RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (Full Version)

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



Message


BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 6:33:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

I am a few ' phobes' I guess Bama...................Daeshophobe (now there's a new one for ya !!!) simbaophobe, (West Africa), fundamentalistophobe, (whatever religion they are), priestophobe (ditto), fanaticophobe, and to come the full circle, phobophobe *LOL*................which I guess means that I should dislike myself to the point of phobia..........................gods, I am beginning to sound like one of those half-wits I have on 'hide' *LOL*

Except you are being silly on purpose.




thompsonx -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 6:36:56 PM)

ORIGINAL: BamaD
ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

The Japanese have long memories Bama and they don't take insults easily. And yes, America gradually cut off Japan's access to raw materials until they were virtually being starved of anything useful to them. At the same time, Japan was gradually being taken over by a very far right-wing government who saw everything as an insult and a matter of honour. A recipe for blood and disaster.


Yes they do, we didn't understand the Japanese and they didn't understand they were kicking a sleeping grizzly.

What exactly did that "sleeping grizzly" do when awakened?



We had a choice, starve them of the raw materials or facilitate their conquest of China.

Why would amerika care what the japanese did to the chinese or vice versa?



We pushed them as far as we could with out fighting them, Roosevelt bluffed a lot and they called his bluff.

Perhaps when they realized that they only had two years of oil in their stash. When that was gone there would be no stoping anyone from waltzing in and taking over. You cannot fight if you have no fuel.

Also, as you know they would have declared war one hour before the attacks but none of thier typists had the clearance, ever seen a diplomat type?

Where do you conjur up this shit??? Oh wait let me guess. You graduated from the university of dumb-ass and you watch the history channel[8|]
The ambasador had been at the funeral of Kenkichi Shinjo and it ran long. He had the 14 points(not the declaration of war) in his pocket.
That coupled with hull making him cool his heals for 20 minutes is why the ultimatum (not the declaration of war) was late.
This does not make the case for the japanese. The 14 points in the untimatum would require that roosevelt, unilaterally without congress, reverse the established policy of amerika. If the 14 point ulitmatum was not met then the ambasador was instructed to go back to the embasy and get the declaration of war and deliver it. Note the japnese did not give the brits or the dutch any warning or declaration of war. The 14 point ultimatum was never expected to be accepted and best case senario the declration of war would be delivered pretty much as the first round was released.
Remember there were two simultanious operations one operation, landing to kota bharu (malaysia) and air raid to pearl harbor must be a surprising attack. The former was to be at night, but the latter had to be after dawn. At first ijn planned hawaii attack about an hour earlier, just after the kota bharu landing at 11:30 wst. After ijn and ija agreed on that, ijn rescheduled the Hawaii attack to 13:30 jst so that less trained pilots on Shokaku and Zuikaku could take off after dawn. Ijb worried that Britain warn amerika and hawaii would be on alert.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 6:37:31 PM)

Yeah, I guess so mate. But I usually only poke fun at myself and I try not to insult or denigrate others on here too much, like those nameless and faceless keyboard heroes.




thompsonx -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 6:50:56 PM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD
When they got close enough to see with binoculars it was too late.
once they could see them they knew they were noi B-17s but by that time is was too late. It was peacetime here, the bases were on a peacetime Sunday morning schedule.

How did you get so phoquig ignorant. Pearl was on high alert and had been for months. Stop watchig t.v. and do some reading.




And what do you think we did to the Japanese that was so terrible that they were justified in attacking us?

The abc alliance denied japan all stratigic material. Oil is one of those comodities. Japan had two years of oil left. If they did not go to war then they would have nothing to fight with later.

We quit selling them things that would help them overrun China, you think that was terrible?
We encouraged others to do the same.


Why is it the business of amerika what japan and china do to one another?




thompsonx -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 6:59:16 PM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD


[Did you know that at the time on the Constitutional Convention we had already had a nation for several years and they were just trying to fix the government.


