| Re: 9/11 Treason [message #196059 is a reply to message #195869] |
Thu, 13 April 2006 10:55   |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
Whenever I hear about these idiotic conspiracy theories, I just remember that my own boyfriend (whom you all know as Blazer), LIVED in Arlington, Virginia on September 11th and he actually, with his own eyes, saw the low-flying plane right before it struck the Pentagon. He lived in a high-rise building of condominiums on one of the upper floors and had a nice view of the city. He said the plane was so close that he probably could have seen the pilot and passengers (if it weren't going so fast, I assume).
So, say what you like, but just remember that you're calling Blazer a liar.
I'm the bawss.
[Updated on: Thu, 13 April 2006 10:56] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 Treason [message #196094 is a reply to message #195869] |
Thu, 13 April 2006 15:53 |
Berkut
Messages: 508
Registered: July 2005
Location: N/A
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Somehow, retarded just does not adequately describe this thread. Besides, George Bush can barely eat a pretzel without a trip to the ER. I doubt his ability to organize the demolition of multiple skyscrapers. This thread makes evolution seem logical.
...having your sig flip people off doesn't help your case either.
By the way, we're talking about terrorists. Whose to say they didn't have a little 'boost' from their luggage?
[Updated on: Thu, 13 April 2006 15:55] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 Treason [message #196123 is a reply to message #195869] |
Thu, 13 April 2006 19:10 |
Berkut
Messages: 508
Registered: July 2005
Location: N/A
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Don't take it that way, I was making a joke that these liberals would actually look at before scrolling down and missing the point. Heck, I've done worse. There was the Great Wasabi Insident of aught-2... embarasses me to this day.
And the Sprite thing is totally understandable. ...Lost: Five 0 is my biggest vice, though. Stuff burns worse than that 8-year-old whiskey I found under the sink.
(Technically, I am conservative, and technically I support Bush. It was but a joke, sorry.)
I saw a book that reminded me of this thread, though. Michael Moore is a Big, Fat, Stupid White Man. Might be worth a look.
[Updated on: Thu, 13 April 2006 19:51] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 Treason [message #196170 is a reply to message #195869] |
Fri, 14 April 2006 05:45 |
 |
Ryan3k
Messages: 363
Registered: September 2004
Location: USA
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
Oh, and for everyone who absolutely hates Michael Moore, he pales in comparison to the crap that Alex Jones puts out. A few examples:
9-11: The Road to Tyranny (2002)
American Dictators: Documenting The Staged 2004 Election (2004)
Martial Law: 9/11 Rise of the Police State (2005)
A Path Beyond
[Updated on: Fri, 14 April 2006 07:11] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 Treason [message #196186 is a reply to message #195869] |
Fri, 14 April 2006 10:37 |
Berkut
Messages: 508
Registered: July 2005
Location: N/A
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
I didn't support Kerry...
Because I'm not old enough to vote :P
But I liked Bush more because Kerry could never seem to make up his mind. Bush is also said to be a Christian, and a supporter of Israel. Kerry was said to be for, then against, then for abortion (then again, I heard this from adults, and we all know how much adults tell the truth :P )
Politics aren't really interesting to me. Humans were never good at governing each other, anyway.
And when I said conservative, I mostly meant against stuff like abortion (I almost experienced that, and wasn't too happy about it when I found out.), gun-control (ok, the crooks have guns. What do we fight them with, harsh language?), and the "modern interpretation" (aka: editing), of the constitution.
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 Treason [message #196202 is a reply to message #195869] |
Fri, 14 April 2006 13:21 |
|
Ryan3k
Messages: 363
Registered: September 2004
Location: USA
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
Well, statistics show that countries with strict gun-control have substantially lower levels of violent crime. However, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed...
A Path Beyond
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 Treason [message #196207 is a reply to message #196202] |
Fri, 14 April 2006 13:36 |
Berkut
Messages: 508
Registered: July 2005
Location: N/A
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Statistics also show that alchohol and tobacco kill more people than firearms. At least rifles come with a safety-switch 
Another thing, I tried finding leading causes of death in the US. It almost never listed abortion. If it gets much worse, the leading cause of death in the US will be parents.
