Dude12
Apr 25th, 2004, 9:11 AM
John Titor said that this year there will be a civil war. I feel that it might happen this year what do you think?
View Full Version : Do you think there will be a civil war this year
Kohler
Apr 25th, 2004, 9:35 AM
It is already May in a week, and i think it might be difficult for a civil war to break out. Maybe in a couple years, but something HUGE would have to go down to tear our country apart in such a manner to cause a civil war.
Chrome Ninja
Apr 25th, 2004, 9:42 AM
Well, i think it would be impossible for a civil war to break out here the only way we could go into civil war would be if Amerikka nuked another country first or somthing like that , then the people would rebel, but i don't think it's going to happen anytime soon.
lotrfan55345
Apr 25th, 2004, 12:03 PM
Maybe, this summer, when there might be oil and natural gas shortages. The "public" may blame the government OR they could blame the "immigrants", for hogging up the recources.
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
evilwill
Apr 26th, 2004, 2:29 AM
I don't think America will ever fall victim to a civil war as long as it has nother country to pick on.
Treehugginhippy
Apr 26th, 2004, 12:43 PM
John Titor said that this year there will be a civil war.
Why did he say that? Looking at your country from the island across the ocean I can't see much wrong. :confused:
Why did he say that? Looking at your country from the island across the ocean I can't see much wrong. :confused:
AngelTV
Apr 26th, 2004, 1:43 PM
Mickey,
your sense of humour is still the same. How you travelling? Oz, interesting theory. Problem with that is if you started a war with Australia you wouldn´t be left with any friends. lol.
your sense of humour is still the same. How you travelling? Oz, interesting theory. Problem with that is if you started a war with Australia you wouldn´t be left with any friends. lol.
Donsun
Apr 26th, 2004, 2:35 PM
John Titor said that this year there will be a civil war. I feel that it might happen this year what do you think?
I think John Titor is full of sh*t. :grin Never happen.
I think John Titor is full of sh*t. :grin Never happen.
SeekNDestroy
Apr 27th, 2004, 1:36 AM
Come on, who voted yes? Own up.
NO there will not be a civil war. Which sides exactly do you think want to fight one?
NO there will not be a civil war. Which sides exactly do you think want to fight one?
DontBeAfraid
Apr 27th, 2004, 8:07 AM
Mike..... as if you cant look up who voted for what.....
TwilightKing
Apr 27th, 2004, 8:11 AM
NO. Too many people are listening to this fictitous John Titor.
lotrfan55345
Apr 27th, 2004, 4:21 PM
BTW, i did vote "yes" beacuse of peak oil & economic ramafications + Bush bashers vs Demoncrats.
John Titor is in no way a factor of my decision.
The "side" I will be choosing is NONE. I will hide in my non-existing bunker. If I really had to choose, I would choose the side people in my area choose.
John Titor is in no way a factor of my decision.
The "side" I will be choosing is NONE. I will hide in my non-existing bunker. If I really had to choose, I would choose the side people in my area choose.
Defiant Noquisi
Apr 27th, 2004, 8:09 PM
There is not going to be any kind of civil war since the first one hasnt ended yet according to the Rebels vs. the Yanks still fighting on the CB radio. Its bad enough there are grown men even arguing over stuff like that. Cmon, consider the source.
lazserus
Apr 27th, 2004, 8:44 PM
Isn't that the time traveler who traveled here from the future in an old buick? Titor is as credible as Micky Mouse. :crazy:
lotrfan55345
Apr 27th, 2004, 10:03 PM
Your not talking to me, right?
Defiant Noquisi
Apr 27th, 2004, 10:47 PM
Isn't that the time traveler who traveled here from the future in an old buick? Titor is as credible as Micky Mouse. :crazy: Dont you put down a fine GM product!!! Im pretty sure it was a Pinto station wagon. :P
substand
Apr 28th, 2004, 1:17 AM
wtf is John Titor?
an idiot retard i would suppose. I'm willing to give you 1:100 odds there won't be a civil war this year. So i put down 100 million dollars. If one happens, you keep it, otherwise you pay me only 1 million.
Thats just retarted. Sorry, just retarded.
an idiot retard i would suppose. I'm willing to give you 1:100 odds there won't be a civil war this year. So i put down 100 million dollars. If one happens, you keep it, otherwise you pay me only 1 million.
Thats just retarted. Sorry, just retarded.
Moishe3rd
May 2nd, 2004, 10:09 AM
There already is a civil war in America. It is between those who believe that they are right because "good and evil" do not exist, only what "I believe is right and what I believe is wrong." These are people who believe that "if I believe it, then it must be right."
These are not people who use history, religion, or even science to bolster their beliefs. These are people who invent their beliefs.
They are at war with people who base their beliefs on history, religion and even science. They are at war with people who logically conclude that "good and evil" do exist and that what is necessary for human survival and achievement is to support the good and fight the evil.
Those who invent their beliefs deride and villify those who believe in good and evil as being illogical, even immoral, even though for those who invent their beliefs, there are no morals. For them, morals have to do with what benefits or hurts the planet; or the plants; or the animals; etcetera; etcetera; ad nauseum. Morals are what feel good.
Those who believe in good and evil are commanded to fight against this massive morass of human opinion.
Examples:
The death of Rantisi is condemned by the world that invents their beliefs.
This same world is silent when it comes to Tibet and Sudan.
Those who invent their beliefs look upon European values as something to be admired.
Those who believe in good and evil remember the non-stop genocides of Europe; of Nationalism; of Fascism; of Communism; of all of the millions upon millions who were slaughtered in the name of sophisticated European morals; of all of the millions upon millions who were slaughtered because they "were not me, my country, my peoples, my interests."
Professors, who invent their beliefs, teach at American universities and teach students that America and Israel are villains and that the enemies of those decent societies are misunderstood victims who are often justified in their hatred.
The inventors of beliefs loathe the American Judeo-Christian value system.
Those who invent their beliefs are morally sick. They believe good is bad, and that those who are bad are simply militants and victimized and misunderstood and the product of hopelessness. Only those who fight the bad are called bad.
(Abridged Dennis Prager)
This is the civil war that we are fighting in this country. The outcome is on a razor's edge.
Should those who invent their beliefs win this war, a new era of death and oppression will overcome the United States. And those whose beliefs worship death and oppression will gain the upper hand.
These are not people who use history, religion, or even science to bolster their beliefs. These are people who invent their beliefs.
They are at war with people who base their beliefs on history, religion and even science. They are at war with people who logically conclude that "good and evil" do exist and that what is necessary for human survival and achievement is to support the good and fight the evil.
Those who invent their beliefs deride and villify those who believe in good and evil as being illogical, even immoral, even though for those who invent their beliefs, there are no morals. For them, morals have to do with what benefits or hurts the planet; or the plants; or the animals; etcetera; etcetera; ad nauseum. Morals are what feel good.
Those who believe in good and evil are commanded to fight against this massive morass of human opinion.
Examples:
The death of Rantisi is condemned by the world that invents their beliefs.
This same world is silent when it comes to Tibet and Sudan.
Those who invent their beliefs look upon European values as something to be admired.
Those who believe in good and evil remember the non-stop genocides of Europe; of Nationalism; of Fascism; of Communism; of all of the millions upon millions who were slaughtered in the name of sophisticated European morals; of all of the millions upon millions who were slaughtered because they "were not me, my country, my peoples, my interests."
Professors, who invent their beliefs, teach at American universities and teach students that America and Israel are villains and that the enemies of those decent societies are misunderstood victims who are often justified in their hatred.
The inventors of beliefs loathe the American Judeo-Christian value system.
Those who invent their beliefs are morally sick. They believe good is bad, and that those who are bad are simply militants and victimized and misunderstood and the product of hopelessness. Only those who fight the bad are called bad.
(Abridged Dennis Prager)
This is the civil war that we are fighting in this country. The outcome is on a razor's edge.
Should those who invent their beliefs win this war, a new era of death and oppression will overcome the United States. And those whose beliefs worship death and oppression will gain the upper hand.
substand
May 5th, 2004, 2:38 AM
well i'll give the same odds to those in other forums... anyone who wants to bet, feel free. its not gonna happen.
stewey
Jun 30th, 2004, 1:23 AM
It wont happen. Peak oil is a sham (they discover more oil every day thanks to technology). Democrats and Republicans are like siblings -- they pretend to hate each other, but deep down they love and respect each other -- for the most part. Any other reasons?
Conservative Front
Jun 30th, 2004, 11:11 PM
I don't believe there will be a civil war this year. But I think in time as politics get more and more partisan (Id say this is the most partisan politics has been in years) that there will eventually be a civil war from the liberals and the conservatives I don't think it will happen anytime soon but once theres enough partisanship there might just be.
DontBeAfraid
Jul 1st, 2004, 4:22 AM
Oil is NOT a renewable rescource, well not realistically. We will run out, no matter how good we get at finding it.
lotrfan55345
Jul 1st, 2004, 4:27 AM
I've made that point to someone but that someone does not seem to get it, or did not see my comment.
stewey
Jul 1st, 2004, 4:36 AM
Yes, but we have quite a while left out of it. A long while.
DontBeAfraid
Jul 1st, 2004, 4:42 AM
How can anybody KNOW that stewey? Until we find it we have only what we have. We may have found it all already, there may be NO MORE oil reserviours(sp) We dont know. And we shouldnt just expect to keep finding it because someday we WILL find the last of it, and as far as we know that day may have already come.
stewey
Jul 1st, 2004, 6:44 AM
How can anybody KNOW that we are at peak oil now? For all we know, maybe oil replenishes itself after a century.
DarkAce
Jul 1st, 2004, 10:40 AM
How can the fossil fuel replenish itself?....
DontBeAfraid
Jul 1st, 2004, 10:59 AM
Wow stewey, that might be the funniest thing I have read i a while. Didnt they teach you about where FOSSIL fuel comes from in 3rd grade?
stewey
Jul 1st, 2004, 11:25 AM
Just saying that we don't know for sure much about oil and oil reserves and the long term effects. That was just my "Way out there, 1 in a zillion chance its true" thing.
lotrfan55345
Jul 12th, 2004, 11:47 AM
Well, there is more of a chance that we are at peak oil now or in the near future, as many reputable sources are saying. You have not given me any links exept for the BBC one, where another article at the BBC said we were at peak oil now. If I have missed any, please point them out.
OrioN
Jul 12th, 2004, 5:34 PM
Wow stewey, that might be the funniest thing I have read i a while. Didnt they teach you about where FOSSIL fuel comes from in 3rd grade?
Before you decide to poke fun at someones theory maybe you should do a little research of your own. In fact I'll help you out a little.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38645
Start there and maybe you will realize Stewey's post wasn't that far out. :Blbl:
(This stuff also may need to be moved to another thread. Not sure, guess its up the admins.)