The federalist papers say you are full of shit as usual.
The federalist papers outline a whole new form of government than the articles of confederation. The new rules would allow for economic growth of the established elete.






thompsonx -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 7:05:15 PM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD


What act of war had we committed against the Japanese?

According to the japs this:

[Secret]


From: Tokyo
To: Washington
December 6, 1941
Purple
#902 (Part 1 of 14) Separate telegram

MEMORANDUM


1. The Government of Japan, prompted by a genuine desire to come to an amicable understanding with the Government of the United States in order that the two countries by their joint efforts may secure the peace of the Pacific area and thereby contribute toward the realization of world peace, has continued negotiations with the utmost sincerity since April last with the Government of the United States regarding the adjustment and advancement of Japanese-American relations and the stabilization of the Pacific area.



The Japanese Government has the honor to state frankly its views, concerning the claims the American Government has persistently maintained as well as the measures the United States and Great Britain have taken toward Japan during these eight months.



2. It is the immutable policy of the Japanese Government to insure the stability of East Asia and to promote world peace, and thereby to enable all nations to find each its proper place in the world.



Ever since the China Affair broke out owning to the failure on the part of China to comprehend Japan's true intentions, the Japanese Government has striven for the restoration of peace and it has consistently exerted its best efforts to prevent the extension of war-like disturbances. It was also to that end that in September last year Japan concluded the Tri Partite Pact with Germany and Italy.





JD-1: 7143

25843 Navy Trans. 12-6-41 (S)

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 2 of 14)

However, both the United States and Great Britain have resorted to every possible measure to assist the Chungking regime so as to obstruct the establishment of a general peace between Japan and China, interfering with Japan's constructive endeavours toward the stabilization of East Asia, exerting pressure on The Netherlands East Indies, or menacing French Indo-China, they have attempted to frustrate Japan's aspiration to realize the ideal of common prosperity in cooperation with these regions. Furthermore, when Japan in accordance with its protocol with France took measures of joint defense of French Indo-China, both American and British governments, willfully misinterpreted it as a threat to their own possession and inducing the Netherlands government to follow suit, they enforced the assets freezing order, thus severing economic relations with Japan While manifesting thus an obviously hostile attitude, these countries have strengthened their military preparations perfecting an encirclement of Japan, and have brought about a situation which endangers the very existence of the empire.





JD-1:7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41(S)

25843

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 3 of 14).

Nevertheless, facilitate a speedy settlement, the Premier of Japan proposed, in August last, to meet the President of the United States for a discussion of important problems between the two countries covering the entire Pacific area. However, while accepting in principle the Japanese proposal, insisted that the meeting should take place after an agreement of view had been reached on fundamental -(75 letters garbled)-The Japanese government submitted a proposal based on the formula proposed by the American government, taking fully into consideration past American claims and also incorporating Japanese views. Repeated discussions proved of no avail in producing readily an agreement of view. The present cabinet, therefore, submitted a revised proposal, moderating still further the Japanese claims regarding the principal points of difficulty in the negotiation and endeavoured strenuously to reach a settlement. But the American government, adhering steadfastly to its original proposal, failed to display in the slightest degree a spirit of conciliation. The negotiation made no progress.





JD-1:7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41(S)

25843

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 4 of 14)

Thereupon, the Japanese Government, with a view to doing its utmost for averting a crisis in Japanese-American relations, submitted on November 20th still another proposal in order to arrive at an equitable solution of the more essential and urgent questions which, simplifying its previous proposal, stipulated the following points:



(1) The Governments of Japan and the United States undertake not to dispatch armed forces into any of the regions, excepting French Indo-China, in the Southeastern Asia and the Southern Pacific area.



(2) Both Governments shall cooperate with a view to securing the acquisition in the Netherlands East Indies of those goods and commodities of which the two countries are in need.



(3) Both Governments mutually undertake to restore commercial relations to those prevailing prior to the freezing of assets. The Government of the United States shall supply Japan the required quantity of oil.



