OK, lemme see if I've got this figured out...

[aeolian]

So...on 9/11/01, no plane hit the pentagon, it just blew up for some reason. Then, the global positioning sattelites sent out beams activating the microchip implanted in every american's head (which had previously been kept inactive by the flourine in drinking water). This caused us all to go to sleep for exactly five minutes while the plane that didn't hit the pentagon was pulled through time through time somehow. Now, three years later, those chips were activated again, and everyone jumped at the same time. The shock of 300 million people jumping at once sent a seismic wave around the world. At the same time, laser beams were shone into the cockpit of the plane that didn't hit the pentagon, which had just appeared in the air over Indonesia. The pilots, completely blinded by a small green dot, lost control of the aircraft, which crashed into Sumatra at the same time that the seismic wave from all that jumping arrived. This caused the earthquake, which caused the Tsunami.

And this was all planned in advance to destroy the tourism industry of Thailand.

Did I miss anything?

[bowens43]

1. Yes, your meds......

[aeolian]

5. Lithium tastes bad.

You're as bad as my shrink!

*twitch*

[Botany]

2. You got it ......

Except that Jack Ruby was Karl Rove's father. And that trilateral commission helped
the "Texas Strike Force" fix the presidential election.

:bounce:

[Bouncy Ball]

3. I concur with bowens

I think you have missed a dose or two.

(Ah, it starts already...)

[fertilizeonarbusto]

4. You forgot the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot

:crazy:

[papau]

6. Why did they look for body parts in NYC WTC - but not at the Pentagon

that always has been curious.

But I do believe a plane like object hit the Pentagon - and that all aboard the flight that is said to have hit the Pentagon are dead.

[WoodrowFan]

16. they did

they DID look for body parts at the Pentagon, and the remains of the passengers were identified.

[Wonk]

7. Yes, you did. Intentionally? I'll leave that for readers to decide.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_11_02_lucy.html

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

[WoodrowFan]

17. BOL

thanks, those sites are as funny as the original posting!! LOL!!

[tngledwebb]

30. No, your Critical Thrash skateboard site is funnier.

Btw when ARE you going to apologize for saying you would like to see a fellow DU poster hit in the head with a sledgehammer?
Or post anything of any value except your stale little 'CT' bashing routine? Or is that all you are supposed to do?

Got any thoughts on anything else? Try stating your number one issue for America, for example, or what you made you a fan of Woodrow. Anything? No, didn't think so.

[mattclearing]

8. Alerted.

No need to feed.

[MercutioATC]

27. Unsucessfully, obviously...

:evilgrin:

[aeolian]

32. no, I'd say he was quite sucessful.

[MercutioATC]

35. How so? The thread is still open...

Humor has prevailed!

[aeolian]

37. "Humor has prevailed!"

We can only hope...

*distant stare to the horizon.*
*a tear for what might have been*

[aeolian]

90. C'mon, 100!

[aeolian]

9. OK, apparantly this is a 9/11 thread now

and I seem to have been "alerted" as a possible troll.

Touching.

so much for sarcasm.

[mattclearing]

10. Whatever.

Your sense of sarcasm isn't like everyone else's here.

I like that your thread was dealt with so well.

Nice work, Mods. :)

[aeolian]

11. "Everyone else's?"

looks like at least two other people got it.

OK, you're probably right, "whatever."

[mattclearing]

12. Yeah, I should probably alert on them too. Ha Ha!

[aeolian]

13. In sameness there is strength

Thanks for enforcing.

[mattclearing]

14. Your post was disruptive and obnoxious. It demeaned legitimate

questions about September 11th and the Tsunami. And it came within minutes of Fox News accusing DU of conspiracy theory.

It's insulting. You don't have to agree with me. Just don't post condescending gibberish and expect not to get called on it.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mattclearing]

18. Don't worry, I haven't been here that long.

And it has nothing to do with having a thick or thin skin.

My thoughts on conspiracy theory can be found here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2906158#2906286

[MercutioATC]

19. You forgot the Warren Report!!!

Damn newbie!


