Webmaster Forum

Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Controversial Social Issues Discussions concerning controversial social issues. Topics include politics, religion, culture, social and economic issues, etc. Respect required at all times.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Share |
  #41 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 06:09 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by C0ldf1re View Post
Yes, Zap. But casting doubt on the Single Bullet Theory does not in any way prove that there was a dark and powerful financially-motivated conspiracy behind the assassin(s).
The single bullet theory is part of the official explanation of events put forth by the government.
You either believe in the magic bullet theory or there was another shooter.
That's a conspiracy OR ...
There were TWO lone shooters, both crazy, going after the President at the exact same place, at the exact same moment in time.

If you think financial motivation is not reason enough for some to murder then you are naive enough, I suppose, to believe that government works for the betterment of it's citizens and non-citizens alike, there is no mafia and all wars are started purely to help or protect people.
 
Reply With Quote

Advertisement

Advertisement

  #42 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 07:32 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by robjones View Post
All rabbit trails aside... this law is clearly unconstitutional and needs to be challenged. There's no way it'd stand up in court.

This is a striking example of the ruling class deciding THEY are above the law, and frankly everyone that voted for it, regardless of party affiliation [or in the case of the Pres, signed off on it] needs to answer to the voters.

There is no way congress can decide that political dissent is a felony instead of a constitutionally protected right. That violates several basic constitutional principles starting with the first amendment. WTF were they thinking?
Let's hope the challenge comes swiftly and the ruling is firmly in favour of the Constitution.
Let there be no doubt in Congress about what will happen if they vote something like this in again.
 
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 08:27 AM
C0ldf1re's Avatar
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 03-19-10
Location: England. Hampshire.
Posts: 390
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
... If you think financial motivation is not reason enough for some to murder then you are naive enough, I suppose, to believe that government works for the betterment of it's citizens and non-citizens alike, there is no mafia and all wars are started purely to help or protect people.
Well, I am not quite naive enough to believe that murder is never done for money. Children have even murdered their parents to speed up their inheritance, which is far more horrifying than murdering a politician.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
... You either believe in the magic bullet theory or there was another shooter. That's a conspiracy...
OK. Let's follow this conspiracy theory with an open mind.

Oswald was sick, and somebody persuaded him that trying to kill Kennedy was a good idea. But poor deranged Oswald was to be the fall guy. It was planned that Oswald be caught, providing the distraction for other assassins to escape. The other assassins were sane and professional. They would not have taken on the job unless they had their escape well planned, and were well paid.

That does not prove at all that Americans masterminded the plot, nor that anybody did it to disrupt Kennedy's financial legislation. Who else, and why else?

As an ally of the US, I applaud Kennedy's brave and necessary actions during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Soviets would have taken a different view. They would have been happy for Kennedy to die, to prevent him taking any more anti-Soviet military actions. The Soviets also had a very efficient secret service, and the KGB undoubtedly had many officers working undercover in the US. The Soviets had both the motive and the means to organise an assassination attempt upon Kennedy, so why imagine a conspiracy of wealthy Americans?
__________________
Live fast. Die young. Leave a beautiful body of code.
 
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 08:41 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by C0ldf1re View Post
That does not prove at all that Americans masterminded the plot, nor that anybody did it to disrupt Kennedy's financial legislation. Who else, and why else?

As an ally of the US, I applaud Kennedy's brave and necessary actions during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Soviets would have taken a different view. They would have been happy for Kennedy to die, to prevent him taking any more anti-Soviet military actions. The Soviets also had a very efficient secret service, and the KGB undoubtedly had many officers working undercover in the US. The Soviets had both the motive and the means to organise an assassination attempt upon Kennedy, so why imagine a conspiracy of wealthy Americans?
There are a number of theories but they all rely on conspiracy, which you do not believe in.
You only believe in coincidence.

It could have been the Soviets. Sure.
It could just as easily have been the bankers. That was my point.

But, as I pointed out, there have been 4 Presidential assassinations and all 4 of those Presidents had an axe to grind with the banks. Why ignore the obvious? Why rule this a coincidence?

I know it's tough to believe that banks might do harm to anyone for profit, but it's possible.
 
