Slap MessageBoards
Skateboarding => USELESS WOODEN TOY BANTER => Topic started by: runa on January 18, 2013, 03:50:47 AM
-
Can someone explain this to me?
(http://www.infowarsshop.com/thumbnail.asp?file=assets/images/Div_Con_Bottom.jpg&maxx=300&maxy=0)
On Alex Jones' infowars.com they have these decks that are supposed to be a collaboration between them and Alien Workshop, is this legit? It's scary to think that the Workshop would be behind this.
http://www.infowarsshop.com/Divide-And-Conquer-Skate-Deck_p_852.html (http://www.infowarsshop.com/Divide-And-Conquer-Skate-Deck_p_852.html)
-
Its on the website...
"The Infowars "Divide and Conquer" skate deck strikes down the false left/right, republican/democrat paradigm. Open minds and don't be a slave to tyranny."
-
fucking hell shut up alien workshop you wankers stop trying to be something more special than a bunch of well dressed dudes that are good at riding skateboards
-
dude, that's why you kids need to start going to class and stop taking oxy and crack, seriously 'merica is fucked.
You dont even understand there is no such thing as democracy, slavery is still going so badly, I would even say it is the most fascist regime since the nazis. This graphic is about the government controlling the media, the media controlling the general public opinion on politics, and therefore the government controlling people destiny.
Until america gets his own universal health care system poor people will still die without a chance. If you dont have money then you are worth less than shit. Human rights are bullshit. All this fuels the drug and hampa problem.
But whatever, the president is black so everything is good.
-
Alien Workshop has always had graphics exposing government control and conspiracies. The brainwash graphic came out in the mid 90s and the "divide and conquer" graphic came out in 2000 for the election. They also had the sheeple graphic and many others. Look at some of the imagery in their videos, Workshop has always been into this stuff, it's nothing new. I think it's rad and with the pro liberty, free minded and conspiracy theme this is a great collab. I bought both boards and the tee shirt yesterday, just as I bought Spencer Hamilton's first pro board exposing GMO and Monsanto a couple weeks ago.
Infowars and may come off as "right wing" especially now that we have a president whos a democrat it would seem they are ultra critical and focus mostly on the left. However they criticize the republican party just as much as especially when they're in office. I don't think labeling them "right wing" is a fair and should be left up the mainstream media in an attempt to prersuade you not to visit their site(another divide & conquer tactic). I mean sure they are pro second amendment and pro life but they are also anti war and pro civil liberties and came out against the patriot act, bail outs, ndaa etc. Infowars is more of a constitutionalist libertarian leaning news website along with Alex Jones who has been an avid Ron Paul supporter for years, and as I said very critical of the right wing, neocons and republican party.
-
lol of course you read infowars.
-
dude, that's why you kids need to start going to class and stop taking oxy and crack, seriously 'merica is fucked.
You dont even understand there is no such thing as democracy, slavery is still going so badly, I would even say it is the most fascist regime since the nazis. This graphic is about the government controlling the media, the media controlling the general public opinion on politics, and therefore the government controlling people destiny.
Until america gets his own universal health care system poor people will still die without a chance. If you dont have money then you are worth less than shit. Human rights are bullshit. All this fuels the drug and hampa problem.
But whatever, the president is black so everything is good.
I agree with alot of what youre saying but how would having a bunch of corrupt liars and white collar criminals running our healthcare system make it any better?
-
dude, that's why you kids need to start going to class and stop taking oxy and crack, seriously 'merica is fucked.
You dont even understand there is no such thing as democracy, slavery is still going so badly, I would even say it is the most fascist regime since the nazis. This graphic is about the government controlling the media, the media controlling the general public opinion on politics, and therefore the government controlling people destiny.
Until america gets his own universal health care system poor people will still die without a chance. If you dont have money then you are worth less than shit. Human rights are bullshit. All this fuels the drug and hampa problem.
But whatever, the president is black so everything is good.
Fuck you, cunt.
-
Alex Jones, you had one chance at legitimacy and guess what you did?
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m70wn8JvfI1qigohso1_250.jpg)
lol
Piers Morgan debates Alex Jones (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ror9v2LwHoY#ws)
full
Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan On Gun Control - CNN 1/7/2013 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XZvMwcluEg#ws)
kookin' it to da maxx
-
If you live in the states and listen to anything Piers Morgan has to say I feel bad for you but you're probably one of the individuals that opposes people owning guns.
-
Alex Jones of Krooked?
-
yall are sheep
-
Alex Jones, you had one chance at legitimacy and guess what you did?
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m70wn8JvfI1qigohso1_250.jpg)
lol
Piers Morgan debates Alex Jones (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ror9v2LwHoY#ws)
full
Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan On Gun Control - CNN 1/7/2013 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XZvMwcluEg#ws)
kookin' it to da maxx
Alex Jones goes off like that everyday on his radio show. Peirs Morgan knew exactly what would happen if he had him on his show. He also knew it would get his ratings up as well as further his agenda because we've been conditioned to think that anyone yelling about anything(except for sports games of course) is kooky. If you actually listen to what Alex Jones is saying rather than the way he's saying it he wasnt really saying anything kooky at all, in fact the majority of it was accurrate. What I found interesting was how Peirs just let him do that, when a few nights prior the very well spoken Larry Pratt was on his show also defending the second amendment and Peirs was interupting him and calling him names and looking like a kook. Alex Jones is a passionate guy but he's also a sensationalist and in my opinion him going off was entertaining but probably didn't do him any favors. There are many voices in the liberty movement that was his version. However even Alex was holding back, the stats he gave about violent crime were actually wrong playing down how much it's dropped over the last 20 years. I know most of you have been trained that anything other than a monotone NPR voice talking about politics is kooky, so how's this....
Choose Your Own Crime Stats (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0&feature=youtu.be#ws)
Reality Check: An "Apples to Apples" comparison of U.S. and U.K. violent crime rates by Ben Swann (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac2mBa3JLfQ&feature=youtu.be#ws)
Doubtful Peirs will have one of these guys on his show. As you can see the 20% number that Alex Jones was given is actually watered down. I think it was important for him to point out the psychatropic drugs, because that is something that's involved in all these shootings and violent behavior is even listed as one of the side effects however is being ignored by the media. What do you expect though? Main stream media is pretty much state run media, the pundits are lap dogs of the establishment of both political parties. The liberal stations promote the democratic party talking points and Fox promotes the the republican leadership and establishment. How can anyone trust NBC, CNN or Fox? They are all dependent on big corporations(that are in bed with the government on both sides) advertising dollars, so you can't expect them not to be liars and shills, they are essentially corporate/state run.
Here's Larry Pratt on Peirs and as you can see he is well spoken and makes a good argument so Peirs interupts him and calls him names...
GOA's Larry Pratt DESTROYS CNN's Piers Morgan on CT Shooting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9z1wfgNf9E#ws)
Why didn't he do that with Alex Jones? Because he wanted Alex to blow up and come off as kooky in an attempt to discredit second amendment advocates. At the end of the day it was a big story all over the news and on some level got people thinking and some have even said it couldn't helped wake some people up.
The deal is with the whole Peirs Morgan thing is that Peirs is not an American citizen and he is on TV every night attempting to interpret the US constitution and tell American's what rights they should and shouldn't have. He does this by standing on the graves of dead children(even he admitted that on twitter), just as the president used the imagery of the children behind him in his speech just a couple days ago...it's sickening and it's clear propaganda.
"I'm being accused of 'standing on the graves of dead Sandy Hook children' - if that's what it takes to get action, so be it," -Peirs Morgan
-
Alex Jones of Krooked?
Hahahaha
Where is the Gipper on this topic? It's still pretty early out west...
-
Alien Workshop has always had graphics exposing government control and conspiracies. The brainwash graphic came out in the mid 90s and the "divide and conquer" graphic came out in 2000 for the election. They also had the sheeple graphic and many others. Look at some of the imagery in their videos, Workshop has always been into this stuff, it's nothing new. I think it's rad and with the pro liberty, free minded and conspiracy theme this is a great collab. I bought both boards and the tee shirt yesterday, just as I bought Spencer Hamilton's first pro board exposing GMO and Monsanto a couple weeks ago.
Infowars and may come off as "right wing" especially now that we have a president whos a democrat it would seem they are ultra critical and focus mostly on the left. However they criticize the republican party just as much as especially when they're in office. I don't think labeling them "right wing" is a fair and should be left up the mainstream media in an attempt to prersuade you not to visit their site(another divide & conquer tactic). I mean sure they are pro second amendment and pro life but they are also anti war and pro civil liberties and came out against the patriot act, bail outs, ndaa etc. Infowars is more of a constitutionalist libertarian leaning news website along with Alex Jones who has been an avid Ron Paul supporter for years, and as I said very critical of the right wing, neocons and republican party.
I think it's important to have alternative news sources like Infowars, but if you think that Alex Jones is anything more than a crazy conspiracy theorist, I don't know what to tell you. And saying "pro-life" and "constitutional libertarian" is a contradiction.
-
Expand Quote
Alien Workshop has always had graphics exposing government control and conspiracies. The brainwash graphic came out in the mid 90s and the "divide and conquer" graphic came out in 2000 for the election. They also had the sheeple graphic and many others. Look at some of the imagery in their videos, Workshop has always been into this stuff, it's nothing new. I think it's rad and with the pro liberty, free minded and conspiracy theme this is a great collab. I bought both boards and the tee shirt yesterday, just as I bought Spencer Hamilton's first pro board exposing GMO and Monsanto a couple weeks ago.
Infowars and may come off as "right wing" especially now that we have a president whos a democrat it would seem they are ultra critical and focus mostly on the left. However they criticize the republican party just as much as especially when they're in office. I don't think labeling them "right wing" is a fair and should be left up the mainstream media in an attempt to prersuade you not to visit their site(another divide & conquer tactic). I mean sure they are pro second amendment and pro life but they are also anti war and pro civil liberties and came out against the patriot act, bail outs, ndaa etc. Infowars is more of a constitutionalist libertarian leaning news website along with Alex Jones who has been an avid Ron Paul supporter for years, and as I said very critical of the right wing, neocons and republican party.
I think it's important to have alternative news sources like Infowars, but if you think that Alex Jones is anything more than a crazy conspiracy theorist, I don't know what to tell you. And saying "pro-life" and "constitutional libertarian" is a contradiction.
How so? One of the only real jobs of the government is to "protect life, liberty and the persuit of happiness". That's about as constitutional as it gets depending on how you interpret it. I used to be pro choice too when I was younger(public school educated) until I did the researched the history and found out it was founded and all based on eugenics and not womens right.
-
Expand Quote
Alien Workshop has always had graphics exposing government control and conspiracies. The brainwash graphic came out in the mid 90s and the "divide and conquer" graphic came out in 2000 for the election. They also had the sheeple graphic and many others. Look at some of the imagery in their videos, Workshop has always been into this stuff, it's nothing new. I think it's rad and with the pro liberty, free minded and conspiracy theme this is a great collab. I bought both boards and the tee shirt yesterday, just as I bought Spencer Hamilton's first pro board exposing GMO and Monsanto a couple weeks ago.
Infowars and may come off as "right wing" especially now that we have a president whos a democrat it would seem they are ultra critical and focus mostly on the left. However they criticize the republican party just as much as especially when they're in office. I don't think labeling them "right wing" is a fair and should be left up the mainstream media in an attempt to prersuade you not to visit their site(another divide & conquer tactic). I mean sure they are pro second amendment and pro life but they are also anti war and pro civil liberties and came out against the patriot act, bail outs, ndaa etc. Infowars is more of a constitutionalist libertarian leaning news website along with Alex Jones who has been an avid Ron Paul supporter for years, and as I said very critical of the right wing, neocons and republican party.
I think it's important to have alternative news sources like Infowars, but if you think that Alex Jones is anything more than a crazy conspiracy theorist, I don't know what to tell you. And saying "pro-life" and "constitutional libertarian" is a contradiction.
Care to explain either claim?
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Alien Workshop has always had graphics exposing government control and conspiracies. The brainwash graphic came out in the mid 90s and the "divide and conquer" graphic came out in 2000 for the election. They also had the sheeple graphic and many others. Look at some of the imagery in their videos, Workshop has always been into this stuff, it's nothing new. I think it's rad and with the pro liberty, free minded and conspiracy theme this is a great collab. I bought both boards and the tee shirt yesterday, just as I bought Spencer Hamilton's first pro board exposing GMO and Monsanto a couple weeks ago.
Infowars and may come off as "right wing" especially now that we have a president whos a democrat it would seem they are ultra critical and focus mostly on the left. However they criticize the republican party just as much as especially when they're in office. I don't think labeling them "right wing" is a fair and should be left up the mainstream media in an attempt to prersuade you not to visit their site(another divide & conquer tactic). I mean sure they are pro second amendment and pro life but they are also anti war and pro civil liberties and came out against the patriot act, bail outs, ndaa etc. Infowars is more of a constitutionalist libertarian leaning news website along with Alex Jones who has been an avid Ron Paul supporter for years, and as I said very critical of the right wing, neocons and republican party.
I think it's important to have alternative news sources like Infowars, but if you think that Alex Jones is anything more than a crazy conspiracy theorist, I don't know what to tell you. And saying "pro-life" and "constitutional libertarian" is a contradiction.
Care to explain either claim?
Nah he doesn't, that's what he's been taught by state run media and public education so he must be right.
-
Look out everyone the libertarian tag team is back!!!!
(http://www.sugarslam.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/rockers.jpg)
-
Look out everyone the libertarian tag team is back!!!!
(http://www.sugarslam.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/rockers.jpg)
Hahahaha it'd be sick if we actually looked like that. Can't wait for the Gipper to get on here!
-
Fear of war, fear of the economy, fear of terrorists, fear of plagues, fear of toxic food, fear of guns or people with guns. By keeping you in a contast state of fear you are being enslaved. Fear=slavery. How could you not understand this graphic? It is spelled out for you.....divide and conquer.
-
I don't know much, but I know that you're an idiot if you don't think gun control laws should be tighter in this country.
It has nothing to do with the recent killings and everything to do with stupidity.
You can own an automatic assault rifle, but you can't get the free health care that you'll need for shooting your own nut sack off.
Sorry America, but this country is fucked.
-
You can own an automatic assault rifle, but you can't get the free health care that you'll need for shooting your own nut sack off.
this should be on every poster on anti-NRA-demos.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Alien Workshop has always had graphics exposing government control and conspiracies. The brainwash graphic came out in the mid 90s and the "divide and conquer" graphic came out in 2000 for the election. They also had the sheeple graphic and many others. Look at some of the imagery in their videos, Workshop has always been into this stuff, it's nothing new. I think it's rad and with the pro liberty, free minded and conspiracy theme this is a great collab. I bought both boards and the tee shirt yesterday, just as I bought Spencer Hamilton's first pro board exposing GMO and Monsanto a couple weeks ago.
Infowars and may come off as "right wing" especially now that we have a president whos a democrat it would seem they are ultra critical and focus mostly on the left. However they criticize the republican party just as much as especially when they're in office. I don't think labeling them "right wing" is a fair and should be left up the mainstream media in an attempt to prersuade you not to visit their site(another divide & conquer tactic). I mean sure they are pro second amendment and pro life but they are also anti war and pro civil liberties and came out against the patriot act, bail outs, ndaa etc. Infowars is more of a constitutionalist libertarian leaning news website along with Alex Jones who has been an avid Ron Paul supporter for years, and as I said very critical of the right wing, neocons and republican party.
I think it's important to have alternative news sources like Infowars, but if you think that Alex Jones is anything more than a crazy conspiracy theorist, I don't know what to tell you. And saying "pro-life" and "constitutional libertarian" is a contradiction.
Care to explain either claim?
Nah he doesn't, that's what he's been taught by state run media and public education so he must be right.
Well, first off, the Constitution does not claim to protect "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." That's the Declaration of Independence, so claiming that that is a function of the government is a tenuous argument (the DoI is not a rule of law document). But regardless, pro-life individuals believe life to begin at conception, a tricky claim to prove as there is little to no scientific backing for when life begins. Their belief system is based on a (generally) religious one and hence, is a belief system that is based on "faith" more so than "facts." Libertarianism is a political philosophy that believes in as little government intrusion into private and personal matters as possible. What is a larger intrusion than telling a woman what she can and can't do with a ball of cells in her own personal body? Libertarian philosophy holds the body to be an almost sacred space and an individual can do as they please with their own body so long as it does not harm other unequivocally living people. A zygote does not fall into this definition. Can one be against abortion and be a Constitutional Libertarian? Yes. But the implication of "pro-life" is that one believes laws should be enacted to ban abortions, which is a step by the government to control a person's actions and morality--a step antithetical to Libertarianism. That is why I believe that they are incongruous belief systems.
To claim that abortion, which has existed in some form for thousands of years, is based on the eugenics movement, which really came into the spotlight in the early 1900s, is a horrible argument. You're picking and choosing which history of abortion and access to abortion you prefer because saying that abortion only had its roots in eugenics allows you to claim that there is no other legitimate argument for it. It's an ad hominem attack. And regardless of that, it never existed in a solely eugenics sphere and it very easily passes into women's rights and the rights of a person to their bodily space more generally.
As for Alex Jones being a conspiracy theorist, I said that because of his severe distrust of all other news sources, his belief that reality cannot exist in a way explained by other people, and his tendency to ignore the most reasonable explanation for a situation in favor of tying together flimsy facts and disparate events into a more complex, overarching narrative that can be clearly traced back to some oppressive "elite puppetmasters."
Oh, and just so you know, my most formative education was at a private university that is one of the bastions and founders of libertarian economic and social thought. Nice try though.
-
(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ks1ndmyBEP1qa95s8o1_500.gif)
-
I don't know much, but I know that you're an idiot if you don't think gun control laws should be tighter in this country.
It has nothing to do with the recent killings and everything to do with stupidity.
You can own an automatic assault rifle, but you can't get the free health care that you'll need for shooting your own nut sack off.
Sorry America, but this country is fucked.
You're right you don't know much and you don't understand freedom. Heroin is illegal but you can go get some right now if you want. If automatic weapons were illegal(which they pretty much are) a criminal could get one if they wanted to. Therefore making a law against them will only prevent those who follow the law to not being able to defend themselves against criminals who seek them out, it's as simple as that. I don't think you understand how rare a fully automatic weapon is, you have to jump though a bunch of hoops, background checks and pay for fees and licenses to own them. I'm also wondering how this relates to healthcare? Why should a health care provider be required to give anyone something for free? You think the government should make automatic weapons illegal and pay for the population to have healthcare...the same government that's caught day after day involved in corruption and insider trading for their own benefit? The same government that gave 2000 weapons including automatic assault rifles and grenades to Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious? No thanks, I'll just take care of myself and if I choose to have a weapon to defend myself or just because I'm into guns that right is guaranteed and is protected under the constitution. I understand where you're coming from but we've already established that criminals can and will get whatever they want from drugs to weapons so how much sense does it make to have a single shot rifle to defend yourself against a criminal that has a semi auto or even an automatic weapon. I'm not some big gun guy, I just understand freedom, and you can't be truly free without the right to protect yourself. Once you start to restrict(which they've already done) its a slippery slope. You think the government actually cares about less violence? The US government are the biggest killers in the world, they've killed millions of innocent people with the continued illegal undeclared wars and drone attacks...this is about control and always was.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Alien Workshop has always had graphics exposing government control and conspiracies. The brainwash graphic came out in the mid 90s and the "divide and conquer" graphic came out in 2000 for the election. They also had the sheeple graphic and many others. Look at some of the imagery in their videos, Workshop has always been into this stuff, it's nothing new. I think it's rad and with the pro liberty, free minded and conspiracy theme this is a great collab. I bought both boards and the tee shirt yesterday, just as I bought Spencer Hamilton's first pro board exposing GMO and Monsanto a couple weeks ago.
Infowars and may come off as "right wing" especially now that we have a president whos a democrat it would seem they are ultra critical and focus mostly on the left. However they criticize the republican party just as much as especially when they're in office. I don't think labeling them "right wing" is a fair and should be left up the mainstream media in an attempt to prersuade you not to visit their site(another divide & conquer tactic). I mean sure they are pro second amendment and pro life but they are also anti war and pro civil liberties and came out against the patriot act, bail outs, ndaa etc. Infowars is more of a constitutionalist libertarian leaning news website along with Alex Jones who has been an avid Ron Paul supporter for years, and as I said very critical of the right wing, neocons and republican party.
I think it's important to have alternative news sources like Infowars, but if you think that Alex Jones is anything more than a crazy conspiracy theorist, I don't know what to tell you. And saying "pro-life" and "constitutional libertarian" is a contradiction.
Care to explain either claim?
Nah he doesn't, that's what he's been taught by state run media and public education so he must be right.
Well, first off, the Constitution does not claim to protect "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." That's the Declaration of Independence, so claiming that that is a function of the government is a tenuous argument (the DoI is not a rule of law document). But regardless, pro-life individuals believe life to begin a conception, tricky claim to prove as there is little to no scientific backing for when life begins. Their belief system is based on a (generally) religious one and hence, is a belief system that is based on "faith" more so than "facts." Libertarianism is a political philosophy that believes in as little government intrusion into private and personal matters as possible. What is a larger intrusion than telling an woman what she can and can't do with a ball of cells in her own personal body? Libertarian philosophy holds the body to be an almost sacred space and an individual can do as they please with their own body so long as it does not harm other unequivocally living people. A zygote does not fall into this definition. Can one be against abortion and be a Constitutional Libertarian? Yes. But the implication of "pro-life" is that one believes laws should be enacted to ban abortions, which is a step by the government to control a person's actions and morality--a step antithetical to Libertarianism. That is why I believe that are incongruous belief systems.
To claim that abortion, which has existed in some form for thousands of years, is based on the eugenics movement, which really came into the spotlight in the early 1900s, is a horrible argument. You're picking and choosing which history of abortion and access to abortion you prefer because saying that abortion only had its roots in eugenics allows you to claim that there is no other legitimate argument for it. It's an ad hominem attack. And regardless of that, it never existed in a solely eugenics sphere and it very easily passes into women's rights and the rights of a person to their bodily space more generally.
As for Alex Jones being a conspiracy theorist, I said that because of his severe distrust of all other news sources, his belief that reality cannot exist in a way explained by other people, and his tendency to ignore the most reasonable explanation for a situation in favor of tying together flimsy facts and disparate events into a more complex, overarching narrative that can be clearly traced back to some oppressive "elite puppetmasters."
Oh, and just so you know, my most formative education was at a private university that is one of the bastions and founders of libertarian economic and social thought. Nice try though.
The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution go hand in hand, you don't have a Constitution without the Declaration of Independence. Life is listed as an unalienable right(meaning they cannot be altered by any law). I understand the definition of life is up for interpretation just as whether life begins at conception or not. I know that if a women is pregnant with a child and her husband pushes her down the stairs and she loses the child, he will be charged with assault and for murder. I understand it is her body but it is his child too and if she has a right to kill the child shouldn't he have one too? How ridiculous does that sound? All I'm saying is that it's not an oxy moron to be a constitutionalist libertarian and be pro life.
The modern abortion movement is completely based on eugenics. Margaret Sanger was one of the founders of the American Eugenics Society and later founded the American Birth Control League which became the International Planned Parenthood Federation. Dorothy Brush who also worked for Planned Parenthood was another founder of the American Eugenics Society along with JP Morgan and others. Today Planned Parenthood is the single largest provider of abortions in the US. They also get government funding meaning our tax dollars to carry these abortions out. That would be the like the government funding the NRA in the eyes of anti gun advocates.
Let me go through a few Marget Sanger quotes for you and you can decide what her intentions were....
"Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race."
"There is only one reply to a request for a higher birthrate among the
intelligent, and that is to ask the government to first take the burden of
the insane and feeble-minded from your back. [Mandatory] sterilization for
these is the answer."
"[Slavs, Latin, and Hebrew immigrants are] human weeds ... a
deadweight of human waste ... [Blacks, soldiers, and Jews are a] menace to
the race."
"Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need ... We must prevent
Multiplication of this bad stock."
"Today eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most
adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and
social problems.
"I think you must agree ... that the campaign for birth control is not
merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims
of eugenics ... Birth control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the
eugenic educator."
"On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and
discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective."
"Give dysgenic groups [people with 'bad genes'] in our population
their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization."
"We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with
social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most
successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal.
We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro
population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if
it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."
Does that last quote sound familiar? Planned Parenthood is still carrying out Margaret Sanger's plan today with President Obama and Oprah Winfrey speaking on their behalf. Is her Eugenics plan working? Well let's see....
Minority women constitute only about 13% of the female population (age 15-44) in the United States, but they underwent approximately 36% of the abortions.
According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, black women are more than 5 times as likely as white women to have an abortion
On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States.
78% of Planned Parenthood clinics are in minority communities.
If you wanna label yourself "Pro Choice" after knowing all this go right ahead, but I can't get down with this shit.
Sources:
Margaret Sanger's December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255
Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith
Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in
Linda Gordon's Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth
Control in America . New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.
Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization , 1922. Chapter on "The
Cruelty of Charity," pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library
edition."
Margaret Sanger. "The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda."
Birth Control Review , October 1921, page 5.
Margaret Sanger, April 1932 Birth Control Review.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6108a1.htm (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6108a1.htm)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Eugenics_Society (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Eugenics_Society)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger)
I figured I'd add this too because it is somewhat relevant with the discussion of eugenics and government.....
John Paul Holdren is the senior advisor to President Barack Obama on science and technology issues through his roles as Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Co-Chair of the President?s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). This guy who is a senior advisor to the president(who openly backs planned parenthood) co authored a book called 'Econscience: Population, Resources, Environment' in which he called for forced abortions and depopulation. Here are some of those quotes:
"Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."
"One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption?especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society."
"Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock. "
"If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility?just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns?providing they are not denied equal protection."
Remember this isn't some mad scientist saying these things this is a senior advisor to President Obama and the White House who published this stuff in a book.
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Holdren (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Holdren)
Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment
As for Alex Jones, I'm not going to spend my time defending him and his actions. I don't agree with him on every issue but I do find his website and show to be a useful tool in the liberty movement. I think he is one of the most aggressive voices out there, though I'm not always on board with his tactics. He always has informative guests on his show and I'd rather read articles from an independent news source such as his sites and others over state and corporate funded media. It's hard to label something a conspiracy theory just because the government who are known liars say it is.
-
That's a horrible argument against birth control and abortion as well. It completely whitewashed the numerous services that Planned Parenthood offers and fails (again) to provide any arguments for modern pro-choice arguements. Your arguments against abortion is analogous to me saying, "I was all for gun rights until I looked at the history of firearms and discovered their roots in governmental oppression of dissidents, therefore we shouldn't have guns."
And your example of a legal precedent that I'm sure many people disagree with (a man charged with murder for killing a zygote/fetus while assaulting a women) is equally poorly argued. Allowing a man to have a choice over what a woman does with her body again infringes on an individual's bodily autonomy (pretty anti-Libertarian). Saying that it's his child, so he should have equal say ignores that fact that nothing has a right to use a person's body (in this case, a woman's) against his/her will. If he gets a say, what do we do when a woman does not want a child but the man does? Force her to carry it to term despite her wishes?
Finally, your attempt to say that Planned Parenthood is somehow orchestrating a "black genocide" based on Sanger's eugenic beliefs (which I feel it important to not was a widely accepted and respected science across the globe at tht period) greatly ignores the myriad ways that race, sex, and poverty interact in the modern world in favor of a narrative that provides one with a clearly defined enemy.
-
You guys genuinely don't have any idea how fucking stupid and indoctrinated you are do you? The best way to discredit an Alex Jones fan is to let him speak. BTW- Jones didn't come off as crazy because he was loud, he came off crazy because his rants jumped from one place to another without any logical reason or discussion of what he brought up. Gulf of Tonkin to pharmaceuticals to "building 7" while simultaneously refusing to engage in any level of discourse, just screaming ad hominem bullshit whenever he felt cornered. He jumped so much because he knew actually discussing what he brought up would make him look silly. America didn't think he was crazy because he was loud, they thought he was crazy because he was aimlessly ranting like a street-corner tin-foil-hat lunatic.
I wrote a long thing about how silly libertarians are to claim that the government's job is to protect life, while simultaneously wanting to end all drug prohibitions and guns, but if anybody reading this believes the points the Alex Jones nuts are making are better than Oyolars, then nothing will convince them no matter what.
-
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
-
Also, Alex j ripped on bush and the right as much as he did Clinton and Obama. You can't really claim infowars as a right wing group
-
Can someone explain this to me?
(http://www.infowarsshop.com/thumbnail.asp?file=assets/images/Div_Con_Bottom.jpg&maxx=300&maxy=0)
On Alex Jones' infowars.com they have these decks that are supposed to be a collaboration between them and Alien Workshop, is this legit? It's scary to think that the Workshop would be behind this.
http://www.infowarsshop.com/Divide-And-Conquer-Skate-Deck_p_852.html (http://www.infowarsshop.com/Divide-And-Conquer-Skate-Deck_p_852.html)
sat-ire [sat-ahyuh r]
noun
1.
the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
-
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
I feel like this is something obvious racists say. Who ever said all our problems would be gone if we had a black president? You are insulting a position that doesn't exist because you hate the fact that the president is black and really want a white guy back in the office.
-
If he had just stuck to the statistics part of his claim he mightve had an argument. But then he started ranting. Oh well. My favorite alex jones rant is the one where he tries connecting the dark knight rises to a grand conspiracy theory. Then theres the squidbillies rant...that one just made me feel really sorry for him.
-
That's a horrible argument against birth control and abortion as well. It completely whitewashed the numerous services that Planned Parenthood offers and fails (again) to provide any arguments for modern pro-choice arguements. Your arguments against abortion is analogous to me saying, "I was all for gun rights until I looked at the history of firearms and discovered their roots in governmental oppression of dissidents, therefore we shouldn't have guns."
And your example of a legal precedent that I'm sure many people disagree with (a man charged with murder for killing a zygote/fetus while assaulting a women) is equally poorly argued. Allowing a man to have a choice over what a woman does with her body again infringes on an individual's bodily autonomy (pretty anti-Libertarian). Saying that it's his child, so he should have equal say ignores that fact that nothing has a right to use a person's body (in this case, a woman's) against his/her will. If he gets a say, what do we do when a woman does not want a child but the man does? Force her to carry it to term despite her wishes?
