I am not very sure about Bill Clinton. But it has been proven that Hillary Clinton was the mastermind behind more than a dozen murders. She has killed people (including her friends and acquaintances) to hide her crimes. The murder of Vince Foster was just the tip of the iceberg. Christopher W. Ruddy actually wrote a book detailing how Hillary murdered Foster (The Strange Death of Vincent Foster).
A. Hillary is no mastermind. B. It wouldn't bother me one bit for it to have been proven that she was responsible for Foster's death. But that hasn't been proven. Doesn't matter who alleged so in a book. Q1: This one was "Whether or true it's not.... he actually admitted to killing 15 or so people.... why wasn't he picked up?"
....
Well, why wasn't he picked up? This would indicate - A. Secret agencies involved B. Prosecutors decline to prosecute for political reasons. But there's no statute of limitations on murder. Postscript. On finding a transcript of this interview, it somehow does have me ROFL. Here goes - They sent me overseas to kill people for them and told me it was for the good of the Country. So when they asked me to do it for them in the States it felt no different. The real truth is, I did it for the money and I didn't give a shit about the women I beat and the men I murdered. The Clintons are bad people and I did bad things for them. I had to live with that all of these years and now I just don't care anymore who knows it.Larry maintains the Clintons were into so many illegal activities at the time, they had to have a team of mercenaries made up of friends and state-troopers to cover it all up and keep them protected from the public finding out. According to Larry Nichols, both Bill and Hillary were wild and out of control and both were relentless in their pursuit for money and power. From running drugs, to the rape and beating of women and young girls, both of the Clintons are guilty of the unspeakable crimes. When Pete asked Larry about Gennifer Flowers making headlines last week claiming Bill had told her Hillary had eaten more pussy than he had Larry said that's old news, and indeed it is … Larry had made that same statement on the Pete Santilli show early last spring. Larry is adamant that Hillary Clinton is a "Dyke" and always has been. One thing I know for sure She did have enough sex with men to have a kid, but it wasn't Bill Clinton's Kid she had … Chelsea is actually the daughter of Web Hubble.Nichols and many other insiders claim Clinton began having sex with Hubble to gain employment at The Rose Law Firm which she believed would eventually advance Bill Clinton's chances of becoming Governor of Arkansas. Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/10/former-hillary-associate-claims-personal-hit-man-admits-killing-money/#4LzPidIO511rKY2b.99One part of this confuses me, totally. Sex with Hillary gets her favors from Hubble? I would think it would be someone's worst nightmare... |
|
|
|
Gordon Duff calls John McCain the Father of ISIS"Published on Aug 1, 2015 Video by * Harold Saive )channel Gordon Duff Informs Syria that US is subservient to israel and that Senator John McCain is the "Father of ISIS"" Edit: Obama Slips Up: " We're Training ISIL" "During his speech, Obama uttered the line, 'with the additional steps I ordered last month, we’re speeding up training of ISIL forces.'" So what do you guys think? I think the same kind of garbage, misleading statement can be made in any context. XYZ was the Father of Stalin. <<note who he associated with age 20-30>> ZZZ was the Father of Hilter. << same>> etc, etc etc. |
|
|
|
Well, guess what. It did in fact do that in certain places. And then it self corrected...
Hasn't worked well for healthcare - UK consensus among healthcare experts is that there is little/no role of private companies in healthcare provision. Growing consensus also for train transport given lack of competition that can realistically occur on 1 line. UK consensus? Don't make me laugh. You mean a bunch of "healthcare experts," employed by the government, say what they are told to say - if they want to keep their jobs. I mean, do better than that. Please. Growing consensus for train transport? I don't even know what that means. There's no "growing consensus" about the wisdom and economics of Amtrak. There's certainly no "growing consensus" about the wonderful utopia of Argentina's trains. But hey, nobody ever said that every single last aspect of a society should be capitalist. And some aspects change with technology. As an example, it was once clear that most roads might best be done by the government for the general good - but that was the era of paper money. I personally don't think that's true anymore with efficient micropayments and scanners possible. So these things can and should change with time and with technology. One argument against "government services" is that they are much less likely to change with technology, and much less likely to remain, or become, efficient and cost effective. Have to be very, very careful when trying to make big, sweeping generalizations. |
|
|
|
Look, my father is a hardcore 9/11 truther. The PHP conference was not too far away from the world trade centre. Everyone in NY said 9/11 happened the way it happened. My dad told me not to take photos of the WTC. I took one on my S5 and texted it to him without hassle. Sure there was some police presence. It was not constant and hey, what do you expect in a city like New York? These conspiracies are bogus.
so why is your father a truther if according to you and your family the towers fell because of terrorist from a muslim country done it with planes.. so is your father a NUT JOB  you all know the truth... so why is he a truther Nice to see conspiracy theorist see a conspiracy in everything. No your government would never do any harm to its own people would they www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4f9Hs0s1jQNo USA government would never hurt its own people www.youtube.com/watch?v=guSqJAfnuN4NO NEVER   Now I'm thinking, 911 was planned, engineered and executed by a goat. |
|
|
|
Well, guess what. It did in fact do that in certain places. And then it self corrected...
