Learn about the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. Who are they and why do they have control over the money in the country. Some European countries have a similar Federal Reserve. The people who control a nations money controls the citizens. Bush is merely a puppet compared to who really controls the world. The United States is corrupt beyond repair. There won't be a global United States. Unless the reserve makes it so.
When we were gearing up to go to war with Iraq because we believed, apparently on a hunch, that they had WMDs, it was an incontrovertable fact that North Korea had WMDs.
So, NO, we didn't invade Iraq because of WMDs.
Also, that is a faulty analogy. We're not talking about shooting a guy who puts his hand in his pocket. We're talking about shooting a guy because you think a gun is in his pocket when he's done nothing to make you think that.
"If you believe we're in Iraq for the oil then you're just as gullible as you're accusing me of being"
It took 26 years for oil to go from $1/gallon to $2/gallon. It took 2 years for it to go from $2/gallon to $3/gallon. Oil companies have been making record profits since we went into Iraq.
So many clips/videos have been pulled from YouTube about the inconsistencies of 9/11! I suspect that many more will be pulled in the near future. But hey, don't worry, you can still see Britney Spears do something stupid, dog tricks that aren't that interesting, nude women with an IQ of 50 dancing in front of a mirror and last but not least the latest video by Chris Crocker. Now go pay $80.00 to fill up your car! Or "FREE YOUR MIND, and the rest will follow!" THIS WAR IS ILLEGAL! GET OUT NOW!!!!
"The Nazis were offensive while America is being defensive. See the difference? Starting a war to defend yourself is justifiable, while starting a war for power isn't. So far, the only wars America started are wars in self defense or defense of another."
Wow, no wonder why our country is going to collapse. If this is the education people are getting now, i mean shit im only 21 and i at least know that America is the new Fascist nation. I mean open your fucking eyes people.
The Germans went out to re-unite the German speaking people of the Sudetenland and to take back the land that had been taken after it took action after the first world war, That war was started when a Jew commoner killed a nobleman from the German's side. It wasn't until Poland in September that Hitler started to make war and on the 3rd of Sept 1939 NZ Australia and Britain declared war on Germany. USA declared on Germany AFTER Germany did on USA AFTER Pearl Harbor.
Im all with you. but its kinda hard to change shit when our voting system is completely corrupt. The people do not have a say in it whatsoever. As im sure you know, its all the Delegates and Super Delegates. Unless the people in this country actually start caring about their rights and start learning for themselves, the minority of us who do care, are fucked, and will have no effect.
PNAC *uses* American money and people for the benefit of multi-national corporations and Israel. American citizens are as much victims of PNAC as the world at large. It's about expanding corporate and Zionist powers & Americans will pay for, go into debt over, kill for and die for this.
this is another reason religion is fucking humanity. it is training people to be dogs, always obeying their masters. yes, sometimes the people in power are there for a reason, for our benefit. most of the time that gets twisted into something else. and the critical thinking skills having been drowned out by religion make it difficult for people to realize their masters are the ones screwing them.
right, and religion makes people subservient to that, to allow it to take place. if most of a population is raised on a religion that has no basis in reality, yet they believe it, then to lead that population to believe anything else sold to them is nowhere near as difficult as it would be if most people were raised primarily with a scientific understanding of the world. critical thinking. ultimately you can call it 'human nature' to invent religions and cause a viscious cycle
I'm not sure if the causal picture is that simple (i.e. religion leads to loss of critical thinking). This is partly true, but it is surely also true that stupid people are more likely to be tricked into believing some religion. Anyways, talking about religion won't fix this problem. This is a purely political issue right now. Besides, only 20% of people support Bush right now.. So even the religious folks are starting to figure this one out...
Got anything substantial to say? How can you say "yawn" in response to this video? You are the same type of guy who sits back as the Nazis perpetrate the holocaust.
I say yawn because this video is boring. The Nazis were offensive while America is being defensive. See the difference? Starting a war to defend yourself is justifiable, while starting a war for power isn't. So far, the only wars America started are wars in self defense or defense of another. So far, I'm not worried about a semi-Nazi regime coming out of America. At the moment we're fighting the people who want to start a semi-Nazi regime *cough*Al Qaeda*cough*Taliban*cough* Substantial enough?
actually the nazis started their invasion of poland based off 'defense', from the gleiwitz incident. at least they were supposedly attacked, false flag as it was. iraq didn't attack us, it was entirely pre-emptive defense aka offense. so your logic falls flat on it's face.
a purely autonomous al-qaeda can't do shit against an honest cia. but that's the question. is al-qaeda really just an entirely separate group or are they simply being propped up and seeded by a cia with a corrupt element.
Yeah, when there's serious question on whether Iraq has nuclear weapons or not, and won't let us even check to see if they have them or not, we should just wait until a bomb hits D.C. before we do anything. That's a good idea.
It turned out he didn't have any, but it was too dangerous not to invade. If he had let us into Iraq and let us look for the weapons we wouldn't have had to invade. Look at it this way, if we really went in Iraq for the oil, would we have given Saddam an out? That would be way too risky.
dude, the owner of your propaganda source, fox news, which is rupert murdoch if you weren't aware, said it flatly we are invading for the oil. no equivocation whatsoever. look it up. australian interview.
the EXACT same way it was 'too dangerous' to not buy a bunch of Y2K fix it and emergency stuff based upon the claims of the sellers that wanted you to buy them.
the same way it's too dangerous to not believe in god based upon claims of damnation.
etc.
you're living proof an atheist can be just as gullible as anyone else. stop touting some passion for logic and reason if you're not willing to apply it in all areas besides god belief.
either you're a complete idiot not worth arguing with, or you're just trying to be a smartass, taking the piss. it's hard to believe you're that stupid. but then again i shouldn't be surprised.
that you still believe the entirely bullshit proposition of it being 'too dangerous' to not invade, that i just proved was bullshit by showing other equal propositions that are known to be bullshit.
if something is bullshit at its core, there's no amount of research that's going to overturn it. it may convince you after looking at the same arguments over and over, it doesn't mean it's objectively convincing.
research is a meaningless term if you're just looking at a bunch of pro-war propaganda.
fuck you're an idiot. fox news which is the network best known for it's extreme bias in favor of the war and the neocons, is owned by rupert murdoch which said:
"The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy...would be $20 a barrel for oil. That's bigger than any tax cut in any country."
not to mention Cheney back in 99 said the following: "The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil, is still where the prize ultimately lies"
Roosevelt chose not to shoot down the Japanese bomber planes, does that mean he wanted Pearl Harbor to be bombed so he could go into WWII with justification?
be more specific. where and what time are you referring to. we KNOW the attack on pearl harbor could've been easily prevented. if you're talking about invading japan before they attack us, then you're a fucking moron. preventing an attack and invading a country are completely different things.
