rev0lver
Come On Die Young
Yes, I have looked into the Zeitgeist films many times. I don't just sit there and accuse people of being wrong just because it seems that way. What is in those films are not "facts".
Yes, I have looked into the Zeitgeist films many times. I don't just sit there and accuse people of being wrong just because it seems that way. What is in those films are not "facts".
Good lets talk. Before we get into conspiracy theories, I have a question for you. Did you know the Golf of Tonkin incident was a lie, also did you know that was the incident that got us into the Vietnam war?
Tell me what specific freedoms you are referring to so I can provide the appropriate response. As I stated, I don't agree with human rights abuses by the government and things like the Patriot Act, but I do believe in social programs and regulation of businesses and the economy.
Yes I have accepted this as fact since I first read about it. It seems pretty clear to me. If not a total lie at least a gross distortion of the truth.
You seem to know about the Patriot Act, but do you know about any other acts that strip Americans of their freedoms? I ask this cuz I'm trying to get a feel of how much you research things or if you only guided by the main stream media.
I don't know why you're making the assumption that I'm getting all my information from the mainstream media. I live in a college dorm and don't have TV access. I follow politics and news very closely though, and whenever I hear about something happening I look into it. Hell, I probably visit AboveTopSecret more than anything else just because they have interesting stuff there that I want to look into.
Ok since you read about it then you that the incident never took place, and we went to war over a lie. Did you know that that the Vietnam war cost the American tax payer $584 billion and 68,000 American lives? If the people that run our government were able to lie to us then, what makes you think that they wouldn't do it again? Why is it so far fetched to doubt what your government tells you if they are willing to do things like that. The American public has a history of being oppose to wars, but in order to change their minds some thing had to motivate them. Have you ever heard of the P.N.A.C agreement?
I've tried looking up the religious part of the film but can't find enough info to back up its claims. Also some of the older historical documents are hard to find.
First of all, that comes from a misinterpretation of what happened. The evidence points to a small group in the military faking this event and/or distorting what happened to cover their mistakes. The government was likely deceived themselves into going into war. Secondly, it's not that it can't happen, it's that you need reasonable evidence to make such claims when there would be a more obvious proof.
Yes, but until a connection is found between PNAC and 9/11 (I'm going to assume this is where you're going with this), I'm not going to believe one just because it sounds sinister. The only actual power of the PNAC extended as far as the collaboration between politicians that have worked with them.
The religion part is probably the worst. As a strong atheist myself, it is almost embarrassing. Most of what is said there is made up. Like, they say "look how closely the story of Horus resembles the story of Jesus" and proceed to drastically alter the actual story of Horus. But these things extend to the 9/11 part, too.
Not all dude, just so that you understand more so of what I mean, just the radical ones or ones I seem to run into so far in life...it's not ignorance, since you're misunderstanding my point I'm saying from my personal experience to be more specific...you see religion and politics should be separated to begin with, but sadly they're merged with certain "topics" as you know. Sadly, no matter if we help them or not Iran that part of the world will always have chaos, war etc they've had religious wars for years, decades...it really is sad.
lol, the right wing media is one network...heavily outnumbered by the liberal left wing media like I said, CNN, MSNBC, etc. And btw, yes MSNBC is all liberal hosts...CNN is pretty liberal, did you not see that phony Ron paul video saying how "he's a neo nazi" just because of his foreign policies? A bit much...not to mention way off. Fox doesn't say stupid things anymore then MSNBC does, obviously you never heard of two clowns named Keith Obermann or Chris Matthews...they say far dumber things anyone on Fox has ever said. With one getting canned from his job a few times I might add, and another getting "thrills up his leg" for obama lol...yeah....Well, the liberals refer to Mitt's plan as "Romneycare" so it's ok for the libs to refer to conservatives with "insert name here" and care, but if someone says Obamacare that's wrong? hmmm ok, so how about radical liberal agenda by Obama care?