Hasn't worked well for healthcare - UK consensus among healthcare experts is that there is little/no role of private companies in healthcare provision. Growing consensus also for train transport given lack of competition that can realistically occur on 1 line. Just curious. If we all followed your moral advice, and disallowed what you call "racist stuff," then wouldn't the counter argument to your advocacy of progressive social spending (your words "societal investment") be quashed before it was heard?
Seems that would not be good, right?
If I understand you right, I think this is about whether racist opinions should be heard and ignored or banned. Usually the former I'd say. I think the argument is that one can listen to then dismiss racism arguments as being very flawed and toxic. Agree that censoring those views perhaps not helpful, may re-inforce their paranoia. It's close enough. More correctly is that in a democracy he's got the right to say he doesn't want to vote for candidates or programs that give black people money, just like you or I have the right to say we do want to vote for programs that give black people money. More correctly, the calling of racism seems to be very one sided and used for advantage in debate or framing of arguments, where there really isn't a good argument to present....ergo, shut off the debate by screaming "racism!" (see....your response about Flynn etc. already reframed the argument presupposing "racism"....) something like that.... |
|
|
|
Well, guess what. The free market chose government as the most efficient means of doing large-scale stuff.
Well, guess what. It did in fact do that in certain places. And then it self corrected... lol... Nobody likes being taxed, period.
Part of the problem with US Libertarian idealists is that they've got this elaborate (yet flaky) house-of-cards built up about how politics and the economy and everything "ought" to be, but at the same time they've got these huge blind spots such as opportunity cost.
Thanks to your tax dollars, those welfare queens and their 6 kids aren't hungry enough to murder you in the street for a small amount of pocket money, or just for the protein. Yeah, yeah... you'd much rather have the "freedom" to spend those tax dollars on a private security company to save your ass from being attacked in the streets (and endless toll roads and related shit). And of course that would be far more efficient than public/state services, because free-market competition and stuff, just like Bitcoin miners -- LOL. </sarc>.
i'm not a libertarian nor do i mind being taxed, i do mind being taxed to support whore black welfare queens when they could easily be sent somewhere else or sterilised I think this racist stuff should be removed or ignored in this thread (in fact from the civilised world in general). Why bring race into it? Black people didn't like being slaved for hundreds of years, then being born into households with little income, wealth, education, or social connections that others take for granted. blablahblah hit a few nails on the head. Also a matter of short term thinking among libertarian idealists - instead of long-term societal investment via tax (however inefficient), they'd prefer money in the bank now and their children growing up in an apartheid. Not too far off though in the US at the moment, even amongst sunny Yale: http://www.naacpnewhaven.org/wp-content/uploads/NAACP_UrbanApartheid_print_final.pdfJust curious. If we all followed your moral advice, and disallowed what you call "racist stuff," then wouldn't the counter argument to your advocacy of progressive social spending (your words "societal investment") be quashed before it was heard? Seems that would not be good, right? |
|
|
|
Osama Bin Laden is most notorious for plotting and implementing a terrorist plot to kill people and cause destruction using airplanes as the weapon. His Step-mother, Sister, Brother and Father (according the article) have died in plane crashes...that's eerie. Granted, the father's death happened in the 60's and the brother's death happened in the 80's, but still. How can one family be surrounded by so much plane-related torture? Perhaps Karma's a bitch...perhaps God's watching...perhaps I'm making links between things that just have no real connection to each other. I can't help but think that it sounds like a curse. No question having Osama for a brother would be a curse. My condolences to the remaining family for their losses in this tragic event. Unrelated - the flight path of the jet on final approach is, well, indicative of something - mechanical error, perhaps pilot error. Jet pilots at 1200 feet on final approach do not, simply do not suddenly rise 500' and then descend at 3000 fpm and attempt to land. Could be as simple and answer as he was trying to avoid a flock of birds, then goofed. correct procedure would have been to go around for another full landing approach. |
|
|
|
You left out one group that would positively be for Gun Control. Maybe just to divert from their own problem, and maybe just quietly and under the table. Big Pharma. |
|
|
|
There are hundreads of people being eaten every year in Tanzania and other countries, why care so much about a single lion?