No, that's not at all what I was talking about. Someone called the president a couple of hours before the bombing on pearl harbor asking him if we should shoot the planes down, and he chose not to. Then Pearl Harbor was bombed. Now if he did shoot the planes down and made a counter strike would he be looked down upon as much as Bush is now?
completely different scenario. FDR worked to piss off the japanese and withold information and do nothing about it. obviously what the japanese did was wrong and we had to do something about germany at one point or another. but pearl harbor was not a surprise whatsoever and once you see a foe poised for attack, you can rightly defend yourself. so yes, shooting those planes down is good and proper. the same way you would block a punch if you're quick enough. but you don't punch the person before
so why don't we nuke all countries who we think has nukes? hey, you never know..russians might change their mind some day. lets nuke them. and why don't they nuke us, since they know we have nukes, since we might nuke them for thinking they'll nuke us and so on? stop falling all over yourself to defend your bullshit idea of pre-emptive war.
Completely different scenario. We invaded Iraq because we thought they were a threat. We had reasons to believe they had WMDs in development so we asked if we could inspect and see if they had any WMDs and they declined. Why would they decline if they didn't have anything? They were more of a threat than our allied countries with nukes.
"why would they decline if they didn't have anything?"
the same reason a person declines to be arrested on false charges. of course, they can bitchify themselves to our 'authority' and go through the rigamarole. or, seeing as it was sadaam, say fuck you.
either way, why would we need fake intelligence? oh thats right, to convince dumbfucks like yourself. only to find out later it was fake...oh, i guess that hasn't happened yet for you.
"the same reason a person declines to be arrested on false charges."
Actually, it's more like a cop asking you if you have drugs in your car, you say no, he asks if he can look in your car, and you say no. It doesn't take very long for the cop to check out your car, and in the Iraq case, would put the U.S. at ease if they just let the inspectors in. But they didn't, seeing as we couldn't predict the future, there wasn't much else to do but wait and see if we would get bombed. Not a good idea.
that's because you're too much of a dumbed down jackass to know your rights. people don't have to give up to unreasonable search and seizure. and not the cops definition of reasonable, but reasonable defined through probable cause. not just pulled over for speeding and upon a whim the cop decides to give you a body cavity search.
again, the 'intel' used against iraq was FAKE. there was NO reason to believe we would get bombed. god damn how many feet thick is your skull?
The "intel" you are talking about was produced by torturing an arab man for months and asking him "what is the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda". Anyways, you are assuming that the US has the right to run into other countries and dictate what goes on in there. They don't. They are not the world police, and that attitude disgusts me.
That seems pretty illogical to make something up out of the blue and torture somebody to confirm that. What made them think there was a connection before the torture took place? Also, don't assume you know everything about the war because the government has to keep some stuff secret.
"That seems pretty illogical to make something up out of the blue and torture somebody to confirm that. "
Why? Invading Iraq has been in the play book for years now.
How is it illogical? The people responsible for the "intel" are all profiting from the invasion. Seems pretty logical to me. It worked for them, didn't it? It tricked people like you, didn't it?
No, Iraq asked the UN inspectors back in but Bush told them to get out as the US was attacking. Iraq was clearly no threat -- anyone who saw Gulf War I on television could tell you that. The WMDs thing was a sales job concocted by the neocons
oh and I'd also like to add, the guy who sold you your conviction on invading iraq is the same who said the following just 2 years earlier:
"[Saddam Hussein] has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."
time to stop adding fuel to the fire that you're already burning in mate.
You're right. Let's unilaterally decide to initiate wars of aggression against any oil producing nation that the president points his finger at. Fuck you. Over half a million Iraqi CIVILIANS are dead (not to mention more American soldiers than Americans who died in 9/11) because of ignorant mother fuckers like you.
what a fucking ignorant false dichotomy. yeah, lets just invade countries based off assertions and the pet fear they have your gullible ass suckling off of to feel patriotic..only to later give the excuse 'we cant pull out now' when you know god damn well it was a dumbfuck decision to go in. another hannity/oreilly/limbaugh-esque lemming. come on try harder than that.
"The Nazis were offensive while America is being defensive. See the difference? Starting a war to defend yourself is justifiable, while starting a war for power isn't. So far, the only wars America started are wars in self defense or defense of another."
Holy smokes. Is this satire? This is so ignorant I almost shit my pants.
The more you focus on what you are NOT WANTING, the more you create it. So, my question is this... "What solutions do you suggest that are EFFECTIVE???"
he's talking about 'the secret'...that metaphysical bullshit idea if you worry about a subject, you get more of it. his solution is to worry about solutions instead of the problem. then somehow everything will be fixed. which doesn't directly follow, but it does increase the chances of something being fixed. so he's partly right.
I was hoping he wasn't talking about that. That secret BS is terribly annoying. I remember some "Law of Attraction" morons who thought the best way to solve global warming was to stop worrying about it. Pure genius!
Pretty much all neo-cons want, is a bunch of countries seperated by borders, then they can make up wars for profit, If there were no countries there wouldnt be any war. So its the Neo-cons who are against the world govt.
Do something? Do what? start an armed rebellion? The United States is a Democracy (sort of) and it is the Bush administration that got voted in. Thats how it works. Perhaps the answer isn't to overthrowing the government and starting a civil war, but to educate people better so they don't vote for shitty leaders. Just a thought...
that's one side of it, but when the democracy is hijacked and the government starts declaring itself immune in various ways to certain oversight, that's when you don't have much of a choice. the founding fathers said this country would crumble from within and when that happens its up to the people to rebuild it. obviously choose peaceful methods otherwise nothing is going to get done.
if violent methods are chosen, nothing will get done because it will just be chalked up as terrorism..further widening the gap between the rest of the country who are still drinking the govt kool aid that the govt is working in their favor, from the people who see the govt is full of shit and needs changed.
The federal Supreme Court, whos power is completely separate from the president, denied a recount of the votes, so I think its safe to say that bush won rightly the election. The only people you can really blame are stupid voters.
how about a combination of stupid voters with the aid of some vote manipulation.
people always think in black and white, if it's not one extreme it must be totally the other. there's usually a mix of factors for watershed events to occur. what straw breaks the camel's back is what matters.
never did i claim something so sure. i was just posing a possibility you seemed to have dismissed. but i guess you take the BBC and the supreme court as supreme arbiters of the truth. while that may be what their ostensible purpose, it doesn't mean that's what's happening. surely you're aware supreme court justices have some less-than-supreme opinions are you not?
i'm not saying entirely ignore what comes from the authority but always take it with a grain of salt if you dont have all the info.
