Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It works for me. Was that a genuine error for you Wrex?

Yep.

You should know I wouldn't pull your leg that badly mate.

Hmm, odd. It's one of the freebie videos so you don't have to register or be a member to watch it.

It works for me every time I go to that page.

I already checked 3 times, the site gets no more clicks from me.

I have no idea why it would work for you, and not for me.

Doesn't work for me either, for what that's worth.

Fateweaver wrote: I hate liberal ideology more than I hate a root canal.

Amusing that you espouse it, then.





It was either a vote for Nixon, or a vote for hte Commies!

I figured it out. You need to take 3 minutes to register. Doesn't cost any money and you don't get any unsolicited emails from the site.

It's conservative so if you aren't might want to stay away from the other videos but I'd seriously watch it and take the few minutes to register.

It's freaking shocking to say the least.

If you decide it's worth the effort its the top video link on the home page titled "The Islamic Infiltration: Inside our government, armed with our secrets".

Again, conservative website so if you are liberal or slightly left than don't bitch about the other videos but I don't even think liberals can justify the secrets revealed in that video.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

Fateweaver wrote: I hate liberal ideology more than I hate a root canal.

Amusing that you espouse it, then.





It was either a vote for Nixon, or a vote for hte Commies!

How do I espouse liberal ideology? I'm against everything they stand for. I'm not pro-gun control, pro-abortion, pro-pc, pro-kissing the worlds ass. I'm a patriot, most liberals aren't. I believe we are an exceptional country, liberals think our country is the worst one on the globe.

Nothing the liberals believe in I believe in so how am I espousing liberal ideology?

Fateweaver wrote:
How do I espouse liberal ideology? I'm against everything they stand for. I'm not pro-gun control, pro-abortion, pro-pc, pro-kissing the worlds ass. I'm a patriot, most liberals aren't. I believe we are an exceptional country, liberals think our country is the worst one on the globe.

You don't understand liberal thought, at all. That said, you've expressed a sense of social neutrality (that's liberals). You've also expressed a sense of global independence (also liberal).

Fateweaver wrote:
Nothing the liberals believe in I believe in so how am I espousing liberal ideology?

See above. Stop looking at the world in two colors.

"Liberal" is a very broad term, so it's pretty hard to avoid being liberal in any usage of it.

(Also, what's social neutrality referring to?)

Social neutrality = indifference to the sensibilities of one's fellows.

Ah, I see.

What is so bad about that? Islamic extremists are terrorists and they should all be treated as such.

If you are an Islamic extremist than quit trying to blow gak up and destroy our country.

If you are an apologist for these gakkers than I want to see how you'd feel if some Islamic rag-head that wants to see all Westerners die blows up a subway or federal building and your wife/gf/children are killed in the explosion.

I personally support SN.

Fateweaver wrote:What is so bad about that? Islamic extremists are terrorists and they should all be treated as such.

Indeed.

Fateweaver wrote:W
If you are an Islamic extremist than quit trying to blow gak up and destroy our country.

Personally, I think you owe us proof of your lack of extremism. Otherwise I might have to report you to the old folk"s home.

Fateweaver wrote:
I personally support SN.

Of course you do. Manly sensibilities and all.

I didn't realize extremists got sent to a retirement home...

I don't know why people are so eager to paint these broad strokes with liberal this and conservative that. I find myself more on the "liberal" side for quite a few things, but I'm more on the "conservative" side concerning Gun control, CCW, etc.

Fateweaver wrote:I can also prove through video that whistleblowers for the FBI have said that the Islamic Brotherhood along with the ACLU have been allowed to sit in on FBI security meetings to make sure that our security measures are not offensive and deemed politically incorrect. Digest that for a moment. Our top security advisors are discussing matters of our nations security with people who we are trying to defend ourselves from to make sure we don't offend them in the process. Absurd and treasonous.

I'll leave you all with a video. I know Shuma and Dogma will claim it's right wing propaganda but I'm tired of arguing. I'm going back to my beer and guns. Maybe at the gun show I'll buy an AK47, drive to Mexico and sell it so I can say I am contributing to the drug cartel problem in Mexico that the liberals say we, as a country, are the cause of.

I registered with that site and sat through 14 minutes of video to find out that the issue was about the FBI’s relationship with the Islamic group CAIR, a story that finished in May or June of last year. Senior members of CAIR were suspected to have links with Hamas and so direct consultation was ended. And that’s it, the FBI was quite explicit in noting this did not condemn all of CAIR (a large and diverse organisation).

Which brings us to the meat of your claim, that these extremist groups were sitting in on security meetings. The interviewer and interviewee talk around the subject, never mentioning the actual meetings CAIR or the ACLU were actually in... because they want you to believe they were invited into meetings over security matters despite it being ludicrously unlikely. Can you imagine any member of the public ever being included in a security meeting?

So you’re left with the scandalous option, or the plausible option that the meetings with the ACLU and CAIR were direct consultations on civil liberties. Which is such a common thing as to be downright boring. Unless the a member of a consultative group ends up having possible connections to Hamas, at which point it becomes embaressing... but no more than that unless you really, really want it to be.

It’s bizarre you’d bring this up anyway, the connections between CAIR and Hamas were exposed in 2007, during the second Bush administration. Is Bush part of the liberal elite that’s surrendering the country to the terrorists? They'd certainly be 'absurd and treasonous' according to your own claim.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Zyklon wrote:I don't know why people are so eager to paint these broad strokes with liberal this and conservative that. I find myself more on the "liberal" side for quite a few things, but I'm more on the "conservative" side concerning Gun control, CCW, etc.