;)

:hi:

[aeolian]

20. Shock, horror!

I bet Bert from Sesame Street was involved, too! ph34r

[Abe Linkman]

21. I bet you have a degree in History and are extremely well read...

about the JFK assassination, the Warren Commission Report, and most of all, how our government works, whose interest it works hardest for, our intelligence agencies, other political assassinations around the world, and how naive and gullible most of the public is. I'm sure you're also familiar with who H.L. Mencken was and what he meant whenever he said:
"The public always prefers nonsense to sense".

Course, he wasn't talking about ANYONE who posts messages on forums at DU, was he?

[aeolian]

22. My degree is in physics, but other than that, you're right

And I can see quite clearly who benefited from both of those tragedies: JFK, and 9/11. (Oh, and by the way, just for the record, I don't for a second believe everything about the "offical" 9/11 story line.)

But as an asassination attempt, I'd think you'd want to use a slightly more targeted approach than a tsunami.

This was originally supposed to be a light-hearted and sarcastic thread over in GD. It was moved here, much against my will. It was supposed to be about earthquakes, not 9/11. Now everyone's going to take it all seriously and think that I meant to start this crap. *sigh*

[impe]

23. Physics....

Great, at least you're not claiming to be a ATC.

[MercutioATC]

26. impe, I'm hurt...

:cry:

[impe]

28. Sorry Mercutio!

I couldn't resist.:P

[tngledwebb]

24. You are making jokes about tsunamis and earthquakes?

You should be banned from DU OUTRIGHT.

[MercutioATC]

25. Lighten up, Francis.

:eyes:

[tngledwebb]

29. Francis? Lighten up?

Isn't this a bit rich, coming from such a sensitive PC flower, usually so terribly concerned to spare DEAD TERRORISTS the pain and heartbreak of being labeled 'cave dwellers'?

Bebe s'amuse.

[MercutioATC]

36. You don't recognize the quote from "Stripes"?

My argument with the "cave dweller" label isn't founded in political correctness, it has to do with accuracy. "Cave dweller" implies a lack of sophistication...something the terrorists don't suffer from.

As far the title thread, it was a satirical post that tied together many of the recent conspiracy theories. It wasn't making fun of tsunami victims.

Hence, the "Lighten up, Francis".

[aeolian]

38. I got it...

...but I seem to be an oddball. Don't listen to me.

[Abe Linkman]

39. Prefer: "cokeheads", "titty bar habitues", "pork-eatin' religious nuts"?

Speaking of accuracy, there is no factual basis for labeling "them" as terrorists. If you are reserving the right for M-atc & ilk to call them terrorists, then the rest of us are entitled to call them "cave people", "cave dwellers", "Osama's Boys", or anything else.

Who told you that YOU have the right to decide whether or not someone is a terrorist? If it's your opinion that someone is a terrorist, and if you are the kind of person who uses police-type thinking ("yup, we need us a perp and them guys look like they'd be easy to bust")...then that's your right and your problem. Just leave the rest of us free to exercise our own right to use labels.

[MercutioATC]

40. You can spin them however you like.

I'm just pointing out the fact that you're using an innacurate and misleading label.

[Abe Linkman]

41. YOU are the one who is on a spinning wheel.

I'm just telling you like it is. Most people are too polite to, or else they have your number & are bored with your schtick.

[MercutioATC]

43. Whatever, Abe. I've made my point.

The day I degenerate into cutesy phrases, I hope somebody takes away my internet access.

[Abe Linkman]

52. The day you graduate from the use of Voodoo to explain the impossible..

is the day I hope you'll apologize for being an impediment to those of us who know that 9/11 was an inside job and are now trying to figure out more of the truth about what really happened.

Wouldn't it be better if you joined that effort? What would someone have to gain by being a salesman for a Fairy Tale? Do you have political ambitions? Desire for a new full-time career? Are you hoping to become the Gerald Posner of 9/11?

[MercutioATC]

54. Science is on my side, Abe.

All you have been able to produce are personal opinions and links to the lay opinions of others. I haven't seen ANY hard science in any of your arguments, just "I don't think it could have happened that way.".

What's YOUR agenda here, Abe? How is you presenting ideas any different than me doing the same?

...and why is it that anybody with a different opinion has ulterior motives?