(4) The Government of the United States undertakes not to resort to measures and actions prejudicial to the endeavours for the restoration of general peace between Japan and China.



(5) The Japanese Government undertakes to withdraw troops now stationed in French Indo-China upon either the restoration of peace between Japan and China or the establishment of an equitable peace in the Pacific area; and it is prepared to remove the Japanese troops in the southern part of French Indo-China to the northern part upon the conclusion of the present agreement.





JD-1:7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41 (S)

25843

[Secret]



From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 5 of 14)

As regards China, the Japanese Government, while expressing its readiness to accept the offer of the President of the United States to act as "Introducer" of peace between Japan and China as was previously suggested, asked for an undertaking on the part of the United States to do nothing prejudicial to the restoration of Sino-Japanese peace when the two parties have commenced direct negotiations.



The American government not only rejected the above-mentioned new proposal, but made known its intention to continue its aid to Chiang Kai-Shek; and in spite of its suggestion mentioned above withdrew the offer of the President to act as the so-called "Introducer" of peace between Japan and China, pleading that time was not yet ripe for it. Finally, on November 26th, in an attitude to impose upon the Japanese government those principles it has persistently maintained, the American government made a proposal totally ignoring Japanese claims, which is a source of profound regret to the Japanese Government.





JD-1:7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41 (S)

25843

[Secret]



From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 6 of 14)

4. From the beginning of the present negotiation the Japanese Government has always maintained an attitude of fairness and moderation, and did its best to reach a settlement, for which it made all possible concessions often in spite of great difficulties.



As for the China question which constituted an important subject of the negotiation, the Japanese Government showed a most conciliatory attitude.



As for the principle of Non-Discrimination in International Commerce, advocated by the American Government, the Japanese Government expressed its desire to see the said principle applied throughout the world, and declared that along with the actual practice of this principle in the world, the Japanese Government would endeavor to apply the same in the Pacific area, including China, and made it clear that Japan had no intention of excluding from China economic activities of third powers pursued on an equitable basis.



Furthermore, as regards the question of withdrawing troops from French Indo-China, the Japanese government even volunteered, as mentioned above, to carry out an immediate evacuation of troops from Southern French Indo-China as a measure of easing the situation.





JD: 1-7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41(S)

25843

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 4, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 7 of 14)

It is presumed that the spirit of conciliation exhibited to the utmost degree by the Japanese Government in all these matters is fully appreciated by the American government.



On the other hand, the American government, always holding fast to theories in disregard of realities, and refusing to yield an inch on its impractical principles, caused undue delays in the negotiation. It is difficult to understand this attitude of the American government and the Japanese government desires to call the attention of the American government especially to the following points:



1. The American government advocates in the name of world peace those principles favorable to it and urges upon the Japanese government the acceptance thereof. The peace of the world may be brought about only by discovering a mutually acceptable formula through recognition of the reality of the situation and mutual appreciation of one another's position. An attitude such as ignores realities and imposes one's selfish views upon others will scarcely serve the purpose of facilitating the consummation of negotiations.



25843

[Secret]



From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 8 of 14)

Of the various principles put forward by the American government as a basis of the Japanese-American agreement, there are some which the Japanese government is ready to accept in principle, but in view of the world's actual conditions, it seems only a Utopian ideal, on the part of the American government, to attempt to force their immediate adoption.



Again, the proposal to conclude a multilateral non-aggression pact between Japan, the United States, Great Britain, China, the Soviet Union, The Netherlands, and Thailand, which is patterned after the old concept of collective security, is far removed from the realities of East Asia.



The American proposal contains a stipulation which states: "Both governments will agree that no agreement, which either has concluded with any third powers, shall be interpreted by it in such a way as to conflict with the fundamental purpose of this agreement, the establishment and preservation of peace throughout the Pacific area." It is presumed that the above provision has been proposed with a view to restrain Japan from fulfilling its obligations under the Tripartite Pact when the United States participates in the war in Europe, and, as such, it cannot be accepted by the Japanese Government.





