biggest douche in the universe nominee...
polycounter lvl 18
step aside John Edwards!
I give you...Doug Copp
He was at the WTC's ground zero for only days and received $650,000 from September 11th Victims Compensation Fund after he claimed to have developed several illnesses from his "work" there. He has also asked for another $1 million.
He has also gone to other disaster sites to "help" and does nothing but make sure to gets in front of a camera.
I give you...Doug Copp
He was at the WTC's ground zero for only days and received $650,000 from September 11th Victims Compensation Fund after he claimed to have developed several illnesses from his "work" there. He has also asked for another $1 million.
He has also gone to other disaster sites to "help" and does nothing but make sure to gets in front of a camera.
Replies
I'm fairly certain it can't cost that much to cure one man of a few ailments. Especially if he already got $650,000. That's just greed.
The US president and his neo-con cronies made a lot more money out of 911 than that, this guy is a mere pittance compared to them and their warmoungering.
[/ QUOTE ]
and exactly how did George Bush make money off of a terrorist attack?
(hey, he started it...........)
Halliburton made alot of money, but only because they are just about the ONLY company on that scale that is willing to go into a warzone and rebuild a country's infrastucture from the ground up, not like this ass that is making a profit off of the death of over 3,000 people. So please before you spew more garbage from your mouth like that have SOME facts to back it up Hawken.
[/ QUOTE ]
All US presidents after ww2 have used attacks on their own country to go to war. Vietnam was started by allegations of 3 speed boats being shot out of the water. They never existed. Hundreds of thousands died.
Bush answered a question from a child soon after the attacks at an open air conference: "how did you feel when you saw the first plane in the 9/11 attack?" he replied "that morning when I was reading to the kids it was on TV before I entered the class..." The first plane wasn't shown hitting until 24 hours after the attack. For me, and others, this is damning evidence. He confused watching their own CCTV with news. (the footage was recorded by a french news crew making a documentry about fire fighters)
In addition, all investigations into major disasters in the US have taken a few days after any tragic incident. The 9/11 investigation took over 200 days to get started, with major cover ups all over the place, bush and cheney wouldn't testify under oath and the investigators were also chairmen of oil companies.
The FCC warning before the attacks was issued some 45 minutes before the first plane hit, but only 6 fighter jets were allowed to be scrambled, as nearly all of Americas jets were in a training exercises in Canada. Coincidence? PS: these jets were sent in the opposite direction, making it impossible to return in time.
Action wasn't taken to stop these events. Despite huge warnings, letters from Israeli intelligence and other intelligence months before. They let this happen for one reason, to control the oil market in Iraq. As we're at "peak oil" - meaning that this is the highest resource before the decline, it is in the vested interest of Bush and his neo cons to make this happen.
Innocent people died in 9/11, and innocent soldiers are dieing everyday because of this mans greed. Hitler did EXACTLY the same thing to start the second world war by torching the (I don't know the name) building, killing his own people and blaming it on terrorists. He then convinced the country that they should strike back against terrorism thus creating nation acceptance to his plans. He over threw the government and installed the third Reich.
If you take time to study history, you will notice this is not a unique event. Saddam Hussain, as evil as he was, along side Osama, were icons for the news media to use. Don't believe it for one second. Question everything. The English used the excuse of "primitives" when conquering the Americas. "Communists" when "liberating" Vietnam. And now "terrorists" and "WMD" for Iraq.
Easy To Swallow Pills.
Just remember that the oil we use today, is paid for in brave soldiers blood, following orders for a fake war, orchestrated by what could be considered one of the coldest acts of treason against the American public the world has ever seen. And it's not going to get any better as "peak oil" becomes a word cropping up.
Of course there's always the stand point that this was all unknown. Thats a 1 in 5 million chance supposedly. Bush and all the others at the top of this dreadful fiasco are connected to the oil industry. Why else would they spend more than 7 billion dollars on this war? That's the 3 billion Clinton saved for welfare before he landed on his ass for getting sucked off. And 4 billion debt for your children to pay off.