Finally, your attempt to say that Planned Parenthood is somehow orchestrating a "black genocide" based on Sanger's eugenic beliefs (which I feel it important to not was a widely accepted and respected science across the globe at tht period) greatly ignores the myriad ways that race, sex, and poverty interact in the modern world in favor of a narrative that provides one with a clearly defined enemy.
Dude come on you're being completely irrational now, I listed all the facts and you still don't get it? Who is protecting the rights of the child? How is that anti libertarian to want the child's right to be protected as well? I obviously not saying the husband should have equal rights, but he shouldn't be charged with murder if it's just a fetus right? However men have been convicted for just that. But that's cool you wanna be down with sick eugenicists and defend them that's fine by me, but I won't be part of it. Will you at least agree that my tax dollars shouldnt be taken to fund it? Oh no I'm sure you love that my tax dollars are taken to kill babies, I mean why not it goes to kill thousands of middle eastern innocents everyday anyway.
PS I added a piece about John P. Holdren you might wanna go back and look at, but I'm sure you'll write that off as a crazy conspiracy theory even though its a fact.
-
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
Not at all against black people or anybody for that matter. You want me to be racist though, right?
-
Expand Quote
I don't know much, but I know that you're an idiot if you don't think gun control laws should be tighter in this country.
It has nothing to do with the recent killings and everything to do with stupidity.
You can own an automatic assault rifle, but you can't get the free health care that you'll need for shooting your own nut sack off.
Sorry America, but this country is fucked.
You're right you don't know much and you don't understand freedom. Heroin is illegal but you can go get some right now if you want. If automatic weapons were illegal(which they pretty much are) a criminal could get one if they wanted to. Therefore making a law against them will only prevent those who follow the law to not being able to defend themselves against criminals who seek them out, it's as simple as that. I don't think you understand how rare a fully automatic weapon is, you have to jump though a bunch of hoops, background checks and pay for fees and licenses to own them. I'm also wondering how this relates to healthcare? Why should a health care provider be required to give anyone something for free? You think the government should make automatic weapons illegal and pay for the population to have healthcare...the same government that's caught day after day involved in corruption and insider trading for their own benefit? The same government that gave 2000 weapons including automatic assault rifles and grenades to Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious? No thanks, I'll just take care of myself and if I choose to have a weapon to defend myself or just because I'm into guns that right is guaranteed and is protected under the constitution. I understand where you're coming from but we've already established that criminals can and will get whatever they want from drugs to weapons so how much sense does it make to have a single shot rifle to defend yourself against a criminal that has a semi auto or even an automatic weapon. I'm not some big gun guy, I just understand freedom, and you can't be truly free without the right to protect yourself. Once you start to restrict(which they've already done) its a slippery slope. You think the government actually cares about less violence? The US government are the biggest killers in the world, they've killed millions of innocent people with the continued illegal undeclared wars and drone attacks...this is about control and always was.
Nope. It's not that hard at all. My brother in law went to a gun show in Texas, with some cash, and bought one. It wasn't hard. It was just expensive, and he's just stupid.
This idea of Freedom being related to arming yourself is the biggest load of crap ever.
If you think that owning a gun has anything to do with freedom you have no clue at all.
If you want to be free, you should start thinking about being given basic human rights. Like not having to pay for a baby, or for cancer, or for a baby with cancer.
Take care of yourself? How? If you are a minimal percent of the population that can afford either *good insurance, or to pay for healthcare out of pocket than you're extremely lucky. Get sick, and tell me you want to be free and pay for your health.
What about an innocent bystander caught up in an act of gun violence? Do they deserve to go broke for trying to save their lives?
So do you see how one is related to another now?
If you have a pistol, and the intruder has an automatic weapon, or if he has a pistol and you have one, you're still getting shot - or not- either way. You're still stupid, as are they. And one of you is going to have to pay thousands, maybe millions of dollars not to die. And you're still talking about freedom.
-
You guys genuinely don't have any idea how fucking stupid and indoctrinated you are do you? The best way to discredit an Alex Jones fan is to let him speak. BTW- Jones didn't come off as crazy because he was loud, he came off crazy because his rants jumped from one place to another without any logical reason or discussion of what he brought up. Gulf of Tonkin to pharmaceuticals to "building 7" while simultaneously refusing to engage in any level of discourse, just screaming ad hominem bullshit whenever he felt cornered. He jumped so much because he knew actually discussing what he brought up would make him look silly. America didn't think he was crazy because he was loud, they thought he was crazy because he was aimlessly ranting like a street-corner tin-foil-hat lunatic.
I wrote a long thing about how silly libertarians are to claim that the government's job is to protect life, while simultaneously wanting to end� all drug prohibitions and guns, but� if anybody reading this believes the points the Alex Jones nuts are making are better than Oyolars, then nothing will convince them no matter what.
That's it Gipper? That's all you've got? I'm genuinely disappointed. I actually wouldn't be an advocate for the government to protect life when it comes to abortion mainly because I don't think they could handle it, but I certainly don't want them to fund it with tax dollars. What's crazy about Gulf of Tonkin? It has been admitted that the event didn't take place and was written off as bad radar readings. As for building 7 there are numerous people who question the official story including over 1500 architects and engineers who also claim the "official" reasoning for how that building came down is false and impossible, and these are professionals not "conspiracy nuts". As for pharmaceuticals, you're a smart guy Gipper, you know they are linked to violence. The side effects of these drugs admit that violence toward others and yourself is a side effect. Sure it's rare, I heard a only occurring in 4% of patients but even 4% is about 1 in every 25 people who take it and with thousands and thousands taking this stuff it's bound to happen. Also all of these recent shootings, I mean every single one the shooter is on psychatropic drugs of some sort, you can't deny there isn't a link. So you can't simply write off everything that Alex Jones said, however the way he said it, jumping from topic to topic and yelling, sure probably not the most well spoken but all are valid points at least in my opinion. Again I didn't think his piece on Peirs Morgan did him or his message any favors.
-
alex jones mixes info with disinfomation. dope graphic
-
Maafa 21 (2009) Full Length (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02t3Wqg-4Iw#)
This film is highly relevant to the topics covered so far in this thread.
-
(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ks1ndmyBEP1qa95s8o1_500.gif)
I'm sad now (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGBQf8WqwZ0#ws)
-
^ Its relevant because I told you to read a book and you just respond with a stupid youtube video. This is some crazy cognitive dissonance. You may believe abortion is bad or whatever, but are you really stupid enough not to realize how much this contradicts every ideal you spout? That's why you are so obssessed with sharing a conspiracy nobody believes, because some long drawn out conspiracy is the only thing that takes away you being a complete hypocrite. Jesus fucking christ.
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
I want you to acknowledge it.
TMKF- give up, you are going after him instead of facts now. You lost. Give it up.
And what's crazy about bringing up Gulf Of Tonkin? IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND. "Gun control is evil, GULF OF TONKIN!!!! LOOK IT UP!!!" what a fucking idiot, there is no parallel there. Same with every other topic he brought up. You are following his lead now though, answer the questions, don't call me a brainwashing victim. How is the party of liberty over safety in every single other issue suddenly change its mind about abortion. Suddenly the goal of the government is safety. Its such a joke and clear proof that you guys just get indoctrinated and don't question what your cult leader tells you.
The fact that you don't realize how crazy he looked jumping from topic to topic and not acknowledging any of Morgan's points really is sad. You are indoctrinated. Its sad.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
I don't know much, but I know that you're an idiot if you don't think gun control laws should be tighter in this country.
It has nothing to do with the recent killings and everything to do with stupidity.
You can own an automatic assault rifle, but you can't get the free health care that you'll need for shooting your own nut sack off.
Sorry America, but this country is fucked.
You're right you don't know much and you don't understand freedom. Heroin is illegal but you can go get some right now if you want. If automatic weapons were illegal(which they pretty much are) a criminal could get one if they wanted to. Therefore making a law against them will only prevent those who follow the law to not being able to defend themselves against criminals who seek them out, it's as simple as that. I don't think you understand how rare a fully automatic weapon is, you have to jump though a bunch of hoops, background checks and pay for fees and licenses to own them. I'm also wondering how this relates to healthcare? Why should a health care provider be required to give anyone something for free? You think the government should make automatic weapons illegal and pay for the population to have healthcare...the same government that's caught day after day involved in corruption and insider trading for their own benefit? The same government that gave 2000 weapons including automatic assault rifles and grenades to Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious? No thanks, I'll just take care of myself and if I choose to have a weapon to defend myself or just because I'm into guns that right is guaranteed and is protected under the constitution. I understand where you're coming from but we've already established that criminals can and will get whatever they want from drugs to weapons so how much sense does it make to have a single shot rifle to defend yourself against a criminal that has a semi auto or even an automatic weapon. I'm not some big gun guy, I just understand freedom, and you can't be truly free without the right to protect yourself. Once you start to restrict(which they've already done) its a slippery slope. You think the government actually cares about less violence? The US government are the biggest killers in the world, they've killed millions of innocent people with the continued illegal undeclared wars and drone attacks...this is about control and always was.
Nope. It's not that hard at all. My brother in law went to a gun show in Texas, with some cash, and bought one. It wasn't hard. It was just expensive, and he's just stupid.
This idea of Freedom being related to arming yourself is the biggest load of crap ever.
If you think that owning a gun has anything to do with freedom you have no clue at all.
If you want to be free, you should start thinking about being given basic human rights. Like not having to pay for a baby, or for cancer, or for a baby with cancer.
Take care of yourself? How? If you are a minimal percent of the population that can afford either *good insurance, or to pay for healthcare out of pocket than you're extremely lucky. Get sick, and tell me you want to be free and pay for your health.
What about an innocent bystander caught up in an act of gun violence? Do they deserve to go broke for trying to save their lives?
So do you see how one is related to another now?
If you have a pistol, and the intruder has an automatic weapon, or if he has a pistol and you have one, you're still getting shot - or not- either way. You're still stupid, as are they. And one of you is going to have to pay thousands, maybe millions of dollars not to die. And you're still talking about freedom.
You're obviously mixing up semi automatic with automatic, there's no way he went and bought a fully automatic gun from the gun show. What about an innocent bystander being hit by a car? That argument makes no sense. I have health insurance, I work and I pay for it, when I get sick I hardly ever use, only if its something gnarly, so I don't really get your argument there either? Just because I want something for free I should get it? Freedom is related to owning a firearm because in a free society one should be able to own one to protect themselves if they wish, it is a guaranteed right, free healthcare certainly isn't. I do think the healthcare system is broken, and its because there is too much government involvement in it. Ever since they started getting involved prices for procedures and insurance started skyrocketing. When the healthcare bill was passed who's stocks soared? Healthcare providers and insurance providers....pretty easy to see who benefited from that one.
-
^ Its relevant because I told you to read a book and you just respond with a stupid youtube video. This is some crazy cognitive dissonance. You may believe abortion is bad or whatever, but are you really stupid enough not to realize how much this contradicts every ideal you spout? That's why you are so obssessed with sharing a conspiracy nobody believes, because some long drawn out conspiracy is the only thing that takes away you being a complete hypocrite. Jesus fucking christ.
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
TMKF- give up, you are going after him instead of facts now. You lost. Give it up.
And what's crazy about bringing up Gulf Of Tonkin? IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND. "Gun control is evil, GULF OF TONKIN!!!! LOOK IT UP!!!" what a fucking idiot, there is no parallel there. Same with every other topic he brought up. You are following his lead now though, answer the questions, don't call me a brainwashing victim. How is the party of liberty over safety in every single other issue suddenly change its mind about abortion. Suddenly the goal of the government is safety. Its such a joke and clear proof that you guys just get indoctrinated and don't question what your cult leader tells you.
The fact that you don't realize how crazy he looked jumping from topic to topic and not acknowledging any of Morgan's points really is sad. You are indoctrinated. Its sad.
Alright you got me. I hate pretentious white guys that run around and tell people they are racists. You gotta be from Connecticut or Chicago. Am I right?
-
Odd how on the AWS site they have the graphic without "Infowars" printed on it. I question, along with OP, the legitimacy of this collab.
http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672 (http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672)
Also, Planned Parenthood does not use federal funding for abortions, those go towards other services for women's health.
Lastly, if you, TMKF, were a true libertarian you would recognize the rights of women to have an abortion despite your personal moral objections.
-
Expand Quote
That's a horrible argument against birth control and abortion as well. It completely whitewashed the numerous services that Planned Parenthood offers and fails (again) to provide any arguments for modern pro-choice arguements. Your arguments against abortion is analogous to me saying, "I was all for gun rights until I looked at the history of firearms and discovered their roots in governmental oppression of dissidents, therefore we shouldn't have guns."
And your example of a legal precedent that I'm sure many people disagree with (a man charged with murder for killing a zygote/fetus while assaulting a women) is equally poorly argued. Allowing a man to have a choice over what a woman does with her body again infringes on an individual's bodily autonomy (pretty anti-Libertarian). Saying that it's his child, so he should have equal say ignores that fact that nothing has a right to use a person's body (in this case, a woman's) against his/her will. If he gets a say, what do we do when a woman does not want a child but the man does? Force her to carry it to term despite her wishes?
Finally, your attempt to say that Planned Parenthood is somehow orchestrating a "black genocide" based on Sanger's eugenic beliefs (which I feel it important to not was a widely accepted and respected science across the globe at tht period) greatly ignores the myriad ways that race, sex, and poverty interact in the modern world in favor of a narrative that provides one with a clearly defined enemy.
Dude come on you're being completely irrational now, I listed all the facts and you still don't get it? Who is protecting the rights of the child? How is that anti libertarian to want the child's right to be protected as well? I obviously not saying the husband should have equal rights, but he shouldn't be charged with murder if it's just a fetus right? However men have been convicted for just that. But that's cool you wanna be down with sick eugenicists and defend them that's fine by me, but I won't be part of it. Will you at least agree that my tax dollars shouldnt be taken to fund it? Oh no I'm sure you love that my tax dollars are taken to kill babies, I mean why not it goes to kill thousands of middle eastern innocents everyday anyway.
PS I added a piece about John P. Holdren you might wanna go back and look at, but I'm sure you'll write that off as a crazy conspiracy theory even though its a fact.
How am I being irrational? Because I'm saying that new pro-choice arguments exist (which you are ignoring) and you're attempting to discredit the pro-choice argument based off of the rantings of a racist that aren't used by pro-choice advocates nowadays? Is it because I don't believe that a ball of cells that are indistinguishable from a parasite for several weeks or a zygote/fetus (that's the scientific terms for them, "baby" is much too wide of a term) is a living thing that has the right to inhabit a woman's body if she doesn't want it there? I agree with you that a man shouldn't be unilaterally charged with murder for killing a zygote or a fetus. And please tell me where I defend eugenicists. All I said was that eugenics was seen as a legitimate form of science during the time Sanger made those comments. I did not endorse them, but merely provided historical context. And I said that trying to say that Sanger's opinion discredits Planned Parenthood or the pro-choice movement NOW is a horrible way to make a pro-choice argument since nobody is using eugenic rhetoric to support the pro-choice platform.
The John Holden quotes: great! You picked a person with influence and extreme views and oh no! He supports Planned Parenthood! He must think that Planned Parenthood is doing this things and that must be why he supports it! And oh no! I support Planned Parenthood too! Therefore, I must agree with his theories as well!
The argument that tax dollars shouldn't go to Planned Parenthood is a much more legitimate argument but frankly, I don't know enough about the intricacies of government support of non-profits to take part in it. And I don't support any drone strikes nor the U.S.'s presence in the Middle East. You really have a problem with making assumptions about the people who disagree with you, don't you? You should take it easy on the incendiary language and ad hominem attacks as well if you want people to take your opinions seriously. But then again, you do listen to Alex Jones and he is a master of believing that that makes for a cogent argument, so what else should I have expected (look! I can do personal attacks too!)?
-
Expand Quote
^ Its relevant because I told you to read a book and you just respond with a stupid youtube video. This is some crazy cognitive dissonance. You may believe abortion is bad or whatever, but are you really stupid enough not to realize how much this contradicts every ideal you spout? That's why you are so obssessed with sharing a conspiracy nobody believes, because some long drawn out conspiracy is the only thing that takes away you being a complete hypocrite. Jesus fucking christ.
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
TMKF- give up, you are going after him instead of facts now. You lost. Give it up.
And what's crazy about bringing up Gulf Of Tonkin? IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND. "Gun control is evil, GULF OF TONKIN!!!! LOOK IT UP!!!" what a fucking idiot, there is no parallel there. Same with every other topic he brought up. You are following his lead now though, answer the questions, don't call me a brainwashing victim. How is the party of liberty over safety in every single other issue suddenly change its mind about abortion. Suddenly the goal of the government is safety. Its such a joke and clear proof that you guys just get indoctrinated and don't question what your cult leader tells you.
The fact that you don't realize how crazy he looked jumping from topic to topic and not acknowledging any of Morgan's points really is sad. You are indoctrinated. Its sad.
You must be from a former slave state, where you hate carpetbaggers and black people, especially them uppity ones, right? Good thing you put him back in his place like your grandpappy told you needed to happen
-
^ Its relevant because I told you to read a book and you just respond with a stupid youtube video. This is some crazy cognitive dissonance. You may believe abortion is bad or whatever, but are you really stupid enough not to realize how much this contradicts every ideal you spout? That's why you are so obssessed with sharing a conspiracy nobody believes, because some long drawn out conspiracy is the only thing that takes away you being a complete hypocrite. Jesus fucking christ.
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
TMKF- give up, you are going after him instead of facts now. You lost. Give it up.
And what's crazy about bringing up Gulf Of Tonkin? IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND. "Gun control is evil, GULF OF TONKIN!!!! LOOK IT UP!!!" what a fucking idiot, there is no parallel there. Same with every other topic he brought up. You are following his lead now though, answer the questions, don't call me a brainwashing victim. How is the party of liberty over safety in every single other issue suddenly change its mind about abortion. Suddenly the goal of the government is safety. Its such a joke and clear proof that you guys just get indoctrinated and don't question what your cult leader tells you.
The fact that you don't realize how crazy he looked jumping from topic to topic and not acknowledging any of Morgan's points really is sad. You are indoctrinated. Its sad.
How did I lose? I posted the facts! I posted the sources! Where were his facts or sources? He posted his opinion while name calling, that doesn't distinguish a winner. Just because you happen to agree with him doesn't mean he wins and I lose. I don't even care about that I'm just trying to get these facts out. He's questioning a topic that I've done deep research on because I used to be pro choice myself until I caught wind of the whole eugenics movement.
Gulf of Tonkin being staged is an example that the government will do things to broaden their agenda, gain control, take away our rights in the name of a fake threat, I mean come of Gipper look at all the corruption and lies that went on under the Bush administration.....all examples of government tyranny, which is what we need the second amendment to defend against. Peirs has said that is ridiculous to think, he claims government tyranny doesn't exist and we shouldnt be worried about it, so Alex was giving examples. Therefore it's completely relevant.
I agree he looked crazy I went as far as to say it hurt him and his credibility, which was Piers master plan, Alex Jones fell into his trap. However Piers didn't have any points, he just let Alex go off for 15 minutes, while asking if he knew the statistics(ie gun murder rates and what weapons were used). Even if he did bring up relevant points it wouldn't matter because this topic isn't debatable because it is a guaranteed constitutional right for the people to keep and bear arms. Especially for a non US citizen to try to dictate to and manipulate the American people by standing on the graves of dead children.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
^ Its relevant because I told you to read a book and you just respond with a stupid youtube video. This is some crazy cognitive dissonance. You may believe abortion is bad or whatever, but are you really stupid enough not to realize how much this contradicts every ideal you spout? That's why you are so obssessed with sharing a conspiracy nobody believes, because some long drawn out conspiracy is the only thing that takes away you being a complete hypocrite. Jesus fucking christ.
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
I feel like this is something obvious racists say. Who ever said all our problems would be gone if we had a black president? You are insulting a position that doesn't exist because you hate the� fact that the president is black and really want a white guy back in the office.
TMKF- give up, you are going after him instead of facts now. You lost. Give it up.
And what's crazy about bringing up Gulf Of Tonkin? IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND. "Gun control is evil, GULF OF TONKIN!!!! LOOK IT UP!!!" what a fucking idiot, there is no parallel there. Same with every other topic he brought up. You are following his lead now though, answer the questions, don't call me a brainwashing victim. How is the party of liberty over safety in every single other issue suddenly change its mind about abortion. Suddenly the goal of the government is safety. Its such a joke and clear proof that you guys just get indoctrinated and don't question what your cult leader tells you.
The fact that you don't realize how crazy he looked jumping from topic to topic and not acknowledging any of Morgan's points really is sad. You are indoctrinated. Its sad.
You sound so whiny. Calm down. Have a coke and chill.
-
The facts are there, but the dots don't connect. ITs really sad you don't notice that.
If you want a real government conspiracy that actually relates to armed activists, look at the black panther party.
Fred Hampton was known for brokering a truce between the major gangs in Chicago, and starting the free breakfast for school children program by the age of 21. Cointelpro called him the "messiah figure that would bring the civil rights movement to new levels" and released files showed that his peaceful actions scared them.
So what did they do?
They drugged hampton and came in in the middle of the night and blew his brains out. Before they even walked in, they had the excuse for killing him in hand- "he was armed." That wasn't what scared them though, it was the excuse they used.
How do I know they didn't really fear the armed black panthers instead? Because the man who armed the Panthers was named Richard Aoki, and guess who he worked for?
The fucking FBI.
That's right, they armed the panthers as an excuse to kill them off and prevent their progress.
But if you want to believe that having an armed populace does anything to stop government oppression, go ahead, you are just insanely ignorant and stupid. Keep jumping to Gulf of Tonkin every time you have a conspiracy even if it isn't related to any of the motives or actions that took place, just keep saying "Gulf of Tonkin was a conspiracy, so is everything else" until you believe it, also, ignore the arming and killing of the Black Panthers in the 60's, because that doesn't fit the narrative. Only Gulf of Tonkin does, right? Oh, and the only reason for violence in America is pills, nobody who hasn't been medicated has every committed a crime, right? Jesus fuck.
-
Argument against abortion being a woman's right. If a woman chooses to abort a baby, it's her body. If that same woman is murdered while pregnant, the murderer is charged with the murder of two people. Be consistent, government.
-
Placing any value on the political views of the creator of shit like Fantasy Factory and Ridiculousness is almost as bad as taking any political posts on Slap seriously.
FUCK OFF.
-
^ Its relevant because I told you to read a book and you just respond with a stupid youtube video. This is some crazy cognitive dissonance. You may believe abortion is bad or whatever, but are you really stupid enough not to realize how much this contradicts every ideal you spout? That's why you are so obssessed with sharing a conspiracy nobody believes, because some long drawn out conspiracy is the only thing that takes away you being a complete hypocrite. Jesus fucking christ.
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
TMKF- give up, you are going after him instead of facts now. You lost. Give it up.
And what's crazy about bringing up Gulf Of Tonkin? IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND. "Gun control is evil, GULF OF TONKIN!!!! LOOK IT UP!!!" what a fucking idiot, there is no parallel there. Same with every other topic he brought up. You are following his lead now though, answer the questions, don't call me a brainwashing victim. How is the party of liberty over safety in every single other issue suddenly change its mind about abortion. Suddenly the goal of the government is safety. Its such a joke and clear proof that you guys just get indoctrinated and don't question what your cult leader tells you.
The fact that you don't realize how crazy he looked jumping from topic to topic and not acknowledging any of Morgan's points really is sad. You are indoctrinated. Its sad.
The parallel there would be the Hegelian Dialectic...like Rahm Emanuel said, "you never want a serious crisis to go to waste"...whether that crisis is real or a staged false flag. It's the collectivist formula of controlled chaos.
A (thesis) versus B (anti-thesis) equals C (synthesis).
For example: If (A) my idea of freedom conflicts with (B) your idea of freedom then (C) neither of us can be free until everyone agrees to be a slave.
C'mon, you know this stuff, Gipper.
The Soviet Union was based on the Hegelian dialectic, as is all Marxist writing. The Soviets didn't give up their Hegelian reasoning when they supposedly stopped being a communist country. They merely changed the dialectical language to fit into the modern version of Marxist thinking called communitarianism. There is no difference between the top capitalists and the top communists, they utilize the same techniques to consolidate control. Professor Anthony Sutton detailed and articulated this in numerous volumes of his work:
The Best Enemies Money Can Buy -- Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany -- Prof. Antony C. Sutton (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3vZNSAi-QM#)
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
I don't know much, but I know that you're an idiot if you don't think gun control laws should be tighter in this country.
It has nothing to do with the recent killings and everything to do with stupidity.
You can own an automatic assault rifle, but you can't get the free health care that you'll need for shooting your own nut sack off.
Sorry America, but this country is fucked.
You're right you don't know much and you don't understand freedom. Heroin is illegal but you can go get some right now if you want. If automatic weapons were illegal(which they pretty much are) a criminal could get one if they wanted to. Therefore making a law against them will only prevent those who follow the law to not being able to defend themselves against criminals who seek them out, it's as simple as that. I don't think you understand how rare a fully automatic weapon is, you have to jump though a bunch of hoops, background checks and pay for fees and licenses to own them. I'm also wondering how this relates to healthcare? Why should a health care provider be required to give anyone something for free? You think the government should make automatic weapons illegal and pay for the population to have healthcare...the same government that's caught day after day involved in corruption and insider trading for their own benefit? The same government that gave 2000 weapons including automatic assault rifles and grenades to Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious? No thanks, I'll just take care of myself and if I choose to have a weapon to defend myself or just because I'm into guns that right is guaranteed and is protected under the constitution. I understand where you're coming from but we've already established that criminals can and will get whatever they want from drugs to weapons so how much sense does it make to have a single shot rifle to defend yourself against a criminal that has a semi auto or even an automatic weapon. I'm not some big gun guy, I just understand freedom, and you can't be truly free without the right to protect yourself. Once you start to restrict(which they've already done) its a slippery slope. You think the government actually cares about less violence? The US government are the biggest killers in the world, they've killed millions of innocent people with the continued illegal undeclared wars and drone attacks...this is about control and always was.
Nope. It's not that hard at all. My brother in law went to a gun show in Texas, with some cash, and bought one. It wasn't hard. It was just expensive, and he's just stupid.
This idea of Freedom being related to arming yourself is the biggest load of crap ever.
If you think that owning a gun has anything to do with freedom you have no clue at all.
If you want to be free, you should start thinking about being given basic human rights. Like not having to pay for a baby, or for cancer, or for a baby with cancer.
Take care of yourself? How? If you are a minimal percent of the population that can afford either *good insurance, or to pay for healthcare out of pocket than you're extremely lucky. Get sick, and tell me you want to be free and pay for your health.
What about an innocent bystander caught up in an act of gun violence? Do they deserve to go broke for trying to save their lives?
So do you see how one is related to another now?
If you have a pistol, and the intruder has an automatic weapon, or if he has a pistol and you have one, you're still getting shot - or not- either way. You're still stupid, as are they. And one of you is going to have to pay thousands, maybe millions of dollars not to die. And you're still talking about freedom.
You're obviously mixing up semi automatic with automatic, there's no way he went and bought a fully automatic gun from the gun show. What about an innocent bystander being hit by a car? That argument makes no sense. I have health insurance, I work and I pay for it, when I get sick I hardly ever use, only if its something gnarly, so I don't really get your argument there either? Just because I want something for free I should get it? Freedom is related to owning a firearm because in a free society one should be able to own one to protect themselves if they wish, it is a guaranteed right, free healthcare certainly isn't. I do think the healthcare system is broken, and its because there is too much government involvement in it. Ever since they started getting involved prices for procedures and insurance started skyrocketing. When the healthcare bill was passed who's stocks soared? Healthcare providers and insurance providers....pretty easy to see who benefited from that one.
He bought the same weapon used as standard military issue. Semi, or fully, or not at all. I don't know all that much about guns, and nor do I care to. I know it's a weapon he does not need, has no reason to own, and no possible scenario in his life would necessitate the need for using it.
He's also now serving in the US Army. And would tell you the same thing. Having used a much bigger gun to kill plenty of people.
Let's put guns aside for one second and move onto health care, because this is something you clearly don't grasp. Or perhaps have been fortunate enough not to. Your position is one of privilidge not right. Most people don't have what you do and they need it more than you. You say yourself you choose not to use the health coverage you have unless it's "gnarly". Well there are people out there who even in your situation would go broke trying to live a normal life, because "gnarly" is their every day. I speak here from moderate experience. And if someone gets hit by a car, or a bullet, both deserve to right to be treated for their injuries without any personal cost. My original argument mentioned both childcare and cancer treatment, which are not related to gun violence at all.
The bit I put in bold is the reason I can't argue with you. This mentality is shameful, pathetic and inhuman. You think freedom means a right to carry a weapon, but not to have healthcare. You think a country that gives you this is freedom. You're an idiot.
Government intervention in healthcare is not the problem, insurance and pharmaceutical intervention is.
Perhaps what the government would offer wouldn't be ideal, but you won't care about ideal if it saves your life without costing you your house and life savings. It's not like it would be the only option either. In most developed countries with national healthcare you can also choose to have private, insured coverage.
Interestingly at a fraction of the cost of what you're expected to pay in the US.
But go ahead, buy a gun. Hide it in your sock drawer. Fight for your freedom. Contribute to society and make the world a better place.
You fucking moron.
-
Also, for the record:
Piers Morgan is an absolute joke. A complete idiot of a human being. But all this: "johnny foreigner telling us how to live" bullshit, is pathetic.
Just because he's not American doesn't mean he can't talk about America, and the nations policies and beliefs. He has every right to an opinion, and rightly or wrongly he's payed to share them.
Just like all the US born TV personality morons.
It doesn't mean he's right in what he says, but cut the bulllshit about him not being entitled because he's foreign.
Especially as the US is on the shakiest of ground when it comes to telling other countries what to think, and how to act.
-
^ Nope, "libertarian" Alex Jones wants him deported because he was using free speech and taking advantage of freedom of press. Get out of here you freedom hater! I'm not a Piers Morgan fan, but Alex Jones is actually so stupid he makes him look good.
HAHAHA, now TKMF is using his ideology instead of facts. "Healthcare is a privilege, not a right, yadda yadda yadda." No discussion about effectiveness, capability, or the current corporatist state of healthcare where the laws are created just to protect the profit motive. So sad, so sad.
Real deal, I don't even know where to start. Just stop. In terms of what I am smart enough to know- its that you are using the same stupid Alex Jones technique where you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, but think that bringing up things that don't fit will make you seem wise. Bringing up a Hegelian dialectic doesn't make everything a conspiracy.