Because people need something to feel angry about even if they're displacing their anger. This shouldn't have been such a big story as it is. Look, be reasonable. We need stories that touch the hearts and minds of the little people. And which keep them from realizing how much is being stolen from them by their politicians and bankers. You know, Ferguson was used up. You know it was. Cecil's good for a couple more weeks. |
|
|
|
Bias-Free Language Guide claims the word 'American' is 'problematic' of words deemed “problematic” by the University of New Hampshire’s Bias-Free Language Guide. According to the university’s website, the guide “is meant to invite inclusive excellence in [the] campus community.” Terms also considered problematic include: “elders,” “senior citizen,” “overweight,” “speech impediment,” “dumb,” “sexual preference,” “manpower,” “freshmen,” “mailman,” and “chairman,” in addition to many others. The guide defines words such as “homosexual” as “problematic,” offering “Same Gender Loving” as a more inclusive substitute. Similarly, a lack of gender-neutral bathrooms is, according to the university, “ciscentrism.” The university defines “ciscentrism” as “[a] pervasive and institutionalized system that places transgender people in the ‘other’ category and treats their needs and identities as less important than those of cisgender people.” “Ciscentrism,” according to the university, “includes the lack of gender-neutral restrooms, locker rooms, and residences.” Saying “American” to reference Americans is also problematic. The guide encourages the use of the more inclusive substitutes “U.S. citizen” or “Resident of the U.S.” http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6697 “While individuals on our campus have every right to express themselves, I want to make it absolutely clear that the views expressed in this guide are NOT the policy of the University of New Hampshire. I am troubled by many things in the language guide, especially the suggestion that the use of the term ‘American’ is misplaced or offensive. The only UNH policy on speech is that it is free and unfettered on our campuses. It is ironic that what was probably a well-meaning effort to be ‘sensitive’ proves offensive to many people, myself included.” — UNH President Mark W. Huddleston http://unh.edu/unhtoday/statement-unh-president-mark-huddleston-bias-free-language-guideWhat exactly are their problems with calling elderly overweight homosexual illegal aliens with speech imediments and sexual preferences for mailmen out for what they are? |
|
|
|
Photographs have emerged of the 18-month-old child killed in an arson attack by suspected Jewish extremists in the West Bank.
....
Goes to show there are psychos on both sides of the Israeli - Palestinian drama in the ME.[/b] Personally I think they all need to chill the fuck out...
Does evidence exist as to who the perps were? 1. Physical evidence. 2. A terror group claiming responsibility. 3. Someone seeing something? Just curious. What facts are behind the assertion of "arson attack by suspected Jewish extremists?" According to the Indy the perps were "Jewish extremist settlers," they also left graffiti there saying revenge in Hebrew: Their house in Duma had its windows smashed and fire bombs thrown inside before dawn as the family slept. Graffiti in Hebrew reading “revenge” was scrawled outside, below a Star of David. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/how-the-killing-of-an-18monthold-boy-in-the-west-bank-exposed-the-israeli-authorities-failure-to-stem-tide-of-jewish-extremists-10431640.htmlFar as I can tell nobody has been identified yet, prob just have to wait and see how the investigation goes. So, NO evidence the perps were Jewish extremists. Unless you count the graffiti as "evidence?" I guess I don't even understand this. Maybe the Star was painted as an insult, that they were like Jews or had Jew friends? Why is it assumed that it means the perps are Jewish? I'm having trouble making that connection. A cold blooded murder, yes, certainly. |
|
|
|
"what’s called libertarian in the United States, which is a special U. S. phenomenon, it doesn’t really exist anywhere else — a little bit in England — permits a very high level of authority and domination but in the hands of private power: so private power should be unleashed to do whatever it likes. The assumption is that by some kind of magic, concentrated private power will lead to a more free and just society... just a call for some of the worst kinds of tyranny, namely unaccountable private tyranny." http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/noam-chomsky-kind-anarchism-i-believe-and-whats-wrong-libertarians?sc=fbHard to put semantics to one side in terms of correct definition of libertarianism send anarchism, but above statement seems an important point. Why America's obsession with libertarianism?! While the conservative political movement has many brilliant thinkers, the Left has only one - Noam Chomsky. For this reason the article is worth reading. He is rather boring, though. Nim Chimsky I prefer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nim_Chimpsky |
|
|
|
"My child?" Wow, how pretentious can you get? You said you're a "psych major." What are you? Late teens? Early 20's? Bold, bold statements for a student to say...