Again, biased links much? I've read other stories from that site and clearly they're pro liberal...there are no right wing extremists, they're called conservatives and/or republicans is that like your way of trying to counter the whole radical liberal agenda? You want to talk extremists, look up muslim groups starting with ,Al-Qaeda homas etc and how about all the chaos the liberals have caused with protestors on wall street, causing businesses to die or get severly effected because nobody wanted to go there while they occupied the park on wall street? I live in NYC, believe me I know...I've known friends who worked there or around there, cops and people got hurt but you didn't hear that from the mainstream media now did you? Wonder why...and of course there's the whole protestors on the west coast now causing more harm then good...burning the flag, crapping on it, burning cars etc....Also, what about Obama releasing terror cells from G. Bay? You do realize these are the same guys who were apart of the 9/11 attacks right? He's also friends with radical islam leaders who hate us...yeah, I don't think the right wingers are to worry about, not even MSNBC reports that, they'd rather go after candidates family and such. Grasping at straws much?
What are you talking about? They want to follow the law, you're acting as if the right wing are promoting super hero/vigilantes or something? lol the liberals are the ones who don't want to follow procedure, they want to "negotiate" with them or bow down to them. The right want to actually deal with them head on, what's wrong with that? Do you not think the world is better off with all radical terrorists dead or in jail? That doesn't violate the constitution at all, it's called national security. Obama is the one offering unconstitutional policies and even admitted himself several times he wants to "re-write" the constitution...really? lol I'm pretty sure most terrorists come from Islam, Iran etc that part of the world. So yeah they kind of are. They could come from Africa or Netherlands, whatever. If majority of something bad happens to factually come from a certain spot then that's just the way it is.
Oh yes, because negotiating with terrorists is so much better right? All that is doing is buying time and for them, they're thinking hmm good, we have no pressure on us from the usa, we can proceed with our terror plots in the future. Like I've said, they've attacked neutral or countries that weren't involved in hunting them just to prove a point....which is why they must be eliminated. You will always find the fight of good vs. evil in the world or someone's ideal followed by someone else, but this is just a fact of life. You can't have "100% peace" in the world, it's a pipe dream. You can have a world however that you can live in without fear however. They'll always want to fight us, which is why we'll always have to stand up to them. Might be doing wrong? So liberating people from a dictator and offering them a chance for democracy is something so wrong? Hunting terror cells down who happen to live in that part of the world is so wrong? I'll just say I disagree with you highly here..
Clinton didn't really go after Bin Laden at least not as hard as he could, all he did was get on his trail but had CHANCES to kill him and passed on ALL attempts. He blew up an aspirin factory(big whoop and had a chance to sniper OSB but passed) How is it the right wing or anyone who disagreed with Clinton then concerned about nailing OBL and Monica case the reason for Clinton screwing up on OSBL? That makes no sense....sorry, but I'm pretty sure Clinton was impeached and lied on Oath. Did you forget this? Lying in court=kind of a big deal, especially when it's your President. The world was only mocking us and laughing at us, call me crazy if you want but I'd rather be hated then laughed at any day...France has been neutral for the most part, they pulled out their troops when Bush was in against hunting terrorists, same with Spain, Italy etc, etc I'm not talking about financially supported, talking terrorists...and views on war. I'm pretty sure Al-Qaeda was responsible or played a role in the Spain bombing, even if they weren't "the same group" it was a radical terrorist group, that is a fact so same thing with a different name. Look, I'm all for short term war but the fact of the matter is he asked for it and we had reason to go in there. Now everyone says oh the whole WOMD etc, etc wasn't true...ok, then explain to me why Saddam procrastinated for 3 months+ and wouldn't just let our guys merely inspect his shit? Ever hear the saying "if you have nothing to fear, then you have nothing to hide" Well, Saddam did the polar opposite but of course the left won't for a second consider that he had anything moved or hidden...I mean, a week's time even few days is more then enough time to move out weapons or anything to another secure location, much less months...but whatever, I still say the world is better without Hussein and the mainstream liberal media didn't post the people dancing in the streets, tearing down his statue...they just reported the whole "oh we shouldn't have done that yadda, yadda, yadda.." Nobody truly has a "perfect" government or democracy but at least they have one now, doesn't that beat "do what I say or die" way of life?
I read it and several others from other sites, I still disagree with some of the reasoning but whatever. It is what it is, all I'm saying. I don't see what Obama was concerned about revealing more of OSB....a lot of people wanted to see more because of closure..
Actually, there have been reported cases where Muslims have more rights to pray then Christians and Jews...but if you tell that to a Christian or Jew not to, it's perfectly fine?