[Abe Linkman]

55. Only a few, m-atc. Only a few do.

Have an ulterior motive here, and they are easy to spot. If they're being paid, they're overpaid, and if the taxpayers are directly funding them or indirectly funding them (via deductible contributions to right-wing so-called 'think' tanks), then we're getting ripped-off in a bigger way than just the nuisance factor.

[MercutioATC]

56. Interesting. I don't think there's anybody here with some covert agenda.

Some seem better informed than others. Some seem more impassioned than others. Some seem to have a better possession of their mental faculties than others.

I don't believe there are any here who don't believe what they post, though.

[Abe Linkman]

57. As I said: the agenda of stealth Democrats/progressives is very obvious

Nothing subtle. "good cop, bad cop", "hammer time", "__ola" etc.

[MercutioATC]

58. "Hammer time",? You mean they dance in funny pants?

I suppose that WOULD make them kind of obvious. I'll let you know if I see any.


:+

[Abe Linkman]

61. I mean they pretend to be something that they aren't. Like an undercover

cop. Most go undercover in order to commit crimes that they can bust someone else for but some go undercover just to spread misinformation, disinformation and to disrupt those who are onto their games.

[MercutioATC]

73. See, I learn something new every day!

Why the funny name for it, though?

[aeolian]

59. Oh, so that's why I was asked to present my papers!

It's just good old fashioned paranoia.

Careful those stealth progressives! They're everywhere!

ph34r!


__ola! (whatever that means)



EDIT: 2-legit! 2-legit-2-quit!

[LARED]

62. Stealth Democrat? Agenda? Obvious?

Tell all Abe. What obvious agenda are you dreaming about?

[Abe Linkman]

63. An agenda in which even right-wing lurkers would feel free to ......

come out of the closet and announce to the world that they support the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory as well as everything else that most rightwingers support. That way, they could stop the pretention that causes them to feel the necessity for saying things like: "I don't think the Gov't is lying about 9/11, but that doesn't mean I don't have some questions." "I don't necessarily accept everything the Gov't says".
"I'm open-minded but until someone provides proof that the terrorists didn't do it, I have to accept the evidence we have." And on and on.

Don't you agree that would be better, "lared"?

[LARED]

64. Abe, you skipped right over the question

What obvious agenda?

[aeolian]

65. I'm also curious as to what I'm being paid to say.

All I know, Lared, is that if you don't answer the vague, slightly sinnister question at the end of Abe's post, you will forever be labeled as a traitor who "posts-and-runs." I mean, look, he even put you name in quotes, as if that MIGHT NOT BE YOUR REAL NAME!!!

Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got a cheque to go cash. See you at the meeting.

Oops! Uhhh...there is no meeting. Who said anything about a meeting?

[AZCat]

66. Y'know, Abe has a legitimate point here

I think he's off the mark, but his paranoia about paid shills for the Bush Administration certainly gained merit this last week when the Armstrong Williams story broke. Why anyone would pay faux posters on a website such as this is beyond me, but the MSM - certainly there could be more than just the one.

My problem with Abe Linkman's approach is that he interprets what I see as a legitimate position - that of a sincere skeptic - and twists it into a symptom of an overarching conspiracy working to suppress him and his co-theorists.

[aeolian]

67. One wonders, then, about the strength of convictions

involved if a shill posting on a website treatens one's world-view.

[AZCat]

68. Abe doesn't seem worried about that

I wonder sometimes what, if anything, would shake Abe's convictions.

Abe seems to be more worried about "disinformation" or "misdirection" clouding issues for the people that browse this forum. I am worried that he is channelling the late Senator McCarthy in his zeal to "out" the conspirators here - he even claims to have a list of them. Who is on it, I don't know - but I'm sure they're the ones that disagree consistently with Abe.

[Abe Linkman]

69. If you think the paranoids are after U, ask M-atc to answ. my ? 2 him re:

Wed Jan-05-05 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I think there are more than two who have real issues with yours...

I asked brother M-atc to name them, but like the late Senator, so far, he hasn't provided any names on his list. YES, I know he's been busy and will provide that list the next time he logs on to DU.