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 09:07 AM
robjones's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-15-09
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Y'all might consider splitting the Kennedy assassination thing out into a different thread to avoid having competing topics.
__________________
-- CAUTION: Not Politically Correct --
 
Reply With Quote
  #46 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 09:35 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 5 / 100%
I can agree to let it die here. Old news anyway.
 
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 09:51 AM
C0ldf1re's Avatar
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 03-19-10
Location: England. Hampshire.
Posts: 390
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
... I know it's tough to believe that banks might do harm to anyone for profit, but it's possible.
I have sued, or threatened to sue, several banks. I once caught a bank manager out for fraud. I literally mean criminal fraud, and I had the evidence to prove in Court that it was a deliberate and premeditated fraud. (Sigh... pity that it was only for a very trivial sum, or I might have got him sent to jail and made a name for myself! It still probably set a record for being the fastest bank refund in history.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
... It could have been the Soviets. Sure. It could just as easily have been the bankers. That was my point...
It is not easy at all to arrange a killing. Otherwise nasty people would be dying like flies all around us. Even secret services cannot easily arrange assassinations of hostile foreign politicians, otherwise all politicians would need armed guards, which you might notice they do not have. What would make you think that it would easier for bankers to arrange a murder than for anybody else? My immediate reaction is that bribery and corruption would be much more their style, and that bankers would never have the nerve to try to organise a real murder.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
There are a number of theories but they all rely on conspiracy, which you do not believe in. You only believe in coincidence...
I know some conspiracies exist. I also know that some coincidences happen. Why believe in a conspiracy without evidence, if a coincidence would equally explain the facts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
... But, as I pointed out, there have been 4 Presidential assassinations and all 4 of those Presidents had an axe to grind with the banks. Why ignore the obvious? Why rule this a coincidence?...
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of bankers.
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of foreign powers.
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of union bosses.
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of farmers.
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of mobsters.
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of trash collectors.
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of librarians.
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of policemen.
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of soldiers.
All 4 of those Presidents probably annoyed a lot of nurses.
Yes, nurses. They are prime suspects. I'll bet all of those presidents failed to give the nurses the better pay and conditions that they would like. And nurses probably get fed up with patients who always complain and are never grateful. Nurses probably have a repressed urge to murder whining patients, which could easily sublimate into an urge to murder the president. And nurses are hardened to patients dying. The thought of a presidential corpse would not fill them with dread. The truth comes out at last! It was the nurses who did it. Remember... you heard it here first.
__________________
Live fast. Die young. Leave a beautiful body of code.
 
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 09:53 AM
C0ldf1re's Avatar
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 03-19-10
Location: England. Hampshire.
Posts: 390
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by robjones View Post
Y'all might consider splitting the Kennedy assassination thing out into a different thread to avoid having competing topics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
I can agree to let it die here. Old news anyway.
Sorry guys. It was a cross-post. It took a while to write my earlier post, so I did not see your latest posts before finishing mine.
__________________
Live fast. Die young. Leave a beautiful body of code.
 
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 10:07 AM
robjones's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-15-09
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
NP, I'm not complaining about the convo, just figure if you want to run with it, it'd do better if we split it into another spot so it isnt lost in the topic zap has going here.
__________________
-- CAUTION: Not Politically Correct --
 
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 10:49 AM
rabble's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 12-24-08
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,868
iTrader: 0 / 0%
So ... here are my questions.
Who Is this new law aimed directly at?
Why did both parties climb on board?
And ... wasn't this somehow sneaky?

I credit myself with being somewhat UP on things.
Yet, this came as a total surprise.
Anybody wanna do the research for me?
Still hasn't hit the mainstream media as far as I can tell.
What gives?
__________________
Without faith you can change nothing.
You will leave the world as you found it.

Rabble Park

Last edited by rabble; 03-15-2012 at 11:03 AM.
 
Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 10:54 AM
rabble's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 12-24-08
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,868
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by robjones View Post
this law is clearly unconstitutional and needs to be challenged. There's no way it'd stand up in court.

This is a striking example of the ruling class deciding THEY are above the law, and frankly everyone that voted for it, regardless of party affiliation [or in the case of the Pres, signed off on it] needs to answer to the voters.