Before you decide to poke fun at someones theory maybe you should do a little research of your own. In fact I'll help you out a little.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38645
Start there and maybe you will realize Stewey's post wasn't that far out. :Blbl:
(This stuff also may need to be moved to another thread. Not sure, guess its up the admins.)
substand
Jul 13th, 2004, 4:39 AM
and before anyone starts bitching that World Net Daily is "christian right wing," I'd like to defend it in that they've always been factually correct. I used to subscribe to thier magazine, but they got too religious for me... however, on news issues they may focus on news items that right wing christians may enjoy, but they also have anti-drug-war commentary (for an example of "non-christianity" which no "secular" paper publishes on a consistent basis) and they don't make stuff up from what I've read, even if they are selective in which stories they post.
Defiant Noquisi
Jul 13th, 2004, 4:11 PM
Okay, Ive read the above posted link and the theory makes sense, just the same as oil being a "fossil" fuel makes sense. The problem is that they are both theories and we dont know for sure.
I also had this problem with the article...
Think about it ... while not inexhaustible, deep Earth reserves of inorganic crude oil and commercially feasible extraction would provide the world with generations of low-cost fuel. WRONG!! The cost not being talked about is the cost to the environment and to people exposed to the toxins of its use.
Going further, it is being used as a tool to create havoc among nations as well as between those who uber support progress and those who uber support environmentalism. Theres your civil war...already in progress.
I also had this problem with the article...
Think about it ... while not inexhaustible, deep Earth reserves of inorganic crude oil and commercially feasible extraction would provide the world with generations of low-cost fuel. WRONG!! The cost not being talked about is the cost to the environment and to people exposed to the toxins of its use.
Going further, it is being used as a tool to create havoc among nations as well as between those who uber support progress and those who uber support environmentalism. Theres your civil war...already in progress.
lotrfan55345
Jul 14th, 2004, 12:30 PM
My god, try reading that book, or reading some reviews, even a "regular joe" will see lots of things missing or skipped in that book.
And as DN mentioned, the environmental cost.
And as DN mentioned, the environmental cost.
lotrfan55345
Jul 14th, 2004, 12:43 PM
Here is a review of that book.
Reviewer: Carol M. Henn from Rockville, MD USA
I have long believed that oil depletion is a serious issue that could derail our economy sooner than most people think. When promoting this view on internet bulletin boards, people would occasionally respond that Thomas Gold has shown that oil comes from abiotic sources deep within the earth, not from biological sources, and we hence we have plenty, no need to worry.
I have at last gotten around to reading this book. He makes a stronger case than I would have guessed. He also thinks through a number of issues related to his theory in an inventive and interesting way. He argues that earth's first organism was more likely to have evolved underground than on the surface, and makes a pretty good case.
But some of the evidence he provides doesn't really support his contention. For instance, he argues that many earthquakes are due to sudden releases of vast quantities of natural gas, rather than due to plate tectonics. After reading the evidence he brings forth on this, I agree that this is likely a cause of some earthquakes. But this doesn't prove that oil or natural gas comes from abiotic sources, nor does it prove that we have plenty of it.
Gold believes that if oil is bubbling up from middle earth and isn't dependent on ancient plant or animal life for its creation, then we ought to have plenty of it. This doesn't actually follow. If loads of the stuff was bubbling up, we would have more natural oil seeps than we do.
Gold believes that we are discovering vast new amounts of oil all the time and that old oil fields are refilling. Most geologists disagree. We are now burning more oil than we discover, and have been since the early 1980s. What Gold sees as growing reserves, are in many cases not supported by the facts. For instance, in the late 80s most OPEC nations vastly increased their reported reserves. This wasn't due to new drilling that found new oil - it was a ploy to allow them to pump more oil in accordance with OPEC rules that fixed oil production to a percentage of reserves.
Gold doesn't examine the issue of oil in a quantitative manner at all. He believes that oil is abiotic and assumes that means we have plenty of it. He has marshalled some interesting evidence in favor of his theory, but comes up short on analyzing what this means in terms of oil depletion.
Reviewer: Carol M. Henn from Rockville, MD USA
I have long believed that oil depletion is a serious issue that could derail our economy sooner than most people think. When promoting this view on internet bulletin boards, people would occasionally respond that Thomas Gold has shown that oil comes from abiotic sources deep within the earth, not from biological sources, and we hence we have plenty, no need to worry.
I have at last gotten around to reading this book. He makes a stronger case than I would have guessed. He also thinks through a number of issues related to his theory in an inventive and interesting way. He argues that earth's first organism was more likely to have evolved underground than on the surface, and makes a pretty good case.
But some of the evidence he provides doesn't really support his contention. For instance, he argues that many earthquakes are due to sudden releases of vast quantities of natural gas, rather than due to plate tectonics. After reading the evidence he brings forth on this, I agree that this is likely a cause of some earthquakes. But this doesn't prove that oil or natural gas comes from abiotic sources, nor does it prove that we have plenty of it.
Gold believes that if oil is bubbling up from middle earth and isn't dependent on ancient plant or animal life for its creation, then we ought to have plenty of it. This doesn't actually follow. If loads of the stuff was bubbling up, we would have more natural oil seeps than we do.
Gold believes that we are discovering vast new amounts of oil all the time and that old oil fields are refilling. Most geologists disagree. We are now burning more oil than we discover, and have been since the early 1980s. What Gold sees as growing reserves, are in many cases not supported by the facts. For instance, in the late 80s most OPEC nations vastly increased their reported reserves. This wasn't due to new drilling that found new oil - it was a ploy to allow them to pump more oil in accordance with OPEC rules that fixed oil production to a percentage of reserves.
Gold doesn't examine the issue of oil in a quantitative manner at all. He believes that oil is abiotic and assumes that means we have plenty of it. He has marshalled some interesting evidence in favor of his theory, but comes up short on analyzing what this means in terms of oil depletion.
bbbv3.5
Jul 14th, 2004, 1:37 PM
Isnt when people start making bad comments about race in a way a civil war. And all the people of america fight because of race. If we are fighting over stuff like race.....maybe john titors saying was a metaphore.
Sirius
Jul 14th, 2004, 1:54 PM
don't we have a civil war every 4 years?
lotrfan55345
Jul 14th, 2004, 3:19 PM
don't we have a civil war every 4 years?
Ha! Thats funny! :sardonic:
Ha! Thats funny! :sardonic:
substand
Jul 15th, 2004, 2:05 AM
don't we have a civil war every 4 years?
twas quite funny
twas quite funny
Marajadex
Jul 15th, 2004, 2:38 AM
don't we have a civil war every 4 years?
True... Very true!
:blazing:
True... Very true!
:blazing:
repentantsinner
Jul 16th, 2004, 8:36 PM
If we have martial law due to terrorists attacks, or if by the patriot act people start being accused of being "enemy combatsnts" and the NWO tries to take away our guns there may be war in the US. May not american against american though. http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/eberhart_presence_foreign_troops.html http://users.rcn.com/zap.dnai/nwo-006.htm http://users.rcn.com/zap.dnai/troops.html
LC Jeffries
Sep 2nd, 2004, 7:45 AM
No I don't see it happening this year. But at the rate our country is going, I see it happening eventually and I see the Media fanning the flames. Many anarcist would be most happy to fan those flames as well. They would like nothing more then to bring the US to it's knees. We saw small examples of that with some the protesters in New York.
Electric T-Bird
Sep 2nd, 2004, 9:55 AM
I agree, no civil war will happen. The amount of anti-Bush/Government/Or something else protestors only make up a small fraction of the population.
It would get ugly if it did happen.
It would get ugly if it did happen.
Defiant Noquisi
Sep 2nd, 2004, 10:04 PM
Were doomed I tell ya! DOOMED!!
Glad I got that off my chest!
Welcome to the boards. I used ta live in King County.
Glad I got that off my chest!
Welcome to the boards. I used ta live in King County.
Electric T-Bird
Sep 10th, 2004, 9:24 AM
Were doomed I tell ya! DOOMED!!
Glad I got that off my chest!
Welcome to the boards. I used ta live in King County.
DOOMED!! :yikes:
He He, Thanks.
Glad I got that off my chest!
Welcome to the boards. I used ta live in King County.
DOOMED!! :yikes:
He He, Thanks.
Donsun
Sep 10th, 2004, 12:47 PM
There might be just afew days ago i saw on the tv thousands of southerners moving towards the north. The south shall rise again.
Oh my mistake they were just trying to outrun a hurricane! :toast:
Oh my mistake they were just trying to outrun a hurricane! :toast:
Druadan
Sep 11th, 2004, 10:00 AM
I doubt a civil war would happen, although Bush does make it significantly more likely. I have read Titor's stuff, and if you take that stuff, the Illuminati stuff, the document by PNAC, the timeline of events since Coup 2000, and the legislative trends in America under Bush..... it all links in way too much.
I DO, however, think there will be another big terrorist attack between now and the Presidential elections. Something BIG to make it have to be postponed. If I'm right in saying that nothing has ever led to the postponing of an election, it will have to be big.
If all those theories link together like they appear to, then I don't think Bush will accept the loss of an election. He'll win at any cost; and he doesn't have brother Jeb in the Florida Governor's seat to buy the election for him this time.
I DO, however, think there will be another big terrorist attack between now and the Presidential elections. Something BIG to make it have to be postponed. If I'm right in saying that nothing has ever led to the postponing of an election, it will have to be big.
If all those theories link together like they appear to, then I don't think Bush will accept the loss of an election. He'll win at any cost; and he doesn't have brother Jeb in the Florida Governor's seat to buy the election for him this time.
stealthweasle
Sep 12th, 2004, 8:33 PM
Yes, there will be a civil war and ill explain why
John titor said that there would be a civil war, and the date it happens will be blindingly obvous until it happens/
THis means it starts at the ellections at years end
John titor said that there would be a civil war, and the date it happens will be blindingly obvous until it happens/
THis means it starts at the ellections at years end
Electric T-Bird
Sep 13th, 2004, 10:23 AM
Sorry, who is John Titor?
One would think the terrorists want Bush gone, and not attempt to delay the Presidential elections.
Gov. Jeb Bush will run for the next elections after Bush W is out of office to continue Bush Sr.'s legacy. :uh:
One would think the terrorists want Bush gone, and not attempt to delay the Presidential elections.
Gov. Jeb Bush will run for the next elections after Bush W is out of office to continue Bush Sr.'s legacy. :uh:
Emerald_Dragon
Sep 13th, 2004, 2:22 PM
>Sorry, who is John Titor?