[Updated on: Fri, 14 April 2006 13:37] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 Treason [message #196247 is a reply to message #196202] |
Fri, 14 April 2006 17:51 |
 |
DarkDemin
Messages: 1483
Registered: March 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Ryan3k wrote on Fri, 14 April 2006 16:21 |
Well, statistics show that countries with strict gun-control have substantially lower levels of violent crime. However, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed...
|
WRONG!
http://www.gunowners.org/sk0703.htm
| Quote: |
1. Fact: The murder rates in many nations (such as England) were ALREADY LOW BEFORE enacting gun control. Thus, their restrictive laws cannot be credited with lowering their crime rates.1
2. Fact: Gun control has done nothing to keep crime rates from rising in many of the nations that have imposed severe firearms restrictions.
* Australia: Readers of the USA Today newspaper discovered in 2002 that, "Since Australia's 1996 laws banning most guns and making it a crime to use a gun defensively, armed robberies rose by 51%, unarmed robberies by 37%, assaults by 24% and kidnappings by 43%. While murders fell by 3%, manslaughter rose by 16%."2
* Canada: After enacting stringent gun control laws in 1991 and 1995, Canada has not made its citizens any safer. "The contrast between the criminal violence rates in the United States and in Canada is dramatic," says Canadian criminologist Gary Mauser in 2003. "Over the past decade, the rate of violent crime in Canada has increased while in the United States the violent crime rate has plummeted." 3
* England: According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997.4
* Japan: One newspaper headline says it all: Police say "Crime rising in Japan, while arrests at record low."5
3. Fact: British citizens are now more likely to become a victim of crime than are people in the United States:
* In 1998, a study conducted jointly by statisticians from the U.S. Department of Justice and the University of Cambridge in England found that most crime is now worse in England than in the United States.
* "You are more likely to be mugged in England than in the United States," stated the Reuters news agency in summarizing the study. "The rate of robbery is now 1.4 times higher in England and Wales than in the United States, and the British burglary rate is nearly double America's."6 The murder rate in the United States is reportedly higher than in England, but according to the DOJ study, "the difference between the [murder rates in the] two countries has narrowed over the past 16 years."7
* The United Nations confirmed these results in 2000 when it reported that the crime rate in England is higher than the crime rates of 16 other industrialized nations, including the United States.8
4. Fact: British authorities routinely underreport crime statistics. Comparing statistics between different nations can be quite difficult since foreign officials frequently use different standards in compiling crime statistics.
* The British media has remained quite critical of authorities there for "fiddling" with crime data. Consider some of the headlines in their papers: "Crime figures a sham, say police,"9 "Police are accused of fiddling crime data,"10 and "Police figures under-record offences by 20 percent."11
* British police have also criticized the system because of the "widespread manipulation" of crime data:
a. "Officers said that pressure to convince the public that police were winning the fight against crime had resulted in a long list of ruses to 'massage' statistics."12
b. Sgt. Mike Bennett says officers have become increasingly frustrated with the practice of manipulating statistics. "The crime figures are meaningless," he said. "Police everywhere know exactly what is going on."13
c. According to The Electronic Telegraph, "Officers said the recorded level of crime bore no resemblance to the actual amount of crime being committed."14
* Underreporting crime data: "One former Scotland Yard officer told The Telegraph of a series of tricks that rendered crime figures 'a complete sham.' A classic example, he said, was where a series of homes in a block flats were burgled and were regularly recorded as one crime. Another involved pickpocketing, which was not recorded as a crime unless the victim had actually seen the item being stolen."15
* Underreporting murder data: British crime reporting tactics keep murder rates artificially low. "Suppose that three men kill a woman during an argument outside a bar. They are arrested for murder, but because of problems with identification (the main witness is dead), charges are eventually dropped. In American crime statistics, the event counts as a three-person homicide, but in British statistics it counts as nothing at all. 'With such differences in reporting criteria, comparisons of U.S. homicide rates with British homicide rates is a sham,' [a 2000 report from the Inspectorate of Constabulary] concludes."16
|
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=78
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/lott3.html
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0210e.asp
[Updated on: Fri, 14 April 2006 17:53] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 Treason [message #196254 is a reply to message #196206] |
Fri, 14 April 2006 18:16 |
 |
Dave Mason
Messages: 2357
Registered: April 2004
Location: Shropshire, England
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| warranto wrote on Fri, 14 April 2006 21:31 |
NOw all you need is the hunting licence to GET thoes bear arm. Well, assuming bear hunting is in season. 
|
Well the right to bear arms and to bear arms is all fine and dandy but what about the right to arm bears?
www.myspace.com/midas
[Updated on: Sat, 22 April 2006 14:30] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
) 3 Votes
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
.
