You are clearly on the wrong side of the crazy line if you think that any significant number of americans would believe bin Laden if he were to deny the accusation.
Well I guess we'll never know since he hasn't seen fit to deny the accusation. And you are clearly on the wrong side of the crazy line if you think his hands are clean.
If you work a job and make money, why shouldn't you be allowed to spend it however you see fit? Granted, this flies in the face of Communism and Socialism
Actually it doesn't really fly in the face of communism or socialism. In the those cases it's just the political elites that get to hog all of the resources instead of your average citizen who can afford to use more resources.
Remember all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
My January bill was $170.00 for Upstate NY That was for electric and Gas, in a building over 100 years old. That is Not in any way energy-star complaint.
New York State also gets boned on energy costs notwithstanding how complaint your house is. Our electricity is generated using about the same fuel mix as PA yet costs 40% more. Figure that one out.......
Well, I could be a smartass and say we have the biggest guns so whose gonna stop us, but it would seem that the UN of all places gave us that right:
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Given that we are dealing with an orginization that has attacked us it seems rather obvious that we have the right to deal with that orginization.
It should be obvious to even the most sceptical of readers that claiming credit for 9/11 is probably the most tactically valuable thing bin Laden could do, guilty or not.
It should be equally obvious to even the most skeptical of readers that claiming credit for murdering thousands of American citizens isn't likely to prolong your life expectancy and one shouldn't be surprised when the American people and government respond in a hostile manner to such an admission.
Though I live in the UK and don't particularly see how your right to bear arms helps you avoid a corrupt government
That's only one of many reasons that people might have for wanting to exercise their right to keep and bear arms. Target shooting, hunting and self-defense all come to mind as well. I do think it's ashame that in the UK you've abrogated a Common Law right that went back hundreds of years. And for what? You've still got a violence problem. It's just taking place with knives (and illegal guns) instead.
I guess I just don't see how disarming the law-abiding portion of the citizenry makes anyone safer. I've always been opposed to gun control but I only started speaking out passionately on the issue as of late.
I do agree that the argument is fallacious
Well, thanks for that at least. Nice to meet somebody with a level head every once in awhile.
but it's even easier still to kill someone with a gun
I don't think most (sane) gun owners would deny that it's easy to kill someone with a gun. What we would deny is that providing justification for taking those guns away from law-abiding citizens that don't kill people over video games.
The Taliban always maintained that they did not know where Bin Laden was, and even if they did, they had no control over his actions.
If they had no control over his actions then we had every right to go into that country and capture or kill him. There isn't a nation-state on this planet that would have responded differently if thousands of their citizens were murdered.
This will likely be disregarded as conspiracy theorist whackoism
That's exactly how I'm going to disregard it, given the fact that the SOB and members of his organization have admitted their involvement.
If you're going to launch the most expensive war in history then perhaps make sure there are not gigantic questions surrounding what appears to be a poorly constructed false pretext as a reason for doing it.
9/11 was a false pretext? Or are you confusing Iraq with Afghanistan again?
Over here we question the crap that media shits out on our plate.
Yes, blame the media! Anybody that doesn't agree with you is just eating crap from the media.
You want to eat it and say "yum" then digg.com will suit you better.
If you wanna spout your leftist flower-child bullshit then dailykos.com will suit you better. If you want to tout your "blame Christianity" bullshit then go find a militant atheist site or something.
Rate of imprisonment in the US is about the highest in the world.
So is our rate of obesity but I fail to see the connection between either and firearms. Our rate of imprisonment has more to do with decades of a failed drug policy than it does with firearms.
ALSO. One swift run over 100m in less than 9.69 seconds is all it takes to be the new sprint world record holder. Armed with this new knowledge, what are you waiting for?
If you have a point to make it's completely lost on me......
or a front loading rifle like the 2nd amendment was written for.
Well if that's how you wanna qualify the Bill of Rights then I think we need some regulations on the 1st amendment as well. The Founding Fathers never could have anticipated the horrible power of the internet or cable television.
Would this murder have happened if it would have been harder for the kid the get hold of a gun?
How do you purpose making it harder for him to get his hands on a gun without infringing on the rights of your fellow Americans? Would you have made the same statement if he killed them by running them over or by using an axe?
In some respects, this is the fault of religious "leaders." Christians in the pew are in many cases just blindly following their pastors, priests, elders, and ministers who, instead of preaching the gospel, are preaching the same pro-war politics their congregation hears on the Sean Hannity radio show or else they are not denouncing the debacle in Iraq for what it is
Yeah, there isn't a single member of the religious community that's denounced the Iraq War. And the 50-some percent of the American population that's opposed to the war is entirely made up of Atheists as well.
Obviously, an aggressive, preemptive war against a country with no navy or air force, an economy in ruins after a decade of sanctions, and that was no threat to the United States is not a just war.
You left out the part about the leader of that country oppressing 2/3'rds of his population and killing his own people with poison gas. Mind you I'm not convinced that's sufficient reason for the US to get involved but at least try and tell the whole story.
A Christian fighting for the U.S. Government in Iraq doesn't fall under any of these circumstances.
