Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

“If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're a conservative under forty you may be a douche.”
-- Winston Churchill
>> ^blankfist:

A special thanks to @burdturgler for the idea to make the title a viral commercial.

"If my sons did not want wars, there would be none." - Gutle Schnaper, Mayer Amschel Rothschilds wife.

-

"I am one of those who do not believe the national debt is a national blessing... it is calculated to raise around the administration a moneyed aristocracy dangerous to the liberties of the country."

Andrew Jackson, Letter to L. H. Coleman of Warrenton, N.C., 29 April 1824

-

"Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had mens views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."

Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom (1913), Doubleday

-

"From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire."

Winston Churchill, "Zionism versus Bolshevism", Illustrated Sunday Herald (London), February 8, 1920, pg. 5

-

"The people must be helped to think naturally about money. They must be told what it is, and what makes it money, and what are the possible tricks of the present system which put nations and peoples under control of the few."

Henry Ford, My Life and Work, Doubleday, Page & Company, 1922

-

"I am afraid that the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can, and do, create and destroy money. The amount of money in existence varies only with the action of the banks in increasing or decreasing deposits and bank purchases. Every loan, overdraft or bank purchase creates a deposit, and every repayment or bank sale destroys a deposit. And they who control the credit of a nation, direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people."

Reginald McKenna, a former Chancellor of the Exchequer, addressing the shareholders as Chairman of the Midland Bank, at the Annual General Meeting in January 1924.

-

"The present Federal Reserve System is a flagrant case of the Governments conferring a special privilege upon bankers. The Government hands to the banks its credit, at virtually no cost to the banks, to be loaned out by the bankers for their own private profit. Still worse, however, is the fact that it gives the bankers practically complete control of the amount of money that shall be in circulation. Not one dollar of these Federal Reserve notes gets into circulation without being borrowed into circulation and without someone paying interest to some bank to keep it circulating. Our present money system is a debt money system. Before a dollar can circulate, a debt must be created. Such a system assumes that you can borrow yourself out of debt."

Willis A. Overholser, A short review and analysis of the history of money in the United States, with an introduction to the current money problem (1936), p. 56

I never though there WAS a question. I mean, the name itself, "WORLD TRADE Center". It's all about anti-globalization. They mind the fact that we remove crude oil from their homelands (which, given their delusions about an Eternal Caliphate, is a big swath of land), and give monstrously corrupt regimes all the cash and military might they want, as long as they keep the situation contained. The region was never stable to begin with, but with the way it was set up, it'll never get better. In their eyes, the WTC was where all those petrodollars were laundered and used to put a respectable business face on the dark deeds of the past. It's why Ward Churchill got into so much trouble by referring to those who worked in the WTC as 'little Eichmanns'-- hey, man, they were only following orders, pushing papers around an office. He wasn't calling them Nazis. Rather, Eichmann was found guilty not of killing anyone, but rather perfecting a system, the consequences of which was the slaughter of millions. This does not justify in any way the actions taken by the hijackers and their masters. The religion they so fervently follow forbids 'collateral damage'. They are hypocrites, and they are delusional. All this came out before, and I can imagine the MSM not really giving a damn about trucking out that bag of loons one more time.

As for 'It's Israel, stupid!" I'm not a fan of atrocities against unarmed civilians. I have no idea what it would take to make that part of the world get along. I do know that, were we to follow the whims of Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the entire country AND race would be driven into the sea and drowned. There is no pretense to compromise. Israel is a convenient head to hang their hate. Simple as that. Could Israel chill the crap out a little more? Probably. 34 Americans died on the USS Liberty because Israel got sloppy.

The Palestinians need to realize what the people in Kansas seem incapable of understanding--there are people out there who will deceive you. They will make you believe that they are on your side, and protecting your interests. In truth, they only want to stir up the muck within yourselves, and will often make you act outside of your own self-interest. If we can't solve it among people at relative peace, how do we solve it when both sides have been going at it for decades?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

>> ^RKW:
Winston Churchill legendarily made a martini by pouring a glass of Gin and taking a glance at a bottle of vermouth, or letting the sun shine through the bottle of vermouth onto the glass of gin.


Sounds like a homeopathic cocktail.

Winston Churchill legendarily made a martini by pouring a glass of Gin and taking a glance at a bottle of vermouth, or letting the sun shine through the bottle of vermouth onto the glass of gin.

“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” -Winston Churchill

Anyway, if one side fails to make its argument to the people of this democracy/republic, then they get what they deserve. Nothing.

Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.