There is no way congress can decide that political dissent is a felony instead of a constitutionally protected right. That violates several basic constitutional principles starting with the first amendment. WTF were they thinking?
Did I get to kudo you on this post?
If so ... I just tried to do it again.
There's nothing worse than when the two parties agree on something.

My take ...
both parties are trying to silence dissent while they
go about serving their corporate masters.
__________________
Without faith you can change nothing.
You will leave the world as you found it.

Rabble Park

Last edited by rabble; 03-15-2012 at 10:57 AM.
 
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 11:02 AM
rabble's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 12-24-08
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,868
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by C0ldf1re View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard that inferior US Judges are extremely unlikely to wish to be the first to rule that a brand-new law, just signed into force by the President, is unconstitutional. It might be an embarrassingly unwise career move.

Also correct me if I am wrong on this point, but I heard that, even if you were successful in persuading a Court of first instance to strike down a law as unconstitutional, your adversaries would be certain to appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court.

The net result might be the same from your point of view. To challenge a law as unconstitutional is to risk years of worry and endless expense.
All correct.
The cost of free speech has just gone up exponentially.
__________________
Without faith you can change nothing.
You will leave the world as you found it.

Rabble Park
 
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 11:13 AM
robjones's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-15-09
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Well, the voting record clear... it passed with overwhelming support of Dems and GOP, and normally they'd fillibuster for a week if the grocery guy asked them "Paper or plastic?".

This tells us apparently their only common ground is covering their privileged asses.
__________________
-- CAUTION: Not Politically Correct --
 
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 11:33 AM
rabble's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 12-24-08
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,868
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
H. R. 347 makes protest of any type potentially a federal offense with anywhere from a year to 10 years in federal prison, providing it occurs in the presence of elites brandishing Secret Service protection, or during an officially defined 'National Special Security Event' (NSSE). NSSEs , ( an invention of Bill Clinton) are events which have been deemed worthy of Secret Service protection, which previously received no such treatment. Justified through part of 'Presidential Decision Directive 62 in 1998; Bill Clinton created an additional class of special events explicitly under the authority of the U.S. Secret Service.

Past NSSE events included the funerals of Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan, and the national security concern that was Superbowl XXXVI. Other NSSE protected events include the Academy Awards and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions. I suppose presidential candidates, no matter how insane they may be are deserving as much security protection as Brad and Angelina's sex life. The dangerous part of this 'executive order' lies not in the triviality of a SuperBowl receiving taxpayer funded Secret Service protection -- but in the convenience manufactured for any President desperate to hide deliberations of groups like the G-8, the G-20 and the World Trade Organization. The classification of such events as NSSE -- insures the rich and powerful against any pesky accountability or transparency to the unwashed minions -- namely the US public. HR 347 & S. 1794 insulates such events as the G-8, WTO and presidential conventions against tough questions and politically justified protests.

The House vote tally which took place 02/28/12, was 338 for and 3 against. The three dissenters were Rep.Paul Broun R-Georgia, Rep. Justin Amash R-Michigan and Rep. Keith Ellison D-Minnesota. Rep. Ron Paul was reported earlier as having voted against the bill, but that was based on the original vote conducted 02/28/11. Rep. Ron Paul ABSTAINED on the final vote.

Attached Thumbnails
Say Goodbye To The Right To Protest-img52392jpg-2032858_p9.jpg  
__________________
Without faith you can change nothing.
You will leave the world as you found it.

Rabble Park
 
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2012, 11:38 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 5 / 100%
[YT]EUS1m5MSt9k[/YT]
 
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old 03-17-2012, 03:03 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: 11-16-11
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 17
iTrader: 0 / 0%
What the hell happened to this country? Our forefathers are rolling over in their graves. Freedom is a foregone conclusion. I wonder when they're gonna outlaw international travel or worse yet, not let anyone renounce their citizenship and get outta Dodge.

I really think I'm gonna leave. I'm not the only person that sees the writing on the wall. They didn't build all those damn trailers all over the country for nothing. They're planning something...
 