That's a mere excuse ^, if the woman is capable of having a baby without any health concerns to her as in "death" then she can have the baby, abortion more times then not is a mere cop out for having responsibility...why do you think the rise of teenage girls in general over the years have increased? They don't think nor take responsibility before spreading their legs...then want an easy way out for screwing up....Ok, well let me asking why the hell would you get pregnant if you're a crack addict? I wouldn't want to know this person in general or trust them with my pet, much less have a child...
My point is a slip up is tripping on TV, mispronouncing a word(which btw people judged Bush several times) when the reality is some people are just better speakers then others, still I give him more credit in the respect that at least he didn't rely on a teleprompter like Obama...but I won't rant on that..still I don't think it's asking much to put your hand over your heart for national anthem, I'm sure Obama could give the middle finger and libs would still say "hey it's his right, who cares"? I'll remember that next time I see Obama signs "joker" with facepaint and some liberal goes nuts over it or says "racism"! lol
.I spent a lot of my childhood being insulted and degraded with racial remarks, I don't just presume people from said race are the same and don't refer to them as, "this group is like this", personal experience is not an excuse to hold views that are negative and dismissive of people in general, judge people on an individual basis, otherwise the motivation is simplistic contempt. I love everyone because hate is a poison and treat people on an individual basis(not saying you hate anything).
What? The only thing I could find is someone being interviewed and stating how neo nazi groups have previously fundraised for him. CNN has some liberal hosts, but their programming is NOT about opinion. I find it funny too how The Daily Show has supported Ron Paul faaaaarrr more than Fox has. And are you really going to call Joe Scarborough a liberal?
This was done in parody of "Obamacare".
I would hardly characterize this as "radical liberal". He instituted a very weak public healthcare policy to appease the other side while still getting some of what he wants.
Wait.... what? I can't even take you seriously here. I can go and find a news report for EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF THAT LIST. The Southern Poverty Law Center monitors and fights against hate groups, they aren't some liberal media site. Are you really going to try to argue against the widespread existence of right-wing terrorism? I find that not just illogical, but very disrespectful to those who have been killed or otherwise affected by it.
You're going to associate Occupy Wall Street with terrorism now? Really?
We released a guy in exchange for the release of hostages. And no, nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. Many people in Gitmo shouldn't even be there. People have been detained there for years without any evidence of wrongdoing. Some people have been eventually released because we finally acknowledged that they are innocent, and it goes under the radar of the media.
Name them.
They want to racially profile, illegally detain middle-easterners and pass them off as PoW's when it's not the case, and invade the privacy of Muslim-Americans under the guise of national defense.
I believe Dancock had a nice list of terrorists killed under the Obama administration so far. Who are we bowing down to? We've done nothing to actually negotiate, only to pull back from our failed operations that have done nothing but increased chaos. The right want to deal with them head on by breaking the law as I stated above.
Be more specific with what you're talking about here.
This is just showing your ignorance. Islam isn't a part of the world. Iran? What? They're not even arabs and haven't attacked us at all. Middle-Easterners make us anxious, but what were the races of the failed plane terror attackers post-9/11? Oh yeah, Nigerian and British-Jamaican.
Once again, they're attacking us because of our foreign policy. The same foreign policy that has met widespread non-violent criticism, and rightfully so. When we're not supporting Israel, they wouldn't even care to attack us. Our policies should have been changed long before the attacks.
Do I have to state again that France wasn't neutral and the Madrid bombing wasn't an organized terror attack?
Like when he bombed a camp OBL was at and missed him by only a couple hours? If you're referring to Sudan's "offer" to give us OBL a couple years earlier, that didn't actually happen. That's purely right-wing propaganda. It wouldn't have even mattered as we wouldn't have had grounds to detain him.
They claimed he was trying to get OBL to divert attention away from the scandal, which was the biggest media story of the time. I'm surprised you think a sex scandal was more important than killing bin Laden now.
Who's talking about the Bush era? Do you still not understand why these terrorists don't like us?
No, they were not. It doesn't become fact just because you keep repeating it. It wasn't even a group. The evidence points to a loose collaboration between amateur extremists without an agenda in mind.
Because Iraq was an independent country and didn't want to be policed by outside forces. Say things were reversed, and Iraq wanted to inspect American facilities? We would just be like "lolno. gtfo". We can't just say "well, we have this flimsy evidence that they're doing something we don't agree with but they won't let us go look at their shit, let's invade them without approval".