These are my own words and research. This is not some drivel copied from a website, although I can dig out references and proof for these facts, because I doubt this sort of shit is mentioned or questioned on State-run Media.
time to put on the air con.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/defensenationalsecurity.htm
the whole plan is laid out in the document called "Rebuilding america's Defense"
and even before 9/11 attacking iraq was on their agenda
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqmiddleeast2000-1997.htm
in 1998 there is an article listed called "how to Attack Iraq"
go to the website and look around they make no secret of what their plans were prior to 9/11
http://www.newamericancentury.org/index.html
under the statement of principles look at the name of the signatories
Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz
see any familiar names?
odd how all of this was laid out and alot of it has come to be?
the website itself is not an indictment but there is cause for alarm, why would a president oppose an investigation to such a horrific event? some people might call it conspiracy theories but when alot of it has been laid out even before 9/11 by the same people who came to power facts like that cant be ignored.
Innocent people died in 9/11, and innocent soldiers are dieing everyday because of this mans greed. Hitler did EXACTLY the same thing to start the second world war by torching the (I don't know the name) building, killing his own people and blaming it on terrorists. He then convinced the country that they should strike back against terrorism thus creating nation acceptance to his plans. He over threw the government and installed the third Reich.
[/ QUOTE ]
They also started using the term "Homeland" or "Hauptland," to create a sense of racial unity, which is one of the reasons the term "Homeland Security" that the Bush administration has begun to use has always bothered me. I mean, before 9/11, how often did you hear the term "homeland"?
[ QUOTE ]
Just remember that the oil we use today, is paid for in brave soldiers blood, following orders for a fake war, orchestrated by what could be considered one of the coldest acts of treason against the American public the world has ever seen.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's not a fake war -- the war is very real -- but it is an illegal war. After the leaking of the "Downing Street Memo," I don't understand how anyone could defend this administration's intentions in this war.
for example when kofi annon suggested that this war might be an illegal war all of the pundits and news commentators called the alligations offensive,rediculous,insulting and instantly decried them on their shows ,but what they didnt do was actually examine the issue, none of the mainstream reporters you see on CNN,fox new,msnbc did not actually go on their show,dicuss international law,find flaws in kofis assertion based on international laws and the describe at length why it wasnt an illegal war, instead they just scoffed at it without actually examining the issue.
and for the downing street memo,i remember the scandal it caused in britian when released there, the coverage in such british news outlets such as the BBC,the guardian and the independant was in depth,but the story was buried here in the states,i found almost no mention of it in the mainstream media,and when it was finally reported about in this country it was months after the story and many of the news outlets did not report about it decrying it as irrelavent.
instead we get stories on micheal jackson and celebrtities.
unfortunatly too many people rely purely on our entertainment based mainstream media in this country and what it does is under and misinforms people here.
for example a study was done awhile back on how well informed people were based on what news channel they relied on and 2 out of 3 people who watched fox news believed WMD were found in Iraq and that Al qaida was connected to iraq.
2 out of 3 people misinformed on what a channel reports is an appualing percentage for misinformed viewers for any news outlets.
the next distraction news will cover here is the hurricane coverage,always the same stories, a reporters out in the storm talking about how bad it is, footage of the destruction then human interests stories on how people pick up the pieces afterwards.
keyser you seem too well informed to be an american? are you german?
i often recommend to friends of mine who want to be more well informed to look for their news from many various outlets i personally like
The BBc world service
The independent of London
The gaurdian
Rueters
the associated press
El harretz (good iraeli newspaper)
FAIR (fairness and accuracy in reporting)
NPR
agence france
also a good book on how media works in the US read "Manufacturing Consent" by noam choamsky which gives a good detailed break down on how news is reported and filtered in this country
Click the Knife Party link in the pop-up to find the link to the unbelievably gorgeous and persuasive 'Barry Says' movie.
I've never seen a better use of a 'propaganda' design style to perform that exact function.
/jzero
Since I hate streaming, here's a download link: http://www.knife-party.net/movs/barry.mov
on the other side please don't EVER quote bush, that poor bastard is the WORST public speaker on the planet. and I'm sorry, there is no way in hell you will EVER convince me that over 5000 people died because of our presidents greed for oil, if that were so then why is oil almost 60 gallons a barrel and we're paying out the ass in gas prices? oh and since when has this all been a new threat, the Clinton administration had this information also and chose not to do anything about it, at least Bush is taking action and taking the fight to them instead of them bringing it to us, i dont agree with everything Bush does, but at least he understands that these people CANNOT BE TALKED TO or negotiated with. they don't give a damn about negotiating or peace, they blow themselves up in hope killing a few of us, it's our way of life they hate, they dont want modern society, free thinking, freedom of religion or hell even for women to vote or have rights. this debate will never change anyone's mind, but i love hearing everyone's opinion regardless of wether or not i agree.
anyways, get back to works slackers!
