As you wrote " As has been mentioned above, you must simply have no idea what socialism is if you think America is even headed in that direction, we're headed the other way buddy" shows your lack of understanding of political systems.

You can 100% government control on 1 side and 0 government power at the other end

At the 100% you would have labels such as Communism
Socialism,Fascism and such. At 0 would be Anarchy


Our government is in the middle but sliding towards more and more government control and morphing into some for of Oligarchy by buying votes via socialist programs promised by the left.
Then the pudendum swing back and the republicans buy votes by promising to "undue" what the left has done.

Either way the people loose because nothing get totally undone. More and more government control ensues.



1 Yes I would like there to be ZERO dollars donations by corporations and people. Since the government owns public airways and grants them via FCC, hence ABC, CBS, NBC etc let these station allot public time for equal debate for ALL parties and persons. TAKE the money out of politics.

2 I do agree what you indicated by the Republicans and did this week was reprehensible. A passing a trillion + bill and and worse the extra "shit" to help banks and such. But to be fair to republicans , Democrats over screw corporations and republicans attempt to unscrew them.

3 school lunches - Government should not be in regulating school lunch- it should be a local thing. Republicans are just undoing Michelle Obama failed school lunch program. Just more finger pointing points for bloggers to use.

4 Federal government controls the laws in DC Its their little kingdom. They can re ban pot all day long.

Generally speaking there are 5 types of government:
Monarchy - rule by one - never truly exits
Oligarchy - ruled by few - most governments today
Democracy- rule by majority - Majority rule is a failed system.
Republic- rule by law - Law limits Government powers
Anarchy - every man for himself- Always short lived due to power vacuum.


You say " America is sliding away from socialism, and into corporatism" Well they are basically neighbors in the political spectrum which would be some form of Oligarchy. Neither necessary serve the people freely.


Both Democrats and Republicans are sliding headlong towards Oligarchy. One party is just trying to get there quicker than the other party.


Both parities have utterly failed its people. There is only 1 party that desires to steer this country back towards a Republic and that is the TEA party. They get stronger and stronger every time their party fail its constituents. Were not all right wing lynching nuts. That's just a myth promoted by left wing media to color you thinking to stay on the Democrat plantation.
Truth of the matter is that four in 10 Tea Party members are either Democrats or Independents. Go to a rally and see for you self.

He outlines very valid points. Points you'd think any good script doctor could have incorporated and spotted. It's George's inability to take criticism and work with others that killed the prequels. It's as if he wanted to prove that he really could do it again, and that it had to be solely his doing, so HE had to write it all and HE had to direct it.

If HE had been able to create the first drafts and then let talented screenwriters work them over and then maybe go back over them and discuss.... then we might have had some fine films on our hands.

But as it is, I think it's time to just let go of the prequels.

Now, the originals.... THEY need to be released in unaltered, restored form... and there is one such project working on the original Star Wars that is going to create a STUNNING version... just STUNNING.

If it ever gets publicly released, it will be a happy, happy day.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^Jinx:
I dont think he got schooled at all. Well, unless you think ad homs are cool.

He talked, and acted, like a fool--he got called a fool.
Petey tried to control the conversation with talking points--he couldn't.
Schooled.

No sorry. Talking points or not he did still make points. Points that could have been deconstructed and debated. Instead we got some guy calling him an idiot, which true as it may be is probably something any of us could do on our worst days. So no, he wasn't schooled. He is an idiot though and I would like him to get properly destroyed by a real argument, and not just this schoolyard shit.

Oh wait. I suppose in that sense he was "schooled". GODDAMN I'M WITTY.

>> ^joedirt:
what kind of loser makes comments trying to blame victims and be apologist when she seems reasonable and recounting events in a non-sensational way for the media.


You are wrong. She was not being "non-sensational." Hell, with the topics of her speech, there is no way she could be non-sensational (No offense to her or you. Rape and gangbang and police brutality is just that, a sensational recounting.)