[AZCat]

70. You've asked him already - what good would it do for me to repeat?

If he doesn't want to answer, it's not going to any good for me to ask him a second time.

Who really cares how many there are on either side of this discussion - I thought we were concerned about the "truth", not rhetorical domination. Why should any of us be keeping lists of supporters or detractors of various theories? And why should MercutioATC be required to back up what seems to be speculation on his part (hence the "I think")? Haven't you polled this stuff before over in GD - if you really think it is that important why don't you dig the polls up?

And by the way - that was a lovely misdirect. I almost didn't catch it, except that you have used it so often to avoid certain discussions.


On Edit: Added misdirect section

[Abe Linkman]

71. Just trying to help you with your special interest in McCarthyism.

Is there some particular reason why you put quotation marks around the word truth? Is that your special way of saying that you too, are perfectly aware that not everyone here IS interested in finding the truth of what really happened on 9/11?

I thought that maybe, for once M-atc just might want to do something besides take pot shots at people who don't buy into his and the Govt's silly Fairy tale. I know that you aren't his spokesperson, so let's wait and see if he, unlike the late Senator McCarthy (and thanks for reminding me about him and his "lists" of people that HE considered subversives) will be kind enough to provide the names of those folks he was referring to.

I'm sure that most people here do not care much for McCarthy-like tactics, so you're in good company as far as that goes.

Now, pick out something in this message that you can use to talk about as a way of plausibly ignoring the larger message.

Have a nice dog, Cat.

[AZCat]

72. I don't know what the larger message is, but I will try to answer anyway

I am not (to quote you) "perfectly aware that not everyone here IS interested in findihg the truth of what really happened on 9/11". I have yet to see evidence that any of us here is anymore than what we seem - I may have suspicions, but that does not count (as far as I am concerned) as being "perfectly aware".

Yes, I did put quotation marks around the word truth, but for no reason other than to bring attention to it. Perhaps I should have used some other method, like bolding or italicizing, but there was no hidden message in my usage.

Why would listing people that don't support what I will call (for lack of a better term) the Abe Linkman Theory (ALT for short) be something other than taking pot shots - that's my whole point, that this discussion of supporters and detractors of various theories IS taking pot shots at the various personalities, and ignores the actual debate. I would rather we drop it completely and instead discuss the merits of the theories instead of the individuals behind those theories. Are you willing to do that? I mean dropping the whole bit, the loyalty tests, the demands for bona fides, the quizzing on 9/11 CT positions - I think it all gets in the way. McCarthy was a bad man, and I think resurrecting his methods is a good way to cripple the search for the truth (no quotes this time :)).

[MercutioATC]

74. You seriously wanted names?

How about the three who are involved in this very discussion (aeolian, LARED and AZCat)?

That's more than two.

I don't think they'll mind me using their names in this case. If they do, I'll apologize.


See how easy it is when you just ask?

[aeolian]

75. No, I don't mind...

...upon which list did I just get listed?

Sorry, the reply tree has reached it's edge, so I can't see which messages are in response to which anymore.

[MercutioATC]

78. No problem...I'll explain:

I told Abe that I'd bet there were at least two people here who didn't agree with his version of the events of 9/11. He challenged me to name two people.

I thought he was joking.

Apparently, he wasn't. I thought you were a safe bet (especially since you've been taking issue with his statements on this very thread).

[aeolian]

80. Oh, that list. Yeah, I'm on that one.

I hope that doesn't mean I'm cross-listed on some enemies list, tho.

Drinks all around! :toast:

[MercutioATC]

81. Just one poster's "enemy list" for now...

...but I think you were already on it...

:toast:

[Abe Linkman]

76. Congratulations. You found three (count 'em) OCT supporters. Well, ...

that's certainly more than two, isn't it. You must be very proud of your acheivement, after three years of hard work.

[aeolian]

77. OCT? What do I support?

No really, I lost track of things...what's OCT?

[MercutioATC]

82. "Official Conspiracy Theory"...and I never made any such claim.

See Post #79. I cleared that up.

[MercutioATC]

79. No, I simply answered your question, which was silly to begin with.

You didn't ask for the names of "OCT supporters". You asked for the names of TWO people who took issue with your view of the events of 9/11. I provided three.

