Author Topic: The underlying problem with politics in the US (Read 1864 times)

Maverick · « **Reply #30 on:** April 27, 2007, 06:16:33 PM »

ink there's the door, don't let it hit you on the butt on the way out. --->

john9001 · « **Reply #31 on:** April 27, 2007, 06:20:52 PM »

rumor is don imus will replace rosie on the view. he's not as controversial.

Brenjen · « **Reply #32 on:** April 27, 2007, 09:29:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ink
i think we need to seriously put down the people who only care about getting rich of of our blood, for to long we have been killing innocent people, getting killed for bull**** lies,oh ya the Taliban really hit the towers, if you believe that, then you should truly do some research, on how controlled demolition works, then watch the towers fall, use your mind.

Controlled demolition? Oh brother....use your mind?

Here's an idea; use yours. It's a miracle those towers withstood the initial impact, to suppose someone knew they would withstand that sort of impact & pre-plant explosives to finish taking them down is ludicrous. (& no one saw the demolition crews in the weeks before the planes hit?? It takes a long time to prepare a building for demolition.)

And I suppose you think Bush blew up the canals in New Orleans too huh?

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #33 on:** April 27, 2007, 09:41:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Brenjen
Controlled demolition? Oh brother....use your mind?

Here's an idea; use yours. It's a miracle those towers withstood the initial impact, to suppose someone knew they would withstand that sort of impact & pre-plant explosives to finish taking them down is ludicrous. (& no one saw the demolition crews in the weeks before the planes hit?? It takes a long time to prepare a building for demolition.)

And I suppose you think Bush blew up the canals* in New Orleans too huh?

*Levies.

tedrbr · « **Reply #34 on:** April 27, 2007, 11:26:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ink
i think we need to seriously put down the people who only care about getting rich of of our blood, for to long we have been killing innocent people, getting killed for bull**** lies,oh ya the Taliban really hit the towers, if you believe that, then you should truly do some research, on how controlled demolition works, then watch the towers fall, use your mind.

Wow. Such insight (or is it incite?) in post #3.
Yes. The footage of the planes hitting the towers were made in Hollywood, and the people of NYC were all hypnotized and implanted with false memories.

Also, I don't need to research controlled demolitions: I've got 20 years as a Army Combat Engineer and have played with more shocktube, C4, MICLICs, and cratering charges than many. And like Brenjen stated; someone would have noticed all the work a demo job would have required for a drop like that.

You may want to research metal fatigue in the high temperature environment of a JP-fueled fire.

In closing: /.squelch ink

rpm · « **Reply #35 on:** April 28, 2007, 12:06:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ink
i think we need to seriously put down the people who only care about getting rich of of our blood, for to long we have been killing innocent people, getting killed for bull**** lies,oh ya the Taliban really hit the towers, if you believe that, then you should truly do some research, on how controlled demolition works, then watch the towers fall, use your mind.

Is this a counterattack from the PETAwars?

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #36 on:** April 28, 2007, 11:35:04 AM »

Quote

i think we need to seriously put down the people who only care about getting rich of of our blood, for to long we have been killing innocent people, getting killed for bull**** lies,oh ya the Taliban really hit the towers, if you believe that, then you should truly do some research, on how controlled demolition works, then watch the towers fall, use your mind.

Honestly, I'd thought that people realized that this was one of the first conspiracy theories debunked and thrown in the trash after 9/11.

You would have been better off admitting that the jetliners hitting the WTC towers were a definate fact, but that Mohammed Otta and his gang were trained, directed, and enabled to do this by the CIA. That was the only conspiracy theory that even remotely held water. ( The silliest was that an F-117 launched two tomahawk Cruise missles and hit each tower. Plain fantasy.)

P.S. Ink, if they were going to drop the buildings with explosives, they would have started at the bottom, not 2/3 of the way up. The 'controlled demolition' theory is almost as bad as the ALCM one.

lazs2 · « **Reply #37 on:** April 29, 2007, 09:44:00 AM »

no laser... the problem is people like you who allow the worst to get in with your idiotic protest votes.

The politicians do the polls.. they know why you vote the way you do.. your protest is meaningless to all but the party who laughs at you letting the worst of the two evils win.

Democrats like to see a strong libertarian or right wing candidate to siphon off votes from the republican and republicans love to see a strong left wing or environmental whacko candidate so that he will siphon off votes from the democrat.

You give me a viable libertarian candidate and I will vote for him.

You are the problem with your silly naive BS allowing democrats to get in.

lazs

bsdaddict · « **Reply #38 on:** April 29, 2007, 11:41:45 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
no laser... the problem is people like you who allow the worst to get in with your idiotic protest votes.

The politicians do the polls.. they know why you vote the way you do.. your protest is meaningless to all but the party who laughs at you letting the worst of the two evils win.

