-
My[Confined]Space
Better Than Bread
Movies Coming Soon- Star Trek Books
- “Star Trek: Voyager: 16 Seven Of Nine” Review by Deepspacespines.com
- Nana Visitor Joins Us to Talk About Her New Book – Star Trek: Open a Channel: A Woman’s Trek!
- Out Today: “Star Trek #26”
- Star Trek Strange New Worlds Asylum Book Review
- John Jackson Miller Books Ranked!
- “Star Trek: The Next Generation: Headlong Flight” Review by Lessaccurategrandmother.blogspot.com
- Jumping into Adventure with “Into the Void”
- Happy 2024 Birthday to Jim Johnson!
- “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds: Asylum” Review by Trek.fm
- Beadle & Grimm Interview With StarTrekBookClub.com
- Movie Related Products
- “Deadpool & Wolverine” Review
- Kevin Smith Is Getting Closer and Closer to Dogma 2
- “The Garfield Movie” Review
- Disney Said to be Considering a Surprising Replacement for Bob Iger: EA CEO Andrew Wilson – IGN
- Amazon Is Shutting Down Freevee, Its Ad-Supported Video Streamer
- “Breathe” Review
- “Transformers One” Review
- Captain America: Brave New World | Official Trailer
- Marvel Studios’ Thunderbolts* | D23 Brazil Special Look | In Theaters May 2, 2025
- Mattel apologizes after mistakenly printing porn site on ‘Wicked’ movie dolls packaging | CNN Business
- Music Video DB
Tasteless ad is Tasteless, regardless of your political position.
Huh? Is this reverse psychology? 9/11 happened when we had a Republican President and a Republican congress. They still haven’t caught the guy responsible. Have Republicans done anything to prove they are better at national security?
img154.imageshack.us/img154/8364/feelsgoodman911yv8.th.jpg
This is bullshit, terrorism is terrorism (or national conspiracy, whatever)… no kind of government is going to stop it. Maybe a hippie kind… they wouldn’t get into shit like this, so it would not happen.
what??!! absolutely ridiculous. wasn’t there a Republican President in office, who sat in a kiddie chair for SEVEN MINUTES after being told “the country is under attack”?? what part of country is this from? i think i’ll visit that site and tell them my personal opinion now…
If you go to the website on the buildboard and read the guy’s profile it will explain a lot. I mean, he thanks FOX News for showing him the evils of liberalism. Also, he doesn’t know the difference between “you’re” and “your.” However, you got to give the guy credit for trying to make a buck off of American politics.
Oh, and the guy was born in Canada and raised in Florida.
“i think i’ll visit that site and tell them my personal opinion now…”
Posting complaints on the internet is the sharpest and rarest of tools. Be sure to use your powers wisely.
Sometimes it’s impossible to underestimate enough the stupidity of certain segments of the population. I don’t think it matters what country you’re looking at. Unfortunately, we may have more than our share in our own country and they think they should display their stupidity on a billboard and FOX.
Vote for whoever is more qualified. Having parties is fucking retarded. We should just have ideas.
With parties many people vote for the party they’re associated with simply out of spite.
So, thousands of candidates, no form of large-scale fundraising, and thus a complete inability to get your message out there? That’ll work.
Ideas are bullshit, anyway. Jim Jones was lucid and intelligent (in fact he didn’t believe in God or religion and most of his teachings were political and economic), but in practise he lead the biggest an herodom in history. “Communism is nice in theory” has become one of the blandest cliches I can imagine, and would have more kick if it ended with “but involved killing all the people in Cambodia with eye-sight related prescriptions in practise” blah blah blah
Look at me, I can argue about political bullshit on the internets and pretend that my words will do anything other than annoy a pack of idiots halfway across the globe, and that anyone will honestly give a shit.
Not that anyone is necessarily guilty of it in this thread, not yet.
Terror’s tha product ya push
Well I’m a truth addict, oh shit I gotta headrush
Tha sheep tremble an here come tha votes
Thrown from tha throat, new cages and scapegoats
One caution tha mics a detonator unwound
Ta shut down tha devil sound
Shut down tha devil sound
Check tha heads bow in vietnow
Shut down tha devil sound
Turn on tha radio, nah fuck it turn it off
Fear is your only god on the radio
Nah fuck it, turn it off
Turn it off, turn on tha radio, nah fuck it turn it off
Fear is your only god on the radio
Nah fuck it, your saviour’s my guillotine, crosses and kerosene
Well, Bush took office in early 2001 and most of the terrorists involved in 9/11 came to the US in 2000, hence during Clinton’s term…but if you want to go back to 1998 you’ll find that Bin Laden’s location was known and we had a team within range to take him out and Clinton said no. His death might have prevented 9/11 and the USS Cole bombing.