>> Equally as pretentious as the man in the church referred to as "father" who is not your father?
I can't speak on Beliathon's behalf, but it looks to me like a joke, that has been taken very seriously Correct. It wasn't a statement about age, it was a half-joke highlighting the apparent intellectual gap between The Joint and I. You know, the intellectual gap between the average human IQ and a chimpanzee is smaller than the intellectual gap between the average person and a genius IQ. So when I call you a "child" rather than a Great Ape or some other similarly likely-offensive reference to your primateness, I'm actually being quite generous. Even as a young child I would have run logical circles around most of these adults. We're practically not even the same species. There is no evidence of any great intellect on your part. In fact if there were, you would not be having the conversations you are having. |
|
|
|
Photographs have emerged of the 18-month-old child killed in an arson attack by suspected Jewish extremists in the West Bank.
....
Goes to show there are psychos on both sides of the Israeli - Palestinian drama in the ME.[/b] Personally I think they all need to chill the fuck out...
Does evidence exist as to who the perps were? 1. Physical evidence. 2. A terror group claiming responsibility. 3. Someone seeing something? Just curious. What facts are behind the assertion of "arson attack by suspected Jewish extremists?" |
|
|
|
Saudi Arabia Calls On World To Ban Criticism Of Religion Islam…Saudi Arabia has called on the international community to ban all criticism of religion.At a July 25 symposium on media coverage of religious symbols in international law, Abdulmajeed Al-Omari, director for external relations at the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, said: “We have made it clear that freedom of expression without limits or restrictions would lead to violation and abuse of religious and ideological rights. This requires everyone to intensify efforts to criminalize insulting heavenly religions, prophets, holy books, religious symbols and places of worship.” He argued these steps must be taken to prevent intolerance. What Saudi Arabia is in effect arguing for is a global blasphemy law, immunizing Islam from criticism. Islamist extremists have long sought to prevent all depictions of the Muhammed, founder of Islam, whether drawn by a Muslim or non-Muslim, through violence. In January this year 12 people were killed in the offices of Paris-based magazine Charlie Hebdo, by terrorists affiliated with Al-Qaeda in Yemen. The murders were over the satirical magazine’s depictions of the prophet Muhammed and the gunmen shouted “the prophet has been avenged!” http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/saudi-arabia-calls-world-ban-criticism-religion I'm certain that means "ban criticism of all religion except the religion of tHOSE EVOLLL JOOOESSS!" Because when we all go read the Middle Eastern newspapers directly (not the lying versions put out in English) we all know whom they, themselves, criticize. The English translations are the worse lying versions. So are the French's, the Spanish's, the German's, the Japanese's, the Korean's, the Italian's, the Gujarati's (some, not all), the Thai's, the Polish's, the Cantonese's, the Portuguese's, the's Oh - you have looked at them too? That subject deserves a whole nuther thread. Few people know about the extent of lying and disinformation in the English versions. But I guess it would follow, that all the versions they produce for "outsiders" would be nothing but propaganda. Meanwhile the Farsi versions are "Death to the Jews and Great Satan!" |
|
|
|
Interesting... I would not expect Gov Perry to take a stance such as this, perhaps perception/awareness of crypo-currencies is greater than I thought.