:grin you don't want to know.
http://www.johntitor.com/
i think its a hoax. after much much reading. mainly because one of his sources for said TimeTravel possibilities [Stephen Hawking], has since reversed his thesis that what goes into a black hole comes out differently, to align with his opposition, the Quantum physicists, that what comes out of a black hole, would be the same. Which invalidated his theory of parrallel universes and virtual(imaginary) time....or something to that effect.
In any case, Titor's Time travel physics, was based on the use of localized singularities which were based partly on Hawking being right. He wasn't, says Hawking, and coughed up a baseball encyclopedia for losing his bet.
:grin you don't want to know.
http://www.johntitor.com/
i think its a hoax. after much much reading. mainly because one of his sources for said TimeTravel possibilities [Stephen Hawking], has since reversed his thesis that what goes into a black hole comes out differently, to align with his opposition, the Quantum physicists, that what comes out of a black hole, would be the same. Which invalidated his theory of parrallel universes and virtual(imaginary) time....or something to that effect.
In any case, Titor's Time travel physics, was based on the use of localized singularities which were based partly on Hawking being right. He wasn't, says Hawking, and coughed up a baseball encyclopedia for losing his bet.
lotrfan55345
Sep 17th, 2004, 5:16 PM
Recently in my suburb, people have been vandalizing "Kerry-Edwards" posts on peoples lawns, and putting in "Bush-Cheney" signs w/o consent.
I hope no one puts a "Bush-Cheney" sign in our lawn, because I'd probably just write "NAZI" over it, or "photoshop" it somehow.
I hope no one puts a "Bush-Cheney" sign in our lawn, because I'd probably just write "NAZI" over it, or "photoshop" it somehow.
Donsun
Oct 6th, 2004, 12:29 PM
something is wrong with this thread. it keeps showing todays post when its not. last post 9-17. :btchn:
WoOp_De_DoO
Oct 6th, 2004, 1:13 PM
It's because people keep voting in it.
Donsun
Oct 8th, 2004, 2:05 PM
It's because people keep voting in it.
ok thank you i thought it was ducthies fault! :2thumbs:
ok thank you i thought it was ducthies fault! :2thumbs:
Defiant Noquisi
Oct 12th, 2004, 11:12 AM
Yes, there will be a civil war and ill explain why
John titor said that there would be a civil war, and the date it happens will be blindingly obvous until it happens/
THis means it starts at the ellections at years end There might be loud civil strife but I doubt anything will occur just because John Titor said so.
I hope you are reading these boards and educating yourself. :dummy:
John titor said that there would be a civil war, and the date it happens will be blindingly obvous until it happens/
THis means it starts at the ellections at years end There might be loud civil strife but I doubt anything will occur just because John Titor said so.
I hope you are reading these boards and educating yourself. :dummy:
Bigsky770
Oct 25th, 2004, 11:27 PM
Arabs Worried About the Impact of ‘Second US Civil War’
Amir Taheri, Arab News
JEDDAH, 25 October 2004 — Normally it is Washington that worries about stability in Arab countries.
These days, however, there is much official nail biting in Arab capitals over the threat of instability in the United States.
“What we are witnessing in the United States is their second civil war,” says an Arab diplomat posted to Washington. “The difference is that this war is waged in the media, in churches, on the hustings, and inside many American homes.”
That next week’s presidential election is the closest in US history seems certain. What is causing concern in Arab and other capitals is that the intense passions unleashed by both sides could provoke instability and violence regardless of who wins.
Arab diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, claim that the Democrats, many of whom believe their party was robbed of victory in 2000, are determined to fight hard to dislodge President George W. Bush from the White House.
Fears that the “American street” might explode, in the fashion often attributed to the “Arab street,” may well be exaggerated. But the possibility of US government becoming paralyzed for weeks, if not months, as a result of disputes over election results cannot be discounted.
Both President Bush and his Democrat challenger Sen. John Kerry start from a solid support base of around 40 percent of the electorate each. The remaining 20 percent consists of undecided or floating voters whose decision could affect the outcome in 12 states still up for grabs.
In the 2000 presidential election the closeness of the results in the state of Florida provoked a legal duel that was ultimately decided by the US Supreme Court. This time the experience of Florida could be repeated in many other states.
Both Republicans and Democrats have already set up legal headquarters in Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Ohio, West Virginia and New Hampshire. Most polls show the two candidates neck-and-neck in those states. That means the outcome could be decided by a few dozen or a few hundred votes. Some of the states have laws under which if the margin of victory is less than half of one percent a recount is automatically conducted. Others have no such laws, forcing the loser to take the matter to court on other grounds such as possible fraud.
The Florida fight in 2000 dragged on for more than a month. Similar fights in a dozen or more states could last longer. And that could put American decision-making on autopilot, so to speak.
“The prospect of the US being unable to take urgent decisions for months cannot be taken lightly,” suggests an Arab diplomat. “Such paralysis could be dangerous in our region where the situation remains volatile. The war in Iraq, the dispute over Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the UN fight with Syria over Lebanon, and the Israeli plan to withdraw from Gaza cannot be put on the backburner for months.”
The calendar of events for the three months ahead is unusually full in the region.
• Three weeks after the American election Egypt will host an international conference, in Sharm al-Sheikh on the future of Iraq. A lame-duck US administration bogged down in domestic electoral disputes would lack the clout and he credibility to provide leadership.
• A few days after that the International Atomic Energy Agency will have to decide whether to refer Iran to the United Nations’ Security Council for an allegedly illegal nuclear program.
• Also in November Hamed Karzai is scheduled to be sworn in as the first directly elected president of Afghanistan, and to form a new Cabinet. Again, the US is required to play a central role in bringing the rival factions together to ensure a smooth transition to a pluralist system in Kabul.
• Early in December UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is scheduled to report on Syria’s compliance with resolution 1559 that requires the withdrawal of foreign troops from Lebanon. Political paralysis in Washington could render action impossible, thus deepening the crisis in Lebanon.
• In January, Iraq is scheduled to hold elections for a Constituent Assembly to approve the draft of a new constitution for submission to popular vote in a referendum. The perception that the US is too pre-occupied with domestic electoral disputes to focus on Iraqi elections could encourage the forces that are fighting to disrupt the process of democratization in Baghdad.
• In February, Israel is expected to start withdrawing troops from Gaza. This would require American leadership in forming an international peacekeeping force.
If Bush wins the Democrats are certain to do all they can to delay the finalization of the results through litigation.
But even if Kerry wins, the transition might not be as smooth as in 2000. The Republicans are likely to retain control of the Senate; and that would give them the possibility of delaying the formation of a Kerry administration by vetoing his nominees for key posts.
“It may be exaggerated that we are biting our nails in worry,” says an Arab official. “But we need contingency plans to cope with a situation in which the US is busy with its domestic fights.”
LINK to the story HERE:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=53398&d=25&m=10&y=2004
- - -Submitted by Joe (Bigsky770) :vbroll:
Amir Taheri, Arab News
JEDDAH, 25 October 2004 — Normally it is Washington that worries about stability in Arab countries.
These days, however, there is much official nail biting in Arab capitals over the threat of instability in the United States.
“What we are witnessing in the United States is their second civil war,” says an Arab diplomat posted to Washington. “The difference is that this war is waged in the media, in churches, on the hustings, and inside many American homes.”
That next week’s presidential election is the closest in US history seems certain. What is causing concern in Arab and other capitals is that the intense passions unleashed by both sides could provoke instability and violence regardless of who wins.
Arab diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, claim that the Democrats, many of whom believe their party was robbed of victory in 2000, are determined to fight hard to dislodge President George W. Bush from the White House.
Fears that the “American street” might explode, in the fashion often attributed to the “Arab street,” may well be exaggerated. But the possibility of US government becoming paralyzed for weeks, if not months, as a result of disputes over election results cannot be discounted.
Both President Bush and his Democrat challenger Sen. John Kerry start from a solid support base of around 40 percent of the electorate each. The remaining 20 percent consists of undecided or floating voters whose decision could affect the outcome in 12 states still up for grabs.
In the 2000 presidential election the closeness of the results in the state of Florida provoked a legal duel that was ultimately decided by the US Supreme Court. This time the experience of Florida could be repeated in many other states.
Both Republicans and Democrats have already set up legal headquarters in Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Ohio, West Virginia and New Hampshire. Most polls show the two candidates neck-and-neck in those states. That means the outcome could be decided by a few dozen or a few hundred votes. Some of the states have laws under which if the margin of victory is less than half of one percent a recount is automatically conducted. Others have no such laws, forcing the loser to take the matter to court on other grounds such as possible fraud.
The Florida fight in 2000 dragged on for more than a month. Similar fights in a dozen or more states could last longer. And that could put American decision-making on autopilot, so to speak.
“The prospect of the US being unable to take urgent decisions for months cannot be taken lightly,” suggests an Arab diplomat. “Such paralysis could be dangerous in our region where the situation remains volatile. The war in Iraq, the dispute over Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the UN fight with Syria over Lebanon, and the Israeli plan to withdraw from Gaza cannot be put on the backburner for months.”
The calendar of events for the three months ahead is unusually full in the region.
• Three weeks after the American election Egypt will host an international conference, in Sharm al-Sheikh on the future of Iraq. A lame-duck US administration bogged down in domestic electoral disputes would lack the clout and he credibility to provide leadership.
• A few days after that the International Atomic Energy Agency will have to decide whether to refer Iran to the United Nations’ Security Council for an allegedly illegal nuclear program.
• Also in November Hamed Karzai is scheduled to be sworn in as the first directly elected president of Afghanistan, and to form a new Cabinet. Again, the US is required to play a central role in bringing the rival factions together to ensure a smooth transition to a pluralist system in Kabul.
• Early in December UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is scheduled to report on Syria’s compliance with resolution 1559 that requires the withdrawal of foreign troops from Lebanon. Political paralysis in Washington could render action impossible, thus deepening the crisis in Lebanon.
• In January, Iraq is scheduled to hold elections for a Constituent Assembly to approve the draft of a new constitution for submission to popular vote in a referendum. The perception that the US is too pre-occupied with domestic electoral disputes to focus on Iraqi elections could encourage the forces that are fighting to disrupt the process of democratization in Baghdad.
• In February, Israel is expected to start withdrawing troops from Gaza. This would require American leadership in forming an international peacekeeping force.
If Bush wins the Democrats are certain to do all they can to delay the finalization of the results through litigation.
But even if Kerry wins, the transition might not be as smooth as in 2000. The Republicans are likely to retain control of the Senate; and that would give them the possibility of delaying the formation of a Kerry administration by vetoing his nominees for key posts.
“It may be exaggerated that we are biting our nails in worry,” says an Arab official. “But we need contingency plans to cope with a situation in which the US is busy with its domestic fights.”