Again, if you don't like the answers, Abe, you're going to have to start asking different questions.

[Abe Linkman]

83. Why are you playing with words? To wiggle out of something?

My view of the events of 9/11 are well-known: I don't buy the OCT. It's a Fairy Tale.

So, you'll have to find a different convert to your cause, if you are going to continue to maintain that you know of at least three people here who DO support your belief in the OCT. And, you might want to apologize to the worried person whose name you may have erred whenever you included him/her on your "list" of known OCT supporters here at DU.

By the way, do you know of even ONE person that you've converted here, to your point of view? After three years, surely you can name somebody.
I'm not trying to embarass you, I'm just pointing out how far out of the mainstream your views are amongst people who know more about 9/11 than what the mainstream media (and PR/Disinformation campaigns) have told them.

[MercutioATC]

84. WHO is "playing with words"?????

Abe Linkman (1000+ posts) Sun Jan-09-05 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #19

41. Name them, m-atc.


"I think there are more than two who have real issues with yours.."



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=28710&mesg_id=29053&page=


THAT was your question. I said "I think there are more than two who have real issues with yours.." (views on the events of 9/11) and you responded "Name them, m-atc."

That's exactly what I did.


As far as your question on "converting" people, that's never been my intent. I'm here to present my views and (in some cases) the benefit of my professional expertise. People can make their own decisions. "Converting" has nothing to do with it...at least not for me.

[Abe Linkman]

86. In other words, m-atc - no converts & only two people who disagree w/me

Is that about it?

Your views aren't very persuasive, then, are they?

[MercutioATC]

87. Absolutely correct...no "converts"

If I want converts, I'll become a televangelist.

Actually, I did give you three names...and the list wasn't anywhere near complete (but you only asked for two). The question was silly, anyway. I'm sure we both know who stands where, at least as far as the regular posters here go.

My views would only be designed to be "persuasive" if I was trying to persuade people. They're not. For the most part, they're informational (because I'm trying to provide information). Occasionally, they're just an expression of my beliefs based on the available evidence.

If your goal is persuasion, Abe, I'd seriously recommend televangelism. I'm told the money is much better...

[Abe Linkman]

88. Most are not "informational". They're DISinformational, and they ARE...

posted NOT for the purpose of taking up your extra time whenever you aren't in the big dark room.

Fortunately, the only people who are influenced by all of the unproven claims (like the most recent one about entering hijacking codes) are either your fellow travelers (who hadn't thought of the BS reason you came up with)...or people who don't know anything about 9/11, and aren't likely to be motivated to go beyond FOX news or the OCT Foxes here at DU.

[MercutioATC]

93. As always, Abe, you're entitled to your opinion.

If nobody's listening to me, why are you so threatened?

[Abe Linkman]

92. Truth Suppression Tactic: "Ignore info that contradicts Disinfo....

by "admitting" only having a specific area of expertise. That way, the truth suppressor can plausibly AVOID having to deal with legitimate facts, evidence, and logic that shows how fallacious their Disinfo really is. As, "sorry, I only post information about things that I know something about". That way, the truth suppressor can still make outrageous, unproven claims and give crazy opinions that only a fellow propagandist could love. If someone points out the absurdities, the truth suppressor feigns innocence and says they stick to just posting things about areas they know something about, but they're "still entitled to give their opinions".

See how it works, folks? Pretty slick, huh?

[MercutioATC]

94. Ahhh..the "Truth Supression Tactics" again...

:eyes:

If you'd have read my last post, I didn't claim that I only posted on ATC issues. I post both my professional knowledge and my opinion. If it has to do with ATC issues, it's most likely professional knowledge.

As far as avoiding issues, I think anybody who peruses this forum on a regular basis can measure both of our contributions. I'm comfortable letting each individual decide who's avoiding issues.

[AZCat]

85. You're moving the goalposts, Abe

I don't support what you call the OCT (what I call the OS - the official story), but I also don't support the ALT - and what you had originally asked for were people that didn't support the ALT.

I still think this whole making of lists is B.S., and I am now asking for those involved to drop it and get back to what I thought was important - seeking the truth. You're interrogation is becoming a detriment IMHO - please stop.