I've read several studies suggesting there were various statistically significant anomalies that all conveniently operated in Bush's favor. Academic studies are less biased than any branch of the government, and CERTAINLY less biased than the BBC.
Yes they could both be wrong, but of course anything you hear from any source could be wrong as well. Do you have a good reason to doubt their findings?
America is a very bad thing indeed and was always doomed to be. The politics get more and more silly and the crimes get more and more serious, if any nation in europe did the shit the the US does the climate would change and everyone would feel uneasy, what really sucks is that the general american popullation is so mis-guided and think that africa is a country, and there are no reliable mainstream sorces to get their news, so when people speak against america, they are like "OMGOSH COMMUNISM!"
I'm a liberal and like your videos but everyone has known about PNAC and talked about it for about SIX YEARS NOW. This isn't "news."
We all know they wanted to maintain a military large enough to fight two major wars on two fronts and recognized a"Pearl Harbor" like event would be necessary to create the political motivation to do so. We all know they saw the fall of the Soviet empire as a golden opportunity to spread American hegemony. Liberals in America have known this for years.
then why aren't liberals seeing the elephant in the living room with 9/11 possibly having been facilitated if not put into place by these bastards? it seems as if that is always considered some 'no fly zone' of discussion, always considered 'kool aid drinker' area. they keep bitching about the administration yet think their main tool, 9/11, is what they said it is. the farthest they'll go is saying they're incompetent. yet they're competent enough to exploit it in every way possible.
"then why aren't liberals seeing the elephant in the living room with 9/11 possibly having been facilitated if not put into place by these bastards?"
Because 9/11 was not "put into place" by PNAC or Neocons or Bush it was "put into place" by Islamic nut jobs.
Was the government negligent in ignoring relevant information leading up to the attack as they were before Pearl Harbor? Yes. Did they "put either into place?" No.
"Because 9/11 was not "put into place" by PNAC or Neocons or Bush it was "put into place" by Islamic nut jobs."
steel/titan plane turbines molten by the burning jet-fuel, yet enough passenger-dna remained to identify the all pentagon-victims >> +400m towers colapse both the SAME way without doing much additional damage in 10sec >> confiscated camera material from around the pentagon >> some of the suicide-pilots confirmed to be still alive by small-medias and of course unaired my nbc/cnn/etc
you seem to think, just because a certain party exists with certain intentions makes it LIKELY they would be guilty of said crime, is the same as actually being fully responsible for it. i know how that's a double edged sword and can be turned in the opposite direction, towards what i'm suggesting, but what I'm suggesting looking into is totally ignored and scoffed at. why the double standard?
whats ridiculous is people not calling a spade a spade with 9/11. 9/11 is their greatest tool. the neocons have based damn near every bit of their ridiculous bullshit actions off of it. they said it would be necessary as a catalyst to get their wishes into fruition. yet nobody wants to question their version of it. seems a bit retarded to me. just plain COWARDICE to not even bother entertaining a closer examination and take the authority's word for it.
"You know I know Bush wasn't behind 9/11? IT WORKED."
I have examined the "evidence" regarding the WTC. The only thing I find suspect if the official account of the Pentagon and what really happened to Flight 93.
guess what also worked...going into iraq and staying there, among other things. how do you know actually trying to keep the peace is their goal?
Bill Maher is a jackass. you're quoting people and giving opinions that are just relaying an example of the same point i'm talking about.
also what 'evidence' are you referring to? if it has anything to do with 'no planes' or some space beam idea, that's just obviously manufactured bullshit to discredit questioning the official story of 9/11.
"I have examined the "evidence" regarding the WTC. The only thing I find suspect if the official account of the Pentagon and what really happened to Flight 93."
I suppose this means that you read a few news stories and the Wikipedia entry.
The most striking aspect of 9/11 is the incredible resistance to doing a proper investigation. How much more money, time, and media coverage was given to investigating the death of princess Diana? Does that seem right to you?
Yeah, everybody who isn't a fascist must be a communist. (sarcasm)
If you had at least attempted to start with attacking his claims first before you attacked him personally I could have maybe considedred to take you seriously, but you realy are making it hard for me.
I would advise you to stay with religious,or secular related vids neotropic.Dipping you're toe in the swamp of paranod rightwing conspiracy theories,is a dead end.
How is it paranoid, you cocksmear? Go look up the PNAC yourself if you don't believe me. Haven't you forgotten there is war going on right now, that you are paying for? Have you forgotten all the laws that have been broken by the Bush cabal, or didn't you know? Damn, man. Didn't the video tell you to "pay attention"? Let me say it again -pay attention! The US is being run by war criminals.
Your ' response ' was of course based upon hysterics,and not objective fact. It was based upon assertions,with nothing,save a hysterical response. It would be good for example,if you could provide a direct line of evidence from the PNAC position paper,and the resulting actions.Objective fact,not hysterics. If you can not,or are unable to,you share alot in common with the god bots who simply assume truth based upon a priori emotional assumptions.
I gave you at least 5 lines directly from the PNAC document in the video. In any case, this isn't a goddamn essay -it's a youtube video. If you want the sources go look them up. In fact, you definitely should. At least read the wikipedia entry for a start.
You again assume I'm unfamiliar with the subject matter,which of course is as absurd as you're assertion a policy think tanks position paper,translates into the actions of a state.
you mean "your", not "you're". It will be easier to take your opinion seriously after you learn basic grammar.
Manifestly there is something wrong with this administration (that is the greater point of the video) and the PNAC document ties all of it together. You have yet to give a reason for disagreeing with anything in the video, except that you don't believe think tanks influence policy. I wonder why they exist?
It is the common fodder of the Alex Jones crowd,and similar sections of the paranoid American far right...A simple search on Google will prove my assertion.
You have yet to say what is paranoid about it, and what is rightwing about it. Specifically, what claims are paranoid, and what claims are right wing? Don't just make an ad hominem attack by making a comparison to someone with paranoid ideas. Say what is paranoid in the video and why.
So what if the "Alex Jones Crowd" has said something similar to what I have said here? Unless and until you give some reason for disagreeing with a particular claim I have made, then you shouldn't be complaining about anything.
if it's anything paranoid its the right who think there's going to be terror aplenty if we don't bomb countries. and the liberals who believed the same. 9/11 was the fear salvo, alex jones interpretation or not. it clouded everybody's judgment and therefore landed us into the shit we have to deal with now from the administration. golly, something about that makes me want to look into 9/11 a bit more to see if it was what they said it was. oh wait, i can't, i'll get called a conspiradroid.