LINK to the story HERE:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=53398&d=25&m=10&y=2004
- - -Submitted by Joe (Bigsky770) :vbroll:
Chris4334
Oct 30th, 2004, 2:08 AM
Speaking of John Titor...
Mad Cow in media again:
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20041029-011001-3787r
Damn U.S. election...has me up late reading conspiracy theories, worrying about the fate of the world. Why can't you find someone safe and reliable to elect? Stop causing me to lose sleep. All I hear about is the election right now. Every one of my professors at University is stressed about it, too. One is even going to America over the weekend to help Kerry's campaign. Whoever wins, the result is obviously going to be contested by the losing party.... If the complaints are fierce enough, who knows? Damn, I'm a conspiracy nut tonight...but I am getting a sense of some violence on the horizon!
Sorry for such a crazy post, after such a long time away from this place! Good to be back!
Mad Cow in media again:
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20041029-011001-3787r
Damn U.S. election...has me up late reading conspiracy theories, worrying about the fate of the world. Why can't you find someone safe and reliable to elect? Stop causing me to lose sleep. All I hear about is the election right now. Every one of my professors at University is stressed about it, too. One is even going to America over the weekend to help Kerry's campaign. Whoever wins, the result is obviously going to be contested by the losing party.... If the complaints are fierce enough, who knows? Damn, I'm a conspiracy nut tonight...but I am getting a sense of some violence on the horizon!
Sorry for such a crazy post, after such a long time away from this place! Good to be back!
White Knight
Oct 30th, 2004, 11:14 PM
I doubt it will be this year (as it's almost November already), but it probably will happen one day soon. We (America) are a divided country, probably as divided as we ever were. Just look at the election and how divided we are. If there is another disputed election, iut could trigger it. Perhaps we should split into two countries for the better of us all: One liberal and one conservative.
White Knight
Nov 5th, 2004, 12:38 AM
STFU...no one wants to read such hate filled posts.
Who are you to talk like that to me? Speak for yourself and no everyone else. What have I ever said that was "hate filled"? Then again, I guess anything the PC crowd disagrees with these days is hate filled. :vbroll:
Who are you to talk like that to me? Speak for yourself and no everyone else. What have I ever said that was "hate filled"? Then again, I guess anything the PC crowd disagrees with these days is hate filled. :vbroll:
Emerald_Dragon
Nov 5th, 2004, 11:56 AM
>We (America) are a divided country, probably as divided as we ever were.
yeah, its almost north vs. south....heartland vs. cutting edge,
blue vs. grey....blue vs. red.
>Who are you to talk like that to me?
do what i do, "ignore" him. the option is available in your settings. I've been on this
forum for over a year, all this mickeymouse does is incite hate. whoever uses that login, uses it to attack, and probably using another login, to actually add....more of the same.
yeah, its almost north vs. south....heartland vs. cutting edge,
blue vs. grey....blue vs. red.
>Who are you to talk like that to me?
do what i do, "ignore" him. the option is available in your settings. I've been on this
forum for over a year, all this mickeymouse does is incite hate. whoever uses that login, uses it to attack, and probably using another login, to actually add....more of the same.
Marajadex
Nov 9th, 2004, 4:02 PM
With the up-rising against the recent election I am wondering now if there could be a form of civil war in this country? A scary thought.
(Ha ha ha... On CNN Crossfire they just said that the "Blue" states should declare independance and join Canada becoming the "United States of Canada" and the "Red" states would become 'Jesusland")
(Ha ha ha... On CNN Crossfire they just said that the "Blue" states should declare independance and join Canada becoming the "United States of Canada" and the "Red" states would become 'Jesusland")
Havoc Angel
Nov 9th, 2004, 4:18 PM
hehe, here's a graphic of how it would look like on a political map:
click it ! (http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/04/11/con04485.html)
found via googling with 'jesusland'.
click it ! (http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/04/11/con04485.html)
found via googling with 'jesusland'.
Marajadex
Nov 9th, 2004, 9:11 PM
LOL! :rolling:
Yep That is the graphic they used on CNN!
Glad you found it!
::)):
Yep That is the graphic they used on CNN!
Glad you found it!
::)):
Hate_Republicrats
Dec 7th, 2004, 12:19 AM
No way. Too many chickenshit brainwashed sheep in this country to actually fight for Democracy and freedom.
substand
Dec 7th, 2004, 3:36 PM
Too many chickenshit brainwashed sheep in this country to actually fight for Democracy
Are you an authoritarian or do you want to empower chickenshit brainwashed sheep by allowing them to vote? I can't tell which side you fit on.
Are you an authoritarian or do you want to empower chickenshit brainwashed sheep by allowing them to vote? I can't tell which side you fit on.
Hate_Republicrats
Dec 7th, 2004, 8:36 PM
Are you an authoritarian or do you want to empower chickenshit brainwashed sheep by allowing them to vote? I can't tell which side you fit on.
I want people to wake up to the fact that the corporations are controlling America not the people. A vote does not mean anything when the elections are rigged and their is no real choice.
How can working and poor people be represented in this government when you either have to be a millionarre or backed by one to hold public offices. The corporations are stealing this countrys soul I am tired of Mc Wallyworld.
I want people to wake up to the fact that the corporations are controlling America not the people. A vote does not mean anything when the elections are rigged and their is no real choice.
How can working and poor people be represented in this government when you either have to be a millionarre or backed by one to hold public offices. The corporations are stealing this countrys soul I am tired of Mc Wallyworld.
ALIENTheorist
Dec 7th, 2004, 8:46 PM
tru Hate_Republicrats, but i think there might b a civil war as if the US is starting a war people will be against it many I mean in Canada (where I live) people rioted (not that I think it's the right thing 2 do as it premoted some vilence) this being said there might b... but where exactly was this war spose 2 b situated in... b4 i open my big mouth.. lol 2 late...
Death Rattle
Dec 8th, 2004, 3:31 PM
omg THAT'S GREAT. ::)):
Hysterical :drool:
Hysterical :drool:
substand
Dec 8th, 2004, 11:30 PM
I want people to wake up to the fact that the corporations are controlling America not the people. A vote does not mean anything when the elections are rigged and their is no real choice.
How can working and poor people be represented in this government when you either have to be a millionarre or backed by one to hold public offices. The corporations are stealing this countrys soul I am tired of Mc Wallyworld.
Well, you don't seem to have much faith in these chickenshit brainwashed sheep to wake up to the thought that corporations are controlling America. So do you think you'd be better off telling them? Maybe if you incorporated you could run America too and pull the wool from over their eyes...
Have you any proof of rigged elections? Can you say there was no real choice? People chose these candidates in primary elections. Perhaps they seem the same to you, but they obviously didn't seem that way to the people who voted to put them on the ticket for president.
What makes you think YOU escaped the brainwashing? Maybe you have been brainwashed to think the way you do and that plays right into the man's hands...
Maybe the problem isn't with the chickenshit brainwashed sheep. Maybe they know what's best for them, and they voted accordingly.
I know no corporation runs my life... well, aside from all the smokes and booze and music and computers and food I have to buy. Well, and then there's that contract I signed that forces me to be a pawn to TLC, inc... Maybe its time to incorporate myself so I can run things.
How can working and poor people be represented in this government when you either have to be a millionarre or backed by one to hold public offices. The corporations are stealing this countrys soul I am tired of Mc Wallyworld.
Well, you don't seem to have much faith in these chickenshit brainwashed sheep to wake up to the thought that corporations are controlling America. So do you think you'd be better off telling them? Maybe if you incorporated you could run America too and pull the wool from over their eyes...
Have you any proof of rigged elections? Can you say there was no real choice? People chose these candidates in primary elections. Perhaps they seem the same to you, but they obviously didn't seem that way to the people who voted to put them on the ticket for president.
What makes you think YOU escaped the brainwashing? Maybe you have been brainwashed to think the way you do and that plays right into the man's hands...
Maybe the problem isn't with the chickenshit brainwashed sheep. Maybe they know what's best for them, and they voted accordingly.
I know no corporation runs my life... well, aside from all the smokes and booze and music and computers and food I have to buy. Well, and then there's that contract I signed that forces me to be a pawn to TLC, inc... Maybe its time to incorporate myself so I can run things.
Emerald_Dragon
Dec 24th, 2004, 10:55 AM
>Well, you don't seem to have much faith in these chickenshit brainwashed sheep
>to wake up to the thought that corporations are controlling America.
i don't either.
people in America will vote what they believe to be right. They are too lazy to go out and look for answers, to question what's going on. They feel their gov't will take care of them. You can try to wake them up, if they will listen and read and observe. but well, they have to want to be awaken. you cannot force them. that's what 'choice' is all about. choose to look at whats going on or ignore it and do whatever.
i know that if people knew what's going on, they would wake up. but they are only finding out slowly. they have to educate themselves with the tools they have available. I've started with those around me. many are now aware. some choose to ignore it, saying its all some crazy conspiracy theory. but its working, people are becoming aware, seeing thru the BS that the corporate media is putting out.
corporations do own America, its the entrepreneurial mission, to start as a sole proprietorship evolving to more profitability via franchising, incorporating, or whatever means.
>Maybe the problem isn't with the chickenshit brainwashed sheep.
>Maybe they know what's best for them, and they voted accordingly.
they voted because they did not know any better.
even i voted for Kerry, when I knew the better candidate was Dean. But well, Dean didn't have the connections or background, to have a chance against W, whereas Kerry did. The better candidate never made it. The corporate media made sure of that. Its all about money and power. The Democrats didn't have enough money to buy the election, they didn't own the vote counters.
As for rigged elections, how many complaints to the GAO were there, when they decided to look into this years elections? Nothing funny going on? Why is our media focusing on vote fraud in the Ukraine, while ignoring our own in Ohio? I think they can't cover ours due to national security concerns.
>I know no corporation runs my life...
you run your life.
but corporations provide the entertainment, the food, the mortgage to your house,
the lien on your car, the malls that you shop at, etc. Even sole proprietors that provide services and goods have to rely on a corporation of some sort, to do so. How does a "mom and pop" shop compete with Walmart?
>to wake up to the thought that corporations are controlling America.
i don't either.
people in America will vote what they believe to be right. They are too lazy to go out and look for answers, to question what's going on. They feel their gov't will take care of them. You can try to wake them up, if they will listen and read and observe. but well, they have to want to be awaken. you cannot force them. that's what 'choice' is all about. choose to look at whats going on or ignore it and do whatever.
i know that if people knew what's going on, they would wake up. but they are only finding out slowly. they have to educate themselves with the tools they have available. I've started with those around me. many are now aware. some choose to ignore it, saying its all some crazy conspiracy theory. but its working, people are becoming aware, seeing thru the BS that the corporate media is putting out.
corporations do own America, its the entrepreneurial mission, to start as a sole proprietorship evolving to more profitability via franchising, incorporating, or whatever means.