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old 03-18-2012, 09:06 AM
C0ldf1re's Avatar
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 03-19-10
Location: England. Hampshire.
Posts: 390
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by 250k90 View Post
... They didn't build all those damn trailers all over the country for nothing. They're planning something...
That sounds interesting. Please explain!
__________________
Live fast. Die young. Leave a beautiful body of code.
 
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2012, 10:10 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: 11-16-11
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 17
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by C0ldf1re View Post
That sounds interesting. Please explain!
I went down a rabbit hold searching for this kind of info a few months ago and there's trailers set up all over the country. Railroad trailers I believe. I think they're planning martial law.

If you look at all the stuff that's happening, the writing is on the wall. A hundred or so years ago it was easier to control a million people than to kill them. Nowadays, it's infinitely more easy to kill a million people than it is to control them.

I got this information from Casey Research, GoldSilver.com, Info Wars, and a YouTube playlist called The Greatest Truth Never Told.

I hate to be skeptical. I'm usually very optimistic. But this stuff is just crazy. They already don't let you take more than 10 grand outta the country and forget trying to get on a plane with gold and silver.

I'm gonna be setting up a foreign bank account and moving some of my assets offshore before the end of this year. FATCA is a regulation that's coming down the pipe that is gonna make a lot of these options completely illegal. Crazy times we're living in...
 
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2012, 11:07 AM
robjones's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-15-09
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
We have people talking about giving this guy 4 more years. I'm just hoping we make it thru the one he has left.

He tapped the Emergency Petroleum Reserve last June...
...without a real emergency and is thinking about doing it again in hopes of salvaging his re-election, I don't think he grasps the idea of only using powers in a crisis. [No Mr Obama... the possibility you might lose an election is NOT a "National Crisis".]

DIY Crisis Creation
We have a clear example of him using federal agencies to try and create a crisis that would be politically expedient... with the Fast and Furious thing. I really dislike the idea of him having dictatorial powers... and that's EXACTLY what he just granted himself without so much as a nod from Congress.

Obama Grants Himself Control over ALL US resources



My parent's generation had more sense...
...they didn't vote for fascists, they deposed them. This guy needs to get un-elected before he does more harm. We put a guy from Chicago's Daley machine into power, now he's exhibiting all the political integrity Chicago politics have been known for since the days of Al Capone. What a freakin' shock.

Does anyone here really support this new EDICT or the measure shown in the opening post?
This stuff's all coming waaay too close together. I hate to be the first victim of Godwin's Law in this discussion... but lest we forget, Hitler was elected by voters before several "crisis" led to him assuming dictatorial powers. We are seeing FAR too much power being vested in the hands of the executive branch, and that's scary as hell. This is nasty stuff, and the news isn't really saying much about it.
Attached Thumbnails
Say Goodbye To The Right To Protest-obama-exec-order.png  
__________________
-- CAUTION: Not Politically Correct --

Last edited by robjones; 03-19-2012 at 11:19 AM.
 
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2012, 12:06 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: 11-16-11
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 17
iTrader: 0 / 0%
I hope he won't have to use the order. It says specifically that our economy is built upon the free flow of goods and services and that interference messes with that. And that seems to be the government's business (to interfere).

Man, if we go to war with Iran, I might not be able to get outta the country fast enough. They'll probably suspend that too.

Dammit.

Gotta move quicker.
 
Reply With Quote
Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Facebook blocked in Pakistan to Protest against Drawings of Mohammed P.B.U.H nightcrawler Controversial Social Issues 30 05-25-2010 06:57 AM
People who protest at service members funerals. Allen Farlow Controversial Social Issues 10 04-05-2010 06:10 PM
Goodbye! Chris@Crane Forum Lobby 22 11-10-2008 04:43 AM
Plan for Group Tied to Nation of Islam to Patrol Miami Streets Meets With Protest TechWizard Controversial Social Issues 0 06-03-2008 03:53 PM
Students Protest Google Censorship John Scott Google Forum 13 02-25-2006 11:08 AM


V7N Network
Get exposure! V7N I Love Photography V7N SEO Blog V7N Directory


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright © 2003 - 2014 Escalate Media




Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.