Also high oil price = huge profit, not like it costs more to pump out of the earth. (did you really think that Bush would try to keep oil price low for the sake of the people??)
regardless, define a "legal" war for me first, since when did countries start asking for legal permission to start a war? name ONE war where both countries were all "Heck yes, lets kick eachothers asses!"
[/ QUOTE ]
A "legal" war is one that is in accordance with the UN Charter. The United States is a signatory of said charter, so we are obligated to abide by those "rules" of war. We incited a pre-emptive, unilateral war with a country that was of no immediate threat to or nation; that is an illegal war. Look up the "Downing Street Memo." It is an official document that was leaked, which essentially proves that the Bush administration's "WMD/Al Qaeda link/Iraqi liberation" was a fabrication to garner support for what would be an illegal war. They knew it would be an illegal war, and that whole meeting was about how they could get away with it.
[ QUOTE ]
oh and since when has this all been a new threat, the Clinton administration had this information also and chose not to do anything about it
[/ QUOTE ]
Clinton orchestrated an attack on a little known organization called "AL QAEDA." Of course, the conservatives lambasted him and claimed that Clinton was just trying to use the attack as a "distraction" from the Monica distraction. Because we all know what a crime against humanity that whole Monica situation was
[ QUOTE ]
at least Bush is taking action and taking the fight to them instead of them bringing it to us, i dont agree with everything Bush does, but at least he understands that these people CANNOT BE TALKED TO or negotiated with. they don't give a damn about negotiating or peace, they blow themselves up in hope killing a few of us, it's our way of life they hate, they dont want modern society, free thinking, freedom of religion or hell even for women to vote or have rights. this debate will never change anyone's mind, but i love hearing everyone's opinion regardless of wether or not i agree.
[/ QUOTE ]
Who are "them" and "those people"? The people we're killing in Iraq, and the people that are killing us, are IRAQIS. They had nothing to do with 9/11; they are not terrorists. What they are are enemy combatants fighting an occupying force (us). Your argument about "them" hating free thinking and things like women's rights is utter bullshit. As bad as Saddam was, at least he was a secularist, and under his regime women had most of the same rights as men: they could have jobs, they could wear what they wanted, and they were not relegated to a life of servitude. Since we've come in, and brought "democracy," the religious extremists have come into power, and have gone back to the old ways of making women second class citizens. You have it backwards.
And as soon as informed issues were pointed out to you, you had NO comeback. And instead you tried to shrug it off and say "ha, my opponent is stupid, he thoguht Saddam ws a good man."
I'm all for debate, but uninformed people look stupid in a debate. Thank you for reasserting my assumptions.
As for the legality of the war,like was said before there was no authorization for this by the UN, there was a previous warning but for furthur military action a new resolution was needed. Thats the international version of of the legality now on to the national laws which apply,the constitution article VI clause 2 states
"Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding"
first we viloated the UN which this contry is a signatory to and secondly we have violated the Geneva conventions which was a signatory to as well through the goverment policy of torture which has been shown to be not an isolated incident and in fact policies encouraged by Roberto Sanchez and Donald Rumsfeld.
and what angers me the most is that the people who have made these mistakes are not being held accountable but instead given medals by the president.
No one is saying Saddam is a good man,but thats not why we went there,we were told it was an imminant threat, despite all UN efforts we were going to invade anyway and we bypassed the UN in which we are a signatory to which by the constitution means that laws of war made in the UN and the Geneva conventions are the law of the land.
and as someone mentioned as well,the Iraqis have never bombed us,they did not do 9/11,they did not support al qaida and they were never an extremist Ilamic nation, its true Saddam was a bad man but so in Iran we have a bad goverment which does support terrorisim, is poised on nuclear weaponry and has the potential to get it same for North Korea what will we do when we actually have to act on a real threat? how inclined will people be to believe us or support us after Iraq.
Here are some links:
http://www.mikehersh.com/Clinton_vs_Terror_Republicans_vs_Clinton.shtml
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/7/30/154040/162
http://archive.democrats.com/preview.cfm?term=Clinton%20vs.%20Terrorism
http://www.mikehersh.com/Republicans_sabotaged_Clintons_Anti-Terror_Efforts.shtml
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=43926
The people we're killing in Iraq, and the people that are killing us, are IRAQIS.