>Maybe the problem isn't with the chickenshit brainwashed sheep.
>Maybe they know what's best for them, and they voted accordingly.
they voted because they did not know any better.
even i voted for Kerry, when I knew the better candidate was Dean. But well, Dean didn't have the connections or background, to have a chance against W, whereas Kerry did. The better candidate never made it. The corporate media made sure of that. Its all about money and power. The Democrats didn't have enough money to buy the election, they didn't own the vote counters.
As for rigged elections, how many complaints to the GAO were there, when they decided to look into this years elections? Nothing funny going on? Why is our media focusing on vote fraud in the Ukraine, while ignoring our own in Ohio? I think they can't cover ours due to national security concerns.
>I know no corporation runs my life...
you run your life.
but corporations provide the entertainment, the food, the mortgage to your house,
the lien on your car, the malls that you shop at, etc. Even sole proprietors that provide services and goods have to rely on a corporation of some sort, to do so. How does a "mom and pop" shop compete with Walmart?
WasteLandWa|2rior
Dec 24th, 2004, 6:03 PM
Ive thoguht about this topic pretty deeply.... and consitering how extreme this Neo conservitave/christian extremeist, administration is acting...
i could see civil war breaking out in the USA in the next 5 to 10 years...
see this administraitions objective seems to be...
rich get richer buy fucking over the poor...
this republican government will be the last "legitimate" governemet of the USA
democrats will not be heard... the rich, the corporations.. the governement, and the millitary will slowly segrigate themslefs from the middle class and the lower class...
this in turn could cause democratic "terriorisim" or thats what the goverment would call it...
but from the other end it will be freedom fighting...
just like they say micheal moore is a real patriot... and the bush admin is the trators..
i could see civil war breaking out in the USA in the next 5 to 10 years...
see this administraitions objective seems to be...
rich get richer buy fucking over the poor...
this republican government will be the last "legitimate" governemet of the USA
democrats will not be heard... the rich, the corporations.. the governement, and the millitary will slowly segrigate themslefs from the middle class and the lower class...
this in turn could cause democratic "terriorisim" or thats what the goverment would call it...
but from the other end it will be freedom fighting...
just like they say micheal moore is a real patriot... and the bush admin is the trators..
Matt_Armagedon666
Jan 2nd, 2005, 3:16 AM
Yes there will be one with in the next 10 years. Because of the stupid Liberals taking away the second Adment. In putting all the power in the judges bull #$% which are playing around with freaking international law. In third most "Americans" are getting really freaking sick of hearing people burn our flag or disrespect are country. These people don't deserve to clear are men in womens boots in our arm forces with there mouths. They are hateful of America...They go around saying that we are crap or we are greedy. Or some other bull #$#. That is hate speech...
These people blame America. While America gives the most money or food to the rest of the world. America should be looked up to not spit on. Americans have worked in died for our freedom. In look at what happen in the indian ocean we are there to help. You went to get into more good things America doe's?
If Liberals keep on pushing America into there stupid third world shit hole. Or discrease are laws for international laws. Or don't stop pushing there luck then yes there will be a Civil war. L
To lay some blame on Mr.Bush. I think V fox of Mexico, has something on him. Why because we are at war in Bush is leaving are back door open. In we are slowly going down the tolite. But that doe's not give any American the right to disrespect what our four fathers done to get us our freedom. God bless America!!!
These people blame America. While America gives the most money or food to the rest of the world. America should be looked up to not spit on. Americans have worked in died for our freedom. In look at what happen in the indian ocean we are there to help. You went to get into more good things America doe's?
If Liberals keep on pushing America into there stupid third world shit hole. Or discrease are laws for international laws. Or don't stop pushing there luck then yes there will be a Civil war. L
To lay some blame on Mr.Bush. I think V fox of Mexico, has something on him. Why because we are at war in Bush is leaving are back door open. In we are slowly going down the tolite. But that doe's not give any American the right to disrespect what our four fathers done to get us our freedom. God bless America!!!
lotrfan55345
Jan 6th, 2005, 10:24 PM
Yes there will be one with in the next 10 years. Because of the stupid Liberals taking away the second Adment.
?
In third most "Americans" are getting really freaking sick of hearing people burn our flag or disrespect are country.
I'm sure lots of non-americans are getting tired of Americans saying that too.
These people don't deserve to clear are men in womens boots in our arm forces with there mouths.
I don't get it
They are hateful of America...They go around saying that we are crap or we are greedy. Or some other bull #$#. That is hate speech...
... and this isn't?
These people blame America. While America gives the most money or food to the rest of the world.
Japan gives the most foreign aid. Specially shipping construction workers for infa projects. On the top of my head, they give something like 25%-ish of their GDP to aid.
America should be looked up to not spit on.
A lot of people do look up to America, like immigrants, and people like you. But can you force people to like America? Isn't that against the democratic way?
Americans have worked in died for our freedom.
I'm thankful for that...
If Liberals keep on pushing America into there stupid third world shit hole. Or discrease are laws for international laws. Or don't stop pushing there luck then yes there will be a Civil war.
The US could automatically revert to 3rd world status if China/Japan/OPEC decided they dont like us anymore because they own/control a substantial the economy and bought lots of our debt. If they sell all of that, automatical economic crash. Also, the budget deficit/debt was caused by the conservative W admin (a major factor atleast)
To lay some blame on Mr.Bush. I think V fox of Mexico, has something on him. Why because we are at war in Bush is leaving are back door open. In we are slowly going down the tolite.
I don't get that either. Tolite?
But that doe's not give any American the right to disrespect what our four fathers done to get us our freedom. God bless America!!!
Wasnt the freedom of speech law founded by our "four fathers"?
?
In third most "Americans" are getting really freaking sick of hearing people burn our flag or disrespect are country.
I'm sure lots of non-americans are getting tired of Americans saying that too.
These people don't deserve to clear are men in womens boots in our arm forces with there mouths.
I don't get it
They are hateful of America...They go around saying that we are crap or we are greedy. Or some other bull #$#. That is hate speech...
... and this isn't?
These people blame America. While America gives the most money or food to the rest of the world.
Japan gives the most foreign aid. Specially shipping construction workers for infa projects. On the top of my head, they give something like 25%-ish of their GDP to aid.
America should be looked up to not spit on.
A lot of people do look up to America, like immigrants, and people like you. But can you force people to like America? Isn't that against the democratic way?
Americans have worked in died for our freedom.
I'm thankful for that...
If Liberals keep on pushing America into there stupid third world shit hole. Or discrease are laws for international laws. Or don't stop pushing there luck then yes there will be a Civil war.
The US could automatically revert to 3rd world status if China/Japan/OPEC decided they dont like us anymore because they own/control a substantial the economy and bought lots of our debt. If they sell all of that, automatical economic crash. Also, the budget deficit/debt was caused by the conservative W admin (a major factor atleast)
To lay some blame on Mr.Bush. I think V fox of Mexico, has something on him. Why because we are at war in Bush is leaving are back door open. In we are slowly going down the tolite.
I don't get that either. Tolite?
But that doe's not give any American the right to disrespect what our four fathers done to get us our freedom. God bless America!!!
Wasnt the freedom of speech law founded by our "four fathers"?
substand
Jan 7th, 2005, 7:47 PM
On the top of my head, they give something like 25%-ish of their GDP to aid.
You are off by a couple of orders of magnitude there. its something like 0.25%-ish. Still a higher percent that the US (though US is still the largest donor in raw dollars), but WAY off in terms of how much they give.
You are off by a couple of orders of magnitude there. its something like 0.25%-ish. Still a higher percent that the US (though US is still the largest donor in raw dollars), but WAY off in terms of how much they give.
lotrfan55345
Jan 11th, 2005, 6:05 PM
You are off by a couple of orders of magnitude there. its something like 0.25%-ish. Still a higher percent that the US (though US is still the largest donor in raw dollars), but WAY off in terms of how much they give.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/develop/2003/0428flunk.htm
According to this the Netherlands gives the most out of GDP.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/develop/2003/0428flunk.htm
According to this the Netherlands gives the most out of GDP.
SoulofPowerx4
Feb 7th, 2005, 1:08 AM
I think if there is a Rebelion it would be after a catastrophic event, like a Nuclear war. I believe it would be a Failing Government trying to "Control" the people, while the people Deeply Enraged with its own government trying to over throw it. The weapons they are researching are Non - Lethal Weapons used by Police Officers which can be used for good but, they are being made to keep all of us in line with out killing us! I know that they are needed for riots, but whos to say whats a good riot, and a bad riot. The government is like our big brother telling us what is right and bad. Just a Thought.
Haliburton
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:19 PM
2004 is over no civil war. Shall we go for 2005? :jamn: :crazy:
derangel
Feb 16th, 2005, 6:43 AM
If the country split between North and South again, I'd be hard pressed to pick a clear winner. On the one hand, the North has plenty of money, but we have a lot of pacifists. The South has Texas, which is the proverbial equivalent of a hundred Scotlands, except with shotguns instead of bagpipes. This is a tough one.
There obviously wasn't a civil war in 2004, and the forecast doesn't look in favor of RebelvsYankee-style armageddon this year either. If there's a civil war at all it'll probably be between conservatives and liberals. Honestly, you wouldn't think those pro-lifers would put up that much of a fight, but they bite HARD.
Sorry, lack of sleep makes me write weird.
There obviously wasn't a civil war in 2004, and the forecast doesn't look in favor of RebelvsYankee-style armageddon this year either. If there's a civil war at all it'll probably be between conservatives and liberals. Honestly, you wouldn't think those pro-lifers would put up that much of a fight, but they bite HARD.
Sorry, lack of sleep makes me write weird.
White Knight
Feb 16th, 2005, 12:00 PM
If another Civil War breaks out, let's hope the good guys win this time.
midnight21
Feb 23rd, 2005, 11:06 PM
I highly doubt it- We'll be too busy fighting other country's wars like iraq and iran that they wouldn't even be thinking about another civil war. if there is, then it's pretty pathetic on our part...
Really. I'd be really shocked if another US civil war broke out...
Really. I'd be really shocked if another US civil war broke out...
Strife
Feb 24th, 2005, 2:01 AM
I highly doubt it- We'll be too busy fighting other country's wars like iraq and iran that they wouldn't even be thinking about another civil war. if there is, then it's pretty pathetic on our part...
Really. I'd be really shocked if another US civil war broke out...
Id be shocked myself if some how the U.S. pulls through with another war with the insufficient number of troops that we have.