[Abe Linkman]

89. As the very Dulce Decorum would say

Do you see that little button above my name in your post? It's the ignore button. If you make use of it, you might feel better. I know that you wouldn't like it if someone asked YOU to stop posting messages, and yet, if you don't want to read a particular poster's messages, that little "ignore" function works very well, thank you very much.

Based on your message about what you do and what you don't support, it's understandable that someone who doesn't support EITHER the Official Conspiracy OR an Alternative to it, might feel a little jumpy, and therefore the relief that comes from using the "ignore" button might be welcomed, indeed.

Have a nice kitty, cat.

[AZCat]

91. I didn't say that I didn't support any alternative

I just don't support the alternative theory that you have put forth. And why does one have to associate oneself with a particular theory - whatever happened to an honest skeptic, one who is equally skeptical of all possibilities regardless of popularity?

I don't want to put you on ignore Abe, mostly because I like reading your posts. I was hoping that you might change what I saw as behavior that wasn't productive, I wasn't asking you to stop posting messages. That would be rude indeed, to suggest that someone doesn't belong here and I have tried to remain polite in my posts. Perhaps I have failed, but you are welcome to hit "alert" when necessary.

As I have said before (to another poster) I hate repetitive whining, so this is the last I will ever post about this particular tangent. I have asked and you have rejected my suggestion, so I will not bring it up again.

[aeolian]

42. what?

you eat pork religiously while doing lines of coke off a stripper's breasts?

Did I read that right?

:freak:

Say, this misinterpretation thing IS fun! gimme another!

[aeolian]

31. Wow

just, fucking, wow.



I thought I was making a joke about a tangled web of conspiracy theories. Apparantly, I do not know how to write.



But, it's good to know that so many sensitivity enforcers are on hand to make sure that I only post good, clean things.




On edit: I seem to have had a prior post deleted. That's what I get, I guess. I and my thoughts can be insulted in posts, apparantly, but I can't turn those words back on the author and defend myself. Fantastic.

I seem to be violating board rules left and right by being something more than one-dimensional.

[tngledwebb]

33. Chance to make some clarifications.

Any thing about 9/11 that piques your curiosity? Or any one thing wrong with how Shrub handled the war on terra so far?

Apologies if I missed the satiric intent of your post, but there are 200,000 dead in that part of the world with many more deaths to come, and a shameful initial response from this 'Govt' that is similar to Shrub's 'performance' on the morning of 9/11.

And I assume you are aware of the absurd unprecedented NYT attack on DU's credibility re tsunami CT's.

[aeolian]

34. None of the quarter-million who

died in the tsunami tragedy will be brought back by people claiming that secret underground nuclear testing somehow caused a 9.0 earthquake, despite a complete lack of supporting evidence.

None of the millions who now need help will be served by trying to blame someone for an act of geology. Yes Bush's response was, and continues to be, pathetic. What does that have to do with my posts?

Show me where I disrespected any of the dead? Words have been put in my mouth since I first started this thread, and I'm sick of it. How dare you accuse me of disrespecting the dead? What do you know about me?

As for the credibility thing, I don't condition what I think to what the media is doing. Sorry. I don't care that the NYT ran a story about a message board. I don't watch FOX all the time to make sure I'm playing by some friggin rule book.

But given the "attack" on the message board's credibility, I would think a few posts condemning or, yes, even mocking the CT-ers would be welcome. I would think even an attempted display of satiric wit and logic would help the cause. Instead, as I seem to have offended a few shrill and brittle people, I have been attacked.

You perceive me as an enemy. Your first sentence implies that I'm giving bush a free ride by questioning CTs. If you think for a second that I like that ass, then you know nothing about me. Half of us libs have become so damn paranoid and testy that we turn on our own at the slightest disagreement. The other half have wilted into boneless blobs, and believe that defending oneself or using sharp language is impolite. And we wonder why we keep loosing elections.

So unless you're a pilot flying food into Sri Lanka, or you've used your vast wealth to personally set up a foundation to help the sick and homeless, or you've adopted one of the thousands of orphans, then you've got NOTHING to say to me about helping the tsunami victims, let alone respecting them.