[/ QUOTE ]
Keyser, while this is true in principle, it's also true that the insurgency includes fighters from all over the Middle East, who are there to do their business where nobody, it seems, can really stop them.
Heh.
/jzero
on the other side please don't EVER quote bush, that poor bastard is the WORST public speaker on the planet.
[/ QUOTE ]
Foehammer: Quoting bush is about the only ammunition people have, his mistakes are like threads into the truth.
I'm interested to know what people think of the previous Iraq war lead by the previous bush?
Incredibly, this was started by 2 Iranians testifying in court that the Iraqis raided a hospital and threw sick babies from their incubators.
It turned out that both of these Iranians were actors, one the foreign ministers daughter! Still, it was enough to brainwash the American public, and the 1st gulf war started.
I don't take the Iraqis for being dumb Of course their news was filled with just as much non-sense. But imagine how they feel when the united states finds not one but two totally fabricated reasons to commit to war.
If not oil. Then what for?
(think what this has been said in this thread, makes the biggest profiteers of 911 were the american goverment)
No, you see Keyser is informed, and was able to present his informed views, whereas you are not informed, and argue on generalisation.
And as soon as informed issues were pointed out to you, you had NO comeback. And instead you tried to shrug it off and say "ha, my opponent is stupid, he thoguht Saddam ws a good man."
I'm all for debate, but uninformed people look stupid in a debate. Thank you for reasserting my assumptions.
[/ QUOTE ]
ah yes that MUST be it, I am misinformed, the reason i had no COMEBACK, was because this is a tired argument and I'm done with it, you can't change my mind about it and i'll never change yours regardless of what links i post to counter your points and links and this would go on for days and weeks, (heh almost ryhmed, someone gimme a beat.) never mind the fact they violated U.N. sanctions for years and unsuccesfully shot at our planes in their no-fly zones, the point is they didnt play by the rules, so we didnt either it looks like. in future debates i'll try harder to look less stupid...
Israel is violating many more UN laws and every attempt at sanctioning them was vetoed by the US. I don't see Bush proposing anyone invade Israel and use UN forces to keep israeli and palestinian forces separate.
Besides, the no-fly zones were imposed by the US, not the UN, they are unlawful and any US jets flying above Iraq are violating their airspace. The best solution to stop the iraqis from shooting at your planes is not to fly in their airspace and especially not doing so with military aircraft and unloading bombs on them! If the Russians flew a few bombers over US territory and threw a few bombs at major cities, wouldn't the US have the right to fire back even if the Russians claim it is their right to fly through US airspace and drop bombs?
our policy no matter what party the president is from must have less double standards, how can we truely tell the world we support the spread of democracy when we support so many countries which supress it? pakistan,saudi arabia,eygpt
Like the Dalai Lama says, the way to end war is for everyone to disarm. Simple, yet infeasibly difficult.
/jzero
the reason i had no COMEBACK, was because this is a tired argument and I'm done with it
[/ QUOTE ]
That's what people say when they have too much pride to conceed and no ammo to shoot back. I'm a pro at this myself *hah*
Foe your arguements have no substance. True, Rick did slam you and it was pretty harsh but it is none-the-less true, you have a skimpy foundation for arguements based on opinions and generalizations. I'll just address two of them.
[ QUOTE ]
why is oil almost 60 gallons a barrel and we're paying out the ass in gas prices?
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll assume you meant dollars. I remember Frost bringing this up...it's a crazy argument if you think about it.
The American textile and automotive industry wants their people to 'Buy American" and their reasoning is it keeps American money in America. The more moeny this economy funnels out the worse the dollar does.
The money being spent on oil isn't being channeled outwards it is being channeled upwards.
Who is the largest consumer of oil? We are.
Who has the most disposable income? We do.
Where is the money circulating? Here.
So...yes, oil is expensive...and we're profiting off it. Albeit from our own people...but no one ever complains about money when its flowing, only when it's leaving the lower 48.
[ QUOTE ]
at least he understands that these people CANNOT BE TALKED TO or negotiated with. they don't give a damn about negotiating or peace, they blow themselves up in hope killing a few of us, it's our way of life they hate.
[/ QUOTE ]
You might have identified some facts, but what you conclude is...well, it really doesn't make any sense.