Say if there were a draft soon...obviously many people in this country wouldn't be too happy would they? What if a draft costs the U.S. rebellion here at home, or say a civil war breaks. Think of it as strife between americans who back the government, and those who oppose such radical ideas.
Really. I'd be really shocked if another US civil war broke out...
Id be shocked myself if some how the U.S. pulls through with another war with the insufficient number of troops that we have.
Say if there were a draft soon...obviously many people in this country wouldn't be too happy would they? What if a draft costs the U.S. rebellion here at home, or say a civil war breaks. Think of it as strife between americans who back the government, and those who oppose such radical ideas.
Kaos
Feb 24th, 2005, 2:21 PM
i voted no, because the people of today are to fookin lazy to do anything for themselves.
Coolio
Feb 24th, 2005, 5:04 PM
meh, the reptilians are going to cause the civil war! lol
The Sword
Feb 25th, 2005, 11:54 PM
I have thought at times that civil war could be possible. Hate crimes evolving on a larger scale. And striking home(me) or close.
What about the chances of a recession? Is America in one now? Let's say not. But what if the Feds said we were, in a day not so long off. If so, you might as well call it THE GREAT RECESSION.
DEFACIT is the word and scewed up it is. How much deficit can America handle? People are not spending money like they used to, big time. And thet's a bad sign. A very bad sign.
So possibly a recession at this point in time could be the collapse of Americas great wealth. And giving enough reason for folks who are having hard times to get anxious. Sparks can cause fires.
But I will say being the greatful man I am; the ball is still rolling, and I hope it continues.
Honestly, I think things are going to get worse before they get better. Kinda like the bottom has fallen out. I don't think mankind can drown himself. Maybe we'll experience it as a whimpy decline. If not; it will be a new disaster we'll have to climb out of. Or maybe inventions will lead the way, and things will just remain typical.
I know of no pursuit in which more real and important services can be rendered to any country than by improving its agriculture, its breed of useful animals, and other branches of a husbandman's cares.
-George Washington
What about the chances of a recession? Is America in one now? Let's say not. But what if the Feds said we were, in a day not so long off. If so, you might as well call it THE GREAT RECESSION.
DEFACIT is the word and scewed up it is. How much deficit can America handle? People are not spending money like they used to, big time. And thet's a bad sign. A very bad sign.
So possibly a recession at this point in time could be the collapse of Americas great wealth. And giving enough reason for folks who are having hard times to get anxious. Sparks can cause fires.
But I will say being the greatful man I am; the ball is still rolling, and I hope it continues.
Honestly, I think things are going to get worse before they get better. Kinda like the bottom has fallen out. I don't think mankind can drown himself. Maybe we'll experience it as a whimpy decline. If not; it will be a new disaster we'll have to climb out of. Or maybe inventions will lead the way, and things will just remain typical.
I know of no pursuit in which more real and important services can be rendered to any country than by improving its agriculture, its breed of useful animals, and other branches of a husbandman's cares.
-George Washington
White Knight
Feb 26th, 2005, 1:02 AM
Why does there have to be a Civil War? Why can't we just seperate peacefully? I for one look foward to the day when we are two countries, one Red and one Blue.
Coolio
Feb 26th, 2005, 1:47 AM
well, cuz the smae tyhing that happend during the civil war will happen again, the part that didnt spilt, will wnat to keep the other from forming a new country.
White Knight
Feb 26th, 2005, 1:51 AM
well, cuz the smae tyhing that happend during the civil war will happen again, the part that didnt spilt, will wnat to keep the other from forming a new country.
Perhaps they'll realize this time that it wasn't worth the 1 million dead like in the first Civil War. A split would be better for both sides anyway. If it does come down to war, let's hope the good guys win this time.
Perhaps they'll realize this time that it wasn't worth the 1 million dead like in the first Civil War. A split would be better for both sides anyway. If it does come down to war, let's hope the good guys win this time.
substand
Mar 10th, 2005, 2:22 PM
Why does there have to be a Civil War? Why can't we just seperate peacefully? I for one look foward to the day when we are two countries, one Red and one Blue.
It's called Canada, and its just to the north of us.
It's called Canada, and its just to the north of us.
Bigsky770
Mar 11th, 2005, 1:17 PM
. . .Then it seems that it could start HERE:
Under Siege
PUBLISHED ON MARCH 10, 2005:
As illegal immigrants surge across Southern Arizona, life for ranchers living near the border has become a living hell
By LEO W. BANKS
You couldn't find a better place to have lunch than this cramped, dusty Cochise County cook shack. It has every bit of ambience that Arizona ranch country can offer, including a wood-slat ceiling covered with strips of tin from a dismantled pigpen. In ranching, nothing goes to waste, so when Ruth Evelyn Cowan had the opportunity to collect some scrap from her parents' New Mexico ranch, she grabbed it.
The tin might rattle in the wind and drum in the rain, but those sounds create a symphony for Cowan, who loves this place and this life. She was born into it 57 years ago, and you can see that it suits her down to the mud on her boots. You don't have to listen hard to hear the contentment in her voice when she goes on about her American Brahman cattle--big, silver, hump-backed animals with floppy ears that she talks to as if they were her kids.
But this is Southern Arizona under siege, so there really is only one subject on the agenda, one issue that dominates all others here: the border with Mexico and the invasion of illegals who, every day and every night, rush to fill this yawning vacuum.
They are hungry campesinos; unemployed Colombian dishwashers; Brazilian professors on the lam; Syrian women running from abusive men; felons and child molesters; young Mexican women who've been tricked into believing that Chicago is right up the road from Bisbee, so sure those Manolo Blahnik knockoffs will be perfect for walking there; strong-shouldered teenage boys who can lift everything you own for $7 an hour; dark-eyed men who love pornography and use breaks in their treks to ogle skin mags, then toss them on the ground before moving north again; drug addicts who litter pull-up sites with used needles; children who play with Barney dolls; terrified mothers who nurse their infants while hoping to reunite with their stone mason husbands; coyote guides who carry 9 mm automatics, long knives to slash the throats of barking dogs and epinephrine to squirt up their noses for fast energy; and pregnant girls desperate to birth their babies in the great United States.
You can't name a category of human being--good-hearted or crooked, kind or mean--or a nation, religion or ethnic group that isn't using this border to sneak into America illegally. The numbers boggle the mind. In January alone, the Border Patrol in the Tucson sector impounded 557 smuggling vehicles, confiscated 34,864 pounds of marijuana and arrested 35,704 illegals, according to agency spokesman Jose Garza.
The important number is one they can't pinpoint with certainty: how many got through. But figure it this way, using the common belief that, conservatively, for every arrest the Border Patrol makes, another two illegals make it through: With almost 500,000 arrests in the Tucson sector last year, that means somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 million illegals broke into the country successfully last year--an average of almost 3,000 every 24 hours. And arrests for 2005 are up 10 percent, according to Garza.
Because of the sheer number of illegals--as well as their desperation, their willingness to destroy property and intimidate, and the always-simmering fear--Cowan and husband, Bob Giles, have sold most of their cattle and are significantly scaling back their ranching operation.
"I feel such relief," says Cowan of the decision she and her husband made last summer. "I'm tired of continually looking over my shoulder. I'd like to be able to get up in the morning and not have the first part of my day spent repairing damage from the night before. I'd like to be able to live on my own ranch, but I don't feel safe there. I want a rattlesnake to be the worst thing I have to worry about."
Lunch today is tamales and lemonade. It's beautiful outside, the sunlit-gold grass bending in the wind and the Dragoon Mountains standing against the far horizon like black-and-purple pyramids. They make postcards out of scenes like this. Cowan stops to catch her breath. Little in her manner or the setting indicates the seriousness of the topic, or the heartbreak involved. She's good at keeping the rawest of her emotions in check. But there is one tip-off, and it's her eyes. They burn as she talks.
"I'm not an angry person, but I'm just ticked all the time, and that's not a healthy way to live. We're all so angry here. We're tired of the apathy of people who live elsewhere. What's happening here is everyone's problem, not just ours. We're tired of people who live in another country thumbing their noses at our laws, our culture and our customs, and threatening what we've spent generations building."
The words still hold little heat. As we eat and listen to the breeze sifting through the shack, Cowan continues in flat-toned recitation of what she and other ranchers have been saying for a long time. But no one has listened, and nothing has changed, and maybe that's what you hear in her voice--a sad resignation born of the knowledge that she's powerless to change the ongoing nightmare of her life.
"I'm a rich rancher," Cowan says, her tone mocking the very idea. "Well, I guess I am rich in a way. I have my husband, my parents, my friends, the ability to work and make a living. As far as cash in my pocket, I don't have that. Financially, I've been devastated. But I feel spiritually, emotionally and physically bankrupt, too. In my lifetime, I've never been where I am today. I don't want to see the damage the illegals have done anymore, I don't want to look at it; I don't want to fix it. That's a whole new me, because I'm 9-foot-tall and bulletproof. The illegals have changed everything."
The LINK to the story HERE:
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/Currents/Content?oid=oid:66509
. . .The above story (I had to say) when one gives it the benefit of the full read (I urge everyone that likes to keep up with the news to click the link and read the entire story) I've found to be more than a little scary and very displeasing. I understand that many illegals hope to come to this country to provide for themselves and their families a better way of life, but the problem therein is that we cannot know the intentions of all illegals that arrive here, as the FBI has also already issued a warning that Al~Queda actives could easily enter in this way. We're going to need to take some action in this area if we even hope to maintain safety. Those of you that live in these areas, gotta say here and now that I am concerned for your safety. . .
Joe (Bigsky770) [no smilies to add to this one. THIS could get VERY SERIOUS!]
Under Siege
PUBLISHED ON MARCH 10, 2005:
As illegal immigrants surge across Southern Arizona, life for ranchers living near the border has become a living hell
By LEO W. BANKS
You couldn't find a better place to have lunch than this cramped, dusty Cochise County cook shack. It has every bit of ambience that Arizona ranch country can offer, including a wood-slat ceiling covered with strips of tin from a dismantled pigpen. In ranching, nothing goes to waste, so when Ruth Evelyn Cowan had the opportunity to collect some scrap from her parents' New Mexico ranch, she grabbed it.
The tin might rattle in the wind and drum in the rain, but those sounds create a symphony for Cowan, who loves this place and this life. She was born into it 57 years ago, and you can see that it suits her down to the mud on her boots. You don't have to listen hard to hear the contentment in her voice when she goes on about her American Brahman cattle--big, silver, hump-backed animals with floppy ears that she talks to as if they were her kids.
But this is Southern Arizona under siege, so there really is only one subject on the agenda, one issue that dominates all others here: the border with Mexico and the invasion of illegals who, every day and every night, rush to fill this yawning vacuum.