Most soldiers would tell you that they are soldiers first and Christians second. You follow the orders of your Commander-in-Chief and here's a hint: His name isn't Jesus.
After Bush launched his nebulous "war on terrorism" by having Afghanistan bombed back to the Stone Age
Afghanistan was already in the Stone Age. Perhaps you forgot the part where the Government of Afghanistan harbored the man who murdered thousands of Americans and refused to hand him over to face justice?
Christians who support or remain silent about Bush's "war against terrorism" are terribly inconsistent
Wow, religious people aren't always consistent. Do you want a +5 for that insightful observation?
The fact that the president himself never killed anyone is irrelevant - Adolf Hitler never gassed a single Jew.
I'm surprised you managed to go 10 paragraphs without Godwin'ing yourself....
that it is honorable for Christians to enthusiastically participate in U.S. wars of aggression
Wars of aggression? Afghanistan is a war of aggression? Hmmph.
And if nobody gets mod points... we get to watch I Love Lucy re-runs instead.
If the Slashdot crowd is the only one that gets mod points does that mean there won't be anything on TV besides Mythbusters, Office Space and cult movies with racial epithets in the title?
That said, I think NPR (not sure if that is necessarily the same as PBS though) is decidedly biased as well.
I disagree. I think they've gone out of their way to show both sides of the argument even if one side has a pretty absurd argument that isn't even grounded in reality. I've seen them piss off both Liberals and Conservatives and tend to believe the old adage that you are probably doing something right if everybody is unhappy;)
And I might add, NPR did cover the dog story on "All Things Considered." (Online here. [npr.org])
Hmm, I hadn't heard that. At least they only devoted 2 minutes and 46 seconds to it though. How much time has CNN devoted?
Slashdot Mirror
Your contributions were most illuminating.
I hope they were as illuminating as your flamebait'ish sig
Now we can watch the Republicans sit in and try to resolve problems while the Democrats turn out the lights and go home!
Nothing amuses me more than to see our elected officials resolve disputes by acting like Eric Cartman. "Screw you guys, I'm going home!"
You don't wanna know.
Poor interns and pages.......
You are clearly on the wrong side of the crazy line if you think that any significant number of americans would believe bin Laden if he were to deny the accusation.
Well I guess we'll never know since he hasn't seen fit to deny the accusation. And you are clearly on the wrong side of the crazy line if you think his hands are clean.
I honestly don't know why people are looking at colonizing space before they do the ocean.
You just want a talking dolphin, Wesley Crusher wannabe and Jean-Luc Picard knockoff ;)
Male Astronauts have apparently tried quite a bit
Unless you have a citation for this I'm going to assume that you are confusing the NASA channel with old Cinemax reruns of Emmanuelle in Space ;)
If you work a job and make money, why shouldn't you be allowed to spend it however you see fit? Granted, this flies in the face of Communism and Socialism
Actually it doesn't really fly in the face of communism or socialism. In the those cases it's just the political elites that get to hog all of the resources instead of your average citizen who can afford to use more resources.
Remember all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
My January bill was $170.00 for Upstate NY That was for electric and Gas, in a building over 100 years old. That is Not in any way energy-star complaint.
New York State also gets boned on energy costs notwithstanding how complaint your house is. Our electricity is generated using about the same fuel mix as PA yet costs 40% more. Figure that one out.......
Well, I could be a smartass and say we have the biggest guns so whose gonna stop us, but it would seem that the UN of all places gave us that right:
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Given that we are dealing with an orginization that has attacked us it seems rather obvious that we have the right to deal with that orginization.
Ironically enough he gets a +5 for those links......
It should be obvious to even the most sceptical of readers that claiming credit for 9/11 is probably the most tactically valuable thing bin Laden could do, guilty or not.
It should be equally obvious to even the most skeptical of readers that claiming credit for murdering thousands of American citizens isn't likely to prolong your life expectancy and one shouldn't be surprised when the American people and government respond in a hostile manner to such an admission.
Though I live in the UK and don't particularly see how your right to bear arms helps you avoid a corrupt government
That's only one of many reasons that people might have for wanting to exercise their right to keep and bear arms. Target shooting, hunting and self-defense all come to mind as well. I do think it's ashame that in the UK you've abrogated a Common Law right that went back hundreds of years. And for what? You've still got a violence problem. It's just taking place with knives (and illegal guns) instead.
I guess I just don't see how disarming the law-abiding portion of the citizenry makes anyone safer. I've always been opposed to gun control but I only started speaking out passionately on the issue as of late.
I do agree that the argument is fallacious
Well, thanks for that at least. Nice to meet somebody with a level head every once in awhile.
but it's even easier still to kill someone with a gun
I don't think most (sane) gun owners would deny that it's easy to kill someone with a gun. What we would deny is that providing justification for taking those guns away from law-abiding citizens that don't kill people over video games.
The Taliban always maintained that they did not know where Bin Laden was, and even if they did, they had no control over his actions.
If they had no control over his actions then we had every right to go into that country and capture or kill him. There isn't a nation-state on this planet that would have responded differently if thousands of their citizens were murdered.