~ Winston Churchill


And liberalism is a mental disorder.

Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.
Thomas Jefferson

The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
Winston Churchill

Yeah, socialism isn't evil. It just doesn't work very well.

The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
Winston Churchill

That some should be rich shows that others may become rich, and hence is just encouragement to industry and enterprise.
Abraham Lincoln


>> ^rougy:
If there were ever a time for populist outrage, it's now.
The cons will watch people starve, lose their jobs, and die of sicknesses that they cannot afford to pay a doctor to cure, and why?
Because "socialism" is "evil."
If there is one thing wrong with the democrats and the left in general, it's that we're not mad enough, and nobody is doing anything about it.
We'll never make any progress as long as we kowtow to rightwing expectations and play by their rules.

>> ^quantumushroom:
How many of you lefties are willing to explain to the survivors and families of a terrorist attack why we didn't torture some piece of filth for the intel to stop it?


Because it's wrong. Because in using the tools of the filthy, we become as filthy ourselves.


If it's more than 3, then you've just exceeded the number of deserving swine who've been waterboarded.


Your point is? One is too many. Mebbe if your fascist ex-presidents didn't go tear assing around fucking other peoples countries up and killing your young men and women, you wouldn't be a target of terrorist attacks and you wouldn't need to even consider torturing someone.

Your own CIA taught the Taliban everything about insurgency style warfare for fucks sake. You are too stupid to realise that people like you have sown the wind and reaped the whirlwind in their arrogance and blind hate.

Good thing you're in a minority and the only power you have is to spew your hate on the internet... =)

>> ^newtboy:
>> :

becoming a terrorist (and torturing, which is designed to create terror, makes the torturer a terrorist, and the country he comes from a supporter of terrorism) is not the way to fight terrorists. Becoming what you wish to destroy leaves you either failing to destroy the enemy or destroying yourself AS the enemy. Do you understand now?


Wait...wasn't that the sub-plot for the two most recent Batman movies?

>> ^quantumushroom:
Oy vey! Torture is listening to this no-talent a-hole talk endlessly about torture.
How many of you lefties are willing to explain to the survivors and families of a terrorist attack why we didn't torture some piece of filth for the intel to stop it?
If it's more than 3, then you've just exceeded the number of deserving swine who've been waterboarded.


How many grieving Americans that have family members who have been killed in Iraq are you willing to explain your support for the war to quantum? When you do, don't forget to bring your pictures of the "weapons of mass destruction."

Better yet when was the last time you even thought twice about walking into a recruiters office and saying "sign me up!" How many people would you be willing to torture quantum? If the threat to this country is as grave as you and those like minded say it is, why haven't you signed up yet? Hmm, or maybe you have. Maybe the Army has a new top secret unit of soldiers whose mission it is to scour the internet for lefty havens and "give'm hell!" What is it, the 302nd troll brigade?
*wipes tear away... Carry on brave soldier!

Oy vey is right, but the real torture is reading comments from physical, and intellectual cowards that never have any intention of taking part in the disgusting acts they so adamantly support.

>> ^rougy:
What do you think the families of terrorist attacks would say about that?


I've always wondered what they'd think about finding out that the "mastermind" of the attack that took their loved ones, would still be a mostly harmless religious nutjob Saudi socialite had he not been recruited by family friend and then CIA man George H.W. Bush to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan?

Funny how things come around to bite us in the ass. Will we ever learn?

>> ^NetRunner:
Timestamp 7:25 through 8:30 or so covers the bit I think you're disputing.
That was slightly more accurate, but I wasn't disputing anything. Being slightly anal retentive, I'd still pick a new title. Say...
"Idiots who doesn't know history, take quotes out of proper context."

>> ^quantumushroom:
How many of you lefties are willing to explain to the survivors and families of a terrorist attack why we didn't torture some piece of filth for the intel to stop it?


Hmmmm...it seems that terrorism wasn't even a priority to the Bush administration...unless it had something to do with oil and invading Iraq:

Condoleezza Rice’s testimony to the 9/11 commission supports Richard Clarke’s charges to the commission that the Bush administration reduced the urgency of the problem of counter-terrorism--and that the invasion of Iraq marked a major diversion from the “war against terrorism.”
(source)

So...now you must be really mad at the Bush administration for not doing their job and protecting the American people, right QM? Because the Bush administration immediately lowered the priority of anti-terrorism planning to a point that was even lower than Clinton's.

I repeat: upon taking office, G.W. Bush gave a lower priority to fighting terrorism than Bill Clinton.

What do you think the families of terrorist attacks would say about that?