ComradeAgopian, name one paranoid prediction from the left that existed before the war that is not now undeniable fact. WMD, ties to al-quida, it will bankrupt the country, it will destroy our standing in the world, haliburton will profit, too many soldiers will be lost, what line of left wing logic was wrong. NONE OF THEM. what line of right wing logic was wrong, ALL OF THEM. How can you say the left was not fucking nostrodomis before the war and even worse how DARE YOU JUSTIFY THIS DUMB WAR!
Depends where you get your numbers from. It is very hard to figure out an accurate number since nobody is counting bodies. I figure the actual number is somewhere around 500k, since it is around the middle of the ranges that have been given, and close to a number determined by an extensive study.
Sorry but the christians in my country are out of control. Religion is entirely to blame for the ignorance. The best i can do to change this is to breed as many children as posible to be atheists so that in a few generations the population is 50/50.
Macro' Fuck off prick. short of talking to people, reasoning(trying)and voting there isnt shit else to do. unless you expect me to murder every piece of shit i come across. of which would be atleast 150 million religious fucktards.
Religion is part of the problem... But should you let war criminals run your country just because you can't outsmart the religious fundamentalists? Do something about it.
neo: "But should you let war criminals run your country"????
OK if you say so.
The problem isnt outsmarting fundies. The problem is we have elections, people vote, and the person with the most electoral votes wins..... what dont you understand about that.
OR, you could just talk to people and let them know that it there is a gigantic grey area between a normal compassionate person who doesn't at all believe in any god of any kind and someone who activley wants to literally drink the blood of christians and rape every child in site while the burn churches and are gay terrorists roaming the streets. We got into this war because people thought we had two options; USA in Iraq by itself bankrupting this country or the terrorist fucking our kids faces
Telling fundies that theres a grey area. dude that was good for laugh. all fundies hear is, your either with jesus,,,,,, or your defacto with the devil
YOU ARE RIGHT, they are incapable of seeing the error of their ways cause first they must have a sense of humor. As Bill Hicks said, that is what fundalism breeds; no irony. They take things literally, like say revelations. Bush may still bring us the apocalypse before January. He's a born again christian and believes in a coming apocalypse and also has the power to facilitate the apocalypse, and when he fucks up the world he then'll say, I told you the bible was right, look what it made me do.
PHOTOS of 103 CRIMINALS WHO DID 911
(mostly dual-citizen Israelis, 5 Bushes, Cheney
whodidit (DOT) org/cocon.html
ROCKEFELLER REVEALS 9/11 FRAUD to Film maker Aaron Russo (10 mins)
youtube (DOT) com/watch?v=7nD7dbkkBIA
DR. STEVE PIECZENIK: 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB TO TAKE THE U.S. TO WAR & START AN ENDLESS “WAR ON TERROR”
(top operative in 5 admins, Dep Asst Sec State in 3 admins, ex-mil officer, taught false flags, med dr, hero/co-writer of Clancy novels
youtube (DOT) com/watch?v=vicwIrB9JFw
kingwarth 5 months ago
one goverment-> one law-> one police-> one culture-> one language-> one colour-> one uniform-> one class-> one status-> one MIND,
and THEM.
MurmandamusPL 2 years ago
Learn about the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. Who are they and why do they have control over the money in the country. Some European countries have a similar Federal Reserve. The people who control a nations money controls the citizens. Bush is merely a puppet compared to who really controls the world. The United States is corrupt beyond repair. There won't be a global United States. Unless the reserve makes it so.
usistheromanempire 3 years ago
I remember the good old days when neotropic9 made intelligent videos that challenged people's think rather than slinging insults at them.
achilles696969 3 years ago
the nature is constructed in such a way that every pressure is answered with opposing pressures
so they will get balanced withe even greater oppositions as in the passed every body has to pay a price for
arrogance and ignorance
to become mature and nature does not forgive
wilie123 3 years ago
That's a very intelligent comment, especially the first sentence. Strange to come across it on a youtube comment.
harrybinladen 3 years ago
harrybinladen hallo
thanks for your compliment
I have just said what is abvious
some ppl and nations learn the hard way and it seems that the USA is one of them
the have not become mature enough to use this god given power in a wise and controled way
once again pls allow me to quote
POWER IS NOTHING WITH OUT CONTROL
wilie123 3 years ago
Centabyte,
When we were gearing up to go to war with Iraq because we believed, apparently on a hunch, that they had WMDs, it was an incontrovertable fact that North Korea had WMDs.
So, NO, we didn't invade Iraq because of WMDs.
Also, that is a faulty analogy. We're not talking about shooting a guy who puts his hand in his pocket. We're talking about shooting a guy because you think a gun is in his pocket when he's done nothing to make you think that.
shw3nn 3 years ago
I guess this is what you get when Republicans are in charge.
ZaKEEuS 3 years ago
"If you believe we're in Iraq for the oil then you're just as gullible as you're accusing me of being"
It took 26 years for oil to go from $1/gallon to $2/gallon. It took 2 years for it to go from $2/gallon to $3/gallon. Oil companies have been making record profits since we went into Iraq.
shw3nn 3 years ago
So many clips/videos have been pulled from YouTube about the inconsistencies of 9/11! I suspect that many more will be pulled in the near future. But hey, don't worry, you can still see Britney Spears do something stupid, dog tricks that aren't that interesting, nude women with an IQ of 50 dancing in front of a mirror and last but not least the latest video by Chris Crocker. Now go pay $80.00 to fill up your car! Or "FREE YOUR MIND, and the rest will follow!" THIS WAR IS ILLEGAL! GET OUT NOW!!!!
prinparis 3 years ago
"The Nazis were offensive while America is being defensive. See the difference? Starting a war to defend yourself is justifiable, while starting a war for power isn't. So far, the only wars America started are wars in self defense or defense of another."