I agree, but that doesn't justify why we were there.
Not by the way we did it. Look at Libya.
Yes. This is why I agree with the democrats on taxes. And it might as well be just the defense costs. We're spending FAAAAARRRRR more on "defense" than the next highest country on the list of military spending. We could be saving the costs of entire government departments just by cutting a fraction of the defense budget.
Except when he continued the tax breaks.
Public support has nothing to do with its effectiveness. I already stated I think the healthcare plan is too soft. Also, you realize you're forced to buy insurance to drive a car, right? Where is the conservative uproar over that? The only supposedly unconstitutional aspect of this is the "forcing" part. In actuality, it's just preventing people from being freeriders when they get sick and have to go to the hospital. Romney did this same thing without the uproar. I wonder why?
First of all, why do you act like I sit here and watch MSNBC all day? I don't even have TV access here. I stated this when discussing with Shory. And to get to your point, yes it is. The other part of the mandate allows for employees of religious centers to have access to it, but this is NOT done by the employers, it is done by the insurance companies. It requires the employers to include it in their insurance policies, but not to pay for it themselves. The outrage by priests is just outrage by priests. My point still stands about nearly half the country having similar mandates before this, 6 of them being governed by a Republican.
They are allowed to pray just as Christians are allowed to pray. No one's telling anyone to not pray, but it's a different case when, as a common example, a high school team does a group prayer before a game. The difference is public/group displays of it. Muslims are a unique group because their religion requires prayer be done at certain times of the day.
I hear this all the time but do you have actual statistics showing that more often than not, abortion is done just because they don't want responsibility, or are you merely making assumptions? Why is she forced to have the baby anyway? The level of sentience of a human fetus is much less than that of a pig. The only argument for why this life must be preserved is the trivial human connection.
Why are you focusing on the mother? My concern would be for how this child would turn out. You can't just say "hey crack addicts, don't get pregnant". The world doesn't work like that.
Once again, I'm sure I can show you many more videos with Obama's hand over his heart, before and after this took place. The difference between Obama and Bush is that Bush didn't only use bad grammar and made-up words, but just said blatantly stupid shit, and the grace with which he covers up his mistakes ("fool me once, shame on you, fool me, you can't get fooled again" being my favorite).
1. I see you've once again just been shown something, said "damn, these liberals", and didn't look into it. This has already been disproven. She didn't say "all this over a damn flag".
I'm not using Personal experience isn't an excuse, it's a logical basis/assessment being as how it's a good element to judge off of...I'm also not exactly a kid, I'm not the oldest on this site but I sure as hell ain't the youngest lol. I've been around long enough to realize patterns with certain groups or ideals and you're right, nobody is perfect but that still doesn't justify certain actions. It's really no different then MK, what I mean by that is say you play online and you play 10 people with good records but they're all idiots, ignorant scrubs that cry "you dumb spammer" Naturally you will start to think ok, people not from this site are apparently all "scrubs" a fair assessment based on experience of bad experiences? Yes, I think so. However, is that always true? Not necessarily. That's my point. It's no different with other topics of life from political parties to certain groups.Every political ideology has extremists I can post example of crazy Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Republicans, Democrats, Atheists, etc etc. The only thing being proven is that everyone's crazy.....
I spent a lot of my childhood being insulted and degraded with racial remarks, I don't just presume people from said race are the same and don't refer to them as, "this group is like this", personal experience is not an excuse to hold views that are negative and dismissive of people in general, judge people on an individual basis, otherwise the motivation is simplistic contempt. I love everyone because hate is a poison and treat people on an individual basis(not saying you hate anything).
I'm going to give you something to think about, Europe spent many centuries in the dark ages and in religious wars with each other, and Mesopotamia and the Middle East were thriving and progressive....does this sound familiar to what's going on now?
The roles have reversed, that is all.
People moderate with time, education, technology, etc. Europe used to be dominated by similar extreme religious and theocratic institutions, that has radically changed centuries later.
If the global powers got out of Asia and The Middle East, that would help too, but the global powers spend money and use miltiary forces to help keep dictators in power (Russia, China, The United States, France, The United Kingdom) as the main offenders.