JD-1:7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41 (S)

25843

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 9 of 14)

The American Government, obsessed with its own views and opinions, may be said to be scheming for the extension of the war. While it seeks, on the one hand, to secure its rear by stabilizing the Pacific area, it is engaged, on the other hand, in aiding Great Britain and preparing to attack, in the name of self-defense, Germany and Italy two powers that are striving to establish a new order in Europe. Such a policy is totally at variance with the many principles upon which the American Government proposes to found the stability of the Pacific area through peaceful means.



3. Where as the American Government, under the principles it rigidly upholds, objects to settling international issues through military pressure, it is exercising in conjunction with Great Britain and other nations pressure by economic power. Recourse to such pressure as a means of dealing with international relations should be condemned as it is at times more inhuman than military pressure.





JD-7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41 (S)

25843

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 10 of 14)

4. It is impossible not to reach the conclusion that the American Government desires to maintain and strengthen, in collusion with Great Britain and other powers, its dominant position it has hitherto occupied not only in China but in other areas of East Asia. It is a fact of history that one countr-(45 letters garbled or missing)-been compelled to observe the status quo under the Anglo-American policy of imperialistic exploitation and to sacrifice the --es to the prosperity of the two nations. The Japanese Government cannot tolerate the perpetuation of such a situation since it directly runs counter to Japan's fundamental policy to enable all nations to enjoy each its proper place in the world.





JD1-7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41 (S)

25843

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 11 of 14)

The stipulation proposed by the American Government relative to French Indo-China is a good exemplification of the above-mentioned American policy. That the six countries,-Japan, the United States, Great Britain, The Netherlands, China and Thailand,-excepting France, should undertake among themselves to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of French Indo-China and equality of treatment in trade and commerce would be tantamount to placing that territory under the joint guarantee of the governments of those six countries. Apart from the fact that such a proposal totally ignores the position of France, it is unacceptable to the Japanese government in that such an arrangement cannot but be considered as an extension to French Indo-China of a system similar to the n-(50 letters missed)-sible for the present predicament of East Asia.





JD1-7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41 (S)

25843

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902 (Part 12 of 14)

5. All the items demanded of Japan by the American government regarding China such as wholesale evacuation of troops or unconditional application of the principle of Non-Discrimination in International Commerce ignore the actual conditions of China, and are calculated to destroy Japan's position as the stabilizing factor of East Asia. The attitude of the American government in demanding Japan not to support militarily, politically or economically any regime other than the regime at Chungking, disregarding thereby the existence of the Nanking government, shatters the very basis of the present negotiation. This demand of the American government falling, as it does, in line with its above-mentioned refusal to cease from aiding the Chungking regime, demonstrates clearly the intention of the American government to obstruct the restoration of normal relations between Japan and China and the return of peace to East Asia.





JD-1: 7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41 (S)

25843

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

December 6, 1941

Purple

#902. (Part 13 of 14)

5. In brief, the American proposal contains certain acceptable items such as those concerning commerce, including the conclusion of a trade agreement, mutual removal of the freezing restrictions, and stabilization of the Yen and Dollar exchange, or the abolition of extraterritorial rights in China. On the other hand, however, the proposal in question ignores Japan's sacrifices in the four years of the China Affair, menaces the empire's existence itself and disparages its honour and prestige. Therefore, viewed in its entirety, the Japanese government regrets that it cannot accept the proposal as a basis of negotiation.



6. The Japanese government, in its desire for an early conclusion of the negotiation, proposed that simultaneously with the conclusion of the Japanese-American negotiation, agreements be signed with Great Britain and other interested countries. The proposal was accepted by the American government. However, since the American government has made the proposal of November 26th as a result of frequent consultations with Great Britain, Australia, The Netherlands and Chungking, ANDND* presumably by catering to the wishes of the Chungking regime on the questions of CHTUAL YLOKMMTT** be concluded that all these countries are at one with the United States in ignoring Japan's position.