Let's be honest here, this is not a stance...he said "I'll support regulatory breathing room" which means he wouldn't actively pursue or make a priority (of his administration) writing regulations around bitcoin use. This isn't much. He's not saying he believes in bitcoin or even that he understands what it is. He's just saying "it's not a priority". Let's not give him too much credit. He's a conservative, which means less regulation for business and industry. Hopefully bitcoin is allowed to mature and be used with minimal regulation...only time will tell.Tell you what, lets turn that logic upside down. Go ahead, vote in another bunch of Totalitarian Fascist Authoritarian Controllers from the Democrat side, which means more regulation. But don't come bitching and complaining about the severe restrictions of then resulting strangulation-through-regulation-to-death of bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Saudi Arabia Calls On World To Ban Criticism Of Religion Islam…Saudi Arabia has called on the international community to ban all criticism of religion.At a July 25 symposium on media coverage of religious symbols in international law, Abdulmajeed Al-Omari, director for external relations at the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, said: “We have made it clear that freedom of expression without limits or restrictions would lead to violation and abuse of religious and ideological rights. This requires everyone to intensify efforts to criminalize insulting heavenly religions, prophets, holy books, religious symbols and places of worship.” He argued these steps must be taken to prevent intolerance. What Saudi Arabia is in effect arguing for is a global blasphemy law, immunizing Islam from criticism. Islamist extremists have long sought to prevent all depictions of the Muhammed, founder of Islam, whether drawn by a Muslim or non-Muslim, through violence. In January this year 12 people were killed in the offices of Paris-based magazine Charlie Hebdo, by terrorists affiliated with Al-Qaeda in Yemen. The murders were over the satirical magazine’s depictions of the prophet Muhammed and the gunmen shouted “the prophet has been avenged!” http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/saudi-arabia-calls-world-ban-criticism-religion I'm certain that means "ban criticism of all religion except the religion of tHOSE EVOLLL JOOOESSS!" Because when we all go read the Middle Eastern newspapers directly (not the lying versions put out in English) we all know whom they, themselves, criticize. |
|
|
|
Christians aren't supposed to believe in reincarnation. I don't. My child, I'm afraid you haven't been paying attention to Teacher. Once again: Belief is not a choice. It's a compulsion beyond the realm of choice, based on observation/evidence; in science argument and consensus.
Desirability is not a requisite of the truth. I do not choose what I believe because I perceive it as the more attraction option. I'm compelled to believe what I think is true, whether I like it or not!
The truth does not require your approval. It simply is. I don't know of any religions that states that suicide is a good thing. It's murder (of oneself), and so it's a sin for Christians. Religion is how the power elite controlled the peasants for many generations before the Nation State took over that role. Fear is a prison for your mind. This tragic fear of divine retribution would likely prevent you from committing the self-mercy of suicide even if you were enduring days or week of torture. Not months, though, and certainly not years. Pain is an inexhaustible resource, just like pleasure. Under those circumstances, sooner or later your superstition would break, unable to bear the weight of such suffering. Eventually you'd come to your senses and end it. Deep down you know this to be true. "My child?" Wow, how pretentious can you get? You said you're a "psych major." What are you? Late teens? Early 20's? Bold, bold statements for a student to say... A Psych Major? What? Why not be a major in something that will make serious money and be some value to the world. Like chemical engineering. |
|
|
|
I understand this is a truly great work and intend to read at least parts of it. If well summarized in the video, the video is worth watching. |
|
|
|
Damn it, Spendulus, you took what I aid about your hypothetical scenario and acted as if I said it about reality. How about we dont make any of those assumptions in reality and stick with the FACTS!? And you keep refusing to take a few words and conclude logically towards their meaning by considering their context!
Yeah, muslim extremists have a rightwing ideology. However, the article was abut the question of whether or not "domestic, non-muslim right-wing 'terrorists' (extremists)" were a larger threat to US citizens than muslim extremists (domestic or otherwise) since the date of 9/11. That is a question without a definite answer, but the data suggests that domestic, non-muslim terrorist are a larger threat (regardless of their ideology, left or right [though I think anti-abortion, anti-government extremists have a larger kill count]).
There's also the problem of how they self-identify. Most muslim extremists that attack US citizens on US soil aren't screaming "Allahu Akbar!" as they're doing it. They don't seem to usually explicitly explain that their violence is "for the glory of islam" or whatever. We both completely agree that the Boston bomber was a muslim extremist, that what he did is wrong. He said that what he did was a response to the killing of (innocent?) muslims in the middle east. If I'm not mistaken, he stuck to that reason to the point when he was sentenced. I am not excusing terrorism, attacking innocent people is wrong, I just want to point out that the US government has killed innocent muslims and killing innocent US citizens is a completely, immoral, wrong response. Hope that keeps you from strawmanning the thing... again.
Muslim extremist come with as many self-identifiers as there are attackers, I think. We should stick to the shooter's (bomber/stabber/etc.) profile, how that shooter fits in the national status quo, and act proportionately and accordingly to the threat level.
Oh, believe me, I did get your point about the moral equivalency of "muslim terrorists in the USA" and "USA terrorism in the Middle East." I do not agree with it, but I understood it. Since the question was categorizing extremist acts, I do not clearly see that it is relevant. Do you want to give "Muslim extremists who kill innocent people in the USA" a pass from slapping the "terrorist" label if they are not Screaming Allah Akbars? Just trying to clarify your position here. Personally, I really do not care if they are screaming Allah Akbar, or bitching about the Palestinians, the Great Satan, to me the only exception to "terrorist" might be if they were acting against an operational military group and were wearing a uniform of an opposing group. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
