Jump to content
3000AD Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by aramike

  1. aramike

    U.S should pull out!!

    quote: Give it up Aramike, these people are clueless, and are also clueless about who they are talking to, Obviously....LOL Have fun with them if you want, but the ignorance has gotten so far under my skin, that I just can't handle watching it anymore. LOL! Jag, you know me ... have a hard time giving up on most any argument. quote: How did this turn into a tin-foil hat discussion?Good label. But, alas: quote: I don't believe that there was anything materially different about the events of 9/11 than what was given in the 9/11 Commission Report for the most part. I do however believe that 9/11 was the wet dream of the neo-Conservative movement who were itching for an excuse to begin nation building in the Middle East.See, I don't think anyone wants to be charged with "nation-building" in the middle east, despite what libs think. Frankly, I think most conservatives would rather cut ties. The problem is that LIBERALS have made it so difficult for the western world to be self-sustaining that we are somewhat reliant upon mid-east resources. OK, fine. You DO NOT want us to drill in ANWAR. You DO NOT want us to expand off-shore drilling. You DO NOT want to issue resolutions backing Isreal as a sovereign government. Etcetera. Therefore, we are FORCED to deal with middle eastern governments. Is is SO FREAKIN' WRONG to want to do so on OUR, democratically-appointed TERMS? quote: I'm well placed to know how politics can be dirty at a point a few lives don't count when it comes to create an environment suited to implement given policies. That said, I have a hard time viewing 9/11 as a conspiracy because there are 35K peeps working for the NSA in the USA, not counting another 25K outsourced operatives, and the fact that New-Zealand, Canada, the UK and Australia also share significant amounts of NSA's intel and SIGINT infrastructure. Think about that Intelink, NSA's private network, serves over 265'000 customers... The whole information dissemination conduit is designed to allow "CRITIC" class messages to reach the US president within 10 minutes when an event arises. I'am not even talking about chinese and russian eyes & ears.... With so much people involved bugging all what goes on air and cable, traffic related to the design, logistics, and final implementation of such a conspiracy would not have gone unnoticed, and it is dubious that everybody at the NSA would have considered such stunt as legitime enough to shut their mouths. Most of them are scientists, not politicians or extremists. Precisely. Heh, the NY Times can't even keep it's lid on FRONT PAGE publishing of classified information. But somehow they kept the lid on THIS? Like Silk said - Tin Foil Hat.
  2. aramike

    U.S should pull out!!

    quote: That was hardly an exercise in logic and displays some ignorance about modern warfare and the importance placed on information control.Umm yeah. Perhaps I should clue you in to the fact that you're talking to a guy who's 17 year military career was in "information control". quote: It is conceivable and very probable that someone perpetrating a hoax of this magnitude would want to control the flow of information about it to ensure it is perceived in the manner intended.I agree. But that's where your logic completely dodges my point. Yes, someone perpetuating a hoax of this magnitude would want to control information regarding it. NO, they would not likely be ABLE TO. quote: It's called Pys-ops and it is done all the time.Sorry, sir, but that is NOT Psy-Ops. Psy-Ops are information campaigns dedicated to causing a specific emotional and/or psychological response to information. What you're referring to is called "Information Warfare" which involves the control and dissemination of information. quote: We've already been caught manipulating the press in Iraq. Did you miss that one? Nope. Didn't miss that one. Did you miss the fact that the IRAQI press doesn't have NEARLY the power of the American and British media? Or, did you COMPLETELY overlook the fact that the American media has the FIRST AMMENDMENT protecting it's dissemination of information? quote: Due to the similarities in the CNN report it begs the question, Where did that information come from? A fax? A hand-written note? Did it come off an API feed or what? Those are reasonable questions to ask about this. I think they were handed something that came over the 'wire' or whatever and just read it. The CNN reporter had the savvy to know the building had not yet fallen and expressed dismay at the report as he was reading it.Could have been a simple error. I mean, maybe its news to you but the press has been known to jump the gun in sensationalizing things. Now, I know you probably WANT to think that its a grand government conspiracy, but... quote: Where is the logic in the BBC loosing all the tapes from that day? They are lying. Someone would have had to destroy multiple copies in multiple formats. They didn't loose anything. You have to ask yourself why they would say such a thing knowing that many people would understand the great unlikelihood of that happening. Show me where the BBC ITSELF says they lost all of the tapes, not just where someone says that they say it. quote: What do you call the footage? What do you call the admission of BBC that it indeed did happen? It happened that is irrefutable. We have it on video. You can watch it happen in the CNN footage and the BBC footage. The latest Star Wars took what, a year or so to make a FULL LENGTH film? People would have had YEARS to edit simple background footage on a news report. The footage is not that impressive. quote: And yes, there are clips with timestamps.Okay... where? And why should we trust them?
  3. quote: They should change thier name to Gank Squad.LOL! That's Best Buy for ya...
  4. aramike