They are hungry campesinos; unemployed Colombian dishwashers; Brazilian professors on the lam; Syrian women running from abusive men; felons and child molesters; young Mexican women who've been tricked into believing that Chicago is right up the road from Bisbee, so sure those Manolo Blahnik knockoffs will be perfect for walking there; strong-shouldered teenage boys who can lift everything you own for $7 an hour; dark-eyed men who love pornography and use breaks in their treks to ogle skin mags, then toss them on the ground before moving north again; drug addicts who litter pull-up sites with used needles; children who play with Barney dolls; terrified mothers who nurse their infants while hoping to reunite with their stone mason husbands; coyote guides who carry 9 mm automatics, long knives to slash the throats of barking dogs and epinephrine to squirt up their noses for fast energy; and pregnant girls desperate to birth their babies in the great United States.
You can't name a category of human being--good-hearted or crooked, kind or mean--or a nation, religion or ethnic group that isn't using this border to sneak into America illegally. The numbers boggle the mind. In January alone, the Border Patrol in the Tucson sector impounded 557 smuggling vehicles, confiscated 34,864 pounds of marijuana and arrested 35,704 illegals, according to agency spokesman Jose Garza.
The important number is one they can't pinpoint with certainty: how many got through. But figure it this way, using the common belief that, conservatively, for every arrest the Border Patrol makes, another two illegals make it through: With almost 500,000 arrests in the Tucson sector last year, that means somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 million illegals broke into the country successfully last year--an average of almost 3,000 every 24 hours. And arrests for 2005 are up 10 percent, according to Garza.
Because of the sheer number of illegals--as well as their desperation, their willingness to destroy property and intimidate, and the always-simmering fear--Cowan and husband, Bob Giles, have sold most of their cattle and are significantly scaling back their ranching operation.
"I feel such relief," says Cowan of the decision she and her husband made last summer. "I'm tired of continually looking over my shoulder. I'd like to be able to get up in the morning and not have the first part of my day spent repairing damage from the night before. I'd like to be able to live on my own ranch, but I don't feel safe there. I want a rattlesnake to be the worst thing I have to worry about."
Lunch today is tamales and lemonade. It's beautiful outside, the sunlit-gold grass bending in the wind and the Dragoon Mountains standing against the far horizon like black-and-purple pyramids. They make postcards out of scenes like this. Cowan stops to catch her breath. Little in her manner or the setting indicates the seriousness of the topic, or the heartbreak involved. She's good at keeping the rawest of her emotions in check. But there is one tip-off, and it's her eyes. They burn as she talks.
"I'm not an angry person, but I'm just ticked all the time, and that's not a healthy way to live. We're all so angry here. We're tired of the apathy of people who live elsewhere. What's happening here is everyone's problem, not just ours. We're tired of people who live in another country thumbing their noses at our laws, our culture and our customs, and threatening what we've spent generations building."
The words still hold little heat. As we eat and listen to the breeze sifting through the shack, Cowan continues in flat-toned recitation of what she and other ranchers have been saying for a long time. But no one has listened, and nothing has changed, and maybe that's what you hear in her voice--a sad resignation born of the knowledge that she's powerless to change the ongoing nightmare of her life.
"I'm a rich rancher," Cowan says, her tone mocking the very idea. "Well, I guess I am rich in a way. I have my husband, my parents, my friends, the ability to work and make a living. As far as cash in my pocket, I don't have that. Financially, I've been devastated. But I feel spiritually, emotionally and physically bankrupt, too. In my lifetime, I've never been where I am today. I don't want to see the damage the illegals have done anymore, I don't want to look at it; I don't want to fix it. That's a whole new me, because I'm 9-foot-tall and bulletproof. The illegals have changed everything."
The LINK to the story HERE:
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/Currents/Content?oid=oid:66509
. . .The above story (I had to say) when one gives it the benefit of the full read (I urge everyone that likes to keep up with the news to click the link and read the entire story) I've found to be more than a little scary and very displeasing. I understand that many illegals hope to come to this country to provide for themselves and their families a better way of life, but the problem therein is that we cannot know the intentions of all illegals that arrive here, as the FBI has also already issued a warning that Al~Queda actives could easily enter in this way. We're going to need to take some action in this area if we even hope to maintain safety. Those of you that live in these areas, gotta say here and now that I am concerned for your safety. . .
Joe (Bigsky770) [no smilies to add to this one. THIS could get VERY SERIOUS!]
Bigsky770
Mar 11th, 2005, 1:38 PM
FBI chief warns of aliens
from al-Qaida-tied nations
Illegals 1st get false identity in Brazil, then enter Mexico, cross U.S. border
Posted: March 8, 2005
7:33 p.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
Adding information to previous reports about terrorists crossing the southern border, FBI Director Robert Mueller told a congressional panel today that illegal aliens from countries with ties to al-Qaida have crossed into the U.S. from Mexico using false identities.
Mueller says some of the aliens are people with Middle Eastern names who have adopted Hispanic last names before coming into the U.S.
"We are concerned, Homeland Security is concerned about special interest aliens entering the United States," Mueller said.
"Special interest aliens" are those from countries where al-Qaida is known to be active, the Associated Press reported.
Mueller said one route takes Middle Easterners to Brazil, where they assume false identities before entering Mexico and then crossing into the U.S.
Bush administration officials have previously said al-Qaida could try to infiltrate the United States through the Mexican border.
Full story from this LINK:
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43211
Joe (Bigsky770)
from al-Qaida-tied nations
Illegals 1st get false identity in Brazil, then enter Mexico, cross U.S. border
Posted: March 8, 2005
7:33 p.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
Adding information to previous reports about terrorists crossing the southern border, FBI Director Robert Mueller told a congressional panel today that illegal aliens from countries with ties to al-Qaida have crossed into the U.S. from Mexico using false identities.
Mueller says some of the aliens are people with Middle Eastern names who have adopted Hispanic last names before coming into the U.S.
"We are concerned, Homeland Security is concerned about special interest aliens entering the United States," Mueller said.
"Special interest aliens" are those from countries where al-Qaida is known to be active, the Associated Press reported.
Mueller said one route takes Middle Easterners to Brazil, where they assume false identities before entering Mexico and then crossing into the U.S.
Bush administration officials have previously said al-Qaida could try to infiltrate the United States through the Mexican border.
Full story from this LINK:
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43211
Joe (Bigsky770)
Bigsky770
Mar 11th, 2005, 2:07 PM
. . .I'd think that the month of "April" could be the start of things. . .:(
'Minutemen' to Patrol Arizona Border to Curb Illegal Immigration Crossings
By Lara Jakes Jordan Associated Press Writer
Published: Feb 21, 2005
WASHINGTON (AP) - Intent on securing the vulnerable Arizona border from illegal immigrant crossings, U.S. officials are bracing for what they call a potential new threat this spring: the Minutemen.
Nearly 500 volunteers have already joined the Minuteman Project, anointing themselves civilian border patrol agents determined to stop the immigration flow that routinely, and easily, seeps past federal authorities. They plan to patrol a 40-mile stretch of the southeast Arizona border throughout April when the tide of immigrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border peaks.
"I felt the only way to get something done was to do it yourself," said Jim Gilchrist, a retired accountant and decorated Vietnam War veteran who is helping recruit Minutemen across the country.
"We've been repeatedly accused of being people who are taking the law into our own hands," said Gilchrist, 56, of Aliso Viejo, Calif. "That is an outright bogus statement. We are going down there to assist law enforcement."
Officials concede the 370-mile Arizona border is the most porous stretch on the U.S.-Mexico line. Moreover, recent intelligence show that al-Qaida terrorists are likely to enter the country through the Mexico border, James Loy, the deputy secretary of the Homeland Security Department, said last week.
"Several al-Qaida leaders believe operatives can pay their way into the country through Mexico, and also believe illegal entry is more advantageous than legal entry for operational security reasons," Loy said in written testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Rest of the story from this LINK:
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB59DREG5E.html
Post Note: I don't (myself) think that this is a very good idea; Here we have a case whereas civilians are patrolling a border as such, many of whom I fear have not the slightest clue as to what they may be up against. Well-armed and funded drug-dealers as well as people-smugglers that use fully-automatic weapons and may be armed with the latest in tech to get their dirty-work done. I fear many needless casualties from this and the start of things that would be better handled by Nat'l Guard units patrolling the same areas. It is a job that best can be accomplished by the military and our government needs to see this as a "Real and imminent threat", and not just nickel-and-dime this one away with a few guards here, a few there. In closing though, one must ask? "What about those Americans that LIVE in these areas traumatized by these events do?" Just pick-up and run? Have they no right to defend themselves and their property should the government prove unwilling (or) unable to do this? No easy answers in this one, I'm afraid. . .
Joe (Bigsky770)
'Minutemen' to Patrol Arizona Border to Curb Illegal Immigration Crossings
By Lara Jakes Jordan Associated Press Writer
Published: Feb 21, 2005
WASHINGTON (AP) - Intent on securing the vulnerable Arizona border from illegal immigrant crossings, U.S. officials are bracing for what they call a potential new threat this spring: the Minutemen.
Nearly 500 volunteers have already joined the Minuteman Project, anointing themselves civilian border patrol agents determined to stop the immigration flow that routinely, and easily, seeps past federal authorities. They plan to patrol a 40-mile stretch of the southeast Arizona border throughout April when the tide of immigrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border peaks.
"I felt the only way to get something done was to do it yourself," said Jim Gilchrist, a retired accountant and decorated Vietnam War veteran who is helping recruit Minutemen across the country.
"We've been repeatedly accused of being people who are taking the law into our own hands," said Gilchrist, 56, of Aliso Viejo, Calif. "That is an outright bogus statement. We are going down there to assist law enforcement."
Officials concede the 370-mile Arizona border is the most porous stretch on the U.S.-Mexico line. Moreover, recent intelligence show that al-Qaida terrorists are likely to enter the country through the Mexico border, James Loy, the deputy secretary of the Homeland Security Department, said last week.
"Several al-Qaida leaders believe operatives can pay their way into the country through Mexico, and also believe illegal entry is more advantageous than legal entry for operational security reasons," Loy said in written testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Rest of the story from this LINK:
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB59DREG5E.html
Post Note: I don't (myself) think that this is a very good idea; Here we have a case whereas civilians are patrolling a border as such, many of whom I fear have not the slightest clue as to what they may be up against. Well-armed and funded drug-dealers as well as people-smugglers that use fully-automatic weapons and may be armed with the latest in tech to get their dirty-work done. I fear many needless casualties from this and the start of things that would be better handled by Nat'l Guard units patrolling the same areas. It is a job that best can be accomplished by the military and our government needs to see this as a "Real and imminent threat", and not just nickel-and-dime this one away with a few guards here, a few there. In closing though, one must ask? "What about those Americans that LIVE in these areas traumatized by these events do?" Just pick-up and run? Have they no right to defend themselves and their property should the government prove unwilling (or) unable to do this? No easy answers in this one, I'm afraid. . .