JD-1: 7143 Navy Trans. 12-6-41 (S)

25843

*Probably "and as"

**Probably "China, can but."

From: Tokyo

To: Washington

7 December 1941

(Purple-Eng)

#902 Part 14 of 14

(NOTE.-In the forwarding instructions to the radio station handling this part, appeared the plain English phrase "VERY IMPORTANT")



7. Obviously it is the intention of the American Government to conspire with Great Britain and other countries to obstruct Japan's efforts toward the establishment of peace through the creation of a New Order in East Asia, and especially to preserve Anglo-American rights and interests by keeping Japan and China at war. This intention has been revealed clearly during the course of the present negotiations. Thus, the earnest hope of the Japanese Government to adjust Japanese-American relations and to preserve and promote the peace of the Pacific through cooperation with the American Government has finally been lost.



The Japanese Government regrets to have to notify hereby the American Government that in view of the attitude of the American Government it cannot but consider that it is impossible to reach an agreement through further negotiations.



25843
JD-1: 7143 (M) Navy trans. 7 Dec. 1941 (S-TT)

(EXHIBITS OF JOINT COMMITTEE , EXHIBIT NO. 1 INTERCEPTED DIPLOMATIC MESSAGES SENT BY THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT BETWEEN JULY l AND DECEMBER 8, 1941





Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 7:15:08 PM)

Well, if they were vacation resorts, my family are taking one fucking loooooooooong vacation. I suppose those blokes in black uniforms with whips, dogs and guns, were the german equivalent of the Butlins Red-Coats in the holiday camps in UK ? The chimneys were to ensure the water was warm at all time, in the swimming pools in them and the electric fences were an accidental short caused by the 'Son et Lumiere' show for the guests that accidentally touched the fence once in a while.




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 7:52:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Well, if they were vacation resorts, my family are taking one fucking loooooooooong vacation. I suppose those blokes in black uniforms with whips, dogs and guns, were the german equivalent of the Butlins Red-Coats in the holiday camps in UK ? The chimneys were to ensure the water was warm at all time, in the swimming pools in them and the electric fences were an accidental short caused by the 'Son et Lumiere' show for the guests that accidentally touched the fence once in a while.

Yep, and don't forget the heated showers.




vincentML -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 8:07:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Bama..................if it never happened, we must have said something to annoy some of the distant relations in our family who disappeared sometime between 1940 and 1945. Maybe they all got run over by the same bus on a Cologne street one dark night ?

A friend of my mothers was a survivor of the death camps, and a friend of mine lost several relatives in them. He actually told me that knowing survivors didn't mean they actually existed. What we thought were death camps were Jewish vacation resort or some such nonsense. Didn't explain the gypsys' and others who were sent there.

Interesting stuff. The Nazi's put out propaganda newsreels to con their own people early on. The newsreels showed Jews at play in the camps and being entertained by a Jewish orchestra. So, yeah, that was real propaganda shit.

THIS WAS A LATER FILM




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/2/2016 8:10:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Bama..................if it never happened, we must have said something to annoy some of the distant relations in our family who disappeared sometime between 1940 and 1945. Maybe they all got run over by the same bus on a Cologne street one dark night ?

A friend of my mothers was a survivor of the death camps, and a friend of mine lost several relatives in them. He actually told me that knowing survivors didn't mean they actually existed. What we thought were death camps were Jewish vacation resort or some such nonsense. Didn't explain the gypsys' and others who were sent there.

Interesting stuff. The Nazi's put out propaganda newsreels to con their own people early on. The newsreels showed Jews at play in the camps and being entertained by a Jewish orchestra. So, yeah, that was real propaganda shit.

THIS WAS A LATER FILM

But Rule thinks that is reality, and the films taken when the camps were liberated were fakes.