    U.S should pull out!!

    quote: The whole Liberally-biased media business is a myth. No, I'm saying it is obvious the media was being used to shape the public perception of the WTC 7 destruction. Actually, its a pretty well-acknowledged fact. The myth is perpetuated by people who try to pretend that fact doesn't exist. quote: No, I'm saying it is obvious the media was being used to shape the public perception of the WTC 7 destruction. And, I am saying that you're wrong. Conspiracy theories usually fail to pass muster because they don't stand up to logic. And, it is NOT logical that the Bush administration can use the media to conceal hidden 9/11 agendas but fail to get them to stop reporting about subjects not so flattering to them. quote: CNN, BBC, and now I hear ABC all reported the fall of building 7 before it happened. Umm, nope. Actually, most of the feeds of the BUILDINGS falling on 9/11 on those stations are readily available on the Internet. Oh, and they SHOW THE BUILDINGS FALLING LIVE AS THEY REPORT IT. AT THE SAME TIME. You've been conned. quote: This is purely a matter of reporters reading the teleprompter and trusting that the producer knows what they are talking about.Clearly you know NOTHING about how news is produced. "Live" reporters don't read from teleprompters. Anchors do, and ONLY during scheduled newscasts. Hmm, but on most networks, reporters on the SCENE reported the tower collapse. quote: Several networks reported the same false information in much the same way at the same time. It seems reasonable to say they received the information from the same source. The source needs to be identified. "Right" But, you have absolutely NO PROOF that this occured. Wait, you must have been able to pick up on something that EVERY news network and reasonable person missed for the last 6 years... ...or you got duped. quote: Whatever the explanation wouldn't you agree that it needs to be throughly investigated? The evidence at this point is irrefutable. Major TV networks were feed a story about WTC 7 falling and "why" before it happened by someone.There IS NO EVIDENCE, not to mention NONE THAT IS IRREFUTABLE. Logic: Think about how stupid it would be to give notice on an event such as this to the media when the media would CLEARLY require NO NOTICE to cover it. Hmm. But the same people were smart enough to pull it off. Right. Oh, and funny how this quote comes from a website reporting this so-called discorvery: quote: Although there is no clock or time stamp on the footage, the source claims the report was given at 4:57pm ESTWow. Good job relying on an unidentified source. [ 03-02-2007, 04:26 AM: Message edited by: aramike ]
  5. aramike

    U.S should pull out!!

    Yeah, sure... Somehow the US government alerted the BBC to this and the HUNDREDS of people who would HAVE to be involved to simply air it kept things under a tight lid until the Internet exposed it... If the US government (led by GWB) was going to blow up its own buildings, do you REALLY think that they would alert a LIBERALLY-BIASED MEDIA to it and expect that it would be kept under wraps? Heh, the media will report anything to get Bush in hot water... except the ONE thing that really would... Right.
  6. I still long for the days of the original Wing Commander...
  7. aramike

    A return to the old days....

    quote: Originally posted by Cruis.In: Derek, one question, I'm not sure I understand why the Xbox360 ver comes or must come a year after the PC one. I think he said the opposite - PC version a year after 360. The reasoning is simple: to help sell consoles.
  8. aramike

    Deputy kills teen while serving warrant

    Maybe if he wasn't conducting armed robberies (which, ironically the article doesn't state until about halfway through; can we say "bias"?), the cops wouldn't have to be so jumpy. I'll start being concerned when good citizens are getting shot out-of-line. When the small percentage of overall criminals being shot occurs, I really have no worries...
  9. aramike