On a sidenote, the war in Iraq is stupid, but it’s got all of the terrorists focused on hitting us there instead of here. We’re pretty wide open in this country to attacks.
Everyone is either one party or another. Hopefully the democrats will win this year, 1: because it’ll be a nice change from the republicans and 2: 4 really bad years and we might vote someone who wont wipe his cum off his dick with tax money.
Raaaaaaage Against the Machine!
Politics suck. I hate trying to pick the lesser of two evils. Obama and McCain both suck. Can we please just reroll?
krjac82:
Sorry to destroy your fluffy little illusion but practically NOTHING could have stopped 9/11 or the USS Cole bombing. Okay, the guards on deck could have shot the guys on the incoming boat but how could they know those guys were about to explode?
In fact, even after 9/11, the jihadist method works again and again and again. And least of all would the death of Osama bin Laden have changed anything. The jihadist movement is far older than him and his death will not stop it. He just transports the idea and has a lot of money. But when he dies, the idea and the money will still be there. There would just be another guy after him, transporting the decades-old idea. You see that in Iraq every fucking day. Or did the death of al-Zarkawi change a lot?
Goldfinger: Please do not refer to them as “jihadists”. It makes you look ignorant. I don’t mean to be rude, so I’ll explain. I have a lot of Muslim friends. They’re all decent guys, mostly interested in making money and getting with hot women. Something most of us would empathize with, methinks. But whenever they hear someone on the news babbling on about “the jihadists”, the cringe.
Why?
Well, because there are two meanings for the term “jihad”. One is a war against yourself, a battle with your own internal demons. Noble, yes, but if all jihadists just sat in a room full of incense while meditating, they probably wouldn’t seem too menacing, so let’s move on to the other definition: A noble struggle against an unjust, tyrannical oppressor.
Well now. Look at that. If a jihadist is someone involved in a noble struggle against an unjust, tyrannical oppressor, that sure doesn’t paint the US in a very good light, now does it? Every time some pundit refers to these people as jihadists, they’re basically saying, “Darn you people, why are you fighting against my tyrannical oppression!” Sounds like the bad guys in crappy comic books for chrissakes.
Now, I know the horse is dead at this point, but I’m giving it one last kick. Imagine if, at the height of the Cold War, the USSR invaded America. You’re watching footage on the news of hospitals being bombed, orphanages being shelled, and those reporting on these atrocities were calling the Soviets “Noble liberators” and “Friends of freedom” and “Admirable heroes”. Wouldn’t you be thinking, WTF? Why are they giving these people such glowing praise when they’re showing them murdering children?
Well, when you call terrorists jihadists, that’s essentially what you’re doing. There’s plenty of other perfectly good names for them: terrorists, murderers, cowards, baby-killers. Just stop giving them the legitimacy they so desperately crave by calling them jihadists.
Gah. That should be “they cringe” at the end of the first paragraph, obviously.
It’s simple. They want to divert attention away from the fact that if there was anyone in office responsible, it was Republicans. I’m not saying they were, but it certainly wasn’t the Democrats.
Basically, I’m calling them jihadists because they call themselves jihadists. They use some parts of the Koran as a very specious justification for their ‘jihad’ (and are leaving out others that would make them look very very stupid) and they use their specious conception of the term ‘jihad’ to justify the killing of every non-islamic person. Of course, the correct term would be ‘jihadist terrorists’.
Now, there may be a lot of other meanings to the word jihad and we can start calling everybody funny names until nobody knows who is meant by what – but that doesn’t get us very far. Because I bet “terrorists, murderers, cowards, baby-killers” are terms the US of A (and the rest of the western world) is characterised with by those terrorists.
SO fuck America and get out. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, or gtfo. As long as any of you yanks continue to live and work and spend in that country you are supporting this world’s Mordor. You still have the choice to leave. Complaining about it on the internet solves nothing.
Everyone knows about the lesser/greater Jihad thing. No one cares.
Oh, yeah, just to add to Goldfinger’s point, “Mujahideen” is arabic for “Jihadists” and that seems to be the word of choice amongst terrorists and militant groups.
Also, while I would say that the US harbours an old and destructive form of the colonial mentality, you, Agzed, made a retarded argument: Someone saying something is true isn’t objective confirmation that it’s true. Especially when it comes to abstract terms like “Tyranny” which are, while they have a basis in reality, and understood socially and culturally and are probably conditioned.
Also, “Tyrant” is a concept that I do not believe is mentioned in the Quran.
Also, triple post fucking a
Personally, I think that billboard helps democrats more than hurts them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYI7JXGqd0o
www.welfarestate.com/911/
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm
911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/deceptions/telegraph_stolenids.html
@krjack82: go back to 1998 you’ll find that Bin Laden’s location was known and we had a team within range to take him out and Clinton said no.
You know that’s absolutely false, right? What you’re talking about never happened. You know that, right?