Wow, no wonder why our country is going to collapse. If this is the education people are getting now, i mean shit im only 21 and i at least know that America is the new Fascist nation. I mean open your fucking eyes people.
zbambam5 3 years ago
The Germans went out to re-unite the German speaking people of the Sudetenland and to take back the land that had been taken after it took action after the first world war, That war was started when a Jew commoner killed a nobleman from the German's side. It wasn't until Poland in September that Hitler started to make war and on the 3rd of Sept 1939 NZ Australia and Britain declared war on Germany. USA declared on Germany AFTER Germany did on USA AFTER Pearl Harbor.
chepickle 3 years ago
Im all with you. but its kinda hard to change shit when our voting system is completely corrupt. The people do not have a say in it whatsoever. As im sure you know, its all the Delegates and Super Delegates. Unless the people in this country actually start caring about their rights and start learning for themselves, the minority of us who do care, are fucked, and will have no effect.
zbambam5 3 years ago
PNAC *uses* American money and people for the benefit of multi-national corporations and Israel. American citizens are as much victims of PNAC as the world at large. It's about expanding corporate and Zionist powers & Americans will pay for, go into debt over, kill for and die for this.
proteanview 3 years ago
...Don't know what Zionism has to do about any of this... I'm 70% sure you are a cock for brains...
MacroHard001 3 years ago
Macro: You're right... apparently you don't know.
proteanview 3 years ago
this is another reason religion is fucking humanity. it is training people to be dogs, always obeying their masters. yes, sometimes the people in power are there for a reason, for our benefit. most of the time that gets twisted into something else. and the critical thinking skills having been drowned out by religion make it difficult for people to realize their masters are the ones screwing them.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
Religion isn't the main problem here. This is something else. This is human nature. This is greed, thirst for power, malevolence, and cowardice.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
right, and religion makes people subservient to that, to allow it to take place. if most of a population is raised on a religion that has no basis in reality, yet they believe it, then to lead that population to believe anything else sold to them is nowhere near as difficult as it would be if most people were raised primarily with a scientific understanding of the world. critical thinking. ultimately you can call it 'human nature' to invent religions and cause a viscious cycle
Thrashaero 3 years ago
I'm not sure if the causal picture is that simple (i.e. religion leads to loss of critical thinking). This is partly true, but it is surely also true that stupid people are more likely to be tricked into believing some religion. Anyways, talking about religion won't fix this problem. This is a purely political issue right now. Besides, only 20% of people support Bush right now.. So even the religious folks are starting to figure this one out...
MacroHard001 3 years ago
*yawn*
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
Got anything substantial to say? How can you say "yawn" in response to this video? You are the same type of guy who sits back as the Nazis perpetrate the holocaust.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
I say yawn because this video is boring. The Nazis were offensive while America is being defensive. See the difference? Starting a war to defend yourself is justifiable, while starting a war for power isn't. So far, the only wars America started are wars in self defense or defense of another. So far, I'm not worried about a semi-Nazi regime coming out of America. At the moment we're fighting the people who want to start a semi-Nazi regime *cough*Al Qaeda*cough*Taliban*cough* Substantial enough?
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
actually the nazis started their invasion of poland based off 'defense', from the gleiwitz incident. at least they were supposedly attacked, false flag as it was. iraq didn't attack us, it was entirely pre-emptive defense aka offense. so your logic falls flat on it's face.
a purely autonomous al-qaeda can't do shit against an honest cia. but that's the question. is al-qaeda really just an entirely separate group or are they simply being propped up and seeded by a cia with a corrupt element.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
Yeah, when there's serious question on whether Iraq has nuclear weapons or not, and won't let us even check to see if they have them or not, we should just wait until a bomb hits D.C. before we do anything. That's a good idea.
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
LOL if you actually believed Sadam had "weapons of mass destruction". It was soooooooooooo obvious bush was lying.
iamaloserandisuck 3 years ago
It turned out he didn't have any, but it was too dangerous not to invade. If he had let us into Iraq and let us look for the weapons we wouldn't have had to invade. Look at it this way, if we really went in Iraq for the oil, would we have given Saddam an out? That would be way too risky.
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
dude, the owner of your propaganda source, fox news, which is rupert murdoch if you weren't aware, said it flatly we are invading for the oil. no equivocation whatsoever. look it up. australian interview.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
it's always 'too dangerous' whenever you flat out believe claims of armageddon if we don't go along with the claimant's agenda.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
the EXACT same way it was 'too dangerous' to not buy a bunch of Y2K fix it and emergency stuff based upon the claims of the sellers that wanted you to buy them.
the same way it's too dangerous to not believe in god based upon claims of damnation.
etc.
you're living proof an atheist can be just as gullible as anyone else. stop touting some passion for logic and reason if you're not willing to apply it in all areas besides god belief.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
So, you're expecting me to be gullible enough to suddenly think you're right for threats of "being gullible" if I don't?
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
either you're a complete idiot not worth arguing with, or you're just trying to be a smartass, taking the piss. it's hard to believe you're that stupid. but then again i shouldn't be surprised.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
Suit yourself. I just can't figure out how you think I'm gullible when I'm in the minority, good day.
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
people who believe the earth's flat are also a minority. what does popularity have anything to do with gullibility?
you're trying too hard to be smart. it just makes you more of a dumbass.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
I did the research and came up with my own conclusion which happens to disagree with yours. What am I being gullible for?
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
that you still believe the entirely bullshit proposition of it being 'too dangerous' to not invade, that i just proved was bullshit by showing other equal propositions that are known to be bullshit.
if something is bullshit at its core, there's no amount of research that's going to overturn it. it may convince you after looking at the same arguments over and over, it doesn't mean it's objectively convincing.
research is a meaningless term if you're just looking at a bunch of pro-war propaganda.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
If you believe we're in Iraq for the oil then you're just as gullible as you're accusing me of being.
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
fuck you're an idiot. fox news which is the network best known for it's extreme bias in favor of the war and the neocons, is owned by rupert murdoch which said:
"The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy...would be $20 a barrel for oil. That's bigger than any tax cut in any country."
not to mention Cheney back in 99 said the following: "The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil, is still where the prize ultimately lies"
kissinger and greenspan have also said its oil
Thrashaero 3 years ago
Roosevelt chose not to shoot down the Japanese bomber planes, does that mean he wanted Pearl Harbor to be bombed so he could go into WWII with justification?
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
be more specific. where and what time are you referring to. we KNOW the attack on pearl harbor could've been easily prevented. if you're talking about invading japan before they attack us, then you're a fucking moron. preventing an attack and invading a country are completely different things.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
No, that's not at all what I was talking about. Someone called the president a couple of hours before the bombing on pearl harbor asking him if we should shoot the planes down, and he chose not to. Then Pearl Harbor was bombed. Now if he did shoot the planes down and made a counter strike would he be looked down upon as much as Bush is now?
