.

Torture is another story, but as far as treating them like PoWs, that was passed by Congress.

and the entire "enemy combatants" bullshit has yet to stand legal test versus the Geneva conventions...until it does it's still bullshit..

the whole "checks and balances" thing, imo

[Ziegler]

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html



I do hope you're not going to try and claim that the First Amendment isn't part of the Constitution. :)


Ok...so for those in the reading comprehension impaired section.....

care to link me where it states in the Constitution...
.....seperation of church and state...

The actual document, and not some letter from TJ.

I included some pretty colors and different sized fonts to hopefully keep your attention long enough for you to read AND comprehend.

[Warhawk]

hey your capitalism thing has worked out real good for you guys.

It actually has, very well in fact. I think you are reading and listening to mainstream media. They are always and will be Doomsday oriented. Everything is "The end of America as we know it".

The US is fine.

[jonyak]

It actually has, very well in fact. I think you are reading and listening to mainstream media. They are always and will be Doomsday oriented. Everything is "The end of America as we know it".

The US is fine.

:rolleyes:

denile is a river in egypt.

[Jezrith]

hey your capitalism thing has worked out real good for you guys.

Considering it has been a major factor in the largest growth of a middle class in man's history, it's not doing too shabby...

[Warhawk]

and the entire "enemy combatants" bullshit has yet to stand legal test versus the Geneva conventions...until it does it's still bullshit..

the whole "checks and balances" thing, imo

You should be more worried about how others disregard the Geneva Convention, than how we do. They are in a critical violation of it, at all times.

[DocGonzo]

Ok...so for those in the reading comprehension impaired section.....

care to link me where it states in the Constitution...
.....seperation of church and state...

The actual document, and not some letter from TJ.

I included some pretty colors and different sized fonts to hopefully keep your attention long enough for you to read AND comprehend.

the First Amendment states - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

i bolded the pertinent section for you...

if ANY part of the government touches ANY part of religion, it violates that section...since, by the secular covenant of our Constitution, all religions are to be treated the same

so..mentioning a single god violates those who believe in a pantheon, etc...

simple shit really...an dyes "in god we trust" on our money is a violation which should be corrected ...imo, the same as the "under god" in the Pledge foisted on us during the 50s to propagandize against the "godless communists"

watch the Bing Crosby flick "the Bells of St. Mary's" sometime...the children recite the ACTUAL pledge as was originally written

but i digress...

[DocGonzo]

You should be more worried about how others disregard the Geneva Convention, than how we do. They are in a critical violation of it, at all times.

true enough...

all the MORE fucking reason we should adhere to it by the letter and the spirit, imo

but criminal organizations are not part of the Geneva treaty, only national governments...al Qaeda are criminals, not a government...that conflation is the root of the problem and has been deliberately confused by the neocons

[AtanasRikard]

Now imagine you want to make a new car. In your mind, it's a perfect vehicle.

In capitalism, your company makes the car and markets it. It may fail in the consumer market but it may spark or lead to other cars that succeed.

in socialism, you have to get the opinion of all your employees, down to the fucking janitor, before the comnpany is allowed to make the car.

Why have design teams, just have everyone get boxes of crayons and throw shit on paper, then vote which one to make?

Socialism only looks good on paper, and only when you use best case scenarios as example.

This example really makes no sense imo. I thought someone said that socialism stymies creative thought. Based on your example socialism allows for everyone to have their own creative ideas and for those ideas to actually have some validity. Why can't a janitor have the greatest idea for a car ever? Because he's a janitor he can't have a creative thought?

[shadowy]

A.K.A - The State.



Not sure why you keep bringing this up, I haven't noticed anyone claim otherwise.

Do you think corporations board of directors is The State? If so then yes i suppose i'd have to agree with you.

Well the reason i keep bringing it up is that some people seem to think socialism equals totalitarism, guess i thought you did too. :)

[Ziegler]

the First Amendment states - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

i bolded the pertinent section for you...

if ANY part of the government touches ANY part of religion, it violates that section...since, by the secular covenant of our Constitution, all religions are to be treated the same

so..mentioning a single god violates those who believe in a pantheon, etc...

simple shit really...an dyes "in god we trust" on our money is a violation which should be corrected ...imo, the same as the "under god" in the Pledge foisted on us during the 50s to propagandize against the "godless communists"

watch the Bing Crosby flick "the Bells of St. Mary's" sometime...the children recite the ACTUAL pledge as was originally written

but i digress...


No...what it means is just what it says. Congress can not make an "official" religion or tell the muslims that they cant practice islam.

That's it...that is all there is to it. Just like....the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. everything else is what you want it to mean.