    The Tax Debate

    quote: Yeah, Aramike, way to debate with facts.Actually, I am debating with facts. I'm conservative - which means I believe constructionally in the Constitution. And here are the REAL facts that you either don't know or ignore. The fact is that through the 16th Ammendment taxes are allowed to be levied at the discretion of Congress (specifically the House as granted later). Although I'm certain you'll ignore those facts, alas I'll present portions of the Constitution that argues against the absurdities you propose: ARTICLE THREE, SECTION THREE: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted. That should at least partially answer why you can't simply execute people for violations of the Constitution. However, in case you wish to argue against that, you may want to research what you consider to be "against the Constitution" with regards to taxes. Here, I'll put it in bold italics: READ the Constitution before claiming that something is in violation of the Constitution. Regarding taxes, here's the 16th Ammendment (which you've clearly ignored): The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration. Here's another one, ARTICLE 2 SECTION 3 regarding the Presidency and laws: Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States. Since the words "faithfully executed" rely upon judgement, how can you possibly subject officials to EXECUTION based upon ANYONE'S JUDGEMENT? In case you haven't read it (which I don't think you have), the Constitution doesn't allow for punishment based upon interpretation. However, considering that the Constitution SPECIFICALLY allows for ammendment and interpretation, what you propose would be akin to a police state. Oh, and it's stupid. Let's say that the people who interpret the Constitution decide that it means something YOU don't agree with. Then you would be subject to punishment. Good thing the Constitution SPECIFICALLY CALLS FOR Constitutional disagreements to be settled CIVILLY, and NOT CRIMINALLY (except for treason). Hmmm, so where are these violations that you speak of? If not taxes, than what's the point in relation to this thread? quote: Look up "Police state" aramike. It's when the CITIZENS are oppressed by the government, NOT when the government is accountable TO the citizens.Maybe you missed the part about our government being for the people, BY THE PEOPLE. Citizen government - any criminal restrictions upon it are against CITIZENS, and we would therefore be a POLICE STATE. Considering that a POLICE STATE would allow the police to have absolute control, and that YOU propose that the government be at the mercy of the judgement of a criminally prosecuting organization (versus that organization being at the mercy of the citizen government), you propose a POLICE STATE. See, the Constitution grants 3 co-equal branches of government and SPECIFICALLY CALLS for governmental and Constitutional disagreements to be settled through a civil process (NOT a criminal process). Civil law does NOT allow for execution or imprisonment, PERIOD. You may want to come equipped with facts next time.
  10. aramike

    The Tax Debate

    quote: Originally posted by Soback: What a fallacy, to justify a wrongdoing by pointing out a worse wrongdoing. It's like saying that Sadam wasn't bad because when compared to Stalin or Hitler, he only killed a couple of million as opposed dozens of million. Or how about, "Hey, my house was robbed, but it's ok because they only took the tv and some jewlery. The neighbors house on the other hand was cleaned out. So I don't mind." Wouldn't be suprised if in a decade there will be insurgency, trying futilely to expose and overthrow this corrupt, illegitimate goverment, by force. That's why accountability on personal level, and extreemly tough sentences need to be imposed and enforced on every government employee. If a government employee (appointed, elected or hired) knowingly violates the Constitution, it's execution time. Corrupt/illegal conduct = labor camp. Willfull incompetence = prison time. Gross incompetence = termination without any further ability in government employment, for life. Only then will you get a clean government. There will NEVER be responsibility without accountability, those two go hand in hand. Without these ideas being instituted, we the sheep will always be getting fleeced and abused. ...and therefore open the nation up to tyranny and oppression as a police state. No thanks. I'd rather pay taxes.
  11. quote: Originally posted by Voli0: N.Y Times article That's good IMO. Hopefully they'll get out something to dig out all the crap Bush administration is trying to cover. -v If you KNOW that the administration is trying to cover something up, then why do you need additional documents to prove it? Seems like you don't know squat. You only hope. I find it sad that you hope for betrayal.
  12. aramike

    All-Insurgent November 2006 Rollcall

    Oh man we need some drama around here...
  13. aramike

    UCLA student tasered

    Why the hell do certain people always feel the need to defend the "crook"? Is there some underlying issue surrounding "authority" that somehow makes every decision they make the wrong one? It's amazing how the people who continuously criticize the authorities have no idea what it's like to actually walk in their shoes... Oh, and he was TASERED, not SHOT. Is the need to protest authority so deep that even HUMANE methods of restraint are not acceptable?
  14. aramike

    Talk about a back stabbing

    quote: Originally posted by LostInSpace: I hope the republican party asks for all the money back they made available for his republican campaign. True dat. Unfortunately, however, it's called the "cost of doing business". The funny thing is, though, that this guy probably received hardly anything in the first place...
  15. aramike

    PS3 Fiasco!

    quote: Originally posted by Kalshion: You know, Ebay shouldn't allow that type of selling, when a new item, like a console, is JUST released, it should RESTRICT sale of that item for at least a month. That would discourage people from pulling this crap, but also make it a crime to do something like this so soon after the item was released. It's supposed to be a crime: profiteering. When you try to sell something with actually no risk whatsoever (if you don't sell it, just return it), that's essentially profiteering.
  16. aramike

    Talk about a back stabbing

    quote: This should only be allowed pre election as Lieberman did.Look, I know where you're coming from and I think the guy's a snake ... however ... ...considering that an elected politician can vote however he wishes on any issue, what would be the point of not allowing someone to change parties? Say he stayed Republican and voted everything Democrat... what would be the difference? We both know that it would be a shame to only allow votes to be along party lines so there is no real solution to this problem... ...except the ballot box.
  17. aramike

    Internet Explorer 7 and cookies....help please.