DesideriScuri -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 5:52:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
A friend of my mothers was a survivor of the death camps, and a friend of mine lost several relatives in them. He actually told me that knowing survivors didn't mean they actually existed. What we thought were death camps were Jewish vacation resort or some such nonsense. Didn't explain the gypsys' and others who were sent there.


Worst. Resort. Ever.




ifmaz -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 11:05:56 AM)

FR

quote:

ORIGINAL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8168697/Mark-Ruffalo-on-terrorist-watchlist.html?utm_content=buffer93f27&utm_medium=social&utm_source=app.net&utm_campaign=buffer

Mark Ruffalo on terrorist watchlist

Mark Ruffalo, the Hollywood actor, has been added to a US terror advisory list after he promoted a documentary about the effects of natural gas drilling.

The 43-year-old year old actor was placed on the watch list by Pennsylvania's Office of Homeland Security after he arranged screenings for the "Gasland" documentary.
The film won the special jury prize at this year's Sundance Film festival and chronicles how communities have been affected by a boom in natural gas drilling.
In Pennsylvania the film, written and directed by Josh Fox, shows a resident who is able to set fire to his tap water.
Ruffalo, who has starred in films including "Shutter Island," "The Kids Are Alright" and "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," told GQ magazine that his inclusion on the list was "pretty funny."


(This is from 2010)




Termyn8or -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 6:51:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Jeez Thermy!

quote:

But I digress. I know the principles of RADAR, and I think a military base should be on the lookout when the RADAR is not working. Like 911, you fly a Cessna and deviate from you filed flight plan and they will need to talk to you.


Like, the plane hijackers would really respond to the control towers for a chat: "Oh, jolly good day, chaps. Deviating from our flight plan? Oh, just a bit of sight seeing around the trade towers. Don't give it a thought. We will be done shortly."

Fighter jets were dispatched to intercept the doomed planes.

Don't be an idiot, please.


Yeah, they were dispatched and what happened ? The attack was a total success.

So they accomplished WHAT ? For a half a fucking trillion a year.

And I do realize the logistic problems with such a situation. First of all, what should said fighter jets do ? Shoot them down with civilians in them ? Can you imagine public opinion if they had done that ? And even if they had shot them down the pieces were going to land somewhere. They do not have energy weapons that disintegrate things, they have ballistic weapons and even off those are explosive they are not enough power to totally vaporise a jumbo jet.

But the bottom line is THEY CAUSED THIS. Keep on bombing, sooner or later maybe Europe will not like us anymore and we'll have to bomb them into friendship. There will be no need for racial or ethnic profiling because we will be hated by ALL of them. Keep it up. Half the world did not support Iraq 2, and the only allies we have are bought and paid for, and that is not the people. They people of those countries can't fucking stand us. So when they send troops to "help" us take over another regime or some shit, just how much can "we" trust them ?

And I put the word "we" in quotes because quite frankly, they cannot trust me. What they do is make all these enemies and then sell protection. And the protection is not good. If not for the intervention of the US, whether the support of the house of Saud or Israel or whatever, those people would have never known that the WTC even existed. Like Africa, when did they go exploring ? If not for the slave trade they might never have known the rest of the world existed. They didn't teach us how to build boats.

I said before, arm the pilots. They are vetted better than cops. They got good eyesight and are not drunk when on duty. Either that or have air marshals on every flight who are armed and skilled. For a half a fucking trillion dollars a year, why can't we do that ?

Oh, because of 130+ military bases all over the world and QME for our best buddy who steals from us and does nasty shit and tries too make it look like we did it. And the famous F-35 that can barely get off the ground, and that is by hotwiring the motherfucker like a car t6hief back in the 1960s, which means all these cool (killing) features don't work. I doubt Israel will even take them for free, they are not stupid.

What the point of my rant is is that THERE IS NO DEFENSE. Israel has that Iron Dome, yet somehow the rockets get through.