Joe (Bigsky770)
voxpopulisuxx
Mar 13th, 2005, 5:07 PM
I belive there will be a sort of Balkan style civil war, not like A against B...but more like A+B against L and M.....and all of them against Z,,,total fracturing, tribalism (innercity) and sectarianism....but not this year...but within my own life time...so I didnt vote at all...
Hofner
Apr 8th, 2005, 3:06 AM
Well, i think it would be impossible for a civil war to break out here the only way we could go into civil war would be if Amerikka nuked another country first or somthing like that , then the people would rebel, but i don't think it's going to happen anytime soon.
As I read your post, I can't help but wonder how old you are - to have made a comment such as this suggests you have no awareness of the MANY, MANY potential causes of a civil war in America which, in my personal opinion, is long overdue; actually, not so much civil war as outright anarchy. Unfortunately, inherent in anarchy is disorganized violence to no viable end, so perhaps just a clean coups is in order.
But back to my original point: Have you not considered civil rights, human rights, infringements upon our Constitutional Rights as potential causes of a civil war in this country? How about the beautiful simplicity of the Red/Blue philosophy? Or even better, a Michael Moore movie that everyone believes? That would do it! I would have to put the people's reaction to our "nuking another country" as WAAAY down the credibility list, right there with that "gentleman scholar" who doesn't believe in supervolcanoes. . .
Cheers!
As I read your post, I can't help but wonder how old you are - to have made a comment such as this suggests you have no awareness of the MANY, MANY potential causes of a civil war in America which, in my personal opinion, is long overdue; actually, not so much civil war as outright anarchy. Unfortunately, inherent in anarchy is disorganized violence to no viable end, so perhaps just a clean coups is in order.
But back to my original point: Have you not considered civil rights, human rights, infringements upon our Constitutional Rights as potential causes of a civil war in this country? How about the beautiful simplicity of the Red/Blue philosophy? Or even better, a Michael Moore movie that everyone believes? That would do it! I would have to put the people's reaction to our "nuking another country" as WAAAY down the credibility list, right there with that "gentleman scholar" who doesn't believe in supervolcanoes. . .
Cheers!
repentantsinner
Apr 8th, 2005, 7:16 PM
Just wait till the next, or series of next terrorist attacks enable th us government to declare martial law. Many will revolt agaist the police state. Wait untill the powers that be try to confiscate people guns, then there will be millions of "patriots', "constitutionalist", "millitia", "survivalists" etc. fighting against the government.
bbbv3.5
Apr 8th, 2005, 7:30 PM
Well its 2005...nope dont remember a civil war breaking out in 2004. I might have pressed a nurralizer from MIB to make me forget abotu it im not sure.. Do any of you remember a civil war.
cjpluss
Apr 9th, 2005, 5:22 AM
Just wait till the next, or series of next terrorist attacks enable th us government to declare martial law. Many will revolt agaist the police state. Wait untill the powers that be try to confiscate people guns, then there will be millions of "patriots', "constitutionalist", "millitia", "survivalists" etc. fighting against the government.
Confiscate people's guns... well they could never do that here in the UK, as noone even has guns. There are totally illlegal under ANY circumstances. If you are found to have a gun, you will be arrested. Wait, does that mean its already happened here... :lol: :lol:
Confiscate people's guns... well they could never do that here in the UK, as noone even has guns. There are totally illlegal under ANY circumstances. If you are found to have a gun, you will be arrested. Wait, does that mean its already happened here... :lol: :lol:
White Knight
Apr 9th, 2005, 3:36 PM
Confiscate people's guns... well they could never do that here in the UK, as noone even has guns. There are totally illlegal under ANY circumstances. If you are found to have a gun, you will be arrested. Wait, does that mean its already happened here... :lol: :lol:
How long's it been since guns became illegal in the UK, like 20 years? Why didn't you guys revolt? Didn't you have pro-gun groups (like the NRA) like we do?
How long's it been since guns became illegal in the UK, like 20 years? Why didn't you guys revolt? Didn't you have pro-gun groups (like the NRA) like we do?
cjpluss
Apr 10th, 2005, 2:20 PM
How long's it been since guns became illegal in the UK, like 20 years? Why didn't you guys revolt? Didn't you have pro-gun groups (like the NRA) like we do?
I guess we just really didn't need them, and most people didn't have them anyway. There is nothing good about guns, they only cause trouble. Im sure there were pro gun groups, but there just weren't enough people supporting them to revolt. Not even police here can carry guns, only in situations where the criminal has a gun too, but again, that rarely happens. Everyone feels alot safer without them
I guess we just really didn't need them, and most people didn't have them anyway. There is nothing good about guns, they only cause trouble. Im sure there were pro gun groups, but there just weren't enough people supporting them to revolt. Not even police here can carry guns, only in situations where the criminal has a gun too, but again, that rarely happens. Everyone feels alot safer without them
Red Shift
Apr 21st, 2005, 2:43 PM
i am personnaly looking to get a job in the police, taking a course at college that is geared towards the poice, army, navy...etc
While there are many police officers who don't want to carry firearms, i am among the few that want to see every officer armed with a firearm, i have friends in the police who have been in terrible situations due to not carrying fire arms, eg, officers in persuit, not knowing the criminal/suspect is armed
Although i hear that the public get a sense of security knowing the British police force don't have to carry firearms, i would feel safer if they did
There is the idea of every officer being armed with a taser/stun gun
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1465000/images/_1468188_stungun2.gif
but until that is here, i feel the police are in the situation of being under gunned in some situations (the fact of stun guns are non leathal weapons makes me prefer them to conventional firearms, but of course they have their disadvantages...)
just my two cents or pennies :dork:
just incase you want to know more about the proposed stun gun http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1468188.stm
P.S --- CJPluss, not wanting to be a buttmunch or anything, but there are circumstances where you can own firearms in the UK and its legal :P
Shotgun licences all round kiddies :P
Only thing that makes shotguns illegal is the storage of weapon, ammo and obtaining a license
there are some other circumstances with other weapons, but i've typed enough already :P
While there are many police officers who don't want to carry firearms, i am among the few that want to see every officer armed with a firearm, i have friends in the police who have been in terrible situations due to not carrying fire arms, eg, officers in persuit, not knowing the criminal/suspect is armed
Although i hear that the public get a sense of security knowing the British police force don't have to carry firearms, i would feel safer if they did
There is the idea of every officer being armed with a taser/stun gun
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1465000/images/_1468188_stungun2.gif
but until that is here, i feel the police are in the situation of being under gunned in some situations (the fact of stun guns are non leathal weapons makes me prefer them to conventional firearms, but of course they have their disadvantages...)
just my two cents or pennies :dork:
just incase you want to know more about the proposed stun gun http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1468188.stm
P.S --- CJPluss, not wanting to be a buttmunch or anything, but there are circumstances where you can own firearms in the UK and its legal :P
Shotgun licences all round kiddies :P
Only thing that makes shotguns illegal is the storage of weapon, ammo and obtaining a license
there are some other circumstances with other weapons, but i've typed enough already :P
White Knight
Apr 21st, 2005, 3:09 PM
i am personnaly looking to get a job in the police, taking a course at college that is geared towards the poice, army, navy...etc
While there are many police officers who don't want to carry firearms, i am among the few that want to see every officer armed with a firearm, i have friends in the police who have been in terrible situations due to not carrying fire arms, eg, officers in persuit, not knowing the criminal/suspect is armed
Although i hear that the public get a sense of security knowing the British police force don't have to carry firearms, i would feel safer if they did
There is the idea of every officer being armed with a taser/stun gun
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1465000/images/_1468188_stungun2.gif
but until that is here, i feel the police are in the situation of being under gunned in some situations (the fact of stun guns are non leathal weapons makes me prefer them to conventional firearms, but of course they have their disadvantages...)
just my two cents or pennies :dork:
just incase you want to know more about the proposed stun gun http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1468188.stm
P.S --- CJPluss, not wanting to be a buttmunch or anything, but there are circumstances where you can own firearms in the UK and its legal :P
Shotgun licences all round kiddies :P
Only thing that makes shotguns illegal is the storage of weapon, ammo and obtaining a license
there are some other circumstances with other weapons, but i've typed enough already :P
Wow, that's just nuts how our countries are soooooooooo different. Here in the States, the police are always talking about being MORE armed, not less. I can't even begin to imagine why any cop would want to not carry a gun. Actually, I can't imagine why any PERSON wouldn't want a gun, but that's a whole new ballgame. :)
While there are many police officers who don't want to carry firearms, i am among the few that want to see every officer armed with a firearm, i have friends in the police who have been in terrible situations due to not carrying fire arms, eg, officers in persuit, not knowing the criminal/suspect is armed
Although i hear that the public get a sense of security knowing the British police force don't have to carry firearms, i would feel safer if they did
There is the idea of every officer being armed with a taser/stun gun
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1465000/images/_1468188_stungun2.gif
but until that is here, i feel the police are in the situation of being under gunned in some situations (the fact of stun guns are non leathal weapons makes me prefer them to conventional firearms, but of course they have their disadvantages...)
just my two cents or pennies :dork:
just incase you want to know more about the proposed stun gun http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1468188.stm
P.S --- CJPluss, not wanting to be a buttmunch or anything, but there are circumstances where you can own firearms in the UK and its legal :P
Shotgun licences all round kiddies :P
Only thing that makes shotguns illegal is the storage of weapon, ammo and obtaining a license
there are some other circumstances with other weapons, but i've typed enough already :P
Wow, that's just nuts how our countries are soooooooooo different. Here in the States, the police are always talking about being MORE armed, not less. I can't even begin to imagine why any cop would want to not carry a gun. Actually, I can't imagine why any PERSON wouldn't want a gun, but that's a whole new ballgame. :)
White Knight
Apr 21st, 2005, 3:09 PM
Double post, please delete.
Marajadex
Apr 21st, 2005, 4:56 PM
I am not sure if this is true all over the US but here locally if a policeman or woman wants to carry a taser they have to be hit by one first. Then they can be allowed to carry one.
mikem
May 3rd, 2005, 12:42 PM
I am not sure if this is true all over the US but here locally if a policeman or woman wants to carry a taser they have to be hit by one first. Then they can be allowed to carry one.
Meaning if you are attacked/shocked with or by a taser, you are then allowed to carry one of your own?
Meaning if you are attacked/shocked with or by a taser, you are then allowed to carry one of your own?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.6 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.