    Make sure your IE options are correctly set and that your security level allows for cookies.
  18. aramike

    God help us it's starting already

    quote: Originally posted by Jaguar: quote:Originally posted by aramike: Isn't it amazing, though, how Democrats apparently think you don't have the same rights if your an Arab human? But if you are a terrorist Arab human, willing to blow yourself and innocents up, then you have all the rights that the Constitution grants US citizens. ...and yet we elected these people...
  19. Bye bye, Crispy. For those who are curious, thanks to a member of the community who informed me that this may be a banned individual, I've been keeping an eye on this moron. My philosophy is to just see if he screws up or acts like an ass. In my opinion, posting a thread with no point other than to be inflammatory is acting like an ass. Then to reply to yourself 3 times with nothing but anedoctal BS is acting like an ass. Finally, to register to a board that banned you with an IP address that is oddly similar (read: damned near the same) to other banned IP addresses is acting like an ass. So, I banned pretty much that whole IP. If anyone has any problems logging in due to that, please email [email protected] so someone can rectify the situation.
  20. aramike

    God help us it's starting already

    quote: Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: Comparing Iraq to China is just.plain.silly. Heck, he can't even think of whacking the moron over in South Korea, let alone Iran or China. Sadamn was an easy target. Besides, they have oil. Actually, the context of the comparison is far from silly. Human rights are human rights. Period. They're not different in Iraq or China or the US. If you're a human you have certain rights, I believe. Isn't it amazing, though, how Democrats apparently think you don't have the same rights if your an Arab human?
  21. aramike

    It is official...

    quote: Originally posted by CrispyCritters: Gee fellas...looks like the Dems just took the Senate. Looks like you be 'crispycritters' for a change. Bush should be crapping his pants about now. Because he going to be impeached for starting this war in Iraq under false pretenses. I highly doubt the new conservative democrats are going to go along with that... ...but feel free to fantasize.
  22. quote: By its nature, history is something that cannot be researched explicitly, like we can do research on most natural sciences. Of course, the results of historical events are to be seen to everyone, but the true events leading in results often remains elusive. History research is merely making assumptions, some based on better documentary, some worse. You should know all that if you're history student. And thats also why I make a distinction between true past and history.This is total gobbledegook, and has nothing to do with the point of the discussion. It's a sign that you really don't have nowhere else to go. Realistically, while history may be written by the victor, there are ways of dilleneating historical facts and theories. We all know for a FACT that certain events happened, and that they led to other events. This would include CONFLICT TO SECURE FREEDOM. Seriously, you're not going to confuse myself or the issue by attempting to muddy historical minutae to the point where we don't even know what we're talking about anymore. The fact is that people fought for YOUR freedoms. The fact is that you don't appreciate it. The fact is, it's a shame that you shamelessly exercise the freedoms that, by extension, you don't believe you should have.
  23. quote: Originally posted by Voli0: I'd guess that the reason why elections in US are often dirty because their politics are it aswell. More you can blame the other, more you have chances of success by yourself. Discusting. I guess you can call an university professor a nutcase anytime, they often don't have a clue about anything... -v Or we can all just use your line of thinking and be so tunnel-visioned into attempting to make reality fit your vision of the world that you can't even see the world for what it is...
  24. quote: Originally posted by Voli0: If you would know more about the true past, you wouldn't be so optimistic about it. Its full of dark and bloody things, and it would be about time to step out of that road. -v Umm, actually, I'm an avid student of history. While I'm not quite sure what you mean about this so-called "true past" of yours, I do agree that it was chock full of dark and bloody things. Far moreso than today is. Yet another benefit of people fighting and dying for good causes. But I'm sure you probably don't grasp that concept...
  25. quote: Well, history is as it is. There's no way that I could've affected in it, so what should I be grateful for? Should I accept killing because it may have prevented more serious crimes? Should I accept it just because it has happened before? I wonder how many soldiers are soldiers because of its 'nobility', and not because of money and pure barbarism? In my opinion, justifying killing with 'noble purposes' of liberation or freedom is just another way to make one capable to live with it. All excuses. I wonder if we'll fight fire with fire 'till we all burn?So, in your opinion your freedom to speak openly and detract from authority isn't noble enough to fight for? Someone fought for that, even though you don't appreciate it. In fact, your callous dismissal of that fact leads me to believe that you should either simply shut up (because you don't evidently believe you should have the right to speak) or be casually disregarded. You want to know why your utopian ideas will never catch on? How on earth are people going to trust those like you to lead us into the future if you can't appreciate the past?