From now on, you only get this response until you answer me: If gun control scares the government, then why did they arm the black panthers and then kill them? Because all you are doing is taking it back far enough that it might relate- Both involve events on planet earth too! How fucking stupid can I be!!
Also, here is who you listen to:
Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan On Gun Control - CNN 1/7/2013 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XZvMwcluEg#ws)
I'm not saying this so you realize it. I'm saying it so people can know how stupid and crazy you are. Nobody with half a brain believes the stupid shit you do. You care, that's great, now ACT on real issues instead of creating conspiracy theories.
-
The facts are there, but the dots don't connect. ITs really sad you don't notice that.
If you want a real government conspiracy that actually relates to armed activists, look at the black panther party.
Fred Hampton was known for brokering a truce between the major gangs in Chicago, and starting the free breakfast for school children program by the age of 21. Cointelpro called him the "messiah figure that would bring the civil rights movement to new levels" and released files showed that his peaceful actions scared them.
So what did they do?
They drugged hampton and came in in the middle of the night and blew his brains out. Before they even walked in, they had the excuse for killing him in hand- "he was armed." That wasn't what scared them though, it was the excuse they used.
How do I know they didn't really fear the armed black panthers instead? Because the man who armed the Panthers was named Richard Aoki, and guess who he worked for?
The fucking FBI.
That's right, they armed the panthers as an excuse to kill them off and prevent their progress.
But if you want to believe that having an armed populace does anything to stop government oppression, go ahead, you are just insanely ignorant and stupid. Keep jumping to Gulf of Tonkin every time you have a conspiracy even if it isn't related to any of the motives or actions that took place, just keep saying "Gulf of Tonkin was a conspiracy, so is everything else" until you believe it, also, ignore the arming and killing of the Black Panthers in the 60's, because that doesn't fit the narrative. Only Gulf of Tonkin does, right? Oh, and the only reason for violence in America is pills, nobody who hasn't been medicated has every committed a crime, right? Jesus fuck.
Come on Gipper you know I'm not saying that the only reason for violence is pills, I'm just pointing out that these mass murder suicides the guys are almost always on the drugs that claim violent thoughts and actions in the side effects. I'm also not saying that the black panther conspiracy that you cited isn't true, in fact it probably is. That actually sounds like the more recent fast and furious operation, arming the drug cartels and gangs to supposedly follow the guns when it was actually to demonize the second amendment until they got caught. Which I want to add was going on under Bush before Obama even got into office. I'm not saying everything is a conspiracy, I'm saying that when a government has been know to stage events for political gain time and time again, it would be stupid for them not to be suspects especially when they clearly have something to gain. It's funny how you only believe the conspiracies that fall in line with your beliefs, I take all of them into consideration, noone know the facts of anything for sure we just go on what we're told. I'm not claiming to know anything, just connecting dots, which you say don't connect.....
I don't see how a women who founds a Eugenics club also founds an Abortion club and has quote after quote promoting Eugenics and her Abortion club just so happens to be the largest abortion provider in the country....oh yeah and the government takes taxpayer money and gives it to this abortion club whilst having a senior advisor to the president of the country who wrote a book calling for forced sterilization and abortion....I guess that's just a coincidence, those dots don't connect at all.
-
Odd how on the AWS site they have the graphic without "Infowars" printed on it. I question, along with OP, the legitimacy of this collab.
http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672 (http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672)
Also, Planned Parenthood does not use federal funding for abortions, those go towards other services for women's health.
Lastly, if you, TMKF, were a true libertarian you would recognize the rights of women to have an abortion despite your personal moral objections.
I guess if I were a "true" libertarian I'd be down for child pornography too right? If government funds go to Planned Parenthood its helps them as a foundation, they are the largest abortion provider in the country, so that bs argument doesn't work.
-
The call for deportation about foreign subterfuge and subversion. This collaboration is definitely not satire nor a hoax. Alien has an ad on there page and here is the link to the store: http://www.infowarsshop.com/Brainwash-Skate-Deck_p_851.html
Here are the other products in the collab.
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/thumbnailasp.jpg)
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/thumbnail-1asp.jpg)
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/thumbnail-2asp.jpg)
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/thumbnail-3asp.jpg)
Gip, here is Black Panther Veteran, Larry Pinkney discussing cointelpro and much more on Alex's show last July:
Larry Pinkney of The Black Panther Party on Alex Jones Show (7-24-12) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKm8DDYviIM#ws)
-
One thing: there's nothing more pathetic than a bunch of dudes on a message board talking about abortion.
-
You don't know about Fred Hampton?
The shut the fuck up moron. You don't get it. Look something up for once.
And no, its not like fast and furious, which you have decided is an anti-2nd amendment conspiracy despite the fact that Gun nut George W. Bush was the one who started it and no evidence of actions taken to make it lead to gun control.
Also, there was no attempt to ban guns after Fred Hampton, just the continued framing, killing, and exiling of Panther after Panther.
Having guns as part of your movement is the government's wet dream. You can't beat their organization that way.
You are so fucking ignorant it is scary.
And Real deal, how the fuck is it not free speech? Its not like only citizens have that in America. Suddenly though somebody who is saying something that you don't agree with shouldn't have it? Free speech is all about subterfuge and subversion, somehow when Alex Jones is talking you agree, but when somebody who disagrees speaks, you fall in line behind your cult leader and justify why THE SPEECH OF THE OPPOSITION MUST BE CRUSHED. Yeah, you really care about liberty.Fucking moron.
-
TMKF, you don't really know what libertarianism means, do you? Libertarians don't support child pornography because IT HARMS THE CHILD! Libertarians believe in little to no regulation in personal lives WHEN IT DOES NOT HARM ANOTHER HUMAN BEING!
And please tell me where I resorted to name calling (except that post where I did it to point out the fact that it was what you were resorting to quite early on in the debate). I didn't try to argue your quotes because I know them already and I don't agree with them. No rational human being does. What I instead tried to do was illustrate your inability to engage with pro-choice beliefs in any other manner than a eugenics one. Your inability shows the fact that you don't have a modern argument against abortion since that is not how people make pro-choice arguments today. That's it.
-
^ Nope, "libertarian" Alex Jones wants him deported because he was using free speech and taking advantage of freedom of press. Get out of here you freedom hater! I'm not a Piers Morgan fan, but Alex Jones is actually so stupid he makes him look good.
HAHAHA, now TKMF is using his ideology instead of facts. "Healthcare is a privilege, not a right, yadda yadda yadda." No discussion about effectiveness, capability, or the current corporatist state of healthcare where the laws are created just to protect the profit motive. So sad, so sad.
Real deal, I don't even know where to start. Just stop. In terms of what I am smart enough to know- its that you are using the same stupid Alex Jones technique where you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, but think that bringing up things that don't fit will make you seem wise. Bringing up a Hegelian dialectic doesn't make everything a conspiracy.
From now on, you only get this response until you answer me: If gun control scares the government, then why did they arm the black panthers and then kill them? Because all you are doing is taking it back far enough that it might relate- Both involve events on planet earth too! How fucking stupid can I be!!
Also, here is who you listen to:
Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan On Gun Control - CNN 1/7/2013 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XZvMwcluEg#ws)
I'm not saying this so you realize it. I'm saying it so people can know how stupid and crazy you are. Nobody with half a brain believes the stupid shit you do. You care, that's great, now ACT on real issues instead of creating conspiracy theories.
He's not a citizen, therefore his propaganda intending to overthrow our constitution and bill of rights is an act of subversion, which was upheld by the supreme court during the communist era. However even Alex Jones said they did that to get attention.
The government isn't scared of arming people as long as it will eventually justify disarming them in the end.
-
Yeah man, because the U.S. government's precedents while caught up in McCarthyism are a great yardstick by which to measure justice.
-
You're implying that Piers Morgan?s anti-gun crusade and subversion of a guaranteed American Right is protected by free speech under the first amendment when it clearly isn?t since foreign nationals do not have absolute first amendment rights.
The fact that the first amendment does not apply to non-citizens was established in the Supreme Court?s affirmation of Bluman v. FEC in January 2012. The court?s decision rubber-stamped a District Court decision which found under its first amendment analysis that, ?The United States has a compelling interest in limiting the participation of foreign citizens in such activities, and ?thereby preventing foreign influence over the U.S. political process.?
-
Expand Quote
Odd how on the AWS site they have the graphic without "Infowars" printed on it. �I question, along with OP, the legitimacy of this collab.
http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672 (http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672)
Also, Planned Parenthood does not use federal funding for abortions, those go towards other services for women's health.
Lastly, if you, TMKF, were a true libertarian you would recognize the rights of women to have an abortion despite your personal moral objections.
I guess if I were a "true" libertarian I'd be down for child pornography too right? If government funds go to Planned Parenthood its helps them as a foundation, they are the largest abortion provider in the country, so that bs argument doesn't work.
Bad counter, child porn infringes on someone else (the child) so that would not fit in with the ideology.
And your argument is bs, the federal funding is used for pap smears, mammograms, and other services. I recall a stat from election season that while PP is the largest abortion provider, only 3% of their activities are abortions.
-
You don't know about Fred Hampton?
The shut the fuck up moron. You don't get it. Look something up for once.
And no, its not like fast and furious, which you have decided is an anti-2nd amendment conspiracy despite the fact that Gun nut George W. Bush was the one who started it and no evidence of actions taken to make it lead to gun control.
Also, there was no attempt to ban guns after Fred Hampton, just the continued framing, killing, and exiling of Panther after Panther.
Having guns as part of your movement is the government's wet dream. You can't beat their organization that way.
You are so fucking ignorant it is scary.
And Real deal, how the fuck is it not free speech? Its not like only citizens have that in America. Suddenly though somebody who is saying something that you don't agree with shouldn't have it? Free speech is all about subterfuge and subversion, somehow when Alex Jones is talking you agree, but when somebody who disagrees speaks, you fall in line behind your cult leader and justify why THE SPEECH �OF THE OPPOSITION MUST BE CRUSHED. Yeah, you really care about liberty.Fucking moron.
George Bush may have posed as an American who was pro second amendment(a gun nut in your terms) in order to get elected, just as he promised a non interventionist foreign policy, no nation building, smaller government and to uphold the constitution. Meanwhile he illegally waged war on multiple countries, along with nation building, tripled the size of government and government spending, and essentially did away with the 4th and 5th amendment with the patriot act. Not to mention gave all his buddies the defense(offense) contracts. His pops called for a new world order multiple times, we know he was daddy's good little son who would ultimately continue that agenda after he got booted. Their new world order involves disarming the population of the world check out the UN treaties.
I don't have a problem with what Morgan says, because I don't feel threatened by it. He's unpopular and has extremely low ratings, I just think its sick how he tries to manipulate American's into giving up their constitutional rights by using dead children as an example when he's not even an American. I'm not saying he shouldn't have an opinion I don't think he should be silenced, I didn't sign the petition. I just disagree with him and his tactics. However what he is doing does fall into the definition of subversion.
-
This is the worst thing Alien Workshop has done! God damn. Infowars is soooo fucking looney, it would have been cooler if they did a coast to coast collab, Chomsky or something more subtle. I'm shocked at this.
-
This is the worst thing Alien Workshop has done! God damn. Infowars is soooo fucking looney, it would have been cooler if they did a coast to coast collab, Chomsky or something more subtle. I'm shocked at this.
So telling ghost stories and discussing remote viewing isn't looney? I should say I am a fan of C2C. George Norrie pro model would be sick.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Odd how on the AWS site they have the graphic without "Infowars" printed on it. �I question, along with OP, the legitimacy of this collab.
http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672 (http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672)
Also, Planned Parenthood does not use federal funding for abortions, those go towards other services for women's health.
Lastly, if you, TMKF, were a true libertarian you would recognize the rights of women to have an abortion despite your personal moral objections.
I guess if I were a "true" libertarian I'd be down for child pornography too right? If government funds go to Planned Parenthood its helps them as a foundation, they are the largest abortion provider in the country, so that bs argument doesn't work.
And your argument is bs, the federal funding is used for pap smears, mammograms, and other services. �I recall a stat from election season that while PP is the largest abortion provider, only 3% of their activities are abortions.
I'm just wondering who protects the rights of the unborn? You think an unborn baby wants to be killed? If you see it as just a fetus thats your interpretation but I don't, I see it as an unborn living person. As I said if you guys wanna back murder and eugenics that's cool but I can't. I'd love to see the source that only 3% of Planned Parenthood is abortion. They perform close to half a million abortions a year...that's a large 3%. Even if that was true which I'm sure it isn't the federal funding helps them as an organization. I just don't think the government should be involved in giving organizations tax dollars, they should just let us keep that money and we can decide what organizations we want to donate to.
-
Expand Quote
This is the worst thing Alien Workshop has done! God damn. �Infowars is soooo fucking looney, it would have been cooler if they did a coast to coast collab, Chomsky or something more subtle. I'm shocked at this.
So telling ghost stories and discussing remote viewing isn't looney? I should say I am a fan of C2C. George Norrie pro model would be sick.
It is looney, but no one takes it seriously. Things like remote viewing, aliens etc, fit more in line with Alien's image. It would have been more tongue in cheek.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
This is the worst thing Alien Workshop has done! God damn. �Infowars is soooo fucking looney, it would have been cooler if they did a coast to coast collab, Chomsky or something more subtle. I'm shocked at this.
So telling ghost stories and discussing remote viewing isn't looney? I should say I am a fan of C2C. George Norrie pro model would be sick.
It is looney, but no one takes it seriously. Things like remote viewing, aliens etc, fit more in line with Alien's image. It would have been more tongue in cheek.
I hear ya. Whitley Strieber X aws
-
I can't even understand how Alex Jones is on the radio, like who let him on and who even listens and agrees, fucking madness.
-
TMKF, you don't really know what libertarianism means, do you? Libertarians don't support child pornography because IT HARMS THE CHILD! Libertarians believe in little to no regulation in personal lives WHEN IT DOES NOT HARM ANOTHER HUMAN BEING!
And please tell me where I resorted to name calling (except that post where I did it to point out the fact that it was what you were resorting to quite early on in the debate). I didn't try to argue your quotes because I know them already and I don't agree with them. No rational human being does. What I instead tried to do was illustrate your inability to engage with pro-choice beliefs in any other manner than a eugenics one. Your inability shows the fact that you don't have a modern argument against abortion since that is not how people make pro-choice arguments today. That's it.
I certainly know about libertarianism means, I'm a libertarian and have been for quite some time. I simply just see an unborn child as a person who has rights and not just a fetus. Therefore I see abortion as harming another human being.
I'm sorry I was mixed up your comments with someone elses, I apologize sir.
-
(http://www.babycenter.com/i/m/stages/popups/05/index.jpg)
OK TMKF, so you shouldn't have an abortion if you think this 5 week old fetus is a person.
-
Expand Quote
TMKF, you don't really know what libertarianism means, do you? Libertarians don't support child pornography because IT HARMS THE CHILD! Libertarians believe in little to no regulation in personal lives WHEN IT DOES NOT HARM ANOTHER HUMAN BEING!
And please tell me where I resorted to name calling (except that post where I did it to point out the fact that it was what you were resorting to quite early on in the debate). I didn't try to argue your quotes because I know them already and I don't agree with them. No rational human being does. What I instead tried to do was illustrate your inability to engage with pro-choice beliefs in any other manner than a eugenics one. Your inability shows the fact that you don't have a modern argument against abortion since that is not how people make pro-choice arguments today. That's it.
I certainly know about libertarianism means, I'm a libertarian and have been for quite some time. I simply just see an unborn child as a person who has rights and not just a fetus. Therefore I see abortion as harming another human being.
I'm sorry I was mixed up your comments with someone elses, I apologize sir.
Just shut up, it's nothing to do with what you're talking about. This is about Alien Workshop doing a straight up kook collab with someone with no credibility. I'd expect this shit from a lesser company.
What's next a Timothy McVeigh graphic? Koresh? American Resistance Movement?
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
TMKF, you don't really know what libertarianism means, do you? Libertarians don't support child pornography because IT HARMS THE CHILD! Libertarians believe in little to no regulation in personal lives WHEN IT DOES NOT HARM ANOTHER HUMAN BEING!
And please tell me where I resorted to name calling (except that post where I did it to point out the fact that it was what you were resorting to quite early on in the debate). I didn't try to argue your quotes because I know them already and I don't agree with them. No rational human being does. What I instead tried to do was illustrate your inability to engage with pro-choice beliefs in any other manner than a eugenics one. Your inability shows the fact that you don't have a modern argument against abortion since that is not how people make pro-choice arguments today. That's it.
I certainly know about libertarianism means, I'm a libertarian and have been for quite some time. I simply just see an unborn child as a person who has rights and not just a fetus. Therefore I see abortion as harming another human being.
I'm sorry I was mixed up your comments with someone elses, I apologize sir.
Just shut up, it's nothing to do with what you're talking about. This is about Alien Workshop doing a straight up kook collab with someone with no credibility. I'd expect this shit from a lesser company.
What's next a Timothy McVeigh graphic? Koresh? American Resistance Movement?
Obviously Alein Workshop doesn't agree with you. Can you cite some examples of how Infowars has "no credibility" or perhaps justify comparing them to Timothy McVeigh?
This collab makes perfect sense to me, I think it's pretty rad that Alien Workshop is backing alternative media.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Odd how on the AWS site they have the graphic without "Infowars" printed on it. �I question, along with OP, the legitimacy of this collab.
http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672 (http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672)
Also, Planned Parenthood does not use federal funding for abortions, those go towards other services for women's health.
Lastly, if you, TMKF, were a true libertarian you would recognize the rights of women to have an abortion despite your personal moral objections.
I guess if I were a "true" libertarian I'd be down for child pornography too right? If government funds go to Planned Parenthood its helps them as a foundation, they are the largest abortion provider in the country, so that bs argument doesn't work.
And your argument is bs, the federal funding is used for pap smears, mammograms, and other services. �I recall a stat from election season that while PP is the largest abortion provider, only 3% of their activities are abortions.
I'm just wondering who protects the rights of the unborn? You think an unborn baby wants to be killed? If you see it as just a fetus thats your interpretation but I don't, I see it as an unborn living person. As I said if you guys wanna back murder and eugenics that's cool but I can't. I'd love to see the source that only 3% of Planned Parenthood is abortion. They perform close to half a million abortions a year...that's a large 3%. Even if that was true which I'm sure it isn't the federal funding helps them as an organization. I just don't think the government should be involved in giving organizations tax dollars, they should just let us keep that money and we can decide what organizations we want to donate to.
You are embarrassing yourself. How old are you? What do you believe in?
Actually, I take that back: have you ever gotten another human being pregnant? Have you yourself ever been pregnant?
Shut the fuck up about abortion. It's not your fight and it's not your debate.
It's none of ours.
How can you believe in freedom and believe you have the right to tell another human being what to do with their body? I can't believe you can talk about an unborn baby not wanting to be killed and be anti free healthcare. Not that's it any sort of argument, but it puts holes in yours:
How many "free" abortions do you think people have because they can't afford to give birth to a child, or pay for the medicine and health care that child will require for the rest of it's life?
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
TMKF, you don't really know what libertarianism means, do you? Libertarians don't support child pornography because IT HARMS THE CHILD! Libertarians believe in little to no regulation in personal lives WHEN IT DOES NOT HARM ANOTHER HUMAN BEING!
And please tell me where I resorted to name calling (except that post where I did it to point out the fact that it was what you were resorting to quite early on in the debate). I didn't try to argue your quotes because I know them already and I don't agree with them. No rational human being does. What I instead tried to do was illustrate your inability to engage with pro-choice beliefs in any other manner than a eugenics one. Your inability shows the fact that you don't have a modern argument against abortion since that is not how people make pro-choice arguments today. That's it.
I certainly know about libertarianism means, I'm a libertarian and have been for quite some time. I simply just see an unborn child as a person who has rights and not just a fetus. Therefore I see abortion as harming another human being.
I'm sorry I was mixed up your comments with someone elses, I apologize sir.
Just shut up, it's nothing to do with what you're talking about. This is about Alien Workshop doing a straight up kook collab with someone with no credibility. I'd expect this shit from a lesser company.
What's next a Timothy McVeigh graphic? Koresh? American Resistance Movement?
Obviously Alein Workshop doesn't agree with you. Can you cite some examples of how Infowars has "no credibility" or perhaps justify comparing them to Timothy McVeigh?
This collab makes perfect sense to me, I think it's pretty rad that Alien Workshop is backing alternative media.
Alternative fictional media, maybe. Alex Jones is a lunatic (I liked Gippers tin foil hat analogy) who grasps at any straw he can to try to justify a non existent point that he has built from the ground up. The reason he is on more obscure radio channels and the internet is because nothing he says really relates to anything except his own fame agenda, and no "credible" media outlet (term used very loosely) would put him on, other than to exploit his train wreck for ratings. He has created a caricature of himself, and the sillier he acts, the more attention he gets... and with that, the more sponsors and money he gets. The more fanny packs and skateboards he can sell.
The problem I have with "truthers", and Alex Jones specifically, is that they take away effort and spotlight from real cultural issues. This country does have a gun violence problem. That is an inarguable fact. Where you stand on what needs to be done about it is where the road divides, and the arguments start. Ranting and raving about the New World Order and how Obama's Hitler mustache is coming in nicely is taking away time, and even money, from people who have sound minds to come together and make an effort to come to a compromise. While Alex jones himself is in no position to really have any say in the legislation process, he is duping A LOT of stupid, stupid people to take his bait, and thus creating a movement that is nothing more than giant counterproductive measure against a compromise on the real issues.
Whenever presented with rational debate policies (No, I don't mean Piers Morgan... that guy is a kook too) Jones just yells at the top of his lungs about things that usually have nothing to do with the topic at hand. He isn't helping anything except himself, and is in fact diverting attention from efforts that might otherwise hold some merit on the actual problems at hand, not the fabricated ones.
No one needs to "win" this issue. There needs to be compromise with the American people as a whole at the heart of the concern, not personal agendas. Gun nuts spout their rhetoric, and gun abolishers spout theirs. This is basically arguing religion at this point. No one even listens to the other side, so no one is going to walk away with an altered opinion.
The discussion should start in the middle with the understanding that neither side of the coin is going to get exactly what they want, and work outward to protect the American people and the constitution in the best way possible, and attempt to make both sides as happy (or equally slighted) as possible. That is what compromise is.
-
I think I hate all of you.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
TMKF, you don't really know what libertarianism means, do you? Libertarians don't support child pornography because IT HARMS THE CHILD! Libertarians believe in little to no regulation in personal lives WHEN IT DOES NOT HARM ANOTHER HUMAN BEING!
And please tell me where I resorted to name calling (except that post where I did it to point out the fact that it was what you were resorting to quite early on in the debate). I didn't try to argue your quotes because I know them already and I don't agree with them. No rational human being does. What I instead tried to do was illustrate your inability to engage with pro-choice beliefs in any other manner than a eugenics one. Your inability shows the fact that you don't have a modern argument against abortion since that is not how people make pro-choice arguments today. That's it.
I certainly know about libertarianism means, I'm a libertarian and have been for quite some time. I simply just see an unborn child as a person who has rights and not just a fetus. Therefore I see abortion as harming another human being.
I'm sorry I was mixed up your comments with someone elses, I apologize sir.
Just shut up, it's nothing to do with what you're talking about. �This is about Alien Workshop doing a straight up kook collab with someone with no credibility. I'd expect this shit from a lesser company. �
What's next a Timothy McVeigh graphic? Koresh? American Resistance Movement?
Obviously Alein Workshop doesn't agree with you. Can you cite some examples of how Infowars has "no credibility" or perhaps justify comparing them to Timothy McVeigh?
This collab makes perfect sense to me, I think it's pretty rad that Alien Workshop is backing alternative media.
Alternative fictional media, maybe. Alex Jones is alunatic (I liked Gippers tin foil hat analogy) who grasps at any straw he can to try to justify a non existent point that he has built from the ground up. The reason he is on more obscure radio channels and the internet is because nothing he says really relates to anything except his own fame agenda, and no "credible" media outlet (term used very loosely) would put him on, other than to exploit his train wreck for ratings. He has created a caricature of himself, and the sillier he acts, the more attention he gets... and with that, the more sponsors and money he gets. The more fanny packs and skateboards he can sell.
The problem I have with "truthers", and Alex Jones specifically, is that they take away effort and spotlight from real cultural issues. This country does have a gun violence problem. That is an inarguable fact. Where you stand on what needs to be done about it is where the road divides, and the arguments start. Ranting and raving about the New World Order and how Obama's Hitler mustache is coming in nicely is taking away time, and even money, from people who have sound minds to come together and make an effort to come to a compromise. While Alex jones himself is in no position to really have any say in the legislation process, he is duping A LOT of stupid, stupid people to take his bait, and thus creating a movement that is nothing more than giant counterproductive measure against a compromise on the real issues.
Whenever presented with rational debate policies (No, I don't mean Piers Morgan... that guy is a kook too) Jones just yells at the top of his lungs about things that usually have nothing to do with the topic at hand. He isn't helping anything except himself, and is in fact diverting attention from efforts that might otherwise hold some merit on the actual problems at hand, not the fabricated ones.
No one needs to "win" this issue. There needs to be compromise with the American people as a whole at the heart of the concern, not personal agendas. Gun nuts spout their rhetoric, and gun abolishers spout theirs. This is basically arguing religion at this point. No one even listens to the other side, so no one is going to walk away with an altered opinion.
The discussion should start in the middle with the understanding that neither side of the coin is going to get exactly what they want, and work outward to protect the American people and the constitution in the best way possible, and attempt to make both sides as happy (or equally slighted) as possible. That is what compromise is.
Exactly, and if you mention any credible news outlet, from the Guardian to NYT to Washington Post to whoever etc they're automatically "turncoats" to use their term and in on the agenda. The funny thing is these people can never give an answer to what the ultimate goal of a so called NWO would be. It all amounts to wasted energy, that does take away from real issues.
Alex Jones is the type of raving person you'd see in Workshop videos between parts like the "that's not what we were told" in Photosynthesis.
That is why this so wack.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Odd how on the AWS site they have the graphic without "Infowars" printed on it. �I question, along with OP, the legitimacy of this collab.
http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672 (http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672)
Also, Planned Parenthood does not use federal funding for abortions, those go towards other services for women's health.
Lastly, if you, TMKF, were a true libertarian you would recognize the rights of women to have an abortion despite your personal moral objections.
I guess if I were a "true" libertarian I'd be down for child pornography too right? If government funds go to Planned Parenthood its helps them as a foundation, they are the largest abortion provider in the country, so that bs argument doesn't work.
And your argument is bs, the federal funding is used for pap smears, mammograms, and other services. �I recall a stat from election season that while PP is the largest abortion provider, only 3% of their activities are abortions.
I'm just wondering who protects the rights of the unborn? You think an unborn baby wants to be killed? If you see it as just a fetus thats your interpretation but I don't, I see it as an unborn living person. As I said if you guys wanna back murder and eugenics that's cool but I can't. I'd love to see the source that only 3% of Planned Parenthood is abortion. They perform close to half a million abortions a year...that's a large 3%. Even if that was true which I'm sure it isn't the federal funding helps them as an organization. I just don't think the government should be involved in giving organizations tax dollars, they should just let us keep that money and we can decide what organizations we want to donate to.
You are embarrassing yourself. How old are you? What do you believe in?
Actually, I take that back: have you ever gotten another human being pregnant? Have you yourself ever been pregnant?
Shut the fuck up about abortion. It's not your fight and it's not your debate.
It's none of ours.
How can you believe in freedom and believe you have the right to tell another human being what to do with their body? I can't believe you can talk about an unborn baby not wanting to be killed and be anti free healthcare. Not that's it any sort of argument, but it puts holes in yours:
How many "free" abortions do you think people have because they can't afford to give birth to a child, or pay for the medicine and health care that child will require for the rest of it's life?
I'll be 29 on Monday. I don't have a kid, my wife and I are trying, no luck yet. We plan to adopt as well but want to try to have our own first.
I don't understand the argument that I don't understand freedom if I'm not for what I consider a form murder as well as a tool of eugenics. Which I pointed out earlier in the thread and posted all the sources. I understand the fetus debate I just don't agree with it. I'm not against contraception to prevent from getting pregnant but I feel like once you are that it is living person and if you intentionally kill it or "terminate" it then I'm not down for it. As I said to the others if you are that's your opinion and you're entitled to that opinion, I simply disagree.
As far as "free" Heathcare, there is no sub thing unless a doctor performs a procedure as a form of charity which I think is fine obvioisly. What I don't like and don't trust is state run healthcare which is for some reason labeled as free. Why? Because its not free. I think itll end up being like anything else the state takes over...the price will go up and the quality will go down. First of all it further creates dependency on the state, which I don't think is sustainable, like Medicare and social security. It leaves the door open for corruption, back door deals and insider trading between Heathcare and insurance companies and their lobbyists and the politicians, ultimately creating more problems than solutions in the name of giving the people something better and free. Am I really crazy to think this? Are you going to claim this kind of stuff doesn't go on within government? I do think there needs to be some kind of reform that takes the government out of healthcare all together because they've proven incapable and not trustworthy. I don't think ripple understand that America is broke, they can't even pay our current bills, how would it be possible to add more? The US borrows .50cents of every dollar we print...this can't last forever. We're gonna be facing another financial crisis and the Gipper along with the government is gonna say its because we're not borrowing enough! Print print print......but I'm the crazy one.
-
This thread sure is something.
-
you are out of your mind if you think entrusting our healthcare to corporations, who are out to make a profit, is a smart or reasonable thing to do.
-
do people actually buy skate brand sunglasses?
-
Don't limit guns, because people will find ways to get what they want anyway, but ban abortion? Instead of doctors, clinics, and safe abortions, we'll go back to coat hangers, Chik-Fil-A bathrooms, and girls dying. Abortion prohibition isn't a real solution to proactively addressing unwanted pregnancies.
-
you are out of your mind if you think entrusting our healthcare to corporations, who are out to make a profit, is a smart or reasonable thing to do.�
Out of my mind? Healthcare is provided by doctors who are individuals who have practices, or work for hospitals or treatment centers etc. Insurance companies are promdominently corporations. Do you think the government currently runs everything or should run everything? Have that proven to have our best interest at heart? Have you ever heard of a free market? What's wrong with making a profit for your work? Man this country is worse off than I thought...
-
you are out of your mind if you think entrusting our healthcare to corporations, who are out to make a profit, is a smart or reasonable thing to do.
The govt is trustworthy though right?
-
I think TMKF has some valid points. �He's overstating things, but let's get to the core of some of these arguments.