If people want the Middle East to grow and mature in a positive way, leave them alone, Europe turned out fine after having religious wars, church domination, and the dark ages of ignorance. The most the world should do is share knowledge, provide charity for natural diasters, and things that any human would appreciate happening to them, keep the bases, the funding of regimes, and other shady policies out of it.
You do know that there's plenty of liberal people who work for CNN, way more then conservative ultimately right? Just want to make you aware of this...CNN isn't nearly as bad as MSNBC but just saying. You're entitled to believe what you wish though.
Really? Well, you're a liberal so naturally you'll have a different definition of a lot of things from those opposed. But yeah to me yes he's a radical liberal, boarderline socialist. I guess we all have our views.
lol, yes because you're comparing right wing crazies to terrorists, then when I post liberal nutjobs throwing shit at people and causing violence, you ask me "you compare lefties to terrorists" lol wow man, the level of hypocrisy here is staggering dude...
lol, you mean like you associated "right wingers" with terrorism? Love the hypocrisy there...again. No, I'm not comparing protesters despite how stupid or ignorant they may be to terrorists, unlike liberals who compare right wingers to them, I just think they're just as crazy mentally but no, not terrorists...watch youtube vids MANY out there, asking them what are you protesting, they have no answer...half the time they sound stoned.
And many people who were there deserved to stay there, not be released or moved...yeah, only being associated with terror plots, cells etc but yeah...innocent until proven guilty right? Even if it means the nation's security...uh huh. Oh a lot of stuff goes under the radar of the media.
Gladly, this link covers it...I can post more if you wish.
No, they're going by historical facts that show that most terror cells and people associated with them happen to be muslim..how is that racial profiling? So, let me ask you if there's a terror plot that we need to uncover, will we go after latinos and whites or wait...maybe people from the ghetto, blacks? Instead of people that happen to be muslim, everything is race with you liberals...come on enough dude. Has nothing to do with it. If that were true, every "republican" would be trying to pass a law banning all muslims from the US, clearly not the case.
Yeah, when you're dealing with radicals and national security you're worried about "breaking the law" a little? I think if it saves lives, I'd be flexible...or your family say, would you prefer we did things wrong and they got killed or bent a few things in order to save hundreds if not thousands?
You know, rewriting the constitution...wanting to alter amendments, laws etc
You're the one that's ignorant here, if you're trying to say that "it wasn't muslims from that part of the world" that attacked us, I'm just going to ignore this totally and/or laugh...Nigerian and British attacked us? uhh yeah....no.
They're not attacking us before of foreign policy alone, that's only part of it it's also a way of them trying to show fear across the world and intimidate us to do what they want thru threats and killing innocents...your second part is pure opinion.
lol we didn't miss it, it was avoided purposely because Clinton was afraid to strike or potentially hurt others in the process...he had no balls, flat out. And due to that, 9/11 happened. How does that not matter?
Well, the scandal was a big distraction, especially when you lie under oath, and you're the president caught with your pants down...but that aside, I don't think that at all. Some republicans were concerned with that, others were concerned about OBL...when did I ever say a sex scandal is more important then Bin Laden? Never said that, but good job putting words in my mouth.
Uhh I was merely pointing out the facts of when that started...I understand perfectly well, do you know why terrorists hate us? They've hated us long before any foreign policy...or even before we were there.
Yes they were, but believe what you want dude. My point was it was linked to muslim extremists just as nutty as Al-Qaeda...why do you deny this?
Uh, America is 10000000000x more powerful then Iraq, thus that's an unfair comparison. We're not radical dictators so we'd negotiate I'm sure. Like said, 3 months procrastinating...lol so sure nothing went on there. We'll just disagree with the Saddam thing.
Dude, I'm not a dem and I agree with the defense spending too much money but it's not the only thing, the Obamacare, surplus etc is also WAY too much....nothing justifies trillions of dollars.
but your view. Still dont think he caved to anyone...republicans least of all.Well, we'll just agree to disagree ok. Romney didn't do the exact same thing, but I don't like him anyway.
I never said you do that, but it does sound like you read liberal sites a lot given your posts. We never had an issue before with churches and paying for abortions, bc...that's why it caused such an uproar, but not previously. Obama's plan is very controversial.
Not at all dude, most schools yes. But not all...you didn't read the link I posted did you?