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
completely different scenario. FDR worked to piss off the japanese and withold information and do nothing about it. obviously what the japanese did was wrong and we had to do something about germany at one point or another. but pearl harbor was not a surprise whatsoever and once you see a foe poised for attack, you can rightly defend yourself. so yes, shooting those planes down is good and proper. the same way you would block a punch if you're quick enough. but you don't punch the person before
Thrashaero 3 years ago
So if cops have a guy surrounded and the guy quickly puts his hand in his jacket pocket it's not justified for a cop to shoot him?
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
You can't block a nuke.
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
so why don't we nuke all countries who we think has nukes? hey, you never know..russians might change their mind some day. lets nuke them. and why don't they nuke us, since they know we have nukes, since we might nuke them for thinking they'll nuke us and so on? stop falling all over yourself to defend your bullshit idea of pre-emptive war.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
Completely different scenario. We invaded Iraq because we thought they were a threat. We had reasons to believe they had WMDs in development so we asked if we could inspect and see if they had any WMDs and they declined. Why would they decline if they didn't have anything? They were more of a threat than our allied countries with nukes.
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
keyword: thought
"why would they decline if they didn't have anything?"
the same reason a person declines to be arrested on false charges. of course, they can bitchify themselves to our 'authority' and go through the rigamarole. or, seeing as it was sadaam, say fuck you.
either way, why would we need fake intelligence? oh thats right, to convince dumbfucks like yourself. only to find out later it was fake...oh, i guess that hasn't happened yet for you.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
"the same reason a person declines to be arrested on false charges."
Actually, it's more like a cop asking you if you have drugs in your car, you say no, he asks if he can look in your car, and you say no. It doesn't take very long for the cop to check out your car, and in the Iraq case, would put the U.S. at ease if they just let the inspectors in. But they didn't, seeing as we couldn't predict the future, there wasn't much else to do but wait and see if we would get bombed. Not a good idea.
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
that's because you're too much of a dumbed down jackass to know your rights. people don't have to give up to unreasonable search and seizure. and not the cops definition of reasonable, but reasonable defined through probable cause. not just pulled over for speeding and upon a whim the cop decides to give you a body cavity search.
again, the 'intel' used against iraq was FAKE. there was NO reason to believe we would get bombed. god damn how many feet thick is your skull?
Thrashaero 3 years ago
So if the cop received faked intel from HQ it's still his fault for searching the person's car?
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
The "intel" you are talking about was produced by torturing an arab man for months and asking him "what is the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda". Anyways, you are assuming that the US has the right to run into other countries and dictate what goes on in there. They don't. They are not the world police, and that attitude disgusts me.
neotropic9 3 years ago
That seems pretty illogical to make something up out of the blue and torture somebody to confirm that. What made them think there was a connection before the torture took place? Also, don't assume you know everything about the war because the government has to keep some stuff secret.
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
"That seems pretty illogical to make something up out of the blue and torture somebody to confirm that. "
Why? Invading Iraq has been in the play book for years now.
How is it illogical? The people responsible for the "intel" are all profiting from the invasion. Seems pretty logical to me. It worked for them, didn't it? It tricked people like you, didn't it?
neotropic9 3 years ago
"The people responsible for the "intel" are all profiting from the invasion."
Where's your proof to back this statement up?
CentabyteZero 3 years ago
watch 'Iraq for sale - the war profiteers'
agentchronicthc 3 years ago
No, Iraq asked the UN inspectors back in but Bush told them to get out as the US was attacking. Iraq was clearly no threat -- anyone who saw Gulf War I on television could tell you that. The WMDs thing was a sales job concocted by the neocons
oldjoe5 3 years ago
oh and I'd also like to add, the guy who sold you your conviction on invading iraq is the same who said the following just 2 years earlier:
"[Saddam Hussein] has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."
time to stop adding fuel to the fire that you're already burning in mate.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
nope. you have to see his weapon. not an action of quickly putting your hand in your jacket.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
You're right. Let's unilaterally decide to initiate wars of aggression against any oil producing nation that the president points his finger at. Fuck you. Over half a million Iraqi CIVILIANS are dead (not to mention more American soldiers than Americans who died in 9/11) because of ignorant mother fuckers like you.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
what a fucking ignorant false dichotomy. yeah, lets just invade countries based off assertions and the pet fear they have your gullible ass suckling off of to feel patriotic..only to later give the excuse 'we cant pull out now' when you know god damn well it was a dumbfuck decision to go in. another hannity/oreilly/limbaugh-esque lemming. come on try harder than that.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
oh and you forgot vietnam. oh thats right, they attacked us at gulf of tonkin right?
too bad mcnamara tells us decades after the fact it never happened.
the tv is far from the best source of credible information. welcome to the real world.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
"So far, the only wars America started are wars in self defense or defense of another. "
You dumb ass ignorant fuck. Do us all a favor and kill yourself. Or at least read a fucking history book.
"At the moment we're fighting the people who want to start a semi-Nazi regime *cough*Al Qaeda*cough*Taliban*cough* Substantial enough?"
Al Qaeda has nothing to do with Iraq. Nothing. You dumb shit. Turn off Fox.
"So far, I'm not worried about a semi-Nazi regime coming out of America."
I can see that!
MacroHard001 3 years ago
"The Nazis were offensive while America is being defensive. See the difference? Starting a war to defend yourself is justifiable, while starting a war for power isn't. So far, the only wars America started are wars in self defense or defense of another."
Holy smokes. Is this satire? This is so ignorant I almost shit my pants.
AndrewSaunders123 3 years ago
Good message. What are YOU doing about this?
elvis32z 3 years ago
I think he made a video.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
Yes, I can see that... I'm sure he's doing more than just making videos.
elvis32z 3 years ago
The more you focus on what you are NOT WANTING, the more you create it. So, my question is this... "What solutions do you suggest that are EFFECTIVE???"
truvelocity 3 years ago
What are you talking about?
MacroHard001 3 years ago
he's talking about 'the secret'...that metaphysical bullshit idea if you worry about a subject, you get more of it. his solution is to worry about solutions instead of the problem. then somehow everything will be fixed. which doesn't directly follow, but it does increase the chances of something being fixed. so he's partly right.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
I was hoping he wasn't talking about that. That secret BS is terribly annoying. I remember some "Law of Attraction" morons who thought the best way to solve global warming was to stop worrying about it. Pure genius!
MacroHard001 3 years ago
Pretty much all neo-cons want, is a bunch of countries seperated by borders, then they can make up wars for profit, If there were no countries there wouldnt be any war. So its the Neo-cons who are against the world govt.