It's a stretch to say that the pro-choice movement today is largely supported by eugenicists (it's supported by liberals who do not believe a fetus is human life). �Eugenics definitely played a role in the abortion movement early on, but these days there are very few eugenicists, and yes, its very disturbing that one of Obama's senior advisors suggests that reproductive freedom can take a backseat to achieving ideal population levels.
But, I think it makes very logical sense that tax dollars wouldn't go toward an organization doing something vehemently opposed by those financially supporting it. �There are two arguments people make here:
1: The funds are specifically meant for good things, like STD testing
To which I would reply STD testing is great, but it's still supporting an organization that roughly 100 million people in the US wouldn't willingly support.
And 2. �Only 3% of what they do is abortion. �Over 300,000 abortions is 3% of their services yes, but it accounts for $165 million (or 15%) of their revenue. �Saying 3% sounds a lot better than saying they make $165 on abortions. �
Whether its foreign wars or planned parenthood, our tax dollars shouldn't be spent on things that a significant amount of taxpayers are opposed to. �We're funding drones that have killed civilians in Pakistan, Yemen, and other countries. � I think we can all agree we're not okay with that.
There's one thing I can agree with Alex Jones on - you can't really trust this government. �
-The US govt interned Japanese Americans in the WWII era (I wouldn't have blamed any of them for using semi-automatics to defend against "government tyranny")
-The US govt knowingly withheld the cure to syphillis while experimenting on African Americans in the south up until the mid 70's during the Tuskegee experimens.
-The draft. �Yeah, some other countries do it. �But they don't send their troops to Vietnam. �
-The US joint chiefs of staff signed off on Operation Northwoods which would have been the US govt bombing Miami and other cities and blaming it on the Cubans so we could have had public support to go to war. �JFK didn't want to do it, JFK got killed and no one knows who was behind it besides this Lee Harvey Oswald guy.
It's funny that the ethnic groups with the least history of US government oppression (caucasians) are often the most insistent to protect themselves against it. �Yeah, they come off as crazy and overly paranoid. �But let's not get on the "we're not like them" train just because we don't want to be associated with truthers and gun lovers. �
The board graphic is good - think of how divided the country gets when you focus in on issues like legally purchased semi-automatic firearms, which statistically represent the tiniest of blips on the radar of deaths in the US. �
-
Don't limit guns, because people will find ways to get what they want anyway, but ban abortion? Instead of doctors, clinics, and safe abortions, we'll go back to coat hangers, Chik-Fil-A bathrooms, and girls dying. Abortion prohibition isn't a real solution to proactively addressing unwanted pregnancies.
Good points.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Odd how on the AWS site they have the graphic without "Infowars" printed on it. �I question, along with OP, the legitimacy of this collab.
http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672 (http://www.alienworkshop.com/#/products/8/17/p_672)
Also, Planned Parenthood does not use federal funding for abortions, those go towards other services for women's health.
Lastly, if you, TMKF, were a true libertarian you would recognize the rights of women to have an abortion despite your personal moral objections.
I guess if I were a "true" libertarian I'd be down for child pornography too right? If government funds go to Planned Parenthood its helps them as a foundation, they are the largest abortion provider in the country, so that bs argument doesn't work.
And your argument is bs, the federal funding is used for pap smears, mammograms, and other services. �I recall a stat from election season that while PP is the largest abortion provider, only 3% of their activities are abortions.
I'm just wondering who protects the rights of the unborn? You think an unborn baby wants to be killed? If you see it as just a fetus thats your interpretation but I don't, I see it as an unborn living person. As I said if you guys wanna back murder and eugenics that's cool but I can't. I'd love to see the source that only 3% of Planned Parenthood is abortion. They perform close to half a million abortions a year...that's a large 3%. Even if that was true which I'm sure it isn't the federal funding helps them as an organization. I just don't think the government should be involved in giving organizations tax dollars, they should just let us keep that money and we can decide what organizations we want to donate to.
You are embarrassing yourself. How old are you? What do you believe in?
Actually, I take that back: have you ever gotten another human being pregnant? Have you yourself ever been pregnant?
Shut the fuck up about abortion. It's not your fight and it's not your debate.
It's none of ours.
How can you believe in freedom and believe you have the right to tell another human being what to do with their body? I can't believe you can talk about an unborn baby not wanting to be killed and be anti free healthcare. Not that's it any sort of argument, but it puts holes in yours:
How many "free" abortions do you think people have because they can't afford to give birth to a child, or pay for the medicine and health care that child will require for the rest of it's life?
I'll be 29 on Monday. I don't have a kid, my wife and I are trying, no luck yet. We plan to adopt as well but want to try to have our own first.
I don't understand the argument that I don't understand freedom if I'm not for what I consider a form murder as well as a tool of eugenics. Which I pointed out earlier in the thread and posted all the sources. I understand the fetus debate I just don't agree with it. I'm not against contraception to prevent from getting pregnant but I feel like once you are that it is living person and if you intentionally kill it or "terminate" it then I'm not down for it. As I said to the others if you are that's your opinion and you're entitled to that opinion, I simply disagree.
As far as "free" Heathcare, there is no sub thing unless a doctor performs a procedure as a form of charity which I think is fine obvioisly. What I don't like and don't trust is state run healthcare which is for some reason labeled as free. Why? Because its not free. I think itll end up being like anything else the state takes over...the price will go up and the quality will go down. First of all it further creates dependency on the state, which I don't think is sustainable,� like Medicare and social security. It leaves the door open for corruption, back door deals and insider trading between Heathcare and insurance companies and their lobbyists and the politicians, ultimately creating more problems than solutions in the name of giving the people something better and free. Am I really crazy to think this? Are you going to claim this kind of stuff doesn't go on within government? I do think there needs to be some kind of reform that takes the government out of healthcare all together because they've proven incapable and not trustworthy. I don't think ripple understand that America is broke, they can't even pay our current bills, how would it be possible to add more? The US borrows .50cents of every dollar we print...this can't last forever. We're gonna be facing another financial crisis and the Gipper along with the government is gonna say its because we're not borrowing enough! Print print print......but I'm the crazy one.
I don't disagree that it won't be perfect. Far from it. But do you honestly think the current system is better than what you're worse-case-scenarioing? Have that kid you're planning, pay all that money, go for it. I just hope you never get sick, and nor does your child, and that you never have to come out of your little guns and freedom bubble to realize what the real important things in life are.
Being healthy, and being able to afford to live at least a reasonable life.
Fuck it though: FREEDOM!
Buy guns. Buy your baby-to-be a gun!
Not agreeing with abortion is just not something I can understand. You don't have to agree with it, it's not your issue to agree with. So it's okay NOT to have a baby (think about the poor sperm, and how you're destroying their entire existence, out their in the cold. You should cry every time you jerk off. That's a baby you're wasting), but if you get pregnant by mistake, and are in no shape, have no money, no support to raise the child you're supposed to just go for it?
Get the fuck out here.
-
Expand Quote
you are out of your mind if you think entrusting our healthcare to corporations, who are out to make a profit, is a smart or reasonable thing to do.�
Out of my mind? Healthcare is provided by doctors who are individuals who have practices, or work for hospitals or treatment centers etc. Insurance companies are promdominently corporations. Do you think the government currently runs everything or should run everything? Have that proven to have our best interest at heart? Have you ever heard of a free market? What's wrong with making a profit for your work? Man this country is worse off than I thought...
You (as in giant corporations) shouldn't make huge piles of money out of peoples suffering, illness and death. Or their well-being for that matter. And having the government involved doesn't suddenly mean that doctors won't make money. You think being a doctor in other developed countries with "free" healthcare isn't a well-paid job?
Having a chronic life-long disease where the only medication available to treat it costs $700 A MONTH is not a free market. It's a fucking cruel joke.
-
However, not every solution plays out well. Ending slavery didn't play out well economically, but it was the only way to move forward respecting the rights of all. Whether or not abortion should be allowed shouldn't be based on convenience. Either a fetus is a person or it isn't, and you shouldn't arrive at that conclusion based on how well things would play out. That's pragmatism divorced from principle, and nations should be founded on principles.
(edited to say this ^ was in response to a suggestion that banning abortion would lead to backalley abortions)
For the record, I'm for a healthcare system similar to that of Italy. We currently pay far more for much less. Yeah, government is inefficient blah blah blah but not other countries governments? I think it should be declared a human right. I wouldn't say we're demanding services of our doctors any more than I'd say we're demanding services of our firemen. Should firemen let the homes burn of those who didn't pay their taxes?
-
. George Norrie pro model would be sick.
-
I think TMKF has some valid points. �He's overstating things, but let's get to the core of some of these arguments.
It's a stretch to say that the pro-choice movement today is largely supported by eugenicists (it's supported by liberals who do not believe a fetus is human life). �Eugenics definitely played a role in the abortion movement early on, but these days there are very few eugenicists, and yes, its very disturbing that one of Obama's senior advisors suggests that reproductive freedom can take a backseat to achieving ideal population levels.
But, I think it makes very logical sense that tax dollars wouldn't go toward an organization doing something vehemently opposed by those financially supporting it. �There are two arguments people make here:
1: The funds are specifically meant for good things, like STD testing
To which I would reply STD testing is great, but it's still supporting an organization that roughly 100 million people in the US wouldn't willingly support.
And 2. �Only 3% of what they do is abortion. �Over 300,000 abortions is 3% of their services yes, but it accounts for $165 million (or 15%) of their revenue. �Saying 3% sounds a lot better than saying they make $165 on abortions. �
Whether its foreign wars or planned parenthood, our tax dollars shouldn't be spent on things that a significant amount of taxpayers are opposed to. �We're funding drones that have killed civilians in Pakistan, Yemen, and other countries. � I think we can all agree we're not okay with that.
There's one thing I can agree with Alex Jones on - you can't really trust this government. �
-The US govt interned Japanese Americans in the WWII era (I wouldn't have blamed any of them for using semi-automatics to defend against "government tyranny")
-The US govt knowingly withheld the cure to syphillis while experimenting on African Americans in the south up until the mid 70's during the Tuskegee experimens.
-The draft. �Yeah, some other countries do it. �But they don't send their troops to Vietnam. �
-The US joint chiefs of staff signed off on Operation Northwoods which would have been the US govt bombing Miami and other cities and blaming it on the Cubans so we could have had public support to go to war. �JFK didn't want to do it, JFK got killed and no one knows who was behind it besides this Lee Harvey Oswald guy.
It's funny that the ethnic groups with the least history of US government oppression (caucasians) are often the most insistent to protect themselves against it. �Yeah, they come off as crazy and overly paranoid. �But let's not get on the "we're not like them" train just because we don't want to be associated with truthers and gun lovers. �
The board graphic is good - think of how divided the country gets when you focus in on issues like legally purchased semi-automatic firearms, which statistically represent the tiniest of blips on the radar of deaths in the US. �
Great post.
Just to clarify...it would be foolish to think that the pro choice movement is mostly made up of and supported by eugenicsts, and I wasn't claiming that. I agree with your assessment. I just know the foundation of the modern pro choice movement is largely based on eugenics. I do feel that these eugenicsts plan was to indoctrinate abortion as a sociatal normalcy, desensatise the issue and make it about women's rights, in order to hide their true intentions. I think that's pretty obvious when you look at the quotes of the people involved. People have become so accustomed to abortion now that there is two taking place every minute, and many simply use it as birth control. Id say Margaret Sanger & JP Morgans plan is alive and well today and that is what I think about when I think about abortion. Most are taught as I was taught that its a women's right. They're told than this issue is taboo and never to question it and if you do you're a women hater who thinks women have no place but in the kitchen and shouldn't have the right to vote. I did some research on it, what I found disturbed me and changed my mind on the issue, simple as that.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
you are out of your mind if you think entrusting our healthcare to corporations, who are out to make a profit, is a smart or reasonable thing to do.�
Out of my mind? Healthcare is provided by doctors who are individuals who have practices, or work for hospitals or treatment centers etc. Insurance companies are promdominently corporations. Do you think the government currently runs everything or should run everything? Have that proven to have our best interest at heart? Have you ever heard of a free market? What's wrong with making a profit for your work? Man this country is worse off than I thought...
You (as in giant corporations) shouldn't make huge piles of money out of peoples suffering, illness and death. Or their well-being for that matter. And having the government involved doesn't suddenly mean that doctors won't make money. You think being a doctor in other developed countries with "free" healthcare isn't a well-paid job?
Having a chronic life-long disease where the only medication available to treat it costs $700 A MONTH is not a free market. It's a fucking cruel joke.
Expand Quote
you are out of your mind if you think entrusting our healthcare to corporations, who are out to make a profit, is a smart or reasonable thing to do.�
Out of my mind? Healthcare is provided by doctors who are individuals who have practices, or work for hospitals or treatment centers etc. Insurance companies are promdominently corporations. Do you think the government currently runs everything or should run everything? Have that proven to have our best interest at heart? Have you ever heard of a free market? What's wrong with making a profit for your work? Man this country is worse off than I thought...
my insurance dropped me as soon as i got sick. my medication was something like $5000/month after that, as well as a 35,000 bill for the first time i had to be hospitalized. it gets to the point where you finally realize that it costs too much to be alive, and you begin to pray for death. i made it through all of that shit somehow, but i can tell you there are so many that just give up. i know, because i spent months in the hospital with them.
it was a free government hospital that saved my life, and although i am very grateful, the care i received was complete shit and i wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. and i had a disease that isn't always necessarily life threatening; i had to get chemo with little kids who were most certainly going to die. and not comfortably at least, because they happened to be born to parents with not a lot of money or because some asshole in a cubicle decided to weasel out of their insurance contract.
its easy to sit on your high horse if you've never been ill, but it will happen to all of us at some point, and when it does just see how fast some number cruncher is going to scour your medical history to look for a way out. we're spending billions upon billions of dollars to make rich people richer, while we let our own citizens die like dogs. its fucking disgusting, and you are a fucking idiot for falling for it.
-
This one time at band camp I stuck a flute in my pussy.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
you are out of your mind if you think entrusting our healthcare to corporations, who are out to make a profit, is a smart or reasonable thing to do.�
Out of my mind? Healthcare is provided by doctors who are individuals who have practices, or work for hospitals or treatment centers etc. Insurance companies are promdominently corporations. Do you think the government currently runs everything or should run everything? Have that proven to have our best interest at heart? Have you ever heard of a free market? What's wrong with making a profit for your work? Man this country is worse off than I thought...
You (as in giant corporations) shouldn't make huge piles of money out of peoples suffering, illness and death. Or their well-being for that matter. And having the government involved doesn't suddenly mean that doctors won't make money. You think being a doctor in other developed countries with "free" healthcare isn't a well-paid job?
Having a chronic life-long disease where the only medication available to treat it costs $700 A MONTH is not a free market. It's a fucking cruel joke.
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
you are out of your mind if you think entrusting our healthcare to corporations, who are out to make a profit, is a smart or reasonable thing to do.�
Out of my mind? Healthcare is provided by doctors who are individuals who have practices, or work for hospitals or treatment centers etc. Insurance companies are promdominently corporations. Do you think the government currently runs everything or should run everything? Have that proven to have our best interest at heart? Have you ever heard of a free market? What's wrong with making a profit for your work? Man this country is worse off than I thought...
my insurance dropped me as soon as i got sick. my medication was something like $5000/month after that, as well as a 35,000 bill for the first time i had to be hospitalized. it gets to the point where you finally realize that it costs too much to be alive, and you begin to pray for death. i made it through all of that shit somehow, but i can tell you there are so many that just give up. i know, because i spent months in the hospital with them.
it was a free government hospital that saved my life, and although i am very grateful, the care i received was complete shit and i wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. and i had a disease that isn't always necessarily life threatening; i had to get chemo with little kids who were most certainly going to die. and not comfortably at least, because they happened to be born to parents with not a lot of money or because some asshole in a cubicle decided to weasel out of their insurance contract.
its easy to sit on your high horse if you've never been ill, but it will happen to all of us at some point, and when it does just see how fast some number cruncher is going to scour your medical history to look for a way out. we're spending billions upon billions of dollars to make rich people richer, while we let our own citizens die like dogs. its fucking disgusting, and you are a fucking idiot for falling for it.
Thank. Fucking. You.
When you're down and out and push comes to shove, free healthcare might just save your life. Whether it's of the highest quality or not.
Imagine the walking-wounded being asked to pay for top quality health care when in a war zone, rather than gratefully receive the life-saving budget shit that they do, that gets them to the helicopter and home.
Sorry to hear about the shit you went through. My own pails in comparison, but the point is the same.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
TMKF, you don't really know what libertarianism means, do you? Libertarians don't support child pornography because IT HARMS THE CHILD! Libertarians believe in little to no regulation in personal lives WHEN IT DOES NOT HARM ANOTHER HUMAN BEING!
And please tell me where I resorted to name calling (except that post where I did it to point out the fact that it was what you were resorting to quite early on in the debate). I didn't try to argue your quotes because I know them already and I don't agree with them. No rational human being does. What I instead tried to do was illustrate your inability to engage with pro-choice beliefs in any other manner than a eugenics one. Your inability shows the fact that you don't have a modern argument against abortion since that is not how people make pro-choice arguments today. That's it.
I certainly know about libertarianism means, I'm a libertarian and have been for quite some time. I simply just see an unborn child as a person who has rights and not just a fetus. Therefore I see abortion as harming another human being.
I'm sorry I was mixed up your comments with someone elses, I apologize sir.
Just shut up, it's nothing to do with what you're talking about. �This is about Alien Workshop doing a straight up kook collab with someone with no credibility. I'd expect this shit from a lesser company. �
What's next a Timothy McVeigh graphic? Koresh? American Resistance Movement?
Obviously Alein Workshop doesn't agree with you. Can you cite some examples of how Infowars has "no credibility" or perhaps justify comparing them to Timothy McVeigh?
This collab makes perfect sense to me, I think it's pretty rad that Alien Workshop is backing alternative media.
Alternative fictional media, maybe. Alex Jones is alunatic (I liked Gippers tin foil hat analogy) who grasps at any straw he can to try to justify a non existent point that he has built from the ground up. The reason he is on more obscure radio channels and the internet is because nothing he says really relates to anything except his own fame agenda, and no "credible" media outlet (term used very loosely) would put him on, other than to exploit his train wreck for ratings. He has created a caricature of himself, and the sillier he acts, the more attention he gets... and with that, the more sponsors and money he gets. The more fanny packs and skateboards he can sell.
The problem I have with "truthers", and Alex Jones specifically, is that they take away effort and spotlight from real cultural issues. This country does have a gun violence problem. That is an inarguable fact. Where you stand on what needs to be done about it is where the road divides, and the arguments start. Ranting and raving about the New World Order and how Obama's Hitler mustache is coming in nicely is taking away time, and even money, from people who have sound minds to come together and make an effort to come to a compromise. While Alex jones himself is in no position to really have any say in the legislation process, he is duping A LOT of stupid, stupid people to take his bait, and thus creating a movement that is nothing more than giant counterproductive measure against a compromise on the real issues.
Whenever presented with rational debate policies (No, I don't mean Piers Morgan... that guy is a kook too) Jones just yells at the top of his lungs about things that usually have nothing to do with the topic at hand. He isn't helping anything except himself, and is in fact diverting attention from efforts that might otherwise hold some merit on the actual problems at hand, not the fabricated ones.
No one needs to "win" this issue. There needs to be compromise with the American people as a whole at the heart of the concern, not personal agendas. Gun nuts spout their rhetoric, and gun abolishers spout theirs. This is basically arguing religion at this point. No one even listens to the other side, so no one is going to walk away with an altered opinion.
The discussion should start in the middle with the understanding that neither side of the coin is going to get exactly what they want, and work outward to protect the American people and the constitution in the best way possible, and attempt to make both sides as happy (or equally slighted) as possible. That is what compromise is.
Exactly, and if you mention any credible news outlet, from the Guardian to NYT to Washington Post to whoever etc they're automatically "turncoats" to use their term and in on the agenda. The funny thing is these people can never give an answer to what the ultimate goal of a so called NWO would be. It all amounts to wasted energy, that does take away from real issues.
Alex Jones is the type of raving person you'd see in Workshop videos between parts like the "that's not what we were told" in Photosynthesis.
That is why this so wack.
Are you aware Operation Mockingbird? The Washington Post and New York Times factor very prominently. Here's a decent overview: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/mockingbird.htm (http://www.apfn.org/apfn/mockingbird.htm) ...but search for your self, there's much, much more out there about and relating to it.
Here are some books that I routinely recommend.
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/thumbnailasp-1.jpg)
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/517goRI-h6L_SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/creature-jekyll-island_2669_500.jpg)
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/000d5eae_medium.jpg)
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
TMKF, you don't really know what libertarianism means, do you? Libertarians don't support child pornography because IT HARMS THE CHILD! Libertarians believe in little to no regulation in personal lives WHEN IT DOES NOT HARM ANOTHER HUMAN BEING!
And please tell me where I resorted to name calling (except that post where I did it to point out the fact that it was what you were resorting to quite early on in the debate). I didn't try to argue your quotes because I know them already and I don't agree with them. No rational human being does. What I instead tried to do was illustrate your inability to engage with pro-choice beliefs in any other manner than a eugenics one. Your inability shows the fact that you don't have a modern argument against abortion since that is not how people make pro-choice arguments today. That's it.
I certainly know about libertarianism means, I'm a libertarian and have been for quite some time. I simply just see an unborn child as a person who has rights and not just a fetus. Therefore I see abortion as harming another human being.
I'm sorry I was mixed up your comments with someone elses, I apologize sir.
Just shut up, it's nothing to do with what you're talking about. �This is about Alien Workshop doing a straight up kook collab with someone with no credibility. I'd expect this shit from a lesser company. �
What's next a Timothy McVeigh graphic? Koresh? American Resistance Movement?
Obviously Alein Workshop doesn't agree with you. Can you cite some examples of how Infowars has "no credibility" or perhaps justify comparing them to Timothy McVeigh?
This collab makes perfect sense to me, I think it's pretty rad that Alien Workshop is backing alternative media.
Alternative fictional media, maybe. Alex Jones is alunatic (I liked Gippers tin foil hat analogy) who grasps at any straw he can to try to justify a non existent point that he has built from the ground up. The reason he is on more obscure radio channels and the internet is because nothing he says really relates to anything except his own fame agenda, and no "credible" media outlet (term used very loosely) would put him on, other than to exploit his train wreck for ratings. He has created a caricature of himself, and the sillier he acts, the more attention he gets... and with that, the more sponsors and money he gets. The more fanny packs and skateboards he can sell.
The problem I have with "truthers", and Alex Jones specifically, is that they take away effort and spotlight from real cultural issues. This country does have a gun violence problem. That is an inarguable fact. Where you stand on what needs to be done about it is where the road divides, and the arguments start. Ranting and raving about the New World Order and how Obama's Hitler mustache is coming in nicely is taking away time, and even money, from people who have sound minds to come together and make an effort to come to a compromise. While Alex jones himself is in no position to really have any say in the legislation process, he is duping A LOT of stupid, stupid people to take his bait, and thus creating a movement that is nothing more than giant counterproductive measure against a compromise on the real issues.
Whenever presented with rational debate policies (No, I don't mean Piers Morgan... that guy is a kook too) Jones just yells at the top of his lungs about things that usually have nothing to do with the topic at hand. He isn't helping anything except himself, and is in fact diverting attention from efforts that might otherwise hold some merit on the actual problems at hand, not the fabricated ones.
No one needs to "win" this issue. There needs to be compromise with the American people as a whole at the heart of the concern, not personal agendas. Gun nuts spout their rhetoric, and gun abolishers spout theirs. This is basically arguing religion at this point. No one even listens to the other side, so no one is going to walk away with an altered opinion.
The discussion should start in the middle with the understanding that neither side of the coin is going to get exactly what they want, and work outward to protect the American people and the constitution in the best way possible, and attempt to make both sides as happy (or equally slighted) as possible. That is what compromise is.
Exactly, and if you mention any credible news outlet, from the Guardian to NYT to Washington Post to whoever etc they're automatically "turncoats" to use their term and in on the agenda. The funny thing is these people can never give an answer to what the ultimate goal of a so called NWO would be. It all amounts to wasted energy, that does take away from real issues.
Alex Jones is the type of raving person you'd see in Workshop videos between parts like the "that's not what we were told" in Photosynthesis.
That is why this so wack.
Are you aware Operation Mockingbird? The Washington Post and New York Times factor very prominently. Here's a decent overview: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/mockingbird.htm (http://www.apfn.org/apfn/mockingbird.htm) ...but search for your self, there's much, much more out there about and relating to it.
Here are some books that I routinely recommend.
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/thumbnailasp-1.jpg)
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/517goRI-h6L_SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/creature-jekyll-island_2669_500.jpg)
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/000d5eae_medium.jpg)
Just stop.
-
The notion of divide and conquer has been beautifully illustrated by this thread - you've all drawn lines in the sand against each other on push-button topics, when almost every one of you universally agrees that corporations, corrupt leaders and the endless pursuit of money by those who already have most of it are responsible.
The guys at the top want you to keep fighting against each other - that way they can keep doing whatever they want. I don't think that's even a conspiracy.
-
Hey at lease we are not Chinese or god forbid, Mexicans. Then we would really be screwed. Our government might be corrupt but at least the government has the ability to shoot nukes out of the sky and nobody else really has that technology. All that evil allows for the safety of all of us and protects us. At least for the time being until the corrupt leaders sell us out and then we will end up like the Romans. I am just going to bask in the fact that I am very lucky. I hope I die before I have to see the US fall. I mean I love the fact that I can worry about skateboarding and even the poor pieces of shit who are worthless, instead of having to worry about dying from lack of a toilet or water. I mean there are people out there dying from diarrhea. And getting back to Mexico and the China, can you imagine having to live in even those conditions. Hell I would even go as far to be gracious I am not British. They might have it pretty good but they are always angry because they got their asses kicked and just refuse to let it go. As an American I am damn lucky and I fucking love it.
-
dude, that's why you kids need to start going to class and stop taking oxy and crack, seriously 'merica is fucked.
You dont even understand there is no such thing as democracy, slavery is still going so badly, I would even say it is the most fascist regime since the nazis. This graphic is about the government controlling the media, the media controlling the general public opinion on politics, and therefore the government controlling people destiny.
.....
But whatever, the president is black so everything is good.
+ motherfucking 1
-
OP has fallen into the left/right false paradigm.
AWS has always been some conspiracy shit.
Alex Jones might be a blowhard but most of what he says (including [and especially] 9/11 being an inside job) has merit.
The problem with America is that much of the [otherwise] politically aware populace can't divorce themselves from their belief systems and look at reality objectively--i.e. without emotion--to acknowledge that the last 11.5 years of foreign & domestic policy have been driven by the greatest act of hoodwinking in any of our lifetimes. It's equally exasperating and pathetic to see Pals wax political against the "right wing" whilst swallowing the Kean Commission BS hook, line & sinker.
-
... when almost every one of you universally agrees that corporations, corrupt leaders and the endless pursuit of money by those who already have most of it are responsible.
Add in the jerkoffs who feel that the world owes them a living just for merely taking up space, and I would gladly agree. There's no shortage of that idiocy these days.
-
Haha you crazy americans
-
Regardless of how you feel about INFOWARS, this has to be one of the weakest collaborations imaginable.
ITS A SKATEBOARD.
ITS A TOY MADE FOR FUN.
In my world a graphic is supposed to either look good or make you laugh, not politicise kids.
-
That graphic is nothing but a cheap attempt at profiteering from the hype surrounding jones farcical interview.
Fuck workshop. Shits pathetic.
-
That graphic is nothing but a cheap attempt at profiteering from the hype surrounding jones farcical interview.
Fuck workshop. Shits pathetic.
Everyone makes mistakes.
-
That graphic is nothing but a cheap attempt at profiteering from the hype surrounding jones farcical interview.
Fuck workshop. Shits pathetic.
This graphic was made for the 2012 elections. The collabo was done after the fact. Dont conflate the two. Workshops always been into this kind of stuff or did you miss out on the last 20 years of art direction? If it bums you out because it wasnt another "fun" ripoff graphic or a logo board then whatever, just dont buy it.
The moral of the story is that you shouldnt take everything mainstream media says at face value but you shouldn't take everything alternative media like infowars says at face value either. You dont have to agree with everyting they say but the idea of it is cool. Like punk rock or slayer.
In the united states there are about 320,000,000 people living here, upto 80,000,000 of those people own firearms and there are almost 15,000,000 background checks related to gun purchases in 2012 but only 15,000 homicides are committed with guns. Clearly every dude who owns a gun isn't batshit crazy even if you want to believe they are. So you can see why someone would want to defend guns if the majority of owners, 99% of them, are responsible and don't shoot people with them. i think the extra bump in rate we have here is a result of gun access and opportunity.
Theres gang violence and murder that will still happen with or without a gun ban but Im sure there are people in france who wish they could shoot up their entire schools but can't because access is so difficult. Its a mental health issue for sure because that french kid still wants to shoot up his school but reducing access certainly goes a long way to curb bad mistakes and behavior like that.
-
I didn't even read this thread and it bored me to tears.
-
OP has fallen into the left/right false paradigm.
AWS has always been some conspiracy shit.
Alex Jones might be a blowhard but most of what he says (including [and especially] 9/11 being an inside job) has merit.
The problem with America is that much of the [otherwise] politically aware populace can't divorce themselves from their belief systems and look at reality objectively--i.e. without emotion--to acknowledge that the last 11.5 years of foreign & domestic policy have been driven by the greatest act of hoodwinking in any of our lifetimes. It's equally exasperating and pathetic to see Pals wax political against the "right wing" whilst swallowing the Kean Commission BS hook, line & sinker.
Stupid. I can't believe how stupid some people are. You sound like Sarah Palin..."Oh the mainstream media."
-
Expand Quote
That graphic is nothing but a cheap attempt at profiteering from the hype surrounding jones farcical interview.
Fuck workshop. Shits pathetic.
This graphic was made for the 2012 elections. The collabo was done after the fact. Dont conflate the two. Workshops always been into this kind of stuff or did you miss out on the last 20 years of art direction? If it bums you out because it wasnt another "fun" ripoff graphic or a logo board then whatever, just dont buy it.
The moral of the story is that you shouldnt take everything mainstream media says at face value but you shouldn't take everything alternative media like infowars says at face value either. You dont have to agree with everyting they say but the idea of it is cool. Like punk rock or slayer.