I'll post more on stats tomo when I have more time, but yes I'm pretty sure most abortions are due to inconvenience MOST of the time, not all though. How am I making assumptions based off facts and logical observation? Why is she forced to destroy it? Why not even consider adoption? Because she don't feel like carrying an extra weight for 9 months? Should have thought of that before she said "fuck me, don't care about protection" then..lol
You brought up crack addict and the mother, I merely elaborated on it.
he didn't make up words, he messed up his words. At least bush could remember his shit, even though he struggled at times. Obama needs his tele lol which implies poor memorization.Lol, dude I've shown you several facts and you've gave me the typical "that's racist/profiling, right wingers are terrorists" etc things that is obviously false because of your emotional feelings...
Ok, since I have to go to class and can't respond to the rest till later I just want to respond to this one thing.
lol. well you're probably right about this. usually these things just keep going back and forth and no one changes their mind. but i can continue if you want.
dude... YOU'RE COMPARING COFFEE BURNS TO THE OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING. what the fuck? these protesters (and might i remind you that the libertarians are a large part of OWS, too) are throwing things for the purpose of being a nuisance, none of them have anything close to murder in mind. your denial here is unbelievable. i'm not comparing right-wingers to terrorists, i'm saying you should at least acknowledge the widespread existence of right-wing terrorism. i don't think all republicans want to kill people in the same way i don't think muslims do either.
we're not talking about murder vs murder. we're talking about a few people throwing shit causing minor injuries at best vs murder. i gave you a list with around 100 instances of mass murder, plots to bomb + kill government workers/politicians/police officers, single murders for the purpose of sending a larger message (abortion doctors, muslims), and a guy who crashed a plane into a government building (sound familiar?) all based on their extreme right-wing ideologies. you gave me a story about a coffee burn and mentioned that some other people have thrown stuff too. the comparison you're trying to make isn't even close. this is why i find this disrespectful. Do you not realize the second largest terror attack on American soil was done by a right-wing extremist?
Wait, what? You're blaming muslims for the Norway attacks? Do you even know what I'm talking about? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks
What do you mean by abortion doctors can be either? The murders/threats against abortion doctors have all come from extreme right-wingers who believe they are doing god's work. I don't know how mass murder committed on the basis of a person's extreme right-wing beliefs is considered "over exaggerating".
The fact that someone can be so brainwashed into thinking the things I'm quoting is what's scaring me the most.
NO, I'm saying a violent act due to being nutty or radical is a violent act! No worries though, I'll be providing proof that leftwings "terrorists" as you call rightwing terrorists as well to counter your point of "it's just right wingers who commit acts like this" totally wrong and false. Some of the protesters are libertarian but majority are liberals, ALL the ones on Wall Street were in fact liberals! You know the ones who caused destruction, mayhem, chaos, businesses to fail, disturbing the peace and fighting with cops occupying Zucotti Park in NYC? Shitting in buckets, peeing, reeking, acting stupid for no reason and not even knowing wtf they're protesting? Did you know that hundreds of both Oakland and NY protestors who majority are liberals committed acts of violence and also hundreds of arrests?
There is no 100 instances lol, I read a few...not hundreds...besides, I just provided hundreds of arrests, acts of violence do to liberals being extreme in both Oakland and last year in NY Wall Street....hurting police, businesses, people around them...uh yeah, you can't blame all right wingers for one nut job...that's like me blaming every liberal out there for that one dumb liberal with the coffee and groups throwing rocks...BOTH sides have nutjobs, period. I'll take a page out of YOUR book, what you said earlier, "breaking the law is breaking the LAW" I don't care if it's murder or vandalism...so now what? You're going to say well "this crime isn't as bad as that crime"? lol So yes it is a close comparison as a bomb or throwing rocks can kill someone. Again, did you not read what stoning is? I love how you just ignored that totally...is a stone not a rock? The second largest attacks on US soil was not done by right wing extremists...not even close guy. However, the largest groups of radical protesters however ARE in fact leftwing liberals...read the links above. Also, why do you liberals get so offended by a difference in opinion? The amount of direspect the left offers the right is near to unequaled and same for the right vs. left at times. But one thing I will say, at least the right doesn't constantly attack personally with their opponents families like liberals do, that's dirty and irrelevant and I don't like that at all when someone's running for something. I don't care what they do with their family, unless they're killing them it's completely irrelevant...and the hypocrisy is mind boggling. Example, when people said "Clinton shouldn't have done that in the white house" all the libs and his fanbase said was "it's his personal life, who cares if he did it while he was working" Yet, with Newt's "past marriage debacles" that's all you hear from the libs, omg he left his wife who had cancer!!! Because that's so relevant lol.