PinoX7 3 years ago
Do something? Do what? start an armed rebellion? The United States is a Democracy (sort of) and it is the Bush administration that got voted in. Thats how it works. Perhaps the answer isn't to overthrowing the government and starting a civil war, but to educate people better so they don't vote for shitty leaders. Just a thought...
iamaloserandisuck 3 years ago
that's one side of it, but when the democracy is hijacked and the government starts declaring itself immune in various ways to certain oversight, that's when you don't have much of a choice. the founding fathers said this country would crumble from within and when that happens its up to the people to rebuild it. obviously choose peaceful methods otherwise nothing is going to get done.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
@Thrashaero
"obviously choose peaceful methods otherwise nothing is going to get done"
do you mean "obviously we can't choose peaceful methods"?
iamaloserandisuck 3 years ago
no
if violent methods are chosen, nothing will get done because it will just be chalked up as terrorism..further widening the gap between the rest of the country who are still drinking the govt kool aid that the govt is working in their favor, from the people who see the govt is full of shit and needs changed.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
Explain to me how we voted Bush in? Do you not remember the recount?
truvelocity 3 years ago
The federal Supreme Court, whos power is completely separate from the president, denied a recount of the votes, so I think its safe to say that bush won rightly the election. The only people you can really blame are stupid voters.
iamaloserandisuck 3 years ago
how about a combination of stupid voters with the aid of some vote manipulation.
people always think in black and white, if it's not one extreme it must be totally the other. there's usually a mix of factors for watershed events to occur. what straw breaks the camel's back is what matters.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
"with the aid of some vote manipulation"
What makes you so sure, because both the federal supreme court and the BBC seem to think bush won the election fairly.
The BBC article is called "
Bush was 'true winner'
iamaloserandisuck 3 years ago
never did i claim something so sure. i was just posing a possibility you seemed to have dismissed. but i guess you take the BBC and the supreme court as supreme arbiters of the truth. while that may be what their ostensible purpose, it doesn't mean that's what's happening. surely you're aware supreme court justices have some less-than-supreme opinions are you not?
i'm not saying entirely ignore what comes from the authority but always take it with a grain of salt if you dont have all the info.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
I've read several studies suggesting there were various statistically significant anomalies that all conveniently operated in Bush's favor. Academic studies are less biased than any branch of the government, and CERTAINLY less biased than the BBC.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
What academic studies are those? Also if the BBC is biased then what alternative news source would you recommend?
iamaloserandisuck 3 years ago
I would also like to point out the Republican parties recent class act move of blocking a bill meant to help ensure fair elections.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
@Thrashaero
Yes they could both be wrong, but of course anything you hear from any source could be wrong as well. Do you have a good reason to doubt their findings?
iamaloserandisuck 3 years ago
America is a very bad thing indeed and was always doomed to be. The politics get more and more silly and the crimes get more and more serious, if any nation in europe did the shit the the US does the climate would change and everyone would feel uneasy, what really sucks is that the general american popullation is so mis-guided and think that africa is a country, and there are no reliable mainstream sorces to get their news, so when people speak against america, they are like "OMGOSH COMMUNISM!"
Atheistictruth 3 years ago
I'm a liberal and like your videos but everyone has known about PNAC and talked about it for about SIX YEARS NOW. This isn't "news."
We all know they wanted to maintain a military large enough to fight two major wars on two fronts and recognized a"Pearl Harbor" like event would be necessary to create the political motivation to do so. We all know they saw the fall of the Soviet empire as a golden opportunity to spread American hegemony. Liberals in America have known this for years.
tommylehman 3 years ago
then why aren't liberals seeing the elephant in the living room with 9/11 possibly having been facilitated if not put into place by these bastards? it seems as if that is always considered some 'no fly zone' of discussion, always considered 'kool aid drinker' area. they keep bitching about the administration yet think their main tool, 9/11, is what they said it is. the farthest they'll go is saying they're incompetent. yet they're competent enough to exploit it in every way possible.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
"then why aren't liberals seeing the elephant in the living room with 9/11 possibly having been facilitated if not put into place by these bastards?"
Because 9/11 was not "put into place" by PNAC or Neocons or Bush it was "put into place" by Islamic nut jobs.
Was the government negligent in ignoring relevant information leading up to the attack as they were before Pearl Harbor? Yes. Did they "put either into place?" No.
Ridiculous.
tommylehman 3 years ago
"Because 9/11 was not "put into place" by PNAC or Neocons or Bush it was "put into place" by Islamic nut jobs."
steel/titan plane turbines molten by the burning jet-fuel, yet enough passenger-dna remained to identify the all pentagon-victims >> +400m towers colapse both the SAME way without doing much additional damage in 10sec >> confiscated camera material from around the pentagon >> some of the suicide-pilots confirmed to be still alive by small-medias and of course unaired my nbc/cnn/etc
Medhiv83 3 years ago
your attitude is exactly what i'm referring to.
you seem to think, just because a certain party exists with certain intentions makes it LIKELY they would be guilty of said crime, is the same as actually being fully responsible for it. i know how that's a double edged sword and can be turned in the opposite direction, towards what i'm suggesting, but what I'm suggesting looking into is totally ignored and scoffed at. why the double standard?
Thrashaero 3 years ago
whats ridiculous is people not calling a spade a spade with 9/11. 9/11 is their greatest tool. the neocons have based damn near every bit of their ridiculous bullshit actions off of it. they said it would be necessary as a catalyst to get their wishes into fruition. yet nobody wants to question their version of it. seems a bit retarded to me. just plain COWARDICE to not even bother entertaining a closer examination and take the authority's word for it.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
I'll quote Bill Maher:
"You know I know Bush wasn't behind 9/11? IT WORKED."
I have examined the "evidence" regarding the WTC. The only thing I find suspect if the official account of the Pentagon and what really happened to Flight 93.
tommylehman 3 years ago
guess what also worked...going into iraq and staying there, among other things. how do you know actually trying to keep the peace is their goal?
Bill Maher is a jackass. you're quoting people and giving opinions that are just relaying an example of the same point i'm talking about.
also what 'evidence' are you referring to? if it has anything to do with 'no planes' or some space beam idea, that's just obviously manufactured bullshit to discredit questioning the official story of 9/11.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
"I have examined the "evidence" regarding the WTC. The only thing I find suspect if the official account of the Pentagon and what really happened to Flight 93."
I suppose this means that you read a few news stories and the Wikipedia entry.
The most striking aspect of 9/11 is the incredible resistance to doing a proper investigation. How much more money, time, and media coverage was given to investigating the death of princess Diana? Does that seem right to you?
MacroHard001 3 years ago
More of the seemingly endless stream of leftist bulls*it.