In the united states there are about 320,000,000 people living here, upto 80,000,000 of those people own firearms and there are almost 15,000,000 background checks related to gun purchases in 2012 but only 15,000 homicides are committed with guns. Clearly every dude who owns a gun isn't batshit crazy even if you want to believe they are. So you can see why someone would want to defend guns if the majority of owners, 99% of them, are responsible and don't shoot people with them. i think the extra bump in rate we have here is a result of gun access and opportunity.
Theres gang violence and murder that will still happen with or without a gun ban but Im sure there are people in france who wish they could shoot up their entire schools but can't because access is so difficult. Its a mental health issue for sure because that french kid still wants to shoot up his school but reducing access certainly goes a long way to curb bad mistakes and behavior like that.
I hope you're under the age of 20.
-
Expand Quote
I hope I die before I have to see the US fall.? ? I mean I love the fact that I can worry about skateboarding and even the poor pieces of shit who are worthless, instead of having to worry about dying from lack of a toilet or water.
Shit will hit the fan soon. It's not a matter of if but when. A lot of people are predicting within the next few years, at least by 2017. Good luck when it does, America will become a third world country (if it isn't already), people will become desperate, because when they've lost everything they've got nothing left to lose.
You have to get out more. That is just soooooo wrong and insulting to people that live in the third world, you cannot be more clueless.
-
How many of you numbnuts think:
1.)9/11 was an inside job?
2.)Sandy Hook was fake/an inside job?
3.)That being able to own a gun should be easier than getting health care?
-
"As far as "free" Heathcare, there is no sub thing unless a doctor performs a procedure as a form of charity which I think is fine obvioisly. What I don't like and don't trust is state run healthcare which is for some reason labeled as free. Why? Because its not free. I think itll end up being like anything else the state takes over...the price will go up and the quality will go down."
Your ignorance is just painful to read. This argument is not some hypothetical for you to feel out. There is hard evidence in every developed country on the planet that a state run option lowers cost overall. It's not open to debate. The only reason you have been hoodwinked into believing that it is open to debate is in order for the insurance companies to keep a vice grip on your family's health and finances. You have nowhere else to go so you are at their mercy. I have lived in many countries with state run healthcare. In Spain, I paid 50 EUR extra a month for 100% covered premium private care because I could. No copay, no fucking deductible, nothing.. ever for less than a fraction of what it costs here to get nothing in return (I currently pay $570 a month for my family to have a 5K deductible each and essentially get nothing covered). You will always have the option of buying private health insurance. Just because there are public buses doesn't mean you can't still buy a fucking car if you want stupid. It's not mutually exclusive. The only difference is that Americans would have the choice the rest of the world has: To not have to choose between going broke or staying healthy.
-
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/480404_10152252950070942_1022594961_n.jpg)
-
I hope you're under the age of 20.
Dont have anything better to say?
-
Expand Quote
I hope you're under the age of 20.
Dont have anything better to say?
I think that says enough
-
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/480404_10152252950070942_1022594961_n.jpg)
Please. Use your head.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/vJH05KD.jpg)
One does not simply become a Libertarian without cognitive dissonance.
-
Expand Quote
"As far as "free" Heathcare, there is no sub thing unless a doctor performs a procedure as a form of charity which I think is fine obvioisly. What I don't like and don't trust is state run healthcare which is for some reason labeled as free. Why? Because its not free. I think itll end up being like anything else the state takes over...the price will go up and the quality will go down."
Your ignorance is just painful to read. This argument is not some hypothetical for you to feel out. There is hard evidence in every developed country on the planet that a state run option lowers cost overall. It's not open to debate. The only reason you have been hoodwinked into believing that it is open to debate is in order for the insurance companies to keep a vice grip on your family's health and finances. You have nowhere else to go so you are at their mercy. I have lived in many countries with state run healthcare. In Spain, I paid 50 EUR extra a month for 100% covered premium private care because I could. No copay, no fucking deductible, nothing.. ever for less than a fraction of what it costs here to get nothing in return (I currently pay $570 a month for my family to have a 5K deductible each and essentially get nothing covered). You will always have the option of buying private health insurance. Just because there are public buses doesn't mean you can't still buy a fucking car if you want stupid. It's not mutually exclusive. The only difference is that Americans would have the choice the rest of the world has: To not have to choose between going broke or staying healthy.
+1
-
How many of you 9-11 truther kooks believed in the mayan 2012 thing? Be honest.
-
this thread should be renamed 'out urself as a ridiculous libertarian/idiot', kinda a Coles notes on which posters are crazy
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
"As far as "free" Heathcare, there is no sub thing unless a doctor performs a procedure as a form of charity which I think is fine obvioisly. What I don't like and don't trust is state run healthcare which is for some reason labeled as free. Why? Because its not free. I think itll end up being like anything else the state takes over...the price will go up and the quality will go down."
Your ignorance is just painful to read. This argument is not some hypothetical for you to feel out. There is hard evidence in every developed country on the planet that a state run option lowers cost overall. It's not open to debate. The only reason you have been hoodwinked into believing that it is open to debate is in order for the insurance companies to keep a vice grip on your family's health and finances. You have nowhere else to go so you are at their mercy. I have lived in many countries with state run healthcare. In Spain, I paid 50 EUR extra a month for 100% covered premium private care because I could. No copay, no fucking deductible, nothing.. ever for less than a fraction of what it costs here to get nothing in return (I currently pay $570 a month for my family to have a 5K deductible each and essentially get nothing covered). You will always have the option of buying private health insurance. Just because there are public buses doesn't mean you can't still buy a fucking car if you want stupid. It's not mutually exclusive. The only difference is that Americans would have the choice the rest of the world has: To not have to choose between going broke or staying healthy.
+1
exactly. I pay 100 usd a month for private insurance for my family on top of public medical in australia. it covers a wide array of stuff and even kicks in for things like acupuncture. We don't have to have private insurance it just has some nice benefits. before we were married and lived in the US I couldn't get insurance and my wife paid 400 a month for pretty much nothing.
-
i always wanted one of those "star spangled lie" shirts. or the "tv is your god" one.
-
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
guys guys
presidents of the United States (which is actually a foreign corporation, a fact I'm sure none of you will actually look up) are selected NOT elected.
votes are so we don't riot
campaigns are to convince you to accept who you're getting anyways.
there is a difference between a freeman or state citizen and a bondman or United States citizen.
when you get your SSN you become a "federal employee" and tax paying entity. your name is in caps because you are now a corporation and the US which is a corporation (as opposed to the USA which is the land mass) can only deal with corporations. this is why you get a marriage license because you are performing a "corporate merger"
it all comes down to maritime admiralty law and UCC laws.
anyone know what the number on the BACK of your SS card is? a bond exchange number for YOU. this is traded on the open market. you are collateral the corporation puts up, to pay of the debt it acquires from borrowing from the federal reserve (a foreign banking cartel, which is part of the IMF, which is part of the crown corporation, which is simply the PAPACY'S bank)
divide and conquer comes from the illuminati's (jesuits, knights of malta, continental freemasons, and high level shriner freemasons) law of five. ever wonder where the peace sign comes from? as in the hand sign? not the symbol which is actually the crows foot a witchcraft symbol.
the law of five is how to bring order out of chaos, and vice versa. make the chaos, then bring about the order you want, but couldn't get the people to originally accept (just like the Hegelian dialectic)
its a good graphic other than pointing people to be misled at infowars, which is run by jesuit coadjutor alex jones.
please people, do some research.
i skate, work and still find time to do it. it just means no more mind numbing bread and circuses.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
guys guys
presidents of the United States (which is actually a foreign corporation, a fact I'm sure none of you will actually look up) are selected NOT elected.
votes are so we don't riot
campaigns are to convince you to accept who you're getting anyways.
there is a difference between a freeman or state citizen and a bondman or United States citizen.
when you get your SSN you become a "federal employee" and tax paying entity. your name is in caps because you are now a corporation and the US which is a corporation (as opposed to the USA which is the land mass) can only deal with corporations. this is why you get a marriage license because you are performing a "corporate merger"
it all comes down to maritime admiralty law and UCC laws.
anyone know what the number on the BACK of your SS card is? a bond exchange number for YOU. this is traded on the open market. you are collateral the corporation puts up, to pay of the debt it acquires from borrowing from the federal reserve (a foreign banking cartel, which is part of the IMF, which is part of the crown corporation, which is simply the PAPACY'S bank)
divide and conquer comes from the illuminati's (jesuits, knights of malta, continental freemasons, and high level shriner freemasons) law of five. ever wonder where the peace sign comes from? as in the hand sign? not the symbol which is actually the crows foot a witchcraft symbol.
the law of five is how to bring order out of chaos, and vice versa. make the chaos, then bring about the order you want, but couldn't get the people to originally accept (just like the Hegelian dialectic)
its a good graphic other than pointing people to be misled at infowars, which is run by jesuit coadjutor alex jones.
please people, do some research.
i skate, work and still find time to do it. it just means no more mind numbing bread and circuses.
I like your sense of humour.
-
-10 is all i get for speaking the truth? come on fools you can do better than that.
remember "in one voice they cried Barabas!"
-
hey stim co i work for the government thanks for all the info about yourself
-
-10 is all i get for speaking the truth? come on fools you can do better than that.
remember "in one voice they cried Barabas!"
(http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/17/tinfoilhatman.jpg)
-
The conspiracy perspective will always be comforting because it implies that there is a group of people somewhere that are actually in control of what is going on, when in fact the truth is much more frightening.
-
The conspiracy perspective will always be comforting because it implies that there is a group of people somewhere that are actually in control of what is going on, when in fact the truth is much more frightening.
This. Everything must have an explanation to a conspiracy theorist. 9/11 truthers could tell you how the gov. made sure it was sunny that morning.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
guys guys
presidents of the United States (which is actually a foreign corporation, a fact I'm sure none of you will actually look up) are selected NOT elected.
votes are so we don't riot
campaigns are to convince you to accept who you're getting anyways.
there is a difference between a freeman or state citizen and a bondman or United States citizen.
when you get your SSN you become a "federal employee" and tax paying entity. your name is in caps because you are now a corporation and the US which is a corporation (as opposed to the USA which is the land mass) can only deal with corporations. this is why you get a marriage license because you are performing a "corporate merger"
it all comes down to maritime admiralty law and UCC laws.
anyone know what the number on the BACK of your SS card is? a bond exchange number for YOU. this is traded on the open market. you are collateral the corporation puts up, to pay of the debt it acquires from borrowing from the federal reserve (a foreign banking cartel, which is part of the IMF, which is part of the crown corporation, which is simply the PAPACY'S bank)
divide and conquer comes from the illuminati's (jesuits, knights of malta, continental freemasons, and high level shriner freemasons) law of five. ever wonder where the peace sign comes from? as in the hand sign? not the symbol which is actually the crows foot a witchcraft symbol.
the law of five is how to bring order out of chaos, and vice versa. make the chaos, then bring about the order you want, but couldn't get the people to originally accept (just like the Hegelian dialectic)
its a good graphic other than pointing people to be misled at infowars, which is run by jesuit coadjutor alex jones.
please people, do some research.
i skate, work and still find time to do it. it just means no more mind numbing bread and circuses.
You're an idiot. Just trying to make everything sound as complicated as possible. There's no conspiracy in everything and there's nobody that would be in charge of all of this. You just hate certain people and way of thinking and try to convince your self that its everywhere so that you have something to rebel against. And besides if it was that way, then you're still just wasting your time thinking about it cuz it will never matter what you think and you will never be able to make a change. Just enjoy life and dont give a crap about what might be going on in the world.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
guys guys
presidents of the United States (which is actually a foreign corporation, a fact I'm sure none of you will actually look up) are selected NOT elected.
votes are so we don't riot
campaigns are to convince you to accept who you're getting anyways.
there is a difference between a freeman or state citizen and a bondman or United States citizen.
when you get your SSN you become a "federal employee" and tax paying entity. your name is in caps because you are now a corporation and the US which is a corporation (as opposed to the USA which is the land mass) can only deal with corporations. this is why you get a marriage license because you are performing a "corporate merger"
it all comes down to maritime admiralty law and UCC laws.
anyone know what the number on the BACK of your SS card is? a bond exchange number for YOU. this is traded on the open market. you are collateral the corporation puts up, to pay of the debt it acquires from borrowing from the federal reserve (a foreign banking cartel, which is part of the IMF, which is part of the crown corporation, which is simply the PAPACY'S bank)
divide and conquer comes from the illuminati's (jesuits, knights of malta, continental freemasons, and high level shriner freemasons) law of five. ever wonder where the peace sign comes from? as in the hand sign? not the symbol which is actually the crows foot a witchcraft symbol.
the law of five is how to bring order out of chaos, and vice versa. make the chaos, then bring about the order you want, but couldn't get the people to originally accept (just like the Hegelian dialectic)
its a good graphic other than pointing people to be misled at infowars, which is run by jesuit coadjutor alex jones.
please people, do some research.
i skate, work and still find time to do it. it just means no more mind numbing bread and circuses.
You're an idiot. Just trying to make everything sound as complicated as possible. There's no conspiracy in everything and there's nobody that would be in charge of all of this. You just hate certain people and way of thinking and try to convince your self that its everywhere so that you have something to rebel against. And besides if it was that way, then you're still just wasting your time thinking about it cuz it will never matter what you think and you will never be able to make a change. Just enjoy life and dont give a crap about what might be going on in the world.
well you can do what you have done which is to take the blue pill, research nothing, never understand anything useful
or you can do what i do which is to take the red pill, RESEARCH AND POST FACTS, and learn something useful
my question is this: HOW MANY OF YOU SHIT TALKING COWARDS ACTUALLY LOOKED UP THE FACTS THAT I POSTED?
probably none, as that would require the BALLS to face the truth.
calling someone an idiot or a troll after posting FACTS, not SPECULATION, proves who the real coward and idiot is.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
guys guys
presidents of the United States (which is actually a foreign corporation, a fact I'm sure none of you will actually look up) are selected NOT elected.
votes are so we don't riot
campaigns are to convince you to accept who you're getting anyways.
there is a difference between a freeman or state citizen and a bondman or United States citizen.
when you get your SSN you become a "federal employee" and tax paying entity. your name is in caps because you are now a corporation and the US which is a corporation (as opposed to the USA which is the land mass) can only deal with corporations. this is why you get a marriage license because you are performing a "corporate merger"
it all comes down to maritime admiralty law and UCC laws.
anyone know what the number on the BACK of your SS card is? a bond exchange number for YOU. this is traded on the open market. you are collateral the corporation puts up, to pay of the debt it acquires from borrowing from the federal reserve (a foreign banking cartel, which is part of the IMF, which is part of the crown corporation, which is simply the PAPACY'S bank)
divide and conquer comes from the illuminati's (jesuits, knights of malta, continental freemasons, and high level shriner freemasons) law of five. ever wonder where the peace sign comes from? as in the hand sign? not the symbol which is actually the crows foot a witchcraft symbol.
the law of five is how to bring order out of chaos, and vice versa. make the chaos, then bring about the order you want, but couldn't get the people to originally accept (just like the Hegelian dialectic)
its a good graphic other than pointing people to be misled at infowars, which is run by jesuit coadjutor alex jones.
please people, do some research.
i skate, work and still find time to do it. it just means no more mind numbing bread and circuses.
You're an idiot. Just trying to make everything sound as complicated as possible. There's no conspiracy in everything and there's nobody that would be in charge of all of this. You just hate certain people and way of thinking and try to convince your self that its everywhere so that you have something to rebel against. And besides if it was that way, then you're still just wasting your time thinking about it cuz it will never matter what you think and you will never be able to make a change. Just enjoy life and dont give a crap about what might be going on in the world.
well you can do what you have done which is to take the blue pill, research nothing, never understand anything useful
or you can do what i do which is to take the red pill, RESEARCH AND POST FACTS, and learn something useful
my question is this: HOW MANY OF YOU SHIT TALKING COWARDS ACTUALLY LOOKED UP THE FACTS THAT I POSTED?
probably none, as that would require the BALLS to face the truth.
calling someone an idiot or a troll after posting FACTS, not SPECULATION, proves who the real coward and idiot is.
/b/ro, first you need to look up the definition of a fact.
-
All the statists in this thread clamoring for free shit are hilarious and believing in the two party system.
You are the exact audience for the graphic and you are butt hurt it is coming from Alien Workshop.
-
FACTS
EDIT: WE LIVIN THAT BLUE PILL LIFESTYLE
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
guys guys
presidents of the United States (which is actually a foreign corporation, a fact I'm sure none of you will actually look up) are selected NOT elected.
votes are so we don't riot
campaigns are to convince you to accept who you're getting anyways.
there is a difference between a freeman or state citizen and a bondman or United States citizen.
when you get your SSN you become a "federal employee" and tax paying entity. your name is in caps because you are now a corporation and the US which is a corporation (as opposed to the USA which is the land mass) can only deal with corporations. this is why you get a marriage license because you are performing a "corporate merger"
it all comes down to maritime admiralty law and UCC laws.
anyone know what the number on the BACK of your SS card is? a bond exchange number for YOU. this is traded on the open market. you are collateral the corporation puts up, to pay of the debt it acquires from borrowing from the federal reserve (a foreign banking cartel, which is part of the IMF, which is part of the crown corporation, which is simply the PAPACY'S bank)
divide and conquer comes from the illuminati's (jesuits, knights of malta, continental freemasons, and high level shriner freemasons) law of five. ever wonder where the peace sign comes from? as in the hand sign? not the symbol which is actually the crows foot a witchcraft symbol.
the law of five is how to bring order out of chaos, and vice versa. make the chaos, then bring about the order you want, but couldn't get the people to originally accept (just like the Hegelian dialectic)
its a good graphic other than pointing people to be misled at infowars, which is run by jesuit coadjutor alex jones.
please people, do some research.
i skate, work and still find time to do it. it just means no more mind numbing bread and circuses.
You're an idiot. Just trying to make everything sound as complicated as possible. There's no conspiracy in everything and there's nobody that would be in charge of all of this. You just hate certain people and way of thinking and try to convince your self that its everywhere so that you have something to rebel against. And besides if it was that way, then you're still just wasting your time thinking about it cuz it will never matter what you think and you will never be able to make a change. Just enjoy life and dont give a crap about what might be going on in the world.
well you can do what you have done which is to take the blue pill, research nothing, never understand anything useful
or you can do what i do which is to take the red pill, RESEARCH AND POST FACTS, and learn something useful
my question is this: HOW MANY OF YOU SHIT TALKING COWARDS ACTUALLY LOOKED UP THE FACTS THAT I POSTED?
probably none, as that would require the BALLS to face the truth.
calling someone an idiot or a troll after posting FACTS, not SPECULATION, proves who the real coward and idiot is.
no, nobody went on the internet and looked up your ''facts'' because it doesnt matter what the ''truth'' is, Our lives are the way they are no matter what the truth is and we are not gonna be able to change anything, so the less i know the better i probably feel. How have you benefitted from learning all that ''usefull'' stuff you talk about? is your or anybody elses life somehow better now? im not a coward or an idiot i just don't believe that anything you say, no matter if its true or not, will ever have an effect on my life so i don't give a fuck. btw you really don't know what the word fact means.
-
Things learned from this thread -
1. Discussing politics on a skateboarding website is akin to discussing calculus with a mixed class that contains both retards and rocket scientists. It's calamity, everyone thinks they're right, and yet, it's terribly sad when you put it all together and watch tempers flare.
2. If you mention a black president, the goon squads cries racism because - god fucking forbid - anyone ever mentions race that's non-white without also praising that same race MUST by one of those darned bigots that are ruining it all! Can't we see how much oppression there still is? I mean, it isn't like we can have a black president or anything in this day and age...oh, wait a sec....we do. So much for that.
3. Apparently, if you're identified as a libertarian for simply not falling for the two-party crap, you wear a tinfoil hat. Just like how if you're liberal, you're a welfare leech, and if you're conservative, you're a bible-thumper. Seems fair enough. Divide and conquer, and all that stuff.
4. Both of the two AWS x InfoWars decks are going to look nice in my office next to my Lee Bender Actions Realized guest model.
Carry on, fellas, I wouldn't want to interrupt this silly pissing match any longer than necessary.
-
...and high level shriner freemasons...
I've never figured out how the Shriner freemasons are always supposed to have so much fucking power when it seems that all they do is sell vidalia onions and drive those tiny cars while wearing a tasseled fez. Always a mystery to me on that one.
All kidding aside, I don't trust the government for shit (and neither should anyone), I just like to keep a very, very wide berth of skepticism on too much conspiracy stuff. Because, if any of it is true, we'd be so tragically fucked that it'd be better that we simply don't know. As people, we can't even handle it when our favorite TV show goes off the air, so even if it were partly true, it'd turn people batshit just to try and grasp the situation.
Sometimes ignorance is bliss. I just prefer to not remain as ignorant as most.
-
D. Bag for Prez
-
D. Bag for Prez
Nah, that job sucks! At least now, when I'm having a shitty day, I just close up shop early and go out for margaritas and numb my brain a bit. Until they put a fully stocked bar in the oval office, I'm out of the running.
-
Expand Quote
...and high level shriner freemasons...
I've never figured out how the Shriner freemasons are always supposed to have so much fucking power when it seems that all they do is sell vidalia onions and drive those tiny cars while wearing a tasseled fez. Always a mystery to me on that one.
All kidding aside, I don't trust the government for shit (and neither should anyone), I just like to keep a very, very wide berth of skepticism on too much conspiracy stuff. Because, if any of it is true, we'd be so tragically fucked that it'd be better that we simply don't know. As people, we can't even handle it when our favorite TV show goes off the air, so even if it were partly true, it'd turn people batshit just to try and grasp the situation.
Sometimes ignorance is bliss. I just prefer to not remain as ignorant as most.
You're just as dumb stimcocruzer.
-
this is slap at its best right here. first you got johnnydipshit or what ever his name is saying THE-WORKSHOP is right winged becuase they made a board colab with INFO wars?!?!? hah fucking great. next you got the entire slap community sharing all this bull shit every one needs to learn for them selves. Just research this shit its not that hard. the world is a fucked up place, every one do your own research and form your own opinion, not the opinoin of another, but your own. wierd right?! RANT OVER>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :'(
P.S.
yes i cried when i saw this. so what
-
Things learned from this thread -
1. Discussing politics on a skateboarding website is akin to discussing calculus with a mixed class that contains both retards and rocket scientists. It's calamity, everyone thinks they're right, and yet, it's terribly sad when you put it all together and watch tempers flare.
2. If you mention a black president, the goon squads cries racism because - god fucking forbid - anyone ever mentions race that's non-white without also praising that same race MUST by one of those darned bigots that are ruining it all! Can't we see how much oppression there still is? I mean, it isn't like we can have a black president or anything in this day and age...oh, wait a sec....we do. So much for that.
3. Apparently, if you're identified as a libertarian for simply not falling for the two-party crap, you wear a tinfoil hat. Just like how if you're liberal, you're a welfare leech, and if you're conservative, you're a bible-thumper. Seems fair enough. Divide and conquer, and all that stuff.
4. Both of the two AWS x InfoWars decks are going to look nice in my office next to my Lee Bender Actions Realized guest model.
Carry on, fellas, I wouldn't want to interrupt this silly pissing match any longer than necessary.
5. Dbag is a faggot.
-
threads like this make me wish hitler won WW2 and america didnt exist
-
5. Dbag is a faggot.
Only when I'm giving your 'ol pappy a sympathy beej. I know he can't get one anywhere else because he's ashamed that he's only packing 2" rock hard, but I'm a firm believer in charity for those who have nowhere else to turn.
Do you REALLY think I'm going to be offended by this? God, you're a dumb cunt.
-
Things learned from this thread -
1. Discussing politics on a skateboarding website is akin to discussing calculus with a mixed class that contains both retards and rocket scientists. It's calamity, everyone thinks they're right, and yet, it's terribly sad when you put it all together and watch tempers flare.
2. If you mention a black president, the goon squads cries racism because - god fucking forbid - anyone ever mentions race that's non-white without also praising that same race MUST by one of those darned bigots that are ruining it all! Can't we see how much oppression there still is? I mean, it isn't like we can have a black president or anything in this day and age...oh, wait a sec....we do. So much for that.
3. Apparently, if you're identified as a libertarian for simply not falling for the two-party crap, you wear a tinfoil hat. Just like how if you're liberal, you're a welfare leech, and if you're conservative, you're a bible-thumper. Seems fair enough. Divide and conquer, and all that stuff.
4. Both of the two AWS x InfoWars decks are going to look nice in my office next to my Lee Bender Actions Realized guest model.
Carry on, fellas, I wouldn't want to interrupt this silly pissing match any longer than necessary.
This type of backlash reminds me of very early post-9/11 hostility that I would go through when I would bash Bush or any of his cronies when they started to dis-assemble our civil liberties for our "own safety".
-
You're just as dumb stimcocruzer.
And, you've certainly proven yourself to be Mensa-level for intelligence with such awesome statements. Care to explain WHY anyone should trust the government? Seriously, instead of being a raving dumbass, try making a point some time. It's your choice to be a trusting dimwit or grasp that nobody in power gives a shit about you, you'll learn things for yourself in due time. You can think whatever you want, but don't believe for a second that anyone in this world will look out for you or REALLY gives a shit about your well-being. That mindset is for pussies and weaklings who are incapable of taking care of themselves, but perhaps that's what you are, some schlub who will always need to lean on the system. Since I don't know you from any other asshole, I'll just assume that's the case based on your response.
I know you're just a kid, but sometimes you've got to let the Santa Claus dreams vanish. It'll save you plenty of heartbreak later when nobody comes rushing to your aid to save you from your own poor choices.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
guys guys
presidents of the United States (which is actually a foreign corporation, a fact I'm sure none of you will actually look up) are selected NOT elected.
votes are so we don't riot
campaigns are to convince you to accept who you're getting anyways.
there is a difference between a freeman or state citizen and a bondman or United States citizen.
when you get your SSN you become a "federal employee" and tax paying entity. your name is in caps because you are now a corporation and the US which is a corporation (as opposed to the USA which is the land mass) can only deal with corporations. this is why you get a marriage license because you are performing a "corporate merger"
it all comes down to maritime admiralty law and UCC laws.
anyone know what the number on the BACK of your SS card is? a bond exchange number for YOU. this is traded on the open market. you are collateral the corporation puts up, to pay of the debt it acquires from borrowing from the federal reserve (a foreign banking cartel, which is part of the IMF, which is part of the crown corporation, which is simply the PAPACY'S bank)
divide and conquer comes from the illuminati's (jesuits, knights of malta, continental freemasons, and high level shriner freemasons) law of five. ever wonder where the peace sign comes from? as in the hand sign? not the symbol which is actually the crows foot a witchcraft symbol.
the law of five is how to bring order out of chaos, and vice versa. make the chaos, then bring about the order you want, but couldn't get the people to originally accept (just like the Hegelian dialectic)
its a good graphic other than pointing people to be misled at infowars, which is run by jesuit coadjutor alex jones.
please people, do some research.
i skate, work and still find time to do it. it just means no more mind numbing bread and circuses.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The burden of proof is on YOU. You are the one who needs to provide links. Wait, you don't want to get mocked for posting tinfoil links? Yeah....
Also......facts? I'll just leave this here:
''[You're] in what we call the reality-based community..... [you] believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality......... That's not the way the world really works anymore..... We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'' -- Karl Rove
I see you're enjoying your paranoid "reality."
-
TLDR
-
Expand Quote
Can someone explain this to me?
(http://www.infowarsshop.com/thumbnail.asp?file=assets/images/Div_Con_Bottom.jpg&maxx=300&maxy=0)
On Alex Jones' infowars.com they have these decks that are supposed to be a collaboration between them and Alien Workshop, is this legit? It's scary to think that the Workshop would be behind this.
http://www.infowarsshop.com/Divide-And-Conquer-Skate-Deck_p_852.html (http://www.infowarsshop.com/Divide-And-Conquer-Skate-Deck_p_852.html)
sat-ire [sat-ahyuh r]
noun
1.
the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
What kind of satirization is it when it is available on Info Wars, and therefore, for them to profit?
-
Expand Quote
You're just as dumb stimcocruzer.
And, you've certainly proven yourself to be Mensa-level for intelligence with such awesome statements. Care to explain WHY anyone should trust the government? Seriously, instead of being a raving dumbass, try making a point some time. It's your choice to be a trusting dimwit or grasp that nobody in power gives a shit about you, you'll learn things for yourself in due time. You can think whatever you want, but don't believe for a second that anyone in this world will look out for you or REALLY gives a shit about your well-being. That mindset is for pussies and weaklings who are incapable of taking care of themselves, but perhaps that's what you are, some schlub who will always need to lean on the system. Since I don't know you from any other asshole, I'll just assume that's the case based on your response.
I know you're just a kid, but sometimes you've got to let the Santa Claus dreams vanish. It'll save you plenty of heartbreak later when nobody comes rushing to your aid to save you from your own poor choices.
^ Just finished Atlas Shrugged.
I suggest you go to your city hall, and see how gov. works and people that do give a shit. I guess you have never taken part in municipal politics like say getting a skatepark built?
-
haha lol, obviously people give a shit. i give a shit. i am people. the global elite, rapes our families and fucks us all in the ass is what (pretty sure) he was referring to.
-
i saw this thread, laughed, scanned through, laughed a little. the only person i know that listens to alex jones is a36 year old stoner who lives in his moms basement.
-
thats cool
-
lol my dad gets his news from Alex Jones/info wars... kinda makes my stomach turn to see this come out of the same company who made photosynthesis:
(http://oi48.tinypic.com/23r43n.jpg)
I love how every libertarian/conspiracy theorist thinks of themselves as a brave lone warrior:
(http://i.imgur.com/oOeBO81.gif)
Also, ever notice how anyone that believes in any of these conspiracies is a thousand times more likely to believe in EVERY conspiracy theory that comes out?
-
haha lol, obviously people give a shit. i give a shit. i am people. the global elite, rapes our families and fucks us all in the ass is what (pretty sure) he was referring to.
"The global elite" That is a beyond empty phrase. Who are these secret overseers? What is the secret handshake? Are they reptile humanoids from another dimension? Are they Jewish? Satanic? All of the above?
-
(http://cf.badassdigest.com/_uploads/images/17390/bohemiangrover_toyset__span.jpg)
-
I heard that 911 was an inside job but when I tell my dad he doesn't believe me
-
i heard al gore made up global warming, alex jones is like robin hood bro.
-
Only when I'm giving your 'ol pappy a sympathy beej. I know he can't get one anywhere else because he's ashamed that he's only packing 2" rock hard, but I'm a firm believer in charity for those who have nowhere else to turn.