Thought you were referring to the Norway attacks which Muslims did in 09 and 10, via the link I provided...I read your link however and don't see how that's any different from the protesting libs here in Oakland or other cases of the left causing violence, and the ones that were on NY Wall Street(who friends of mine personally saw them causing damage) with cops getting involved...the ones in Oakland as you know already I posted the damage they caused. It's all perspective. That's what again the mainstream media is "labeling the guy by" "rightwing terrorists" you do know that political parties elsewhere is vastly different then ours right? May be similar but not the same. Besides, even protesting libs aside there HAVE been documented cases of both leftwing and rightwing uh "terrorists" if you want to call it that....and it's still less then Islamic radicals. Homegrown terrorists(political left and right) -18% while Islamic terrorists have a 22%...
Not from what I read, I've read several abortion doctors being both left wing as well as right wing at times...and most people FOR abortion ARE liberal...some moderate conservatives. It's over exaggerating because you act as if "every abortion doctor" is a righty....that's funny because most doctors I've met who do abortions or spoken to have told me they're liberals...
The sites you link to are hardly unbiased...
What? The libertarian activists were one of the driving forces behind these protests.
I don't associate mass murder with mild protest violence. Also, even though I live in NY I never bothered with the OWS protests. I agree that not many of the people even knew why they were there except to relive the 60's. They didn't even have an organized plan for what they wanted.
The only relevant link there is about Clay Duke (the school board shooter). They claim he's a liberal because he spraypainted a "V" symbol (that's a liberal symbol now?). In actuality, he was either an anarchist or libertarian. He was very anti-government.
Once again.... http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/terror-from-the-right . I counted for you, 97, and that was only after the OKC bombing.
Once again, that's not NEARLY the same as a terror attack with the intent to kill. This is mild, disorganized violence.
I find this a bit disturbing that you don't find murder any worse than vandalism. I guess the next time someone tags a wall we should try them as if they were Osama bin Laden. I'm not ignoring the rock-throwing, i recognize that that's happened. Once again, you can't pin that on liberals as many different political affiliations were represented at these protests, and once again it clearly involved no intent to kill. It's just to be a nuisance and tell cops that they don't like them.
*facepalm*............... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing . 168 people were killed in just this one attack. and you say a guy who threw hot coffee is no different. this is why i'm offended.
Irrelevant, but ok. And if you think that's why liberals don't like Gingrich you're very far off. However, his situation is quite different than Clinton's. Gingrich acted like it was okay, then proceeded to keep a "pro-family" stance on issues.
I've never heard of this attack... I don't remember you linking a story about this.
So in one case 77 people were killed and in the other there were minor injuries and financial damage. And you say it's all perspective.
Not the same exactly, of course. Norway has their own issues specific to their country. However, the basics are the same. This was an anti-Muslim immigration attack based on right-wing ideology. The same right-wing stance as the US far-right. I'm not accusing you of having this extremist opinion, of course, I'm simply saying right-wing extremism is a serious and deadly issue. Also, you do realize who the right-wing is of the Middle-Eastern countries right? I'll give you an example: The Taliban. The same ideology as far-right groups in this country but with a different religion.
I'm only going to talk about the cases involving murder/attempted murder here, as I already explained that the others are far different (not that I believe they are right). Some of those are cases of "extreme vandalism", by groups like the ALF and ELF, who both have the rule of only attacking with no humans present, Bill Ayers' group is a good example of that. Ann Coulter had her speech cancelled due to protests, no violence or credible threats actually occurred. Amy Bishop's attack was based on anger at her co-workers, it had no basis in politics. Joseph Stack's manifesto was about hatred towards taxes, he was an extreme anti-tax guy. That's why he flew the plane into the IRS building. Remind me when this was a liberal stance, again?
What? No, I was talking about those who kill or threaten to kill abortion doctors. Those are from the right.