Do we hate Osama's way of life? Have we murdered some of his innocent countrymen? Can we be negoitated with or talked to?
Yes we do hate his way of life, yes we have killed his countrymen, and yes we do not neogiate with anyone that doesn't mirror our exact same stance or opinions....ever.
I guess we hate peace and negiation too according to your reasoning. That ofcourse is not true imo.
-R
[ QUOTE ]
the reason i had no COMEBACK, was because this is a tired argument and I'm done with it
[/ QUOTE ]
That's what people say when they have too much pride to conceed and no ammo to shoot back. I'm a pro at this myself *hah*
[/ QUOTE ]
heh, they also say that when it's a tired argument that no one will ever agree on, i mean really if i were to give you all the little valid points and links to any information that would back up my way of thinking, what you do, you do the same and it would never end, that's why i say fuck it i'm down, you win, enjoy you are all correct, you guys know everything and you are never wrong, now who wants to talk about religion!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the reason i had no COMEBACK, was because this is a tired argument and I'm done with it
[/ QUOTE ]
That's what people say when they have too much pride to conceed and no ammo to shoot back. I'm a pro at this myself *hah*
[/ QUOTE ]
heh, they also say that when it's a tired argument that no one will ever agree on, i mean really if i were to give you all the little valid points and links to any information that would back up my way of thinking, what you do, you do the same and it would never end, that's why i say fuck it i'm down, you win, enjoy you are all correct, you guys know everything and you are never wrong, now who wants to talk about religion!
[/ QUOTE ]
my friend its not about winning or losing an arguement,i think most of the point people make here is out of a general concern.
i love this country i love its people its history etc,but i also dont think we are headed down the right path to winning this war on terror and americans need to look more into the the effect of our foreign policy, i personally dont accept the oversimplified reasoning we are fed on why these people are trying to kill us.
like the assertion that these people are killing us because they hate our way of life, aside from a few cultural differences how does our way of life vary from many european nations, why arent people from sweden,switzerland,portugal and greece being bombed? and why is the US,Britain,spain, what dramatic difference in the way of life do these people see in the US,UK and spain that would have them attack.
on the other hand one difference i see is in foreign policy
or the other oversimplified explanation is that they hate our freedoms, many european nations are as free or more free than we are yet why are bombs not going off in their nations?
i gave George Bush Jr a shot when he began as president but so much of his policy and actions are harmful and flat out arrogant that i cant support him, when he calls Kerry flip flopper (which he rightfully was) but does things like saying he would fire the leaker,then changes it to he would fire any criminals its back peddling, when he gave slam dunk Goerge Tenet a medal of freedom, gave Donald Rumsfeld a medal, gave condaleeza rice a medal what does this say about our president all 3 of these members ave made bad mistakes which have hurt us and he still praises them,and give them medals?
he hasnt even attended a single funeral of a single soilder who had died needlessly in Iraq.
someone like that in power truely concerns me as it does many people, when people "bash Bush" its because there is plenty to bash
but noone there is no accountability in his administration nor the type of bravery on his parties part to looking into all the wrong doing which has been committed.
where are the self thinking republicans who looked past their party and investigated Nixon?
where are the self thinking republicans who looked past their party and investigated Nixon?
[/ QUOTE ]
they died along with the non extremist Democrats we used to have back in that era.
I really do wish that we did have some extremist democrats in office right now that would stand up to the present administration instead of trying not to rock the boat. I think Bev may be the closest thing we got right now.
Weak.
-R
http://www.bushflash.com/right.html
after all of the info proved to be false,they turned it from search of WMD's to the "forefront on the war on terror"
if Clinton would have done this he we have been out of office by now.
but it does not surprise me,many in this administration have been planning this pre 9/11, they had no intention of hiding their plans as well, the website for a Project for a new american century is still up and you can read it all.
what still amazes me is people who gush over this president as if he was sent to govern this country by god himself.
i have literally seen Bush/God stickers on peoples cars here in Houston.
-nice bit there, Ramucho- simple yet effective.
-does Dennis Kucinich count as an 'extreme' democrat?
Heh, I still chuckle at the "liberalism is terrorism" stickers...
[/ QUOTE ]
The ironic thing is that the Taliban are a bunch of right-wing extremists.
going to the store to buy a few stamps and write a few letters.
Damn you :P
-R