Do you REALLY think I'm going to be offended by this? God, you're a dumb cunt.
You went in! I liked the part where you said you suck middle aged mens' tiny penises because nobody else will.
I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LAnmnS0-9g#)
-
Expand Quote
haha lol, obviously people give a shit. i give a shit. i am people. the global elite, rapes our families and fucks us all in the ass is what (pretty sure) he was referring to.
"The global elite" That is a beyond empty phrase. Who are these secret overseers? What is the secret handshake? Are they reptile humanoids from another dimension? Are they Jewish? Satanic? All of the above?
Perhaps, but Communitarianism certainly is not an empty phrase. Several pages back I posted a video of Stanford Hoover Institute fellow, Anthony Sutton explaining his research findings of the interlocking between top capitalists and communists. He presented congress with the same information. Slanderously and sensationally dismissing that as kooky is beyond ridiculous.
I don't identify as Libertarian. The Libertarian Party was unwilling to step up and debate the communitarians, even after Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote that the "last great debate" in American politics was between the Libertarians and the Communitarians.
I do identify as Anti Communitarian or Anti Collectivist. Communitarianism is the belief that individual and national sovereignty must be balanced against the needs of the global collective. Their entire foundation for forced social evolution rests on their Big Idea that all the world's people will be "free" after everyone gives up any claims to their personal freedom. Defined as the new "spirit" of community, Communitarians believe they are leading mankind into an advanced moral and spiritual state of being. Across the globe, communitarian gurus promote a global program designed to create one big, planned, gated community. They call it sustainable development.
We are on the front lines of a massive multi-front war against our individual, state and national freedom. American officials rarely tell American voters the name of the new system. The Reinvention of America into a Sustainable Communitarian Paradise was never supposed to be debated or voted upon by the American people. Communitarianism is a social science that infiltrates national and state governments via social development programs. It's called Socio-Economics. To the Communitarians, the U.S. Constitution (and all national government) is "outdated" and poses a barrier to achieving world peace and justice.
UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all information, all energy, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL Have you wondered where these terms 'sustainability' and 'smart growth' and 'high density urban mixed-use development' came from? Doesn't it seem like about 10 years ago you'd never heard of them and now everything seems to include these concepts? Is that just a coincidence? That every town and county and state and nation in the world would be changing their land use/planning codes and government policies to align themselves with...what? Far from being a ?conspiracy theory? or a ?tin-foil hat? fantasy, this is an actual United Nations plan, signed onto in 1992 by President George HW Bush along with 178 other world leaders.
The UN called it Agenda 21 because it is the Agenda for the 21st century. According to UN Secretary General Maurice Strong, the ?affluent middle-class American lifestyle is unsustainable.? That includes single family homes, private vehicles, appliances, air-conditioning, & meat-eating. They are a threat to the planet. This might sound like a silly plan that doesn?t affect you. But look around. This economic collapse is UN Agenda 21. You?ll hear that this plan is non-binding, that it?s a dusty old plan with no teeth. That is a lie. In fact over the last 20 years this plan has been implemented all over the United States. It?s called Sustainable Development. The 3 E?s: ecology, economy, equity. After George Bush signed it in 1992, it was brought back to the US by President Clinton (1993) when he created the President?s Council on Sustainable Development for the sole purpose of getting it into every city, county, and state in the US through federal rules, regulations, and grants. This is a global plan but is implemented locally. You?ll see it as a regional plan. It might be called Vision 2035, or Your Town 2025, or One Bay Area, or Plan NY?all of these regional plans are the same. They call for stack and pack housing, restricted mobility, and regional government. Domestic surveillance, smart meters, GMO?s, loss of freedom?all UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. You are losing your rights.
WHAT?S WRONG WITH SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT? How could something that sounds so good be bad? Who wouldn?t want to be sustainable? Vibrant? Walkable? Bikeable? Green? These buzz words were designed to make you think that you?re doing something good for the planet. This is the biggest public relations scam in the history of the world. Sustainable Development was created and defined by the United Nations in 1987, and the action plan to implement it was signed onto in 1992 by US President Bush and 178 other nations. It was called Agenda 21, the Agenda for the 21st century.
Considered unsustainable under this plan: middle class lifestyle, single family homes, private vehicles, meat-eating, air conditioning, appliances, dams, farming, you. Clinton began to implement it in the US in 1993 by giving the American Planning Association a multi-million dollar grant to write a land use legislative blueprint for every municipality in the US. It is called Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook with Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change. This was completed in 2002 and is being used to train planners in every university, college and government planning office in the nation. Growing Smart is Smart Growth. Growing Smart is in your planning department and its principles are in your city and county plan. Right now. Beside this, on the shelf, is The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide put out by ICLEI and the United Nations. Urban areas are being consolidated and rural areas are being emptied of people through restrictive land use policies, gasoline costs, vehicle miles traveled taxes, loss of rural road maintenance, closure of rural schools, closure of rural post offices, water well monitoring, smart meters, and regionalization pressures. Smart Growth is not just the preferred building style for UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development; it is the ideology. Moving people into centralized urban areas in high density housing creates the perfect opportunity for domestic surveillance. This ideology is being used as the justification to radically change every city in the United States and to impose regulations dictated by unelected regional boards and commissions. It is remaking government. This dramatic revolution in private property rights extends to every facet of our lives: education, energy, food, housing, transportation.
A woman in my area who has been in local government as a forensic commercial real estate appraiser specializing in eminent domain valuation for three decades has been at the forefront of standing up to Communitarians and Agenda 21. Her name is Rosa Koire...she happens to be gay and comes from a liberal political background...So you can't use that RIGHT WING bullshit to slander her work. She wrote the book "Behind The Green Mask" and I highly suggest picking it up... her site is Democratsagainstunagenda21.com
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/thumbnailasp-2.jpg)
-
^ Just finished Atlas Shrugged.
I suggest you go to your city hall, and see how gov. works and people that do give a shit.? I guess you have never taken part in municipal politics like say getting a skatepark built?
Good for you for reading something most people won't bother with. And, apologies if I came off harsh, this is SLAP, after all, and being on the defensive right away is usually the best mode.
I've been to city hall. I've worked with local government here as a business owner in my city - I'm closing in on 40, so I've been around the block a while and done more than just peition for a skatepark. Which I did do back around 1989-1990, when the city said "Get 2000 signatures this year, bring them to the table, and we'll see what you can do to get a skatepark", only for them to say "No, we need to build our 15th basketball court instead."
Even local government is a terrible fucking mess, most of the people I've encountered are either
a) Power hungry "little kings" that are looking for their slice of the pie to control, or
b) People who just want the security of goverment work because it's easier than having to deal with the real world of employment
Sure, there are some that DO care (think Rand Paul sitting among a flock of idiots in Congress) and aren't just wanting to live as career politicians and get rich off their connections, but those people usually are just relegated to being "those crazy bastards who don't want to play by the rules" and are marginalized as such.
Politics is an ugly game at the bottom as well as the top. It's a game that has to be played, but needs a serious re-tooling because it's far out of alignment with actually being concerned with serving the people first, and serving one's self secondary.
-
You went in! I liked the part where you said you suck middle aged mens' tiny penises because nobody else will.
I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LAnmnS0-9g#)
I spent enough time lurking before bothering to register recently and learned how things work here. I didn't roll into this mess blind, gotta be ready to fight idiocy with even better idiocy when the need arises, it usually puts dopes like BKPL to bed so that the grown ups can talk a bit more without the kids interrupting.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
haha lol, obviously people give a shit. i give a shit. i am people. the global elite, rapes our families and fucks us all in the ass is what (pretty sure) he was referring to.
"The global elite" That is a beyond empty phrase. Who are these secret overseers? What is the secret handshake? Are they reptile humanoids from another dimension? Are they Jewish? Satanic? All of the above?
Perhaps, but Communitarianism certainly is not an empty phrase. Several pages back I posted a video of Stanford Hoover Institute fellow, Anthony Sutton explaining his research findings of the interlocking between top capitalists and communists. He presented congress with the same information. Slanderously and sensationally dismissing that as kooky is beyond ridiculous.
I don't identify as Libertarian. The Libertarian Party was unwilling to step up and debate the communitarians, even after Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote that the "last great debate" in American politics was between the Libertarians and the Communitarians.
I do identify as Anti Communitarian or Anti Collectivist. Communitarianism is the belief that individual and national sovereignty must be balanced against the needs of the global collective. Their entire foundation for forced social evolution rests on their Big Idea that all the world's people will be "free" after everyone gives up any claims to their personal freedom. Defined as the new "spirit" of community, Communitarians believe they are leading mankind into an advanced moral and spiritual state of being. Across the globe, communitarian gurus promote a global program designed to create one big, planned, gated community. They call it sustainable development.
We are on the front lines of a massive multi-front war against our individual, state and national freedom. American officials rarely tell American voters the name of the new system. The Reinvention of America into a Sustainable Communitarian Paradise was never supposed to be debated or voted upon by the American people. Communitarianism is a social science that infiltrates national and state governments via social development programs. It's called Socio-Economics. To the Communitarians, the U.S. Constitution (and all national government) is "outdated" and poses a barrier to achieving world peace and justice.
UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all information, all energy, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL Have you wondered where these terms 'sustainability' and 'smart growth' and 'high density urban mixed-use development' came from? Doesn't it seem like about 10 years ago you'd never heard of them and now everything seems to include these concepts? Is that just a coincidence? That every town and county and state and nation in the world would be changing their land use/planning codes and government policies to align themselves with...what? Far from being a ?conspiracy theory? or a ?tin-foil hat? fantasy, this is an actual United Nations plan, signed onto in 1992 by President George HW Bush along with 178 other world leaders.
The UN called it Agenda 21 because it is the Agenda for the 21st century. According to UN Secretary General Maurice Strong, the ?affluent middle-class American lifestyle is unsustainable.? That includes single family homes, private vehicles, appliances, air-conditioning, & meat-eating. They are a threat to the planet. This might sound like a silly plan that doesn?t affect you. But look around. This economic collapse is UN Agenda 21. You?ll hear that this plan is non-binding, that it?s a dusty old plan with no teeth. That is a lie. In fact over the last 20 years this plan has been implemented all over the United States. It?s called Sustainable Development. The 3 E?s: ecology, economy, equity. After George Bush signed it in 1992, it was brought back to the US by President Clinton (1993) when he created the President?s Council on Sustainable Development for the sole purpose of getting it into every city, county, and state in the US through federal rules, regulations, and grants. This is a global plan but is implemented locally. You?ll see it as a regional plan. It might be called Vision 2035, or Your Town 2025, or One Bay Area, or Plan NY?all of these regional plans are the same. They call for stack and pack housing, restricted mobility, and regional government. Domestic surveillance, smart meters, GMO?s, loss of freedom?all UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. You are losing your rights.
WHAT?S WRONG WITH SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT? How could something that sounds so good be bad? Who wouldn?t want to be sustainable? Vibrant? Walkable? Bikeable? Green? These buzz words were designed to make you think that you?re doing something good for the planet. This is the biggest public relations scam in the history of the world. Sustainable Development was created and defined by the United Nations in 1987, and the action plan to implement it was signed onto in 1992 by US President Bush and 178 other nations. It was called Agenda 21, the Agenda for the 21st century.
Considered unsustainable under this plan: middle class lifestyle, single family homes, private vehicles, meat-eating, air conditioning, appliances, dams, farming, you. Clinton began to implement it in the US in 1993 by giving the American Planning Association a multi-million dollar grant to write a land use legislative blueprint for every municipality in the US. It is called Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook with Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change. This was completed in 2002 and is being used to train planners in every university, college and government planning office in the nation. Growing Smart is Smart Growth. Growing Smart is in your planning department and its principles are in your city and county plan. Right now. Beside this, on the shelf, is The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide put out by ICLEI and the United Nations. Urban areas are being consolidated and rural areas are being emptied of people through restrictive land use policies, gasoline costs, vehicle miles traveled taxes, loss of rural road maintenance, closure of rural schools, closure of rural post offices, water well monitoring, smart meters, and regionalization pressures. Smart Growth is not just the preferred building style for UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development; it is the ideology. Moving people into centralized urban areas in high density housing creates the perfect opportunity for domestic surveillance. This ideology is being used as the justification to radically change every city in the United States and to impose regulations dictated by unelected regional boards and commissions. It is remaking government. This dramatic revolution in private property rights extends to every facet of our lives: education, energy, food, housing, transportation.
A woman in my area who has been in local government as a forensic commercial real estate appraiser specializing in eminent domain valuation for three decades has been at the forefront of standing up to Communitarians and Agenda 21. Her name is Rosa Koire...she happens to be gay and comes from a liberal political background...So you can't use that RIGHT WING bullshit to slander her work. She wrote the book "Behind The Green Mask" and I highly suggest picking it up... her site is Democratsagainstunagenda21.com
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/thumbnailasp-2.jpg)
the idea of this is that we can't live the way we do now, because of our planets limited resouces. In time all the third world countries will develop to the same economical level as we are and everybody is gonna want to have the same cars, houses, hobbies, food and vacations. Unfortunately if it would happen now, our planet couldn't take it. there would not be enough food or oil or anything. The only way for us to be able to live lives on somewhat similar level, is if we make the whole world a lot more eco friendly and split it to smaller communitys. the other way is to go back to farming and living on your own. sure its gonna be controlled and our freedom will be less free, but there just isnt many ways to solve this problem. we cannot continue living the way we do now but we also don't wanna go 200 years back in time. Anyway the whole process, if there even is a process, will take a lot of time. probably will be over a hundred years until the US will have reached the picture you have painted, and a couple more until most of the world will get there. i don't know what there is to fight against since its not gonna affect us and there isn't really an other way, but then again i have no idea what i'm talking about, i have done no research at all and i have no idea if anything you say is true.
-
In time all the third world countries will develop to the same economical level as we are and everybody is gonna want to have the same cars, houses, hobbies, food and vacations.
Not true. If that were the case, then most 3rd world nations would be upwardly mobile. Look at Africa in general - fucked over by one warlord after another who rapes the nation for all its wealth, then flees during the inevitable uprising to retire in Europe with his $5 billion in stashed Suisse accounts. And, then the citizens elect another asshole (or, they accept leadership from the new jerkoff who overthew the previous one), the cycle doesn't break easily. That's been the fate of Africa in general for the past 100 years, and most nations that HAD the chance at becoming "civilized" have ended up tin-pot dictator hell holes that are barely different than they were 200 years ago, except now they have electricty, cars and indoor plumbing. Anywhere that is run by power/money hungry nuts who milk the citizens and leave them in poverty as happens there will keep things from beoming 1st world, just as they have been for a very long time.
It isn't that countries just "develop" as an evolutionary process - they have to have a central plan to develop, and only a handful of nations have proven they're capable. China is the greatest threat to security and resources, they're going to be interesting to watch over the next decade as they try to stomp us into dust.
-
Expand Quote
In time all the third world countries will develop to the same economical level as we are and everybody is gonna want to have the same cars, houses, hobbies, food and vacations.
Not true. If that were the case, then most 3rd world nations would be upwardly mobile. Look at Africa in general - fucked over by one warlord after another who rapes the nation for all its wealth, then flees during the inevitable uprising to retire in Europe with his $5 billion in stashed Suisse accounts. And, then the citizens elect another asshole (or, they accept leadership from the new jerkoff who overthew the previous one), the cycle doesn't break easily. That's been the fate of Africa in general for the past 100 years, and most nations that HAD the chance at becoming "civilized" have ended up tin-pot dictator hell holes that are barely different than they were 200 years ago, except now they have electricty, cars and indoor plumbing. Anywhere that is run by power/money hungry nuts who milk the citizens and leave them in poverty as happens there will keep things from beoming 1st world, just as they have been for a very long time.
It isn't that countries just "develop" as an evolutionary process - they have to have a central plan to develop, and only a handful of nations have proven they're capable. China is the greatest threat to security and resources, they're going to be interesting to watch over the next decade as they try to stomp us into dust.
You are talking out your ass here about Africa.
-
Expand Quote
In time all the third world countries will develop to the same economical level as we are and everybody is gonna want to have the same cars, houses, hobbies, food and vacations.
Not true. If that were the case, then most 3rd world nations would be upwardly mobile. Look at Africa in general - fucked over by one warlord after another who rapes the nation for all its wealth, then flees during the inevitable uprising to retire in Europe with his $5 billion in stashed Suisse accounts. And, then the citizens elect another asshole (or, they accept leadership from the new jerkoff who overthew the previous one), the cycle doesn't break easily. That's been the fate of Africa in general for the past 100 years, and most nations that HAD the chance at becoming "civilized" have ended up tin-pot dictator hell holes that are barely different than they were 200 years ago, except now they have electricty, cars and indoor plumbing. Anywhere that is run by power/money hungry nuts who milk the citizens and leave them in poverty as happens there will keep things from beoming 1st world, just as they have been for a very long time.
It isn't that countries just "develop" as an evolutionary process - they have to have a central plan to develop, and only a handful of nations have proven they're capable. China is the greatest threat to security and resources, they're going to be interesting to watch over the next decade as they try to stomp us into dust.
Well that is true about africa, but all the Asian countries are on a way different page. People there are well organized, calm and have inhuman workethicks. they will develop rather quickly onto the same level as usa. China and India together have almost half of the world living in them and they are rapidly growing economically and also adapting more and more of the ''western'' culture. People from the 1st world are pushing money into them by manufacturing products there and helping them grow. Also not all africa is the way you described it, but actually a whole lot of it is in steady but slow growing pace. They will start to grow when Chinese and Indian people have gotten their economies so high that they are part of the 1st world, and start exploiting the cheap workforce of Africa.
-
b) People who just want the security of goverment work because it's easier than having to deal with the real world of employment
Sounds good to me, and pretty much every other country in the world.
-
How old are you "TheRealDeal"?
-
theRealDeal, you shouldn't talk about people "slanderously and sensationally" questioning your claims right before slanderously and sensationally misinterpreting the phrase sustainable development to suit that bizarre UN themed Dan Brown fantasy novel of a theory. It would be nice to live in your world where cheeseburgers, mid sized pick ups and toaster ovens grow on trees, but sooner or later you will probably come to realize that that is a fantasy, and that mankind is living way beyond it's means (and there's about to be more of us, consuming more things).
Trust me, the US and others do not give a fuck about non-binding UN treaties unless they contain relatively uncontroversial and GOOD ideas.
-
I could care less if you ridicule me. Just presenting information. I don't flippantly disregard real environmental issues...I grew up playing in streams, then mountain biking and rock climbing and developing a great respect for nature. I currently live in Sonoma County and work in Agriculture...and yeah I have a big ol' EVIL F250 to get loads of compost, hay, etc. Here's the deal though, the environmental movement was hijacked half a century ago. The usurpers have since bombarded people world wide with propaganda to demonize humanity. They employ the Delphi technique to develop a phony consensus. Read through these quotes filled with insider jargon and buzzwords intended to be a "wink wink" to those in the know and to continue to dupe those who aren't. Don't care? Well, suit your self.
Quote by Paul Watson, a founder of Greenpeace: "It doesn't matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true."
Quote by Jim Sibbison, environmental journalist, former public relations official for the Environmental Protection Agency: "We routinely wrote scare stories...Our press reports were more or less true...We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment."
Quote by Ottmar Edenhoffer, high level UN-IPCC official: "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy...Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization...One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."
Quote by Club of Rome: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the ?real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is ?a real one or?.one invented for the purpose."
Quote by Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister: ?No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.?
Quote from the UN's Own "Agenda 21": "Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."
Quote by Maurice Strong, a billionaire elitist, primary power behind UN throne, and large CO2 producer: ?Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about??
Quote by Gus Hall, former leader of the Communist Party USA: "Human society cannot basically stop the destruction of the environment under capitalism. Socialism is the only structure that makes it possible."
Quote by Peter Berle, President of the National Audubon Society: "We reject the idea of private property."
Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature's proper steward and society's only hope.
Quote by David Rockefeller, heir to billion dollar fortune: "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis..."
Quote by Mikhail Gorbachev, communist and former leader of U.S.S.R.: "The emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must assume some aspects of a world government."
Quote by Club of Rome: "Now is the time to draw up a master plan for sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all resources and a new global economic system. Ten or twenty years form today it will probably be too late."
Quote by Lester Brown, founder of the Worldwatch Institute, and founder and president of the Earth Policy Institute: "Nations are in effect ceding portions of their sovereignty to the international community and beginning to create a new system of international environmental governance."
Quote by Dixy Lee Ray, former liberal Democrat governor of State of Washington, U.S.: "The objective, clearly enunciated by the leaders of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present system of independent nations. The future is to be World Government with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises - whether real or not - is expected to lead to ? compliance?
Quote by UN's Commission on Global Governance: "The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation."
Quote by John Holdren, President Obama's science czar: ?A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States...De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation...Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every human being."
Quote by Club of Rome: "Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today?s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time."
Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: ?Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.?
Quote by Jeremy Rifkin, Greenhouse Crisis Foundation: ?The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.?
Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "We contend that the position of the nuclear promoters is preposterous beyond the wildest imaginings of most nuclear opponents, primarily because one of the purported ?benefits? of nuclear power, the availability of cheap and abundant energy, is in fact a liability."
Quote by Club of Rome: "The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man."
Quote by John Davis, editor of Earth First! journal: "Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs."
Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer."
Quote by John Holdren, President Obama's science czar: "There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated...It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."
Quote by Christopher Manes, a writer for Earth First! journal: "The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing."
Quote by Ted Turner, billionaire, founder of CNN and major UN donor, and large CO2 producer: ?A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.?
Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: ?My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it?s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.?
Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing."
Quote by Club of Rome: "...the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion."
Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "The addition of a temporary sterilant to staple food, or to the water supply. With limited distribution of antidote chemicals, perhaps by lottery".
Quote by Jacques Cousteau, mega-celebrity French scientist: "In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day."
Quote by Prince Philip, royal billionaire, married to Queen Elizabeth II, and large CO2 producer: "If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels."
Quote by Ingrid Newkirk, a former PETA President: ?The extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species. Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on Earth - social and environmental.?
Quote by Chris Folland of UK Meteorological Office: ?The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models.?
Quote by David Frame, climate modeler, Oxford University: ?Rather than seeing models as describing literal truth, we ought to see them as convenient fictions which try to provide something useful.?
Quote by Eric Pianka, professor at University of Texas: Good terrorists would be taking [Ebola Roaston and Ebola Zaire] so that they had microbes they could let loose on the Earth that would kill 90 percent of people.
Quote by George Monbiot, a UK Guardian environmental journalist: "It is a campaign not for abundance but for austerity. It is a campaign not for more freedom but for less. Strangest of all, it is a campaign not just against other people, but against ourselves."
Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: ?We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects. We must reclaim the roads and plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of acres of presently settled land.?
Quote by Maurice King, well known UK professor: ?Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.?
Quote by Noel Brown, UN official: "Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of "eco-refugees," threatening political chaos." (Editor: Yes, he meant the year 2000.)
-
You are the worst.
-
I could care less if you ridicule me. Just presenting information. I don't flippantly disregard real environmental issues...I grew up playing in streams, then mountain biking and rock climbing and developing a great respect for nature. I currently live in Sonoma County and work in Agriculture...and yeah I have a big ol' EVIL F250 to get loads of compost, hay, etc. Here's the deal though, the environmental movement was hijacked half a century ago. The usurpers have since bombarded people world wide with propaganda to demonize humanity. They employ the Delphi technique to develop a phony consensus. Read through these quotes filled with insider jargon and buzzwords intended to be a "wink wink" to those in the know and to continue to dupe those who aren't. Don't care? Well, suit your self.
Quote by Paul Watson, a founder of Greenpeace: "It doesn't matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true."
Quote by Jim Sibbison, environmental journalist, former public relations official for the Environmental Protection Agency: "We routinely wrote scare stories...Our press reports were more or less true...We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment."
Quote by Ottmar Edenhoffer, high level UN-IPCC official: "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy...Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization...One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."
Quote by Club of Rome: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the ?real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is ?a real one or?.one invented for the purpose."
Quote by Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister: ?No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.?
Quote from the UN's Own "Agenda 21": "Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."
Quote by Maurice Strong, a billionaire elitist, primary power behind UN throne, and large CO2 producer: ?Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about??
Quote by Gus Hall, former leader of the Communist Party USA: "Human society cannot basically stop the destruction of the environment under capitalism. Socialism is the only structure that makes it possible."
Quote by Peter Berle, President of the National Audubon Society: "We reject the idea of private property."
Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature's proper steward and society's only hope.
Quote by David Rockefeller, heir to billion dollar fortune: "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis..."
Quote by Mikhail Gorbachev, communist and former leader of U.S.S.R.: "The emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must assume some aspects of a world government."
Quote by Club of Rome: "Now is the time to draw up a master plan for sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all resources and a new global economic system. Ten or twenty years form today it will probably be too late."
Quote by Lester Brown, founder of the Worldwatch Institute, and founder and president of the Earth Policy Institute: "Nations are in effect ceding portions of their sovereignty to the international community and beginning to create a new system of international environmental governance."
Quote by Dixy Lee Ray, former liberal Democrat governor of State of Washington, U.S.: "The objective, clearly enunciated by the leaders of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present system of independent nations. The future is to be World Government with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises - whether real or not - is expected to lead to ? compliance?
Quote by UN's Commission on Global Governance: "The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation."
Quote by John Holdren, President Obama's science czar: ?A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States...De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation...Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every human being."
Quote by Club of Rome: "Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today?s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time."
Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: ?Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.?
Quote by Jeremy Rifkin, Greenhouse Crisis Foundation: ?The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.?
Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "We contend that the position of the nuclear promoters is preposterous beyond the wildest imaginings of most nuclear opponents, primarily because one of the purported ?benefits? of nuclear power, the availability of cheap and abundant energy, is in fact a liability."
Quote by Club of Rome: "The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man."
Quote by John Davis, editor of Earth First! journal: "Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs."
Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer."
Quote by John Holdren, President Obama's science czar: "There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated...It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."
Quote by Christopher Manes, a writer for Earth First! journal: "The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing."
Quote by Ted Turner, billionaire, founder of CNN and major UN donor, and large CO2 producer: ?A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.?
Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: ?My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it?s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.?
Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing."
Quote by Club of Rome: "...the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion."
Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "The addition of a temporary sterilant to staple food, or to the water supply. With limited distribution of antidote chemicals, perhaps by lottery".
Quote by Jacques Cousteau, mega-celebrity French scientist: "In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day."
Quote by Prince Philip, royal billionaire, married to Queen Elizabeth II, and large CO2 producer: "If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels."
Quote by Ingrid Newkirk, a former PETA President: ?The extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species. Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on Earth - social and environmental.?
Quote by Chris Folland of UK Meteorological Office: ?The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models.?
Quote by David Frame, climate modeler, Oxford University: ?Rather than seeing models as describing literal truth, we ought to see them as convenient fictions which try to provide something useful.?
Quote by Eric Pianka, professor at University of Texas: Good terrorists would be taking [Ebola Roaston and Ebola Zaire] so that they had microbes they could let loose on the Earth that would kill 90 percent of people.
Quote by George Monbiot, a UK Guardian environmental journalist: "It is a campaign not for abundance but for austerity. It is a campaign not for more freedom but for less. Strangest of all, it is a campaign not just against other people, but against ourselves."
Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: ?We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects. We must reclaim the roads and plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of acres of presently settled land.?
Quote by Maurice King, well known UK professor: ?Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.?
Quote by Noel Brown, UN official: "Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of "eco-refugees," threatening political chaos." (Editor: Yes, he meant the year 2000.)
^^^ with all those quotes, your case is clearly airtight.
so once they had peta, gorbachev (helpfully labelled a communist-thanks!), cnn, stanford university and the rockefellers working together all they needed after that was every scientist on the planet to go along with them. seems believable. hold on, they still had to secretly let every other country on the planet outside of the US in on the secret. if you believe all this i feel sorry for you.
the greatest irony in right wing conspiracy theories is that they always actually help the groups that are truly the greatest threat to us all. So while you think you are helping uncover some big made up con'spiracy on the internet, you are actually the foot soldier in a very true conspiracy and campaign of disinformation by the corporations that are actually fucking everything up. thanks for being part of the problem bro.
also, is "I don't flippantly disregard real environmental issues...I grew up playing in streams" the environmental version of "I'm not racist, one of my friends is black"? either way, i think you penned a winner.
-
also, is "I don't flippantly disregard real environmental issues...I grew up playing in streams" the environmental version of "I'm not racist, one of my friends is black"? either way, i think you penned a winner.
HA
-
I guess mentioning Rosa Koire and the fact that she's gay makes me a homophobe, too. �Keep ridiculing man, i don't give a shit..but again, enough of the Right Wing shit... Democratsagainstunagenda21.com
Here's one of the first articles i encountered that made me want to research Agenda 21. �
eco�logic Special Report Sustainable Development: Transforming America
by Henry Lamb
Environmental Conservation Organization Hollow Rock, Tennessee
December 1, 2005
As the "sustainable development" movement continues to gain momentum, it is worthwhile to step back and take a long look at the big picture, painted with a broad brush to reveal what the United States might look like as the movement's vision is more fully implemented over the next 50 years or so. The picture painted here is based on official documents published by several government agencies and non-government organizations during the last decade. These documents were rarely reported in the news, and average working people have no idea what sustainable development really means, and even less knowledge of what is in store for the future. If the vision of sustainable development continues to unfold as it has in the last decade, life in the United States will be quite different in the future.