It really depends on what you're interested in. If you're interested in policy and forming a decent government then you'll probably find yourself agreeing with different people at different times. If you're interested in forming a personal identity, in belonging to a group, then you'll probably gind yourself picking a side and internalising all their opinions.

I'd recommend the latter to be honest. You're much more likely to get a job on TV.

sebster wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:

Zyklon wrote:I don't know why people are so eager to paint these broad strokes with liberal this and conservative that. I find myself more on the "liberal" side for quite a few things, but I'm more on the "conservative" side concerning Gun control, CCW, etc.

It really depends on what you're interested in. If you're interested in policy and forming a decent government then you'll probably find yourself agreeing with different people at different times. If you're interested in forming a personal identity, in belonging to a group, then you'll probably gind yourself picking a side and internalising all their opinions.

I'd recommend the latter to be honest. You're much more likely to get a job on TV.

Let's not forget that in general it makes things easier. Instead of having to consider a lot of factors and admitting to a complex world with shades of grey, there are only two options.

Fateweaver wrote:What are we apologizing for? We are not the cause of other nations problems (well the UC Berkely and UC Davis students believe we are but they are brainwashed gakheads).

You seem to have no real knowledge of the history of the USA, the goverment and especially the CIA have many times stook their noses in the affairs of other nations to the benifit of themselves, as a reference look at:
Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba
The multiple assination attempts on foreign leaders
Actions in Europe during the cold war
Guatemala 1954
Turkey 1960
Chile 1973
Argentina 1976
there is alot more, and yes the UK has done stuff too, but it doesn't nulify the fact that these were done

BluntmanDC wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:What are we apologizing for? We are not the cause of other nations problems (well the UC Berkely and UC Davis students believe we are but they are brainwashed gakheads).

You seem to have no real knowledge of the history of the USA, the goverment and especially the CIA have many times stook their noses in the affairs of other nations to the benifit of themselves, as a reference look at:
Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba
The multiple assination attempts on foreign leaders
Actions in Europe during the cold war
Guatemala 1954
Turkey 1960
Chile 1973
Argentina 1976
there is alot more, and yes the UK has done stuff too, but it doesn't nulify the fact that these were done

Wait wait
1. How The Feth doe this relate to Captain Antigun Senator?
2. Actions in Europe? You mean where we had divisions and promised ot commite mutual suicide with the rooskies if they invaded your country right RIGHT? Are actions?

BluntmanDC wrote:You seem to have no real knowledge of the history of the USA, the goverment and especially the CIA have many times stook their noses in the affairs of other nations to the benifit of themselves, as a reference look at:
Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba
The multiple assination attempts on foreign leaders
Actions in Europe during the cold war
Guatemala 1954
Turkey 1960
Chile 1973
Argentina 1976
there is alot more, and yes the UK has done stuff too, but it doesn't nulify the fact that these were done

I suppose that a true "patriot" then is anyone who believes that their country is the best and attacks anyone who they don't believe in. In that way, Fateweaver fits the idea of a patriot perfectly!

Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels.
~ Samuel Johnson

Frazzled wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:What are we apologizing for? We are not the cause of other nations problems (well the UC Berkely and UC Davis students believe we are but they are brainwashed gakheads).

You seem to have no real knowledge of the history of the USA, the goverment and especially the CIA have many times stook their noses in the affairs of other nations to the benifit of themselves, as a reference look at:
Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba
The multiple assination attempts on foreign leaders
Actions in Europe during the cold war
Guatemala 1954
Turkey 1960
Chile 1973
Argentina 1976
there is alot more, and yes the UK has done stuff too, but it doesn't nulify the fact that these were done

Wait wait
1. How The Feth doe this relate to Captain Antigun Senator?
2. Actions in Europe? You mean where we had divisions and promised to commit mutual suicide with the rooskies if they invaded your country right RIGHT? Are actions?

You beat me to it, curse you!

I'd love to hear the "multiple assassination attempts on foreign leaders", given there's an executive order in place PREVENTING those very attempts.

if it prevents a war, why would I care?

True, but we can't just go around blowing off politico's heads willynilly.

We just don't have enough bullets!

True, I'm not sure what I'm arguing about, that comment about the US caught me off guard.

Frazzled wrote:if it prevents a war, why would I care?

Because sometimes it causes them later?

Frazzled wrote:True, I'm not sure what I'm arguing about, that comment about the US caught me off guard.

To be fair, it's just another case of a ridiculous statement made off facts from conspiracy theorists.

The US supplies quite a bit of ammo.

I don't think we'd have an ammo shortage so long as Hornady and Federal stay in business.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:if it prevents a war, why would I care?

Because sometimes it causes them later?

I am sure that could occur. As we've not been very good at it historical examples might be helpful in this context.

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:if it prevents a war, why would I care?

Because sometimes it causes them later?

I am sure that could occur. As we've not been very good at it historical examples might be helpful in this context.

Afghan conflicts, the creation of the polar and destructive north korean state, the creation of the Israeli state, the Cuban Missile crisis. We tend to try and pull honey directly out of bee's nests at times, often without gloves. It very often comes back and bites us (or more often creates severe instability in the region which directly effects billions of non americans (the current conflicts being a great example)).

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:if it prevents a war, why would I care?

Because sometimes it causes them later?

I am sure that could occur. As we've not been very good at it historical examples might be helpful in this context.

Afghan conflicts, the creation of the polar and destructive north korean state, the creation of the Israeli state. We tend to try and pull honey directly out of bee's nests at times, often without gloves.

Wait who did we assassinate in Afghanistan again? Who did we assinate to create north Korea (which was occupied by Russia if recollect)? Who did we assassinate to create Israel (which was British if I recollect-wait did we do a hit on the Queen?)?