[tngledwebb]

44. And for your top progressive/Dem issues?

Again, many apologies if I misinterpreted your original post, as a freedom of speech issue alone we can let that one go. I misunderstood and yes, things can get a little overheated these days, for the right and wrong reasons.

But would you mind giving your answers to the question above?

Some other answers might be, for the record:

1.Impeach Bush and Co. for two illegal wars, planned long before 9/11, and for at least two stolen elections.

2. Protest and critique MSM for serving as THE propaganda outlet of the corporate right running this country the last few years (aka BushCo, BFEE, secret government, the military industrial complex.)

3. After restoring democracy and free elections in the USA, cleaning out MSM, and after returning to a government of by and for the People ie ending the electoral college and returning to one person one vote, we need Constitutional or at least FCC reform that will ensure free and equal time for serious and viable political parties on public financed airwaves, with no paid political ads allowed on commercial broadcast media at all. This will only work if coupled with:

4. Campaign finance reform and voting reform, including paper ballots or whatever is easily traced and verified, and voting in every state done exactly the same way, etc.

5. A review of the constitutional limits of Presidential powers, and the appropriate correction to maintain or rather restore the balance of power between the three branches of Government.

6. Tax reform, at least to pre Reaganomic era levels of progressive taxation.

and so on...

[aeolian]

46. I see no need to justify my credentials.

Nor to prove my beliefs.

[Abe Linkman]

48. You apparently also don't see a "need" to respond to questions...

and that doesn't exactly enhance your bona fides. The questions you were asked are extremely reasonable, and it's difficult to imagine that you are not informed about them. Yet, you fail or refuse to give even a "yes" or "no" answer, much less an explanation of how you came to your views. Likewise; you seem to have some objection to merely giving your opinion. Is it because your opinions are uninformed and you would be embarassed to give them?

Wouldn't it be better to be cooperative? After all, it's kind of unfair and ungentlemanly (or unladylike) to "Post and Run". Also, wouldn't it be better to avoid the appearance of trying to change the subject from one of answering simple questions to making everything nothing more than a demand that you "justify your credentials" and "prove your beliefs".

I, for one, don't care about your beliefs, and your credentials aren't of any interest either, since your original message is, well, not very original, and it doesn't challenge anything that is well-established.

[AZCat]

49. "He's bona fide. What are you?"

"Vernon here's got a job. Vernon's got prospects."


I love that movie. :)

[aeolian]

50. It is also not

considered polite to hijack the topic of a thread. What relevance do my views on taxation have here? What would it prove one way or the other weather we agree or not?

I found the questions to be both inappropriate and offensive in tone. What do you think of your state's handling of medicaid? How about irradiated beef, got an opinion on that? How much money do you make? What is your mother's maiden name? Why do you refuse? Are you embarassed? No. You're not.

You don't like what I wrote originally, fine, it really doesn't bother me. I neaver meant this thread to be here in the first place. I am more considerate than to just drop something like this into a forum specifically meant for the discussion of these ideas. I may disagree, but I wouldn't come right into what is more or less a private club just to smash up the party.

This was in GD, before it was moved, and every single thread, it seemed, that I read that day had to do with some theory or other as to "how it all fit together." A lot of bullshit was flying around GD that day. I found it funny. I posted about it. Three other people got it, perhaps chuckled, responded, and made me chuckle. That's about all I was looking for. Then someone didn't like it, a mod agreed, it came here, and then caught fire.

It does surprise me that this thread is staying at the top of this forum. I never expected many more than 5 or six replies, and then the slow fall onto the sediment at the bottom of GD. Oops.

Sorry if I wasn't original enough. I didn't realize that all posts had to challenge the established notion of reality, and cut bold new frontiers of knowledge. How very pedestrian of me. Sorry.

[Make7]

45. Bert from Sesame Street has converted to Islam.

This is for real. Check out the story here.

:) Make7

[aeolian]

51. Waleed and Ernie doesn't quite have the same ring, does it? (n/t)

[mikelewis]

47. This is simply stupid... why respond to such ignorance?

[Make7]

53. That's a good question - why did you? n/t

[mikelewis]

60. Good point