The Vision Half the land area of the entire country will be designated "wilderness areas," where only wildlife managers and researchers will be allowed. These areas will be interconnected by "corridors of wilderness" to allow migration of wildlife, without interference by human activity. Wolves will be as plentiful in Virginia and Pennsylvania as they are now in Idaho and Montana. Panthers and alligators will roam freely from the Everglades to the Okefenokee and beyond. Surrounding these wilderness areas and corridors, designated "buffer zones" will be managed for "conservation objectives." The primary objective is "restoration and rehabilitation." Rehabilitation involves the repair of damaged ecosystems, while restoration usually involves the reconstruction of natural or semi-natural ecosystems. As areas are restored and rehabilitated, they are added to the wilderness designation, and the buffer zone is extended outward. Buffer zones are surrounded by what is called "zones of cooperation." This is where people live - in "sustainable communities." Sustainable communities are defined by strict "urban growth boundaries." Land outside the growth boundaries will be managed by government agencies, which grant permits for activities deemed to be essential and sustainable. Open space, to provide a "viewshed" and sustainable recreation for community residents will abut the urban boundaries. Beyond the viewshed, sustainable agricultural activities will be permitted, to support the food requirements of nearby communities. Sustainable communities of the future will bear little resemblance to the towns and cities of the 20th century. Single-family homes will be rare. Housing will be provided by public/private partnerships, funded by government, and managed by non-government "Home Owners Associations." Housing units will be designed to provide most of the infrastructure and amenities required by the residents. Shops and office space will be an integral part of each unit, and housing will be allocated on a priority basis to people who work in the unit - with quotas to achieve ethnic and economic balance. Schools, daycare, and recreation facilities will be provided. Each unit will be designed for bicycle and foot traffic, to reduce, if not eliminate, the need for people to use automobiles. Transportation between sustainable communities, for people and for commodities, will be primarily by light rail systems, designed to bridge wilderness corridors where necessary. The highways that remain will be super transport corridors, such as the "Trans-Texas Corridor" now being designed, which will eventually reach from Mexico to Canada. These transport corridors will also be designed to bridge wilderness corridors, and to minimize the impact on the environment. Government, too, will be different in a sustainable America. Human activity is being reorganized around ecoregions, which do not respect county or state boundaries. Therefore, the governing apparatus will be designed to regulate the activities within the entire region, rather than having multiple governing jurisdictions with services duplicated in each political subdivision. It is far more efficient to have regional governing authorities with centrally administered services.
Sierra Club's proposal to reorganize North America into 21 Ecoregions. The Sierra Club, one of hundreds of non-government organizations actively working to bring about this transformation, has suggested that North America be divided into 21 ecoregions, that ignore existing national, state, and county boundaries. In 1992, they published a special issue of their magazine which featured a map, and extensive descriptions of how these ecoregions should be managed. (1) The function of government will also change. The legislative function, especially at the local and state level, will continue to diminish in importance, while the administrative function will grow. Already, in some parts of the country, counties are combining, and city and county governments are consolidating. Regional governing authorities are developing; taking precedence over the participating counties, which will eventually evaporate. State governments will undergo similar attrition; as regulations are developed on an ecoregions basis, there will be less need for separate state legislation. The administrative functions of state governments will also collapse into a super-regional administrative unit, to eliminate unnecessary duplication of investment and services.
The Reality This vision is quite attractive to many Americans, especially those born since 1970, who have been educated in the public school system. To these people, nothing is more important than saving the planet from the certain catastrophe that lies ahead, if people are allowed to continue their greedy abuse of natural resources. The public school system, and the media, have been quite successful is shaping new attitudes and values to support this vision of how the world should be. This vision did not suddenly spring from the mind of a Hollywood screenwriter. It has been evolving for most of the last century. Since the early 1960s, it has been gaining momentum. The rise of the environmental movement became the magnet which attracted several disparate elements of social change, now coalesced into a massive global movement, euphemistically described as sustainable development. The first Wilderness Act was adopted in 1964, which set aside nine million acres of wilderness so "our posterity could see what our forefathers had to conquer," as one Senator put it. Now, after 40 years, 106.5 million acres are officially designated as wilderness. (2) At least eight bills have been introduced in the 109th Congress to add more wilderness to the system. (3) And every year, Congress is asked to designate more and more land as wilderness. Most of this land is already a part of a global system of ecoregions, recognized internationally as "Biosphere Reserves." In the United States, there are 47 Biosphere Reserves, so designated by the United Nations Education, Science, and Cultural Organization, (4) which are a part of a global network of 482 Biosphere Reserves. This global network is the basis for implementing the U.N.'s Convention on Biological Diversity, (5) a treaty which the U.S. Senate chose not to ratify. (6) The 1140-page instruction book for implementing this treaty, Global Biodiversity Assessment, provides graphic details about how society should be organized, and how land and resources should be managed, in order to make the world sustainable. This treaty was formulated by U.N. agencies and non-government organizations between 1981 and 1992, when it was formally adopted by the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. Consider this instruction from the Global Biodiversity Assessment:
"...representative areas of all major ecosystems in a region need to be reserved, that blocks should be as large as possible, that buffer zones should be established around core areas, and that corridors should connect these areas. This basic design is central to the recently proposed Wildlands Project in the United States." (7)
Now consider "this basic design" as described in the Wildlands Project:
"...that at least half of the land area of the 48 conterminous states should be encompassed in core reserves and inner corridor zones (essentially extensions of core reserves) within the next few decades.... Nonetheless, half of a region in wilderness is a reasonable guess of what it will take to restore viable populations of large carnivores and natural disturbance regimes, assuming that most of the other 50 percent is managed intelligently as buffer zones. Eventually, a wilderness network would dominate a region...with human habitations being the islands. The native ecosystem and the collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans." (8)
Even though this treaty was not ratified by the United States, it is being effectively implemented by the agencies of government through the "Ecosystem Management Policy." The U.S. Forest service is actively working to identify and secure wilderness corridors to connect existing core wilderness areas. (9) Both state and federal governments have enacted legislation in recent years to provide for systematic acquisition of "open space," land suitable for restoration and rehabilitation, to expand wilderness areas, and to provide "viewsheds" beyond urban boundaries. In the last days of the Clinton Administration, the Forest Service adopted the "Roadless Area Conservation Rule," which identified 58.5 million acres from which access and logging roads were to be removed. In the West, the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management are driving ranchers off the land by reducing grazing allotments to numbers that make profitable operations impossible. Inholders, people who have recreational cabins on federal land, are discovering that their permits are not being renewed. The Fish and Wildlife Service is forcing people off their land through designations of "wetlands," and "critical habitat" which render the land unusable for profit-making activities. Much to the chagrin of the proponents of sustainable development, some of these policies have been slowed, but not reversed, by the Bush administration. Nevertheless, agencies of government, supported by an army of non-government organizations, continue to transform the landscape into the vision described in the Wildlands Project, and in the Global Biodiversity Assessment.
Blueprint for Sustainable Development Other agencies of government are working with equal diligence, to create the "islands of human habitation," otherwise called sustainable communities. The blueprint for these communities was also adopted at the 1992 U.N. Conference in Rio de Janeiro. Its title is "Agenda 21." This 300-page document contains 40 chapters loaded with recommendations to govern virtually every facet of human existence. Agenda 21 is not a treaty. It is a "soft law" policy document which was signed by President George H.W. Bush, and which does not require Senate ratification. One of the recommendations contained in the document is that each nation establish a national council to implement the rest of the recommendations. On June 29, 1993, President Bill Clinton issued Executive Order Number 12852 which created the President's Council on Sustainable Development. (10) Its 25 members included most Cabinet Secretaries, representatives from The Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club and other non-government organizations, and a few representatives from industry. The PCSD set out to implement the recommendations of Agenda 21 administratively, where possible, and to secure new legislation when necessary. One of the publications of the Council is "Sustainable Communities, Report of the Sustainable Communities Task Force." (11) This document, in very generalized language, makes sustainable communities sound like the perfect solution to all the world's ills. Another document, however, describes in much more precise detail exactly what sustainable communities will be. This document was prepared by the Department of Housing and Urban Development as a report to the U.N. Conference on Human Settlements in Istanbul, June, 1996. This report says that current lifestyles in the United States will "...demolish much of nature's diversity and stability, unless a re-balance can be attained - an urban-rural industrial re-balance with ecology, as a fundamental paradigm of authentic, meaningful national/global human security." (12) This highly detailed 25-page report goes on to describe the sustainable community of the future:
"...Community Sustainability Infrastructures [designed for] efficiency and livability that encourages: in-fill over sprawl: compactness, higher density low-rise residential: transit-oriented (TODs) and pedestrian-oriented development (PODs): bicycle circulation networks; work-to-home proximity; mixed-use-development: co-housing, housing over shops, downtown residential; inter-modal transportation malls and facilities ...where trolleys, rapid transit, trains and biking, walking and hiking are encouraged by infrastructures."
"For this hopeful future we may envision an entirely fresh set of infrastructures that use fully automated, very light, elevated rail systems for daytime metro region travel and nighttime goods movement, such as have been conceptualized and being positioned for production at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis; we will see all settlements linked up by extensive bike, recreation and agro-forestry "E-ways" (environment-ways) such as in Madison, Wisconsin; we will find healthy, productive soils where there is [now] decline and erosion, through the widespread use of remineralization from igneous and volcanic rock sources (much of it the surplus quarry fines, or "rockdust", from concrete and asphalt-type road construction or from reservoir silts); we will be growing foods, dietary supplements and herbs that make over our unsustainable reliance upon foods and medicines that have adverse soil, environmental, or health side-effects. Less and less land will go for animal husbandry, and more for grains, tubers and legumes." (13)
Sustainable communities cannot emerge as the natural outgrowth of free people making individual choices in a free market economy. Nor can they be mandated in the United States, as they might be in nations that live under dictatorial rule. Therefore, the PCSD developed a strategy to entice or coerce local communities to begin the transition to sustainability. The EPA provided challenge grants, and visioning grants to communities that would undertake the process toward sustainability. Grants were also made available to selected non-government organizations to launch a visioning process in local communities. This process relies on a trained facilitator who uses a practiced, "consensus building" model to lead selected community participants in the development of "community vision." This vision inevitably sets forth a set of goals - each of which can be found in the recommendations of Agenda 21 - that become the basis for the development of a comprehensive community plan. (14) According to the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), 6,400 local communities in 113 countries have become involved in the sustainable communities Local Agenda 21 process since 1995. (15) ICLEI is one of several international non-government organizations whose mission is to promote sustainable development and sustainable communities at the local level. Dozens of similar national NGOs are at work all across the United States. A cursory search on the term "sustainable communities" through Google or Yahoo will return a staggering number of responses. The federal government deepened its involvement in the transformation of America by providing millions of dollars in grants to the American Planning Association to develop model legislation which embodies the principles of sustainable development. The publication, Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook: Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change, provides model legislation to be adopted by states. Typically, this legislation, when adopted, requires the creation of a statewide comprehensive land use plan that defines the administrative mechanisms for regional government agencies, and provides planning models for counties to use in creating county-wide land use plans. Municipalities within the county are required to produce a plan that conforms with, and is integrated into the county and state plans. (16) Using the coercive power of the federal budget, which the PCSD describes as using "financial incentives and disincentives," the federal government had little trouble getting states to rush to adopt some form of the model legislation. The state of Wisconsin, for examples, says this about its comprehensive planning act:
-
"The Comprehensive Planning Law was developed in response to the widely held view that state planning laws were outdated and inconsistent with the current needs of Wisconsin communities. Commonly recognized as Wisconsin's "Smart Growth" legislation, significant changes to planning-related statutes were approved through the 1999-2001 state biennial budget. Under the new law, any program or action of a town, village, city, county, or regional planning commission, after January 1, 2010, that affects land use must be guided by, and consistent with, an adopted Comprehensive Plan, s. 66. 1001, Wis. Stats." (17)
The APA's Legislative Guidebook offers several forms of the model legislation. States have considerable latitude in the legislation that is adopted. Consequently, each state's legislation may be different, and may impose different requirements on county and city governments. Regardless of the difference, however, they all contain the basic principles set forth in Agenda 21, and they all require the development of plans that result in the implementation of the recommendations contained in Agenda 21. One of the fundamental elements of all the plans requires limiting development (growth) to certain areas within the county. Planners draw lines on maps, supposedly to prevent development in "environmentally sensitive" areas, but which, in fact, are often quite arbitrary and sometimes influenced by political considerations. The value of land inside the development areas skyrockets, while the value of land outside the development areas plummets - with no hope of future appreciation. Another common element of these plans is to limit the activity that may occur within the various plan designations. In King County, Washington, for example, property owners in some parts of the county are required to leave 65% of their land unused, in its "natural" condition.
"Known as the 65-10 Rule, it calls for landowners to set aside 65 percent of their property and keep it in its natural, vegetative state. According to the rule, nothing can be built on this land, and if a tree is cut down, for example, it must be replanted. Building anything is out of the question." (18)
These plans also focus on reducing automobile use. Measures sometimes include making driving less convenient by constructing speed bumps and obstructive center diversions on residential streets, prohibiting single occupant use of certain traffic lanes, as well as a variety of extra "tax" measures for auto use. Oregon is experimenting with a mileage tax, based on miles driven. London has imposed a special tax on automobiles that enter a designated "high traffic area." Several U.S. cities are studying this idea. Santa Cruz, California's plan seeks to ban auto use in certain municipal areas. Hundreds of NGOs have popped up to form a "World Carfree Network" (19) which lobbies local officials to reduce or eliminate auto use. Alternative transportation is another common element of these plans. Light rail is a favorite, even in communities that have no hope of achieving economic viability. Proponents of sustainable development argue that even if a light rail system has to be subsidized forever, it is a bargain just to get automobiles off the streets. Bicycle paths and "Trails" are always a substantial part of sustainable community plans. Housing in sustainable communities presents special problems. Space limitations, imposed by growth boundaries, force higher densities and smaller housing units. The term "McMansions" has been coined to describe new homes that are larger than necessary, as determined by sustainable development enthusiasts. Multiple housing units are preferred over single-family structures. Since sustainable communities cannot grow horizontally, they must grow vertically - if they grow at all. These problems have produced a variety of responses. Some of the new terms that are becoming common in sustainable communities are: Limited Equity Co-ops; Resident-controlled Rentals; Co-housing; Mutual Housing; and many others. (20) Invariably, these schemes are alternatives to the conventional single-family home. Most often, these schemes vest ownership in a corporation that owns the housing units, and residents may, but not always, own shares of the corporation. Living conditions are determined, not by the individual resident, but by the corporation. Financing for the construction of these units, typically requires construction to meet "sustainable" standards, if federal money is used, either directly or indirectly, as in a mortgage guarantee. Single family homes and business structures that already exist when a community is transformed to sustainability are a special problem, since they rarely meet the criteria required by the comprehensive plan. APA's Legislative Guidebook offers a new solution for this problem: "Amortization of Non-Conforming Uses." This means that a city or county may designate a period of time in which existing structures must be brought into conformity with the new regulations.
"But for homeowners who live in a community that adopts the Guidebook's vision, the APA amortization proposal means the extinguishing, over time, of their right to occupy their houses, and without just compensation for loss of that property. How long they have before they must forfeit their homes would be completely up to the local government." (21)
Eminent domain is another tool used by government to bring their communities into compliance with the sustainable communities vision. With increasing frequency, governments have used this technique to take land, not for "public use," as required by the U.S. Constitution, but for whatever the government deems to be a "public benefit." (22) Governments may condemn and seize the private property of an individual, and then give, or sell it, to another private owner who promises to use the property in a way that satisfies the government's vision. Plans adopted at the local level can have extremely detailed requirements. It is not unusual for these plans to specify the types of vegetation that must be used for landscaping, the color of paint to be used - inside and outside the structure, and even the types of appliances and fixtures that must be used. Businesses can be required to use signs that conform in size and color to all the other signs in the neighborhood. There is virtually no limit to the restrictions that these plans may impose. These comprehensive plans are often complicated by an assortment of sub-authorities, such as Historic Districts; Conservation Districts; Economic Development Districts; Scenic Highways and Byways; Scenic Rivers and Streams; and more. These quasi-government agencies are most often created by ordinance, and populated with political appointees. They are frequently given unwarranted authority to dictate the use of private property within their jurisdiction. Individuals caught up in conflict with these agencies are often frustrated by the indifference of elected officials, and financially drained by the legal costs required to resist their dictates. In one form or another, sustainable development has reached every corner of the United States. It has impacted millions of Americans, most of whom have no idea that their particular problem is related to a global initiative launched more than 15 years ago, by the United Nations. Many, if not most of the bureaucrats at the local and state level, charged with implementing these policies, have no knowledge of their origin. What's worse, few people have considered the possible negative consequences of these policies.
Consequences of Sustainable Development What is perhaps the most serious consequence of sustainable development is the least visible: the transformation of the policy-making process. The idea that government is empowered by the consent of the governed is the idea that set the United States apart from all previous forms of government. It is the principle that unleashed individual creativity and free markets, which launched the spectacular rise of the world's most successful nation. The idea, and the process by which citizens can reject laws they don't want, simply by replacing the officials who enacted them, makes the ballot box the source of power for every citizen, and the point of accountability for every politician. When public policy is made by elected officials who are accountable to the people who are governed, then government is truly empowered by the consent of the governed. Sustainable development has designed a process through which public policy is designed by professionals and bureaucrats, and implemented administratively, with only symbolic, if any, participation by elected officials. The professionals and bureaucrats who actually make the policies are not accountable to the people who are governed by them. This is the "new collaborative decisions process," called for by the PCSD. (23) Because the policies are developed at the top, by professionals and bureaucrats, and sent down the administrative chain of command to state and local governments, elected officials have little option but to accept them. Acceptance is further ensured when these policies are accompanied by "economic incentives and disincentives," along with lobbying and public relations campaigns coordinated by government-funded non-government organizations. Higher housing costs are an immediate, visible consequence of sustainable development. Land within the urban growth boundary jumps in value because supply is limited, and continues to increase disproportionately in value as growth continues to extinguish supply. These costs must be reflected in the price of housing. Add to this price pressure, the regulatory requirements to use "green seal" materials; that is, materials that are certified, either by government or a designated non-government organization, to have been produced by methods deemed to be "sustainable." Higher taxes are another immediate, visible, and inevitable consequence of sustainable development. Higher land values automatically result in higher tax bills. Sustainable development plans include another element that affects property taxes. Invariably, these plans call for the acquisition of land for open space, for parks, for greenways, for bike-and- hike trails, for historic preservation, and many other purposes. Every piece of property taken out of the private sector by government acquisition, forces the tax burden to be distributed over fewer taxpayers. The inevitable result is a higher rate for each remaining taxpayer. Another consequence of sustainable development is the gross distortion of justice. Bureaucrats who draw lines on maps create instant wealth for some people, while prohibiting others from realizing any gain on their investments. In communities across the country, people who live outside the downtown area have lived with the expectation that one day, they could fund their retirement by selling their land to new home owners as the nearby city expanded. A line drawn on a map steals this expectation from people who live outside the urban growth boundary. Proponents of sustainable development are forced to argue that the greater good for the community is more important than negative impacts on any individual. There is no equal justice, when government arbitrarily takes value from one person and assigns it to another. Nowhere is this injustice more visible than when eminent domain is used to implement sustainable development plans. The Kelo vs. The City of New London case brought the issue to public awareness, but in cities throughout the nation, millions of people are being displaced, with no hope of finding affordable housing, in the new, "sustainable" community. In Florida, this situation is particularly acute. Retirees have flocked to Florida and settled in mobile home parks to enjoy their remaining days, living on fixed incomes, too old or infirm to think about a new income producing career. Local governments across the state are condemning these parks, and evicting the residents, in order to use the land for development that fits the comprehensive plan, and which produces a higher tax yield. These people are the victims of the "greater good," as envisioned by the proponents of sustainable development. Less visible, but no less important, is the erosion of individual freedom. Until the emergence of sustainable development, a person's home was considered to be his castle. William Pitt expressed this idea quite powerfully in Parliament in 1763, when he said:
''The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the crown. It may be frail - its roof may shake - the wind may blow through it - the storm may enter, the rain may enter - but the King of England cannot enter - all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement.'' (24)
No more. Sustainable development allows king-government to intrude into a person's home before it becomes his home, and dictate the manner and style to which the home must conform. Sustainable development forces the owner of an existing home to transform his home into a vision that is acceptable to king-government. Sustainable development is extinguishing individual freedom for the "greater good," as determined by king-government. Conclusion The question that must be asked is: will sustainable development really result in economic prosperity, environmental protection, and social equity for the current generation, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs? (25) Even in the early days of this century-long transition to sustainability, there is growing evidence that the fundamental flaws in the concept will likely produce the opposite of the desired goals. Forests that have been taken out of productive use in order to conform to the vision of sustainable development have been burned to cinders, annihilating wildlife, including species deemed to be "endangered," resulting in the opposite of "environmental protection." Government- imposed restrictions on resource use in land that is now designated "wilderness," or "buffer zones" have resulted in shortages, accompanied by rapid price increases that result in the opposite of "economic prosperity." In sustainable communities, it is the poorest of the poor who are cast out of their homes to make way for the planners' visions; these victims would not define the experience as "social equity." Detailed academic studies show that housing costs rise inevitably as sustainable development is implemented. Traffic congestion is often worsened after sustainable development measures are installed. (26) And always, private property rights and individual freedom are diminished or extinguished. Sustainable development is a concept constructed on the principle that government has the right and the responsibility to regulate the affairs of people to achieve government's vision of the greatest good for all. The United States is founded on the principle that government has no rights or responsibility not specifically granted to it by the people who are governed. These two concepts cannot long coexist. One principle, or the other, will eventually dominate. For the last 15 years, sustainable development has been on the ascendency, permeating state and local governments across the land. Only in the last few years have ordinary people begun to realize that sustainable development is a global initiative, imposed by the highest levels of government. People are just beginning to get a glimpse of the magnitude of the transformation of America that is underway.
The question that remains unanswered is: will Americans accept this new sustainable future that has been planned for them and imposed upon them?. Or, as Americans have done in the past, will they rise up in defense of their freedom, and demand that their elected officials force the bureaucrats and professionals to return to the role of serving the people who pay their salaries, by administering policies enacted only by elected officials, rather than conspiring to set the policies by which all the people must live.
-
Seek therapy.
-
My neighbors have an infowars sticker on one of their cars. They also have painted their truck with a sunrise, rainbows, and some peace related things. They have signs on their house window and gate that say private property/no solicitation, etc. I wouldnt be surprised if they have cameras around their house. One of the girls that lives there is cute. I may have to put on my Crass Anti War shirt to lure her in.
-
"The Comprehensive Planning Law was developed in response to the widely held view that state planning laws were outdated and inconsistent with the current needs of Wisconsin communities. Commonly recognized as Wisconsin's "Smart Growth" legislation, significant changes to planning-related statutes were approved through the 1999-2001 state biennial budget. Under the new law, any program or action of a town, village, city, county, or regional planning commission, after January 1, 2010, that affects land use must be guided by, and consistent with, an adopted Comprehensive Plan, s. 66. 1001, Wis. Stats." (17)
The APA's Legislative Guidebook offers several forms of the model legislation. States have considerable latitude in the legislation that is adopted. Consequently, each state's legislation may be different, and may impose different requirements on county and city governments. Regardless of the difference, however, they all contain the basic principles set forth in Agenda 21, and they all require the development of plans that result in the implementation of the recommendations contained in Agenda 21. One of the fundamental elements of all the plans requires limiting development (growth) to certain areas within the county. Planners draw lines on maps, supposedly to prevent development in "environmentally sensitive" areas, but which, in fact, are often quite arbitrary and sometimes influenced by political considerations. The value of land inside the development areas skyrockets, while the value of land outside the development areas plummets - with no hope of future appreciation. Another common element of these plans is to limit the activity that may occur within the various plan designations. In King County, Washington, for example, property owners in some parts of the county are required to leave 65% of their land unused, in its "natural" condition.
"Known as the 65-10 Rule, it calls for landowners to set aside 65 percent of their property and keep it in its natural, vegetative state. According to the rule, nothing can be built on this land, and if a tree is cut down, for example, it must be replanted. Building anything is out of the question." (18)
These plans also focus on reducing automobile use. Measures sometimes include making driving less convenient by constructing speed bumps and obstructive center diversions on residential streets, prohibiting single occupant use of certain traffic lanes, as well as a variety of extra "tax" measures for auto use. Oregon is experimenting with a mileage tax, based on miles driven. London has imposed a special tax on automobiles that enter a designated "high traffic area." Several U.S. cities are studying this idea. Santa Cruz, California's plan seeks to ban auto use in certain municipal areas. Hundreds of NGOs have popped up to form a "World Carfree Network" (19) which lobbies local officials to reduce or eliminate auto use. Alternative transportation is another common element of these plans. Light rail is a favorite, even in communities that have no hope of achieving economic viability. Proponents of sustainable development argue that even if a light rail system has to be subsidized forever, it is a bargain just to get automobiles off the streets. Bicycle paths and "Trails" are always a substantial part of sustainable community plans. Housing in sustainable communities presents special problems. Space limitations, imposed by growth boundaries, force higher densities and smaller housing units. The term "McMansions" has been coined to describe new homes that are larger than necessary, as determined by sustainable development enthusiasts. Multiple housing units are preferred over single-family structures. Since sustainable communities cannot grow horizontally, they must grow vertically - if they grow at all. These problems have produced a variety of responses. Some of the new terms that are becoming common in sustainable communities are: Limited Equity Co-ops; Resident-controlled Rentals; Co-housing; Mutual Housing; and many others. (20) Invariably, these schemes are alternatives to the conventional single-family home. Most often, these schemes vest ownership in a corporation that owns the housing units, and residents may, but not always, own shares of the corporation. Living conditions are determined, not by the individual resident, but by the corporation. Financing for the construction of these units, typically requires construction to meet "sustainable" standards, if federal money is used, either directly or indirectly, as in a mortgage guarantee. Single family homes and business structures that already exist when a community is transformed to sustainability are a special problem, since they rarely meet the criteria required by the comprehensive plan. APA's Legislative Guidebook offers a new solution for this problem: "Amortization of Non-Conforming Uses." This means that a city or county may designate a period of time in which existing structures must be brought into conformity with the new regulations.
"But for homeowners who live in a community that adopts the Guidebook's vision, the APA amortization proposal means the extinguishing, over time, of their right to occupy their houses, and without just compensation for loss of that property. How long they have before they must forfeit their homes would be completely up to the local government." (21)
Eminent domain is another tool used by government to bring their communities into compliance with the sustainable communities vision. With increasing frequency, governments have used this technique to take land, not for "public use," as required by the U.S. Constitution, but for whatever the government deems to be a "public benefit." (22) Governments may condemn and seize the private property of an individual, and then give, or sell it, to another private owner who promises to use the property in a way that satisfies the government's vision. Plans adopted at the local level can have extremely detailed requirements. It is not unusual for these plans to specify the types of vegetation that must be used for landscaping, the color of paint to be used - inside and outside the structure, and even the types of appliances and fixtures that must be used. Businesses can be required to use signs that conform in size and color to all the other signs in the neighborhood. There is virtually no limit to the restrictions that these plans may impose. These comprehensive plans are often complicated by an assortment of sub-authorities, such as Historic Districts; Conservation Districts; Economic Development Districts; Scenic Highways and Byways; Scenic Rivers and Streams; and more. These quasi-government agencies are most often created by ordinance, and populated with political appointees. They are frequently given unwarranted authority to dictate the use of private property within their jurisdiction. Individuals caught up in conflict with these agencies are often frustrated by the indifference of elected officials, and financially drained by the legal costs required to resist their dictates. In one form or another, sustainable development has reached every corner of the United States. It has impacted millions of Americans, most of whom have no idea that their particular problem is related to a global initiative launched more than 15 years ago, by the United Nations. Many, if not most of the bureaucrats at the local and state level, charged with implementing these policies, have no knowledge of their origin. What's worse, few people have considered the possible negative consequences of these policies.
Consequences of Sustainable Development What is perhaps the most serious consequence of sustainable development is the least visible: the transformation of the policy-making process. The idea that government is empowered by the consent of the governed is the idea that set the United States apart from all previous forms of government. It is the principle that unleashed individual creativity and free markets, which launched the spectacular rise of the world's most successful nation. The idea, and the process by which citizens can reject laws they don't want, simply by replacing the officials who enacted them, makes the ballot box the source of power for every citizen, and the point of accountability for every politician. When public policy is made by elected officials who are accountable to the people who are governed, then government is truly empowered by the consent of the governed. Sustainable development has designed a process through which public policy is designed by professionals and bureaucrats, and implemented administratively, with only symbolic, if any, participation by elected officials. The professionals and bureaucrats who actually make the policies are not accountable to the people who are governed by them. This is the "new collaborative decisions process," called for by the PCSD. (23) Because the policies are developed at the top, by professionals and bureaucrats, and sent down the administrative chain of command to state and local governments, elected officials have little option but to accept them. Acceptance is further ensured when these policies are accompanied by "economic incentives and disincentives," along with lobbying and public relations campaigns coordinated by government-funded non-government organizations. Higher housing costs are an immediate, visible consequence of sustainable development. Land within the urban growth boundary jumps in value because supply is limited, and continues to increase disproportionately in value as growth continues to extinguish supply. These costs must be reflected in the price of housing. Add to this price pressure, the regulatory requirements to use "green seal" materials; that is, materials that are certified, either by government or a designated non-government organization, to have been produced by methods deemed to be "sustainable." Higher taxes are another immediate, visible, and inevitable consequence of sustainable development. Higher land values automatically result in higher tax bills. Sustainable development plans include another element that affects property taxes. Invariably, these plans call for the acquisition of land for open space, for parks, for greenways, for bike-and- hike trails, for historic preservation, and many other purposes. Every piece of property taken out of the private sector by government acquisition, forces the tax burden to be distributed over fewer taxpayers. The inevitable result is a higher rate for each remaining taxpayer. Another consequence of sustainable development is the gross distortion of justice. Bureaucrats who draw lines on maps create instant wealth for some people, while prohibiting others from realizing any gain on their investments. In communities across the country, people who live outside the downtown area have lived with the expectation that one day, they could fund their retirement by selling their land to new home owners as the nearby city expanded. A line drawn on a map steals this expectation from people who live outside the urban growth boundary. Proponents of sustainable development are forced to argue that the greater good for the community is more important than negative impacts on any individual. There is no equal justice, when government arbitrarily takes value from one person and assigns it to another. Nowhere is this injustice more visible than when eminent domain is used to implement sustainable development plans. The Kelo vs. The City of New London case brought the issue to public awareness, but in cities throughout the nation, millions of people are being displaced, with no hope of finding affordable housing, in the new, "sustainable" community. In Florida, this situation is particularly acute. Retirees have flocked to Florida and settled in mobile home parks to enjoy their remaining days, living on fixed incomes, too old or infirm to think about a new income producing career. Local governments across the state are condemning these parks, and evicting the residents, in order to use the land for development that fits the comprehensive plan, and which produces a higher tax yield. These people are the victims of the "greater good," as envisioned by the proponents of sustainable development. Less visible, but no less important, is the erosion of individual freedom. Until the emergence of sustainable development, a person's home was considered to be his castle. William Pitt expressed this idea quite powerfully in Parliament in 1763, when he said:
''The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the crown. It may be frail - its roof may shake - the wind may blow through it - the storm may enter, the rain may enter - but the King of England cannot enter - all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement.'' (24)
No more. Sustainable development allows king-government to intrude into a person's home before it becomes his home, and dictate the manner and style to which the home must conform. Sustainable development forces the owner of an existing home to transform his home into a vision that is acceptable to king-government. Sustainable development is extinguishing individual freedom for the "greater good," as determined by king-government. Conclusion The question that must be asked is: will sustainable development really result in economic prosperity, environmental protection, and social equity for the current generation, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs? (25) Even in the early days of this century-long transition to sustainability, there is growing evidence that the fundamental flaws in the concept will likely produce the opposite of the desired goals. Forests that have been taken out of productive use in order to conform to the vision of sustainable development have been burned to cinders, annihilating wildlife, including species deemed to be "endangered," resulting in the opposite of "environmental protection." Government- imposed restrictions on resource use in land that is now designated "wilderness," or "buffer zones" have resulted in shortages, accompanied by rapid price increases that result in the opposite of "economic prosperity." In sustainable communities, it is the poorest of the poor who are cast out of their homes to make way for the planners' visions; these victims would not define the experience as "social equity." Detailed academic studies show that housing costs rise inevitably as sustainable development is implemented. Traffic congestion is often worsened after sustainable development measures are installed. (26) And always, private property rights and individual freedom are diminished or extinguished. Sustainable development is a concept constructed on the principle that government has the right and the responsibility to regulate the affairs of people to achieve government's vision of the greatest good for all. The United States is founded on the principle that government has no rights or responsibility not specifically granted to it by the people who are governed. These two concepts cannot long coexist. One principle, or the other, will eventually dominate. For the last 15 years, sustainable development has been on the ascendency, permeating state and local governments across the land. Only in the last few years have ordinary people begun to realize that sustainable development is a global initiative, imposed by the highest levels of government. People are just beginning to get a glimpse of the magnitude of the transformation of America that is underway.