This will likely be disregarded as conspiracy theorist whackoism
That's exactly how I'm going to disregard it, given the fact that the SOB and members of his organization have admitted their involvement.
If you're going to launch the most expensive war in history then perhaps make sure there are not gigantic questions surrounding what appears to be a poorly constructed false pretext as a reason for doing it.
9/11 was a false pretext? Or are you confusing Iraq with Afghanistan again?
Over here we question the crap that media shits out on our plate.
Yes, blame the media! Anybody that doesn't agree with you is just eating crap from the media.
You want to eat it and say "yum" then digg.com will suit you better.
If you wanna spout your leftist flower-child bullshit then dailykos.com will suit you better. If you want to tout your "blame Christianity" bullshit then go find a militant atheist site or something.
You don't see lots of British farmers sons going on killing sprees.
Yeah, the Brits don't have any problems at all with youth violence.
its the attitude that a massively out of date law creates in many Americans minds
I think the problem is the attitude of those that would give up an inalienable right because they deem it to be "out of date", but what do I know....
Rate of imprisonment in the US is about the highest in the world.
So is our rate of obesity but I fail to see the connection between either and firearms. Our rate of imprisonment has more to do with decades of a failed drug policy than it does with firearms.
In short: You fail
ALSO. One swift run over 100m in less than 9.69 seconds is all it takes to be the new sprint world record holder. Armed with this new knowledge, what are you waiting for?
If you have a point to make it's completely lost on me......
I mean, come one, how the fuck can you fail murdering your own dad?! How hard can it be? Learn to finish something damnit, lazy ass kids of today!
Well, he was using the wussy ass 9mm. If he had done it right then he might have finished the job ;)
Yeah, I'm going to hell.......
or a front loading rifle like the 2nd amendment was written for.
Well if that's how you wanna qualify the Bill of Rights then I think we need some regulations on the 1st amendment as well. The Founding Fathers never could have anticipated the horrible power of the internet or cable television.
Would this murder have happened if it would have been harder for the kid the get hold of a gun?
How do you purpose making it harder for him to get his hands on a gun without infringing on the rights of your fellow Americans? Would you have made the same statement if he killed them by running them over or by using an axe?
The first amendment should be congress should not involve in citizens activities unless authorised in writing by ALL constituents^W^W^W^W^W^W^W
Fixed that for you.
In some respects, this is the fault of religious "leaders." Christians in the pew are in many cases just blindly following their pastors, priests, elders, and ministers who, instead of preaching the gospel, are preaching the same pro-war politics their congregation hears on the Sean Hannity radio show or else they are not denouncing the debacle in Iraq for what it is
Yeah, there isn't a single member of the religious community that's denounced the Iraq War. And the 50-some percent of the American population that's opposed to the war is entirely made up of Atheists as well.
Obviously, an aggressive, preemptive war against a country with no navy or air force, an economy in ruins after a decade of sanctions, and that was no threat to the United States is not a just war.
You left out the part about the leader of that country oppressing 2/3'rds of his population and killing his own people with poison gas. Mind you I'm not convinced that's sufficient reason for the US to get involved but at least try and tell the whole story.
A Christian fighting for the U.S. Government in Iraq doesn't fall under any of these circumstances.
Most soldiers would tell you that they are soldiers first and Christians second. You follow the orders of your Commander-in-Chief and here's a hint: His name isn't Jesus.
After Bush launched his nebulous "war on terrorism" by having Afghanistan bombed back to the Stone Age
Afghanistan was already in the Stone Age. Perhaps you forgot the part where the Government of Afghanistan harbored the man who murdered thousands of Americans and refused to hand him over to face justice?
Christians who support or remain silent about Bush's "war against terrorism" are terribly inconsistent
Wow, religious people aren't always consistent. Do you want a +5 for that insightful observation?
The fact that the president himself never killed anyone is irrelevant - Adolf Hitler never gassed a single Jew.
I'm surprised you managed to go 10 paragraphs without Godwin'ing yourself....
that it is honorable for Christians to enthusiastically participate in U.S. wars of aggression
Wars of aggression? Afghanistan is a war of aggression? Hmmph.
If anyone honestly believes that U.S. troops would shoot at people who can offer them free beer and flapjacks, than you're insane.
So what your saying is that if we invade Canada we'll be greeted as liberators? ;)
And if nobody gets mod points ... we get to watch I Love Lucy re-runs instead.
If the Slashdot crowd is the only one that gets mod points does that mean there won't be anything on TV besides Mythbusters, Office Space and cult movies with racial epithets in the title?
That said, I think NPR (not sure if that is necessarily the same as PBS though) is decidedly biased as well.
I disagree. I think they've gone out of their way to show both sides of the argument even if one side has a pretty absurd argument that isn't even grounded in reality. I've seen them piss off both Liberals and Conservatives and tend to believe the old adage that you are probably doing something right if everybody is unhappy ;)
And I might add, NPR did cover the dog story on "All Things Considered." (Online here. [npr.org])
Hmm, I hadn't heard that. At least they only devoted 2 minutes and 46 seconds to it though. How much time has CNN devoted?