RE: Gun control - FAIL

RE: Gun control - FAIL (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

thompsonx -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 10:19:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: Ok. Glad to be helpful. However, IMHO the choice was never between the Shah and the fundamentalists. First it was between the Shah and "something else", and then it was between the western-oriented, the communists and the fundamentalists. I really recommend you "Persepolis". Best regards. Intellectually you are right. But I was working at NSA at the time and with what we saw there were only the two realistic possibilities. It would seem that your goal is world domination by the u.s. Why? Where is that mission statement in the constitution or any other document of the founding of our nation?

thompsonx -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 10:25:24 AM)
quote: Having said all that, I do not advocate it, I am just making a point. Your post contradicts any point you may have thought you made..

DomKen -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 10:29:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: The Shah was ging to be over thrown unless we sent in the Marines. His government collapsed due to endemic corruption and the people hated it. It was previous adminstrations that encouraged the Shah to brutally oppress the people of Iran that made the Iranian Revolution inevitable. Carter was simply the President in office when it finally fell apart, as all the US installed dictatorships eventually did. Leftest montra If they are U S allies anything will be an improvement. If they hate the U S any change will only make things worse. Did the Shah's secret police brutally supress all dissent? Yes. Was the Shah's government so corrupt it failed to routinely provide services to the populace? Yes. Was this supported and encouraged by every President from Ike to Carter? Yes. Could Carter have saved the Shah short of sending in troops? No. So what wasn't factual?

thompsonx -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 10:50:45 AM)
quote: If it is fraud, then perhaps there should be a lawsuit? Isn't that why we have "truth in advertising" laws? False advertising, in the most blatant of contexts, is illegal in most countries. However, advertisers still find ways to deceive consumers in ways that are legal, or technically illegal but unenforceable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising Your concern for the consumer seems less than genuine.

Focus50 -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 3:47:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 So I have to say it is just one more case of the consumer saying, 'fuck, I know it is bad but it tastes good, so fuck it anyways.' I know that's how I felt back when I was a smoker. Freedom of choice meets quality of life - with the latter having nothing to do with what's actually good or healthy for you. Though I'd add that, unlike the smoker, a personal choice to drink that soda does not impact on the health and comfort of those in the vicinity. My next-door neighbour's a Vietnam vet. Got all manner of health issues, esp skin cancers (NOT from Agent Orange or the like but - the govt says so). Last year, he had about his 3rd heart attack and was in hospital for nearly 2 weeks. About a week after he was discharged, I saw him at a local outdoors café enjoying a ciggy in one hand while scoffing a meat pie with the other. I thought, "that's pretty good". That the bloke's not caring about any "long haul" so much as enjoying the ride in his way. Trying to legislate a healthier lifestyle would likely achieve the opposite re personal freedoms and quality of life. In Oz, our drinking water has been treated with fluoride for decades, now, and you can see a big difference in the teeth of kids now as opposed to when I was one. So, as ever, small degrees of change as opposed to whatever the current bandwagon advocates. Nothing at all with the US 2nd and guns, of course, no body count would justify change or the NEED for change there. Quality of life is about the living.... One thing our respective governments do seem to have in common - that government of, by and for the people isn't what drives policy decisions - not in practise. Focus.

dcnovice -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 4:09:51 PM)
FR [image]http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/65/6592/JQM2100Z/posters/j-b-handelsman-mr-speaker-will-the-gentleman-from-small-firearms-yield-the-floor-to-th-new-yorker-cartoon.jpg[/image]

DesideriScuri -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 9:53:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: If it is fraud, then perhaps there should be a lawsuit? Isn't that why we have "truth in advertising" laws? False advertising, in the most blatant of contexts, is illegal in most countries. However, advertisers still find ways to deceive consumers in ways that are legal, or technically illegal but unenforceable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising Your concern for the consumer seems less than genuine. My concern for the consumer? You are saying that the consumer is too stupid to be able to determine if something is healthy for them or not. I'm saying they can, and that they can drink whatever soft drink they want to and in whatever quantity they want. And, you have yet to show where Big Cola has committed any fraud.

thompsonx -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/28/2013 5:57:46 AM)
quote: No denial of the claim, then? You made the assertion that they were perpetrating fraud. I asked you to prove it. You didn't. You won't. What would that seem to indicate? That you are full of shit. That the soft drink peddlers have failed to disclose any and all negative aspects of their product is prima facia evidence that they have not given the consumer full disclosure...oh yes they have complied with the letter of the labeling law which they helped write. Failure to rovide full disclosure prevents the consumer from making a fully informed decission...this is called fraud. For you not to recognize that is a pretty good indication that you do not wish to see that. You do realize that personal attacks are against the tos.

VideoAdminChi -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/28/2013 3:54:08 PM)
FR, Locked for review.

VideoAdminChi -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (5/2/2013 8:40:23 AM)
Unlocked. A number of posts that made other posters the topic were removed, as were posts that quoted or replied to them. If your content is still relevant and you would like it back to repost, please write to me. Please stick to the topic and do not make other posters the topic.

BamaD -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (5/2/2013 10:34:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: The Shah was ging to be over thrown unless we sent in the Marines. His government collapsed due to endemic corruption and the people hated it. It was previous adminstrations that encouraged the Shah to brutally oppress the people of Iran that made the Iranian Revolution inevitable. Carter was simply the President in office when it finally fell apart, as all the US installed dictatorships eventually did. Leftest montra If they are U S allies anything will be an improvement. If they hate the U S any change will only make things worse. Did the Shah's secret police brutally supress all dissent? Yes. Was the Shah's government so corrupt it failed to routinely provide services to the populace? Yes. Was this supported and encouraged by every President from Ike to Carter? Yes. Could Carter have saved the Shah short of sending in troops? No. So what wasn't factual? Did I ever say the Shah was a good guy? no Did I ever say his government was good for the people? no Did I say he was usefull to us? sort of Did I say that Carter should have seen to it the Shah staid in power? no All I said was that he should not have greaessed the wheels for the most anti American and repressive group avaliable. Saying that the Ayatolla was worse than the Shah in no way evenimplies that the Shah was a good guy or that I would condider him a "friend" just that the fundementalists were even worse.

SpanishMatMaster -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (5/3/2013 12:28:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Intellectually you are right. But I was working at NSA at the time and with what we saw there were only the two realistic possibilities. That is probably part of the problem. That you guys did not see other realistic possibilities.

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 8 [9]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125