The question that remains unanswered is: will Americans accept this new sustainable future that has been planned for them and imposed upon them?. Or, as Americans have done in the past, will they rise up in defense of their freedom, and demand that their elected officials force the bureaucrats and professionals to return to the role of serving the people who pay their salaries, by administering policies enacted only by elected officials, rather than conspiring to set the policies by which all the people must live.
The question is that are we gonna be selfish and try to keep our lifestyle and let the rest of the world pay for it or can we accept the the fact that our lives will have to change in order to save the planet from burning out. Sure it will limit our freedom, but if we continue the way we do now, the prices will go up, and it will make the poor people even poorer and the rich even richer.
I didn't read more than the last paragraph so i don't really know what you're saying, but i give up since you seem to have way more enthusiasm to think about this than what i do.
-
I thought this was just going to be a short discussion about the graphic, and it ended up being blown way out of proportion.
Disappointment has been achieved. Thanks, SLAP.
-
Expand Quote
You went in! I liked the part where you said you suck middle aged mens' tiny penises because nobody else will.
I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LAnmnS0-9g#)
I spent enough time lurking before bothering to register recently and learned how things work here. I didn't roll into this mess blind, gotta be ready to fight idiocy with even better idiocy when the need arises, it usually puts dopes like BKPL to bed so that the grown ups can talk a bit more without the kids interrupting.
'Fighting Idiocy' huh? This is not an adult discussion. This is a group of market-fundamentalists rejecting all logical and rational argument because it doesn't fit their fairy tale narrative. Get off your high horse, faggot.
-
My neighbors have an infowars sticker on one of their cars. They also have painted their truck with a sunrise, rainbows, and some peace related things. They have signs on their house window and gate that say private property/no solicitation, etc. I wouldnt be surprised if they have cameras around their house. One of the girls that lives there is cute. I may have to put on my Crass Anti War shirt to lure her in.
Fight war not wars, but I'm gonna lay my patriot missie all up in dat ass.
-
skateboarding is such a good reflection and extension of someones personality but in my personal opinion this is a little unsettling. but to each there own. alien workshop is one of those companies with a lot of money and most certainly does not need any of mine. this collaboration is a little awkward. i will continue to buy from magenta, hopps, and politic. i like those collaborations that skateboard companies do when they put a deserving dudes name on a skateboard and then you buy it because you back that dude, not with some political bullshit
-
skateboarding is such a good reflection and extension of someones personality but in my personal opinion this is a little unsettling. but to each there own. alien workshop is one of those companies with a lot of money and most certainly does not need any of mine. this collaboration is a little awkward. i will continue to buy from magenta, hopps, and politic. i like those collaborations that skateboard companies do when they put a deserving dudes name on a skateboard and then you buy it because you back that dude, not with some political bullshit
I agree with you, though I do not buy Magenta, Hopps, Politic, etc. I'll stick with my non-propaganda for some political website REAL boards.
-
Alex Jones fans: people who care so much about politics and their community that they insult others for not believing what they believe while doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to deal with issues they think are important or do anything positive for their community. Alex Jones is an excuse for actual apathy while deluding yourself into thinking you know more than anybody.
I saw a poll listed on the RT website about American opinions on gun control. It didn't follow the Alex Jones narrative. On facebook, it was literally hundreds of Alex Jones nitwits telling people to unsubscribe to the independent news site because it didn't follow what Jones was saying.
Alex Jones fans are cult members, they believe things that agree with the messages Alex Jones sends them, but as soon as it becomes critical of him or any of his points, its propaganda. The sad thing is, those idiots don't even recognize it despite their obsession with thinking they are the only ones with their eyes wide open.
Oh, and acknowledging the president is black isn't racist. Saying "Oh everything should be totally perfect now because there is a black president" is incredibly racist and implies that if it were up to you, a cracker would be in their fixing things. You emphasized race, you didn't just mention it.
What a pathetic cult. Far more creepy than Bohemian grove, which Nixon described as "the most faggy goddamned thing you could ever imagine"
-
It may have been sarcasm though. That's how I read the comment initially anyway. Kind of like how racism is now over.
-
Alex Jones fans: people who care so much about politics and their community that they insult others for not believing what they believe while doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to deal with issues they think are important or do anything positive for their community. Alex Jones is an excuse for actual apathy while deluding yourself into thinking you know more than anybody.
I saw a poll listed on the RT website about American opinions on gun control. It didn't follow the Alex Jones narrative. On facebook, it was literally hundreds of Alex Jones nitwits telling people to unsubscribe to the independent news site because it didn't follow what Jones was saying.
Alex Jones fans are cult members, they believe things that agree with the messages Alex Jones sends them, but as soon as it becomes critical of him or any of his points, its propaganda. The sad thing is, those idiots don't even recognize it despite their obsession with thinking they are the only ones with their eyes wide open.
Oh, and acknowledging the president is black isn't racist. Saying "Oh everything should be totally perfect now because there is a black president" is incredibly racist and implies that if it were up to you, a cracker would be in their fixing things. You emphasized race, you didn't just mention it.
What a pathetic cult. Far more creepy than Bohemian grove, which Nixon described as "the most faggy goddamned thing you could ever imagine"
Just to be clear, RT is funded by the Federal budget of Russia through the Federal Agency on Press and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation.
That's an amusing inference you made about his fans doing nothing positive for the community.
Funny you brought up Bohemian Grove, I just found out from a wine distributor that a Wine i make with my brother-in-law is going to be served at next July's Bohemian Grove Club encampment.
Also, in his memoirs, Richard Nixon amplified the importance of his membership in the Bohemian Club:
"If I were to choose the speech that gave me the most pleasure and satisfaction in my political career, it would be my Lakeside Speech at the Bohemian Grove in July, 1967. Because this speech traditionally was off the record, it received no publicity at the time. But in many important ways it marked the first milestone on my road to the presidency. [Emphasis added.]
It was an emotional assignment for me and also an unparalleled opportunity to reach some of the most important and influential men?"
-
^ The clarity of a person's writing reflects the clarity of his thinking. Both of yours are diarrhea. Aggressively so. God help us.
-
'Fighting Idiocy' huh? This is not an adult discussion. This is a group of market-fundamentalists rejecting all logical and rational argument because it doesn't fit their fairy tale narrative. Get off your high horse, faggot.
And, the head moonbat comes out to play!
No, it lost the ability to become an "adult conversation" once the bleeding hearts who trust the powers that be decided that the only thing they could do is call me a "faggot" because they live in a delusional world where they actually think being buttfucked by the government is equal to being cared for. All you have to thrown out is your half-baked notion that anyone who is distrustful of the existing system and wants to consider that maybe, just maybe, it's a system that looks out for itself at the expense of the citizens, is some sort of tinfoil hat kook. And that CERTAINLY proves you're "in the know", because anyone who doesn't gobble the media's semen must be a loon.
Can I buy you a gallon sized tub of anal lube for your birthday? You seem to be complacent in getting fucked, may as well grease up.
-
Expand Quote
'Fighting Idiocy' huh? This is not an adult discussion. This is a group of market-fundamentalists rejecting all logical and rational argument because it doesn't fit their fairy tale narrative. Get off your high horse, faggot.
And, the head moonbat comes out to play!
No, it lost the ability to become an "adult conversation" once the bleeding hearts who trust the powers that be decided that the only thing they could do is call me a "faggot" because they live in a delusional world where they actually think being buttfucked by the government is equal to being cared for. All you have to thrown out is your half-baked notion that anyone who is distrustful of the existing system and wants to consider that maybe, just maybe, it's a system that looks out for itself at the expense of the citizens, is some sort of tinfoil hat kook. And that CERTAINLY proves you're "in the know", because anyone who doesn't gobble the media's semen must be a loon.
Can I buy you a gallon sized tub of anal lube for your birthday? You seem to be complacent in getting fucked, may as well grease up.
You sound like you might enjoy living in Somalia, they haven't had a government for at least 20 years.
-
You sound like you might enjoy living in Somalia, they haven't had a government for at least 20 years.
Where on earth do you get the idea that, because I'm unhappy with the current "both parties are the same" system that I'm anything remotely pro-anarchy? Don't overthink things, because then you come up with incorrect assumptions like that.
I simply believe that the current shitty 2 party system has grown too big for its britches. It's now a complex that takes care of itself at all costs, and will feed itself before it feeds the masses. Not that I believe people are entitled to much of anything - no great civilization was built on entitlements, rather, entitlements and complacency have caused civilizations to collapse on themselves as the people care less about governance and more about entertainment and distraction. I just want to see more people wake up to the reality of the system being shitty regardless of whether you vote to the right or to the left, and that it's time the people get mad about being lied to and actually hold their elected officials accountable for their actions. They do the opposite of what they say? Vote 'em the fuck out, just as people should have voted out Obama. Fuck, the man publicly stated "If I don't do what I say I will do in my first term, then you shouldn't re-elect me for a 2nd term." We still have shitloads of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan despite the promises he made. Guantanamo is still open for business despite his promises. Unemployment has stayed hovering at the same place despite promises. I mean, how much more clear does it get that we're fed piles of steaming shit just to get our votes, then, there's no real concern to perform because you can just claim the "other side" keeps blocking your efforts. Isn't it funny, though, that somehow these things didn't get done when Obama had full control of house and senate and could have passed anything he wanted? And yet, the walking fucking dead voted him in again. There's no explanation why people didn't do what he said and vote him out for someone who WOULD do the things he promised that so many voted him in for in the first place. There's only two answers - either people voted for him on color, or, they were voting "team sports" style of us-vs-them and foolishly voted on silly party allegiances, neither of which show intelligence or concern for making things better.
This is what I can't stand. We have SO much information at our fingertips, and can easily find out when bullshit truly is bullshit. But instead, we scream at the "other side" and blame them for everything while giving the elected officials a free pass to keep on fucking us over. Hence my love for the "Divide and conquer" deck because it's true - we've been divided, and we're on the verge of being conquered if we don't finally start trying to change the course we're on. Do you REALLY think that things as they are will get us out of the mess we're in? Do you REALLY think that printing up a goddamned trillion dollar coin and depositing it in the treasury will magically fix our debt as was recently discussed? Do you REALLY think that trampling the constitution is magically going to solve our problems?
I know you obviously have some issues with what I'm saying here, but let me ask, what the fuck do YOU think needs to be done? Shit's getting more fucked every year, so tell me, why aren't you more upset?
-
Expand Quote
You sound like you might enjoy living in Somalia, they haven't had a government for at least 20 years.
Where on earth do you get the idea that, because I'm unhappy with the current "both parties are the same" system that I'm anything remotely pro-anarchy? Don't overthink things, because then you come up with incorrect assumptions like that.
I simply believe that the current shitty 2 party system has grown too big for its britches. It's now a complex that takes care of itself at all costs, and will feed itself before it feeds the masses. Not that I believe people are entitled to much of anything - no great civilization was built on entitlements, rather, entitlements and complacency have caused civilizations to collapse on themselves as the people care less about governance and more about entertainment and distraction. I just want to see more people wake up to the reality of the system being shitty regardless of whether you vote to the right or to the left, and that it's time the people get mad about being lied to and actually hold their elected officials accountable for their actions. They do the opposite of what they say? Vote 'em the fuck out, just as people should have voted out Obama. Fuck, the man publicly stated "If I don't do what I say I will do in my first term, then you shouldn't re-elect me for a 2nd term." We still have shitloads of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan despite the promises he made. Guantanamo is still open for business despite his promises. Unemployment has stayed hovering at the same place despite promises. I mean, how much more clear does it get that we're fed piles of steaming shit just to get our votes, then, there's no real concern to perform because you can just claim the "other side" keeps blocking your efforts. Isn't it funny, though, that somehow these things didn't get done when Obama had full control of house and senate and could have passed anything he wanted? And yet, the walking fucking dead voted him in again. There's no explanation why people didn't do what he said and vote him out for someone who WOULD do the things he promised that so many voted him in for in the first place. There's only two answers - either people voted for him on color, or, they were voting "team sports" style of us-vs-them and foolishly voted on silly party allegiances, neither of which show intelligence or concern for making things better.
This is what I can't stand. We have SO much information at our fingertips, and can easily find out when bullshit truly is bullshit. But instead, we scream at the "other side" and blame them for everything while giving the elected officials a free pass to keep on fucking us over. Hence my love for the "Divide and conquer" deck because it's true - we've been divided, and we're on the verge of being conquered if we don't finally start trying to change the course we're on. Do you REALLY think that things as they are will get us out of the mess we're in? Do you REALLY think that printing up a goddamned trillion dollar coin and depositing it in the treasury will magically fix our debt as was recently discussed? Do you REALLY think that trampling the constitution is magically going to solve our problems?
I know you obviously have some issues with what I'm saying here, but let me ask, what the fuck do YOU think needs to be done? Shit's getting more fucked every year, so tell me, why aren't you more upset?
Indeed you do.
What made me think that you'd enjoy living in a place with no functioning government?(Let's be honest, you probably think our current government is non functioning.) Oh I don't know, maybe the paragraphs you have been posting stating how we're all being fucked in the ass by "the powers that be." Your love of Ayn Rand. Comments like "Government is too big for it's britches."
-
The only thing i have to say in this thread is that the graphic was not made for infowars, it was an election graphic and a pretty good one at that. It got overlooked and the collabo just gets the graphics more exposure to people who would be interested in them. Seems like it worked considering this thread. I don't think theres anything wrong with political graphics or saying something. Some people are into it, some people aren't. No one is forcing you to buy it.
-
THIS IS FOR REAL New!! Victor Garibay (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RX9LmfSbqc#ws)
-
(http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo262/zacchil82/Alieninfoshake_zps8056e99a.jpg)
-
Alex Jones from Waking Life (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJXspT2VtOE#)
This is the only time alex jones has made any sense to me
too bad this is the only time he's ever got fired up over a "real thing"
-
he's still fired up about the exact same thing
-
I love watching Alex Jones do his screaming buffoon character. It's so fucking funny.
It's kind of a bummer that I know people who actually get a large part of their news from him, but it's worth the entertainment value.
Alex Jones becomes a Super Saiyan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhqUk28OwHs#)
-
We Fucking Multiply!- Dystopia
-
Wow just bumping this so a few people can eat their hats when it comes to talking away ultra right fascists and the threat they pose. The lengths people go to in this thread to argue that Infowars and Alex Jones aren't essentially the Proud Boys breeding ground is mind blowing. Fast forward 9 years and an assault on the capitol and the one positive I can take away from this is that finding out about this collab has cured me of my nostalgia for the days before the Sect's unravelling. Although on the other hand it's insane to think the guys responsible for creating these decks haven't been ostracised from the community. And does it mean the riders I look(ed) up to from that era like Heath and Jake Johnson were OK with this?!
-
Alex Jones is so disturbing. The way he rallied for the sandy hook hoax thing is morally wrong. Alien workshop should never had made this collabo.
-
Wow, that board fuckin sucks. Wild i've seen it till now!
-
Damn and I thought Primitive x Dragon Ball Z was bad
-
Damn and I thought Primitive x Dragon Ball Z was bad
-
Wow just bumping this so a few people can eat their hats when it comes to talking away ultra right fascists and the threat they pose. The lengths people go to in this threat to argue that Infowars and Alex Jones aren't essentially the Proud Boys breeding ground is mind blowing. Fast forward 9 years and an asdault on the capitol and the one positive I can take away from this is that finding out about this collab has cured me of my nostalgia for the days before the Sect's unravelling. Although on the other hand it's insane to think the guys responsible for creating these decks haven't been ostracised from the community. And does it mean the riders I look(ed) up to from that era like Heath and Jake Johnson were OK with this?!
Lol wtf, never saw this board.
For anyone who this deck's broader political message appeals to, please don't settle for conspiracy theory brain rot. Do a little bit of reading about the system that is fucking you on a daily basis instead:
https://www.leftvoice.org/bourgeois-democracy-what-do-marxists-mean-by-that-term/
-
Whole shit been trash since they told pluhowski he was too old to ever go pro, when he was 24.
Bring back the collabs with that dog Meatball or whatever dog dill complained about/ said was the final straw..then left to make an FA board with tyshawns head turning into the same breed of dog.
Free max b
-
Whole shit been trash since they told pluhowski he was too old to ever go pro, when he was 24.
Bring back the collabs with that dog Meatball or whatever dog dill complained about/ said was the final straw..then left to make an FA board with tyshawns head turning into the same breed of dog.
Free max b
Truth
-
A lot of the takes in this thread were pretty bad 9 years ago, but holy fuck did they age poorly.
-
I appreciate Alien Workshop. They’ve got great, intelligent art direction. Not to mention great wood, shapes, and team. It probably just goes over most people’s heads. Kinda funny that people are getting butt hurt over it.
https://youtu.be/hMyMAT5-3UE (https://youtu.be/hMyMAT5-3UE)
-
Memory Screen? Photosynthesis? Mind Field? that Cinematographer edit? they get a forever pass for pulling together the teams and artists they did.
i'll say it again -- carter/hill/castrucci = lifetime pass. they can make rob/big and alex jones boards from now til 2070 and it won't undo what they did
-
So who of the carter Hill castrucci triangle sympathizes with the ultra right then?
Also Cinematographer Project was Benny Magliano
-
damn i would skate this
you wouldn’t skate this? i wouldn’t pay money for it but this is a wild collab. can we get an epoch times collab on a metal board?
-
So who of the carter Hill castrucci triangle sympathizes with the ultra right then?
Also Cinematographer Project was Benny Magliano
Get a time machine, set for 2013, and ask them
-
I appreciate Alien Workshop. They’ve got great, intelligent art direction. Not to mention great wood, shapes, and team. It probably just goes over most people’s heads. Kinda funny that people are getting butt hurt over it.
https://youtu.be/hMyMAT5-3UE (https://youtu.be/hMyMAT5-3UE)
this edit is so good i almost cried just now watching it
-
This thread reminded me that I forgot to grab the Kim Jong Un joint Jenkem put our a little while back
https://shop.jenkemmag.com/collections/all/products/fuct-x-jenkem-deck
-
I never really developed any romantic fillin for this brand.
I liked the skateboarding but I was buying mainly Guy boards my whole life.
Kline Lee
I definitely never would fuck with anything political in skateboarding besides stickers.
This graphic is shit and is no where close to anything I believe in.
-
This thread reminded me that I forgot to grab the Kim Jong Un joint Jenkem put our a little while back
https://shop.jenkemmag.com/collections/all/products/fuct-x-jenkem-deck
erik brunetti became such a dork, his ig stories is like scrolling through a maga-head boomer uncle’s facebook. totally ruined any sort of fondness i had for fuct.
-
Expand Quote
This thread reminded me that I forgot to grab the Kim Jong Un joint Jenkem put our a little while back
https://shop.jenkemmag.com/collections/all/products/fuct-x-jenkem-deck
Fuct has always been wack. It came off as tryhard even in the early 90’s.
-
Wow just bumping this so a few people can eat their hats when it comes to talking away ultra right fascists and the threat they pose. The lengths people go to in this thread to argue that Infowars and Alex Jones aren't essentially the Proud Boys breeding ground is mind blowing. Fast forward 9 years and an assault on the capitol and the one positive I can take away from this is that finding out about this collab has cured me of my nostalgia for the days before the Sect's unravelling. Although on the other hand it's insane to think the guys responsible for creating these decks haven't been ostracised from the community. And does it mean the riders I look(ed) up to from that era like Heath and Jake Johnson were OK with this?!
The fuck you searching for that made you find this thread? Info wars skateboard? Kinda suspect… :-X
-
I don’t really think most people knew how dangerous Alex Jones’ reach would become at that point (Jan 2013), but, you know, go off king.
-
Expand Quote
Wow just bumping this so a few people can eat their hats when it comes to talking away ultra right fascists and the threat they pose. The lengths people go to in this thread to argue that Infowars and Alex Jones aren't essentially the Proud Boys breeding ground is mind blowing. Fast forward 9 years and an assault on the capitol and the one positive I can take away from this is that finding out about this collab has cured me of my nostalgia for the days before the Sect's unravelling. Although on the other hand it's insane to think the guys responsible for creating these decks haven't been ostracised from the community. And does it mean the riders I look(ed) up to from that era like Heath and Jake Johnson were OK with this?!
The fuck you searching for that made you find this thread? Info wars skateboard? Kinda suspect… :-X
Actually a really good article: https://thebaffler.com/outbursts/a-crime-and-a-pastime-ohaver
Another thing the article made me find out that's really cringe is Jordan Peterson likes skateboarders.
-
I don’t really think most people knew how dangerous Alex Jones’ reach would become at that point (Jan 2013), but, you know, go off king.
While I didn't know he would peek his head into the mainstream and have a future president on his show... It was widely known that he had dangerous/hateful views and that he was pushing them on an impressionable audience of people, many of which suffer from serious mental health issues like paranoia/schizophrenia.
SecularTalk (Kyle Kulinski) got his start making content pushing back against Alex Jones. InfoWars has always had concerning far-right extremists on.
Clicking on the first video that popped up when I searched "2013 Secular Talk Alex Jones":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWpoupuztkQ
Hmm... who is Larry Pratt?
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/larry-pratt
From this page:
Larry Pratt stands at the intersection of guns and Jesus, lobbying for absolutely unrestricted distribution of firearms while advocating a theocratic society based upon Old Testament civil and religious laws. A pivotal figure in the rise of right-wing militia, or “Patriot,” groups, he spoke at the notorious 1992 “Gathering of Christian Men” in Estes Park, Colo., where 160 neo-Nazis, Klan members, anti-Semitic Christian Identity adherents and others arguably laid the groundwork for the militia movement that would explode in 1994. He believes that white Christians must arm themselves for self-protection in the inevitable social implosions and riots that are soon to come.
Later on...
The gathering was organized by the late Pete Peters, a pastor of Christian Identity, which posits that Jews are biological descendants of Satan and people of color are subhuman. Among the 160 Estes Park attendees were Aryan Nations leader Richard G. Butler and former Aryan “ambassador” and Ku Klux Klan leader Louis Beam.
I didn't pick and choose, it was literally the first video that popped up with that search.
I'm not posting this to call you out, but to inform. I don't see the need for the condescending "go off king". Its okay if you didn't know he was all about at that time, but many of us did.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
This thread reminded me that I forgot to grab the Kim Jong Un joint Jenkem put our a little while back
https://shop.jenkemmag.com/collections/all/products/fuct-x-jenkem-deck
Fuct has always been wack. It came off as tryhard even in the early 90’s.
Pretty true
-
Wow just bumping this so a few people can eat their hats when it comes to talking away ultra right fascists and the threat they pose. The lengths people go to in this thread to argue that Infowars and Alex Jones aren't essentially the Proud Boys breeding ground is mind blowing. Fast forward 9 years and an assault on the capitol and the one positive I can take away from this is that finding out about this collab has cured me of my nostalgia for the days before the Sect's unravelling. Although on the other hand it's insane to think the guys responsible for creating these decks haven't been ostracised from the community. And does it mean the riders I look(ed) up to from that era like Heath and Jake Johnson were OK with this?!
No offense but necro'ing this so you can try to use the power of hindsight to dunk on shit people said 9 years ago is probably the most cringeworthy thing I've seen in the entire thread.
-
Expand Quote
Wow just bumping this so a few people can eat their hats when it comes to talking away ultra right fascists and the threat they pose. The lengths people go to in this thread to argue that Infowars and Alex Jones aren't essentially the Proud Boys breeding ground is mind blowing. Fast forward 9 years and an assault on the capitol and the one positive I can take away from this is that finding out about this collab has cured me of my nostalgia for the days before the Sect's unravelling. Although on the other hand it's insane to think the guys responsible for creating these decks haven't been ostracised from the community. And does it mean the riders I look(ed) up to from that era like Heath and Jake Johnson were OK with this?!
No offense but necro'ing this so you can try to use the power of hindsight to dunk on shit people said 9 years ago is probably the most cringeworthy thing I've seen in the entire thread.
No one could have predicted this in 2013 or trumps presidency until he got elected in 2016. During the process of his presidency, Trumps patronizing and lying ass gaslit all the republicans and hate groups to come out of the woodwork and expose their dumbasses to riot and loot the capitol. Trumps last horrah until he is fully and legally cancelled in the history books i hope..
-
the capital was “attacked” by mower dads who just took live streams of themselves hitting the dab on AOC’s desk or whatever
-
Literally everybody over here in Europe saw this coming. You donuts still on your apologetics game after your country nearly turned into the next 1930s Germany really takes the cake.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Wow just bumping this so a few people can eat their hats when it comes to talking away ultra right fascists and the threat they pose. The lengths people go to in this thread to argue that Infowars and Alex Jones aren't essentially the Proud Boys breeding ground is mind blowing. Fast forward 9 years and an assault on the capitol and the one positive I can take away from this is that finding out about this collab has cured me of my nostalgia for the days before the Sect's unravelling. Although on the other hand it's insane to think the guys responsible for creating these decks haven't been ostracised from the community. And does it mean the riders I look(ed) up to from that era like Heath and Jake Johnson were OK with this?!
No offense but necro'ing this so you can try to use the power of hindsight to dunk on shit people said 9 years ago is probably the most cringeworthy thing I've seen in the entire thread.
No one could have predicted this in 2013 or trumps presidency until he got elected in 2016. During the process of his presidency, Trumps patronizing and lying ass gaslit all the republicans and hate groups to come out of the woodwork and expose their dumbasses to riot and loot the capitol. Trumps last horrah until he is fully and legally cancelled in the history books i hope..
(https://i.ibb.co/VmZwxgZ/HIFt.gif) (https://ibb.co/X8gYD7g)
-
Literally everybody over here in Europe saw this coming. You donuts still on your apologetics game after your country nearly turned into the next 1930s Germany really takes the cake.
eurozone cowards can keep their opinions to themselves
-
Literally everybody over here in Europe saw this coming. You donuts still on your apologetics game after your country nearly turned into the next 1930s Germany really takes the cake.
I wouldn't count our chickens before they hatch. We are an economic depression away from SOMETHING happening. Probably something really bad.
-
this reminded me of the antihero david dees style boards
(https://www.saltypeaks.com/pi/268/Anti-Hero-Paranoid-Trujillo-Skateboard-Deck-8-62.jpg)
(https://www.saltypeaks.com/pi/267/Anti-Hero-Paranoid-Hewitt-Skateboard-Deck-8-28.jpg)
(https://cdn3.volusion.com/pgnrb.yxsdo/v/vspfiles/photos/610-059-0500-2.jpg)
pretty good but real david dees art is way funnier
-
the capital was “attacked” by mower dads who just took live streams of themselves hitting the dab on AOC’s desk or whatever
That’s called misdirection.
Probably told Cooter and his Groop Kooks he’d make them all the new Political Guard if they got this and that done.
Sit and wait it ain’t over yet.
20-30 years from now after the people got full control of the government well know exactly what actually happened beneath the surface of this Culture war they orchestrated.
I’m no sheep. I know what they do with they power
Ima go complain about it in not stoked on rn.
-
If you just put a sticker over the info wars part it's actually an awesome graphic
-
If you just put a sticker over the info wars part it's actually an awesome graphic
Trucks and a Spitfire big head or Venture Awake stickers on each side and you’re good.
-
To those saying we shouldn't apply modern perspective to criticize our past: this was only 9 years ago. I read the first page of this thread without realizing it was from 2013.
It's one thing to give Teddy Roosevelt a hard time for shooting elephants 100 years ago since most people now would agree that it's a shitty thing to do. The difference is that there's probably even MORE people agreeing with Alex Jones now than there were 9 years ago.
-
nah fuck teddy roosevelt's racist ass too
For the record, fuck Teddy Roosevelt.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
This thread reminded me that I forgot to grab the Kim Jong Un joint Jenkem put our a little while back
https://shop.jenkemmag.com/collections/all/products/fuct-x-jenkem-deck
Fuct has always been wack. It came off as tryhard even in the early 90’s.
Pretty true
I love Fuct and I still rep it, I think for the fact it was maybe the first “streetwear” tshirt I had as a kid and I have fond memories… I also just love the whole 90’s vibes in general and what the brand represented for streetwear as a whole (as a fan).
But I have to agree that Erik comes of as an idiot on social media and it bums me out. :-\ I do look at him as the senile uncle and try to ignore it… At least he’s been kinda silent lately and I wish he stays like that.
-
Fuct will always be lame
-
well this is disappointing to learn
-
(https://i.ibb.co/BVXwsf2/st-small-507x507-pad-600x600-f8f8f8.jpg) (https://ibb.co/jvcH48k)
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
This thread reminded me that I forgot to grab the Kim Jong Un joint Jenkem put our a little while back
https://shop.jenkemmag.com/collections/all/products/fuct-x-jenkem-deck
Fuct has always been wack. It came off as tryhard even in the early 90’s.
Word, Fuct was corny from the get go