Slick; but then so was Mao's little Red book.
golfdad1 3 years ago
Yeah, everybody who isn't a fascist must be a communist. (sarcasm)
If you had at least attempted to start with attacking his claims first before you attacked him personally I could have maybe considedred to take you seriously, but you realy are making it hard for me.
DeletedDelusion 3 years ago
FBI CIA! Nice video but in the end the name calling was a bad idea.
Tomppu 3 years ago
Noted. I thought it was appropriate though. If ever it is appropriate it is when discussing war criminals.
neotropic9 3 years ago
FUCK YOU!!! lol. Just kidding. I think you are being too sensitive.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
I would advise you to stay with religious,or secular related vids neotropic.Dipping you're toe in the swamp of paranod rightwing conspiracy theories,is a dead end.
ComradeAgopian 3 years ago
How is it paranoid, you cocksmear? Go look up the PNAC yourself if you don't believe me. Haven't you forgotten there is war going on right now, that you are paying for? Have you forgotten all the laws that have been broken by the Bush cabal, or didn't you know? Damn, man. Didn't the video tell you to "pay attention"? Let me say it again -pay attention! The US is being run by war criminals.
neotropic9 3 years ago
Your ' response ' was of course based upon hysterics,and not objective fact. It was based upon assertions,with nothing,save a hysterical response. It would be good for example,if you could provide a direct line of evidence from the PNAC position paper,and the resulting actions.Objective fact,not hysterics. If you can not,or are unable to,you share alot in common with the god bots who simply assume truth based upon a priori emotional assumptions.
ComradeAgopian 3 years ago
I gave you at least 5 lines directly from the PNAC document in the video. In any case, this isn't a goddamn essay -it's a youtube video. If you want the sources go look them up. In fact, you definitely should. At least read the wikipedia entry for a start.
neotropic9 3 years ago
You again assume I'm unfamiliar with the subject matter,which of course is as absurd as you're assertion a policy think tanks position paper,translates into the actions of a state.
ComradeAgopian 3 years ago
you mean "your", not "you're". It will be easier to take your opinion seriously after you learn basic grammar.
Manifestly there is something wrong with this administration (that is the greater point of the video) and the PNAC document ties all of it together. You have yet to give a reason for disagreeing with anything in the video, except that you don't believe think tanks influence policy. I wonder why they exist?
neotropic9 3 years ago
What's paranoid about it?
And what's "rightwing" about it?
MacroHard001 3 years ago
It is the common fodder of the Alex Jones crowd,and similar sections of the paranoid American far right...A simple search on Google will prove my assertion.
ComradeAgopian 3 years ago
You have yet to say what is paranoid about it, and what is rightwing about it. Specifically, what claims are paranoid, and what claims are right wing? Don't just make an ad hominem attack by making a comparison to someone with paranoid ideas. Say what is paranoid in the video and why.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
So what if the "Alex Jones Crowd" has said something similar to what I have said here? Unless and until you give some reason for disagreeing with a particular claim I have made, then you shouldn't be complaining about anything.
neotropic9 3 years ago
if it's anything paranoid its the right who think there's going to be terror aplenty if we don't bomb countries. and the liberals who believed the same. 9/11 was the fear salvo, alex jones interpretation or not. it clouded everybody's judgment and therefore landed us into the shit we have to deal with now from the administration. golly, something about that makes me want to look into 9/11 a bit more to see if it was what they said it was. oh wait, i can't, i'll get called a conspiradroid.
Thrashaero 3 years ago
ComradeAgopian, name one paranoid prediction from the left that existed before the war that is not now undeniable fact. WMD, ties to al-quida, it will bankrupt the country, it will destroy our standing in the world, haliburton will profit, too many soldiers will be lost, what line of left wing logic was wrong. NONE OF THEM. what line of right wing logic was wrong, ALL OF THEM. How can you say the left was not fucking nostrodomis before the war and even worse how DARE YOU JUSTIFY THIS DUMB WAR!
canyoudigthisfood 3 years ago
100,000 dead civilians? I thought it was more like 1.2-1.4 million.
oggleman 3 years ago
Depends where you get your numbers from. It is very hard to figure out an accurate number since nobody is counting bodies. I figure the actual number is somewhere around 500k, since it is around the middle of the ranges that have been given, and close to a number determined by an extensive study.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
I was using a conservative estimate to avoid flak.
neotropic9 3 years ago
You gave us a problem, but what is the solution? What exactly are we supposed to do? It's not like I put these people in office. Diebold did.
CadicusTheDamned 3 years ago
Excuses excuses excuses. Use your imagination. Maybe you should make a youtube video.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
Anything. Just do something.
neotropic9 3 years ago
Sorry but the christians in my country are out of control. Religion is entirely to blame for the ignorance. The best i can do to change this is to breed as many children as posible to be atheists so that in a few generations the population is 50/50.
AtheistDiscGolfer 3 years ago
More excuses! Coward.
MacroHard001 3 years ago
Macro' Fuck off prick. short of talking to people, reasoning(trying)and voting there isnt shit else to do. unless you expect me to murder every piece of shit i come across. of which would be atleast 150 million religious fucktards.
AtheistDiscGolfer 3 years ago
Religion is part of the problem... But should you let war criminals run your country just because you can't outsmart the religious fundamentalists? Do something about it.
neotropic9 3 years ago
neo: "But should you let war criminals run your country"????
OK if you say so.
The problem isnt outsmarting fundies. The problem is we have elections, people vote, and the person with the most electoral votes wins..... what dont you understand about that.
AtheistDiscGolfer 3 years ago
OR, you could just talk to people and let them know that it there is a gigantic grey area between a normal compassionate person who doesn't at all believe in any god of any kind and someone who activley wants to literally drink the blood of christians and rape every child in site while the burn churches and are gay terrorists roaming the streets. We got into this war because people thought we had two options; USA in Iraq by itself bankrupting this country or the terrorist fucking our kids faces
canyoudigthisfood 3 years ago
Telling fundies that theres a grey area. dude that was good for laugh. all fundies hear is, your either with jesus,,,,,, or your defacto with the devil
AtheistDiscGolfer 3 years ago
YOU ARE RIGHT, they are incapable of seeing the error of their ways cause first they must have a sense of humor. As Bill Hicks said, that is what fundalism breeds; no irony. They take things literally, like say revelations. Bush may still bring us the apocalypse before January. He's a born again christian and believes in a coming apocalypse and also has the power to facilitate the apocalypse, and when he fucks up the world he then'll say, I told you the bible was right, look what it made me do.
canyoudigthisfood 3 years ago 2