Tell you this, I cannot substantiate it except by the word of someone who goes to Gaza with humanitarian aid and whatever, Hamas is not in complete control and those rockets do not necessarily come from Hamas.

He says that Israel is financing some splinter groups and actually supplying some weapons to them for PR value. Note that he has been there and goes there and talks to people there. You can't get this shit on the news anywhere. He tells me of things you will never hear, like the fact that the Palestinians have to pay alot more for everything, and water is pretty much one of those things. Just look up the water usage between Jews and Palesinians.

And back to the rockets, when was the last time a Palestinian rocket killed a Jew ?

See, this is why those people are pissed off. I do not agree with their ways. I do not agree with their religion. I do not agree with this marrying eight year olds shit. But we should not even be aware of that.

Albert Einstein was firmly against the creation of Israel. I correspond with people in other countries who say "Too bad Hitler left enough of them to have a country". And note that no race or creed has in force suck laws about criticism of them or even the questioning of their version of history.

You wanna talk D6MRD ? Show me the fucking bodies. The goddamn Soviets provided all that information and you know how we could trust them :-/

I used to be a bad motherfucker. Ruthless in business, taking advantage and sometimes just dared taking what I want. Strong, practically indestructible. As a teenager and in my early 20s I was not to be fucked with and sometimes you did ot want to be there when I got there

I learned, in time, that you do alot better and are more secure when you got more (real) friends than enemies. This government is considered the leaders, but I realize that leaders are really servants. As a leader you should do your best to lead those you lead into prosperity and happiness.

That means not making enemies because of stealing their shit, which started in South America, then Iran, Then, fucking everywhere. No regime change was ever really impelled by rights or whatever, it has always been money, black gold, Texas tea. Phosphorous, cadmium, gold. These gonniffs are going to go into Mali for gold, if they haven't already.

Yeah, they SUPPOSEDLY debunked the story that the US stole Germany's gold but tell me this - WHY HAVEN'T THEY SHIPPED IT ? /this is a massive coverup, and at one point they said the gold was "leased out". Just what does that mean ?

Don't be stupid ?

T^T




Termyn8or -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 7:43:15 PM)

"Anyone who thinks Hitler was the voice of reason cannot and should not be debated. They are devoid of reason. "

You cannot say that. Well you can but you are not considering all the facts.

German banks run by Jews "created" the money for the Russian revolution. Same shit they do here, but it degrades the country' currency. Most people think it was reparations to France that caused their financial woes, but that was only a small part of it. This same type of banker is now creating money at our expese to finance the expansion of oil companies, and the real joke is most of them are not even based in the US anymore. Just their lobbyists.

Hitler saw this and responded. He turned the country around. Some of his methods were not all that great, or fair, or whatever, but he got the job done and Germans still benefits to this day from what he did. He started, or at least impelled their industrial revolution which is on par with ours. We wrecked ours, but they didn't wreck theirs. That is why their people are not bitching about the Chinese taking their jobs. Granted, there are less jobs there these day s but that is because of increased productivity. Remember what I said - one Man can do the job of ten, what happens to the other nine ? Well they specialised in certain things and gained in those markets, mass markets.

The only thing the US has going for it now in microchips. Your Pentiums etc. That is not enough.

Actually I just remembered something, Austrians, in a poll, something like 40 % of them say they would favor a Nazi type government. In fact they did elect that one guy and some Jew said "It is a slap in the face of democracy" and not much later he was suicided. Yeah, accidentally shot himself six times or suffocated on a pillow or some shit. The usual bullshit like what happened to the Clinton's enemies down in Arkansas.

But on topic, due process is gone. They can take away your rights even if you have not been convicted of anything on a few fronts. If you are out on bail they can require you to turn in all your guns, submit to drug and alcohol testing, refrain from posting certain shit on the internet or even order you not to have internet access. All of these things have happened and happened to people who were not yet convicted.

Fuck this shit.