[Jezrith]

Do you think corporations board of directors is The State? If so then yes i suppose i'd have to agree with you.


No, I'm talking about the country in general, not just one business...


Well the reason i keep bringing it up is that some people seem to think socialism equals totalitarism, guess i thought you did too. :)

Democracy and totalitarianism are not mutually exclusive either.

[holychicken]

No...what it means is just what it says. Congress can not make an "official" religion or tell the muslims that they cant practice islam.
So, say the state decided to make every rule of Islam a law in the US. They never declared Islam as the official religion. Do you think that this is constitutional?

[DocGonzo]

No...what it means is just what it says. Congress can not make an "official" religion or tell the muslims that they cant practice islam.

That's it...that is all there is to it. Just like....the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. everything else is what you want it to mean.

that's an interesting interpretation, but not quite in line with SCOTUS over the last 200+years

the language is very straightforward..."no law respecting an establishment"...that means none...ever, in any way and that all, from Satanism to Viking to the Flying Spaghetti monster are treated the same

just like "shall not infringe"

both are VERY clear

[shadowy]

No, I'm talking about the country in general, not just one business...



Well i wasn't talking about an entire country. :eek:

Democracy and totalitarianism are not mutually exclusive either.

I guess not but i still wonder how a totalitarian government could last for more than one election period, people don't like the government controlling/monitoring everything usually(unless it's to fight a war on terrorism :ninja:).

[holychicken]

that's an interesting interpretation, but not quite in line with SCOTUS over the last 200+years

the language is very straightforward..."no law respecting an establishment"...that means none...ever, in any way and that all, from Satanism to Viking to the Flying Spaghetti monster are treated the same

just like "shall not infringe"

both are VERY clear
Like many people who argue that "lulz, there is no separation of church and state in the constitution!" he either missed or doesn't understand the "respecting" in that clause.

[Jezrith]

Well i wasn't talking about an entire country. :eek:


Well you did bring up congress and the president, etc. My only point, was that the bureaucracy, even if elected by the people, end up being the owner of the property and not the people themselves.


I guess not but i still wonder how a totalitarian government could last for more than one election period, people don't like the government controlling/monitoring everything usually(unless it's to fight a war on terrorism :ninja:).

I think you just answered your own question... ;) and that is only one way to do it. All it takes is 51% to accept/support it...

[praxeology]

I guess not but i still wonder how a totalitarian government could last for more than one election period, people don't like the government controlling/monitoring everything usually(unless it's to fight a war on terrorism :ninja:).

FDR was elected for 3 terms.

[Ample]

This whole thing is such a huge waste of money. When Gordon Brown became PM, I didn't even hear about it until a week later. As for a huge celebration with millions of people? pah.

you clearly are missing the significance of a black president in the U.S.

[shadowy]

Well you did bring up congress and the president, etc. My only point, was that the bureaucracy, even if elected by the people, end up being the owner of the property and not the people themselves.

Well the reason i brought them up was to point out that capitalistic companies and countries are run by bureucratic elite.

As for the second thing, i fail to see how capitalism fares better in this?
Atleast if they can elect there's a possibility of changing the leadership if the leadership fucks up.

[bluthorn]

First and foremost, I am not being duped into anything. I didn't even vote for the guy.

Second, disagreeing with his policies and being blind to what he has said doesn't change the historical significance of a black man being elected president.

Third, and possibly most significantly, your last comment, that he isn't even really black, shows either an intentional disregard for or complete ignorance of race relations in America.

Honestly, all you are doing is further proving to me that the only people that are more ridiculous, sheep-like and blindly partisan than "Obamanites" are the "anti-Obamanites."


I don't give a rat's tail whether he is white, black or red white and freaking blue. His socialistic agenda will not have my support, ever.

[DocGonzo]

I don't give a rat's tail whether he is white, black or red white and freaking blue. His socialistic agenda will not have my support, ever.

take off the tinfoil, set it on the ground, and step away slowly...

if you meant socializing things like insurance companies and banks, thank W...

otherwise, i think you need to learn what the word means

[Ziegler]

So, say the state decided to make every rule of Islam a law in the US. They never declared Islam as the official religion. Do you think that this is constitutional?

well, that depends on the law now doesnt it....
thou shall not murder....
thou shall not commit adultery
We're good so far...
you shall honor the sabbath and keep it holy....probably not so much.

I used christianity to show that we dont even make the predominant religion here as the defacto laws...so it probably wouldnt fly with islam either.

Like many people who argue that "lulz, there is no separation of church and state in the constitution!" he either missed or doesn't understand the "respecting" in that clause.