Democrats like to see a strong libertarian or right wing candidate to siphon off votes from the republican and republicans love to see a strong left wing or environmental whacko candidate so that he will siphon off votes from the democrat.

You give me a viable libertarian candidate and I will vote for him.

You are the problem with your silly naive BS allowing democrats to get in.

lazs

dem or rep, don't really matter. they're both spending us into bankruptcy, both have a vision of an imperialistic American foreign policy, both have a disdain for the Constitution. But hey, keep voting the chumps in, can't get any worse, right?

only difference between the two is how they want to spend our money. One's leading us towards the Socialist States of America and the other's leading us towards the Facist States of America.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #39 on:** April 29, 2007, 11:55:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by bsdaddict
dem or rep, don't really matter. they're both spending us into bankruptcy, both have a vision of an imperialistic American foreign policy, both have a disdain for the Constitution. But hey, keep voting the chumps in, can't get any worse, right?

only difference between the two is how they want to spend our money. One's leading us towards the Socialist States of America and the other's leading us towards the Facist States of America.

Another problem with politics in the US is the american people's clear misunderstanding of economics.

lazs2 · « **Reply #40 on:** April 29, 2007, 11:57:13 AM »

you are correct so far as it goes... You will indeed vote for socialism if you vote for democrats but.. so will you if you vote for republicans.

It is just that the democrats are running toward it while the republicans are walking.

spending? do you want to spend it on worthless social programs that grow every year or wars that get paid off? that is really the choice.. almost every dollar we spend in taxes is going to some worthless social program that democrats have put in over the years.

so... while not much of a choice.. there is a choice... it amounts to survival.

What is the alternative? to "protest" vote for some libertarian and play right into the hands of the socialists?

Say everyone who agreed with libertarian policies including open borders... making all drugs legal and prostitution legal... say we all did... what would they get? like 7% of the vote?

most of us agree with libertarian principals till it gets to the nitty gritty... not enough want open borders or legal heroin.

lazs

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #41 on:** April 29, 2007, 12:04:16 PM »

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ink
i think we need to seriously put down the people who only care about getting rich of of our blood, for to long we have been killing innocent people, getting killed for bull**** lies,oh ya the Taliban really hit the towers, if you believe that, then you should truly do some research, on how controlled demolition works, then watch the towers fall, use your mind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote

Originally posted by rpm
Is this a counterattack from the PETAwars?

No... Ink = Rosie...

Fire cannot melt steel either. Any steelworker can tell you that.

tedrbr · « **Reply #42 on:** April 29, 2007, 12:34:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Fire cannot melt steel either. Any steelworker can tell you that.

Fire does not melt steel. Heat melts steel.

And intense heat over a relatively short period of time can degrade the structural integrity of steel (and rivits) in beams and rebar to the point it can no longer support the forces that have been placed on it. This happens LONG before any melting takes place.

Especially when a number of supports in the overall structure have been sheered, bent, or deformed by several tons of mass flying into it at a couple hundred MPH.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #43 on:** April 29, 2007, 12:40:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by tedrbr
Fire does not melt steel. Heat melts steel.

Sorry, next time I sit around a cold campfire I will keep that in mind.

I am aware that steel changes it's crystaline structure at somewhere near 725C, and when it moves above that, it's elastic properties are lost.

The fact that the one tower stood for the better part of an hour and the first one hit lasted more than an hour after impact shows that the two towers did not fall due to impact damage. The fire (excuse me) heat (from fire) weakened the remaining structure and caused collapse.

bsdaddict · « **Reply #44 on:** April 29, 2007, 01:16:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
Say everyone who agreed with libertarian policies including open borders... making all drugs legal and prostitution legal... say we all did... what would they get? like 7% of the vote?

that's one way to put it, but I must say I'm suprised to hear you resort to slinging FUD. I prefer: Say people start to wake up and see past scare-tactic comments like "Libertarian policies including open borders... making all drugs legal and prostitution legal" and realize that it's a choice between respecting the respecting the Constitution and surrendering to the slow death of the America the Founders envisioned. Say these people realize that it's a choice between freedom and slavery and I think we'd win in a landslide. The problem is getting past the scare tactics, 'cause they're very effective on the sheeple. Jefferson said, "Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." Hitler said, "How lucky for rulers that men do not think." See the connection?

See past the scare tactics and answer yourself these questions: Do you agree with the principal of a fiscally responsible fedgov? Do you agree with the principal of a non-interventionist foreign policy? Do you agree with the principal that an individual's rights overrule concerns over the groups safety?

Quote

most of us agree with libertarian principals till it gets to the nitty gritty... not enough want open borders or legal heroin.

lazs

not all libertarians agree on the border issue. Just look at Ron Pauls stance. And as to the War on Drugs in general, I think more and more people are waking up to the fact that IT'S NOT WORKING! Opinions on what to do about that vary.