T^T




Termyn8or -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 8:16:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Why would ANYone with half a brain attempt to debate RealOne on any issue more serious than how much sugar to put in his cocoa ? That last screed is the biggest load of balderdash I have seen since the so-called 'protocols of Zion', which I am sure he firmly believes to be the truth.


And how do you explain all the truth about how shit iss that is contained in The Protocols ?

You want quotes ? I am totally willing to start a thread on it and then you can debate, well that is IF you can debate.

I have read them, have you ? Have you read the words instead of what you have been told about them ? How can you be qualified to gebate a document you have not read, and from your statement I have much doubt that you ever read it. Because once you read it you see certain things. It is not just about Jewish supremacy, it is also about human nature. For example :

"Every Man would be a dictator if he could"

Where is the word "Jew" in that quote ?

years ago I started editing it and taking out every reference to Jews, but I got lazy and stopped. But if you read the output it gives a pretty clear picture of the people who run the world. I only got through part one. But really it does describe those in power, mostly.

The super rich are addicted to money. Those in power are addicted to power. Addiction is an unreasonable and unsatiable desire for something. There is never enough. The democrats have it, they want to dictate which words you can say. The republicans have it, they want to dictate what you can do in bed.

And not any of them want those laws they impose on us to apply to them, that is how they get their satisfaction, by being "better" than us somehow in their own mind.

So, what now did I hear ? Al Gore got off the no-fl list ?

How did he do that ?

They don't want to tell us ?

Keep your fucking planes then. People need to get some solidarity. No fly, OK. And no more stimulating the economy. Got a job requires you to fly ? Quit. But see USians are not willing to give up their shit, and there is a mortgage on literally everything. (what do you think is collateral for the national debt ?)

We have let this shit happen and really there is no way to go back. I say just have armed guards on the planes just like they do at banks.

I thought they already did lock the cockpit doors in 2001. What, was it "Unlock this door or I will cut this pretty blonde's head off with this box cutter" ? I mean, if you open that door, what the fuck do you think is going to happen. Then you radio ahead and just land where you were supposed to and everyone dead goes to the morgue and everyone alive goes to jail.

We guard our money with guns, but not children, or apparently innocent people who get on a plane, or a bus, or even in a cab but then I have known a couple cab drivers who packed heat. All Uber drivers should because they do not know the destination until they make the pickup. Bring your ass down to where we used to call "jabbabbaland", you know what that means. And there is no "no Uber" list. There is no "no bus" list. There is no "no train" list.

No, they are doing it wrong.

T^T




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 8:21:50 PM)

Yes I have read them and no I won't be debating you or any other closed mind that reads the word 'debate' as.......... ' this is what it is and all you think is wrong'. That's why I put clowns like Thompson on hide. It's pointless and frustrating and I can do without that.




Termyn8or -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 8:24:28 PM)

"Not that hard mr. mensa eligible.Simply plot a great cirlcle course from washington to pearl duuuuhhh "

They didn't have to refuel to do that ? Where could they refuel ?

Doubts here.

T^T




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 8:32:13 PM)

I believe they flew across the Atlantic successfully but maybe they refuelled at Gander. I have no idea. What's the fuel capacity and range of a B-17 ? So I would say that looking at an atlas, those B-17's should have no great problem getting to Hawaii in one hop with the winds helping them along. Just a guess though, so I will leave that to the experts on here.




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 8:48:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

I believe they flew across the Atlantic successfully but maybe they refuelled at Gander. I have no idea. What's the fuel capacity and range of a B-17 ? So I would say that looking at an atlas, those B-17's should have no great problem getting to Hawaii in one hop with the winds helping them along. Just a guess though, so I will leave that to the experts on here.

And they took off every pound that wasn't essential. Why argue about whether is was possible they did it so it was. The only place they could have refuled would have been the Aleutians and I am not sure if they had a large enough landing strip.




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/3/2016 9:19:57 PM)

Very true Bama. It is, or was, an accomplished fact and they were a great plane.




Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625