No, most people derive the seperation of church and state...from TJ's letter to the baptist....not the actual constitution to state that the intent of the 1st amendment is the whole seperation thing.

[Jezrith]

Well the reason i brought them up was to point out that capitalistic companies and countries are run by bureucratic elite.


True, the difference though is that bureaucratic elite doesn't own my house, it doesn't own my car, my clothes, etc. If everything was owned by "The People", then by default as the steward of "The People", they would own all of those things.


As for the second thing, i fail to see how capitalism fares better in this?
Atleast if they can elect there's a possibility of changing the leadership if the leadership fucks up.

Living in the US for 33 years, I have first hand knowledge of how very little can change from one set of leaders to the next. Also, if a company fucks up, I don't have to buy their goods and services, it's kind of like voting except companies have a habit of responding more to losing money than politicians do to losing votes. Not that I'm a fan of corporatism mind you, it just has a little better track record with competition than government does.

[DocGonzo]

for the love of Adam Smith...take this whole stupid "capitalism/solcialism sucks" bullshit into it's own thread and

geddoff mah bridge!

[holychicken]

well, that depends on the law now doesnt it....
thou shall not murder....
thou shall not commit adultery
We're good so far...
you shall honor the sabbath and keep it holy....probably not so much.
I didn't say one or a couple specific laws, I said all of the laws.

Nor did I say or imply that just because something is supported by a religion, we cannot make it a law.

So I ask again. If the state were to make every rule of Islam a law, would they be violating the 1st amendment?

No, most people derive the seperation of church and state...from TJ's letter to the baptist....not the actual constitution to state that the intent of the 1st amendment is the whole seperation thing.
Those types of documents are often cited in SCOTUS rulings because they give insight into the intent of the founders. Interpreting the constitution is not about finding technicalities in what was written, but determining whether or not the rule falls into the spirit of the constitution.

Considering he was one of the founders and helped author those bills, his interpretation is probably worth a whole lot more than yours. No offense.

[Marrik]

Barrack Obama, ugh. I still find it amusing, after all that has happened, Americans vote in an (ex?) Muslim president with a name like Obama (A Bomber).


yeah, nevermind the fact that hes essenitally Bush 2, at least John McCain had a GOOD, AMERICAN NAME! thats whats REALLY important.

[Ignotis]

While not perfect, if you really wanted McCain to win over Obama then you are a imbecile. Not only that, but having Palin over Biden for VP is nothing short of hilarious.

[DocHolliday]

Next time we should tell people not to come.

[Ziegler]

I didn't say one or a couple specific laws, I said all of the laws.

Nor did I say or imply that just because something is supported by a religion, we cannot make it a law.

So I ask again. If the state were to make every rule of Islam a law, would they be violating the 1st amendment?


Those types of documents are often cited in SCOTUS rulings because they give insight into the intent of the founders. Interpreting the constitution is not about finding technicalities in what was written, but determining whether or not the rule falls into the spirit of the constitution.

Considering he was one of the founders and helped author those bills, his interpretation is probably worth a whole lot more than yours. No offense.


In answer to your question...yes, they would be violating, since one of the laws of islam is that islam in the only true religion. Thusly, they would be establishing a state religion. But even if you throw that one out, if they passed it solely on the pretense...this is islmaic law and it is what shall henceforth be the laws of the land.....it would be wrong.
If they somehow managed to make all the sharia laws into laws and them somehow withstand not violating the the constitution (ROFLMAO) or being struck down by the SCOTUS and were also ratified as new amendments to the constitution since that is what it would take for some of them. Then sure, I guess I would abide them as duly appointed laws of america...just as I accept a less than half african person who has nobody in either side of his family tree that has ever lived or even has a relative that has lived the african american life, to be our first african american president.


Now as to TJ. you're absolutely right in that his feelings are far more relevant than mine, but so are the other dissenters who wanted to make sure that they could make their own respective states into christian only states and only relented on the matter because they were allowed that option.

And TJ, not being christian, still was a deist, and believed in a divine Creator. He was a religious person..he even wrote his own version of the new testement. In his choosing of the words of the declaration of independance, it again shows a belief in a high power.

So, again, while the federal government should not declare an official religion, the individual states should be, and the government was certainly based upon the belief of a central god. States should be allowed to have prayer time that doesnt force children to attend. They had them at my school, I never attended and it didnt bother me(in the bible belt no less). If a local courthouse wants to have a nativity scene...they are supposed to have that right. But they dont anymore.

But it does have a place in our government, for if our rights are not granted by divine right, then they are granted by man, and may thusly be taken by man. So long as the term God or Creator isnt designated to be only the hebrew/christain interpretation of that, it is fine.