(Maybe you don’t know that, and that’s why you made the asinine assertion in the first place. In which case I suggest you do some research. Research somewhere other than Conservapedia.)
^ HAH! Five points for refuting this central point – ten points for slamming conservapedia.
It was Bush himself with the backing of the republican party that planned and organized the entire 9/11 incident. Those buildings were prepared ahead of time and rigged with explosives for a controlled demolition. There are no terrorists!
Who would dare piss off the trigger happy super power. NO! Bush orchestrated a way to get the army back into the
Middle-East to fetch his daddies long lost oil. It never made anyone nervous just
how obscure the connection is between Bin Laden and Iraq? In fact, there was no connection. He fooled you all. The dumbest man in political history had the entire nation following along!!!
So who is truly stupid in this equation?
I thought the internet made this sort of information easy to find!
Watch ZeitGeist…
www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
It puts all the evidence in one place.
Probably the most important thing you’ll ever do.
www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons
I remember watching something on TV about how Clinton did have the opportunity, twice, to take out Bin Laden but didn’t because there were children and other civilians in the death zone. I can’t say where or even when I saw this. Maybe someone here knows?
Everyone knows about that area 51 bullshit, Doves: We all have an opinion already and you talking like you’re going to enlighten us is pathetic. Fuck off.
Mr Dooves… Are you implying we invaded Saudi Arabia then? Because Iraq has less Oil then most states in the US.
Seriously.
Anyways, i still think it’s right to stay in Iraq. if anyone knows anything the only reason we got attacked in the first place was because we looked at Afghanistan and said “Fuck it” instead of helping them rebuild. Might want to avoid that with Iraq by, say, staying there and helping it rebuild. Don’t need a whole army there but a contingency force in case of something happening, and trained specialists to fix that mess.
Thats what we did with Japan. Kinda worked. Really well.
Of course! The US government destroyed the WTC themselveso they could get the insurance money 😀
It should say “themselves so”
@MrDooves
The fact that Iraq isn’t connected to bin laden doesn’t mean the 9/11 attack was orchestrated by the US government. Using our friend, logic: if you were going to manufacture a terrorist attack, wouldn’t you make one that had a strong connection to the country you want to invade? It’s like framing a man for murder so you can have his neighbor’s wife.
Its bullshit like this that make the REAL, and numerous, complaints against Bush lose their power.
Goldfinger: Saying “I call them jihadists because they call themselves jihadists” is akin to the media calling me a saint because I call myself a saint, but the reason I’m in the news is for raping women and murdering children. Doesn’t that seem a bit daft to you?
Caio: Same situation as above, and the media is calling me a saint without any sign of irony or sarcasm, if you were to say, “WTF is this bullshit? This guy isn’t a good and saintly man, he’s like the exact opposite of a saint!” On that day, can I call you retarded and hold up this thread as proof that you yourself admitted you’re a retard? Because that would almost be worth it.
In any war, propaganda is important. The more people you can convince that you’re right, the less support the other side has. Giving ammunition to the other side to use against you, now that’s retarded.
Still, jihadism is an ideology (as mentioned above). That’s why they are jihadists and the active fighters (i. e. terrorists & guerilla troops) are called mujahideen. You can call them whatever you want though. I don’t mind.
And I don’t call them just terrorists because there’s differences between certain kinds of terrorism.
Oi. Still missing the point entirely. In the Muslim world, being called a jihadist (or mujahideen, or qaid as the case may be), is a GOOD thing. It’s a wonderful compliment to bestow on someone to tell them that their cause is a jihad and that they are mujahideen. It’s akin to telling an American soldier today that they are as brave and noble as the men who went to war against the Nazis. It’s an incredible honour to have such a compliment given to you, and for it to come from your enemies makes the praise that much sweeter.
So I suppose my question is, why are people so insitant on heaping praise on people who are trying so hard to kill them?
Maybe you are missing the point. How can you tell? This discussion is getting nowhere. As I said, where I come from, people who follow and/or practice an -ism are called -ists. Period. That’s basic linguistics.
In the muslim world the word ‘mujahideen’ may be a positive connotation but in the western world it’s definitely a negative connotation.
It’s just the same with the word ‘Nazi’. If you were a Nazi it was a great thing being entitled as such. But for the rest of the world it was a very negative word. Same as with Stalinists, Nationalists, Creationists and so on and so forth.
It’s basic psycho-linguistics: If I let other people decide what my words mean I give them room in my world. And I’m not gonna let terrorists decide about my vocabulary and by that define what is good and bad.
Seriously not getting his point, are you? IF no one other than westerners would hear terrorists being called jihadists, it wouldn’t matter what we called them because we are already opposed to them. However in real life Muslims in the Middle-East hear this as well. It’s not a good idea to give civilians the impression that terrorist guerrilla organizations are great because that can encourage them to support or join them.
Where is this logic falling apart?