She does use pre-thought language in a calm (Cold?) manner that would be a great boon for any lawyer, but that is calculated, not non-sensational. She is also very general and very broad (A mitigating fact if she is lying and it also leaves room to make shit up.) In fact, the one thing she states that specifically happened (The men strip searching the women,) was a stutter fest of epic-fail proportions.

You want a comment I find strangely amusing? When she says, "What I would find threatening..."

See, that statement is calculating to me because it makes you think... she was threatened by those threatening statements. Most people in her situation would say, "I was threatened *Insert threatening comments.*" Simple, angry, to the point and not predetermined. But her way makes you think and makes you repusled... I mean, these police obviously thought those statements were not threatening (It is what she is implying without saying such...)

Well, hopefully she is lying but if not, hopefully the police are punished severly. (I am hoping for the least of two evils...)

************************************************************************************Edit

What is a more probable accounting would be around this...

The police threatened that if she goes to prision or jail, she would be raped and gangbanged (by prisioners.) That may be an inappropriate comment, but it is not them actually threatening to rape and gangbang her. Those are two completely different beasts. Hell, Scared Staight, the show about teens, used those threats on kids all the time... It supposedly scared some away from crime... It is an observation, not a threat, because rape is rampant in Prision compared to the street.

Still, if it was unlikely she was going to go to prision, the cops were being hats...

Next, the he said/she said of the finger incident... SHE WAS NOT THERE AND IT WAS SECOND HAND GOSSIP BECAUSE SHE DOES NOT KNOW FOR SURE!!! How dare she assume it happened! All these people have a reason to hate the cops... She lost all credibility there...

Even if it happened, it was probably conducted by a medical person as a cavity search because of some comment the protester/friend of hers made. Cavity searches, when done properly, are not against the law in some areas... I think... But what I think is not the point. Point is, why should she put her story on someone else's word?

>> ^mgittle:

You guys should argue in e-prime so you stop speaking in absolutes every other sentence. It would be a cool exercise.


In my opinion, I believe it is generally clear - at least to myself and possibly to others - that the points we are attempting to make here are [in my own personal opinion (which may or may not reflect the opinion of others)] completely subjective, despite the use of what some (you perhaps) might call aggressive and inflexible verbs. Still, the use of more passive language might, generally, in my own opinion, lighten the general tone of the general interaction generally in general.

Better?

Good point. Point taken.

My transplanted English prof pal from Oregon commented on the latest news here relative to himself and the students that pass for literate enrolled in the college he works for....he's pretty much in the same camp I'm in...don;t let your kids be defiled by public schools in the U.S...Texas is simply a more finely-focused lens of dissolution....and on your televisions so you had to look, huh??

Again, Robot monkey programming makes for obedient little wage-slaves-

Secondary public schools in general in the states, would not pass the 1945 US school litmus test of acceptable practice and curriculum-People have been duped into settling for a thin veneer of the real as opposed to a fine deep lustre...and all of you here, who have fingers to point, point the one that screams complicity, at the man or woman, or at that emasculated fucking male in the mirror....you too, Norwegian-

Oh yeah, and like bea, I spent plenty of time out of tis state as well, living, working, voting, etc. Cali, Oregon, Colorado, Washington State.....regions mean little in the grand scheme of the country as a whole-yer all in the same federal shit storm of idiocracy to the humans being.

In reply to this comment by GeeSussFreeK:
That is the same sound I make when the limited format of text fails to fully convey the ideas in my head! Like when 2 missiles pass each other in flight hehehe (they don't call them missiles for nothing I guess!)

Anyway, I didn't mean to exasperate you. This was not my intent. You are always a very insightful and humble person here on the sift, and for that you have my greatest respect. Here's to the next delightful convo!

i find you an interesting person also.
and one i feel i can discuss things with that others may either take offense or become indignant.
thats why i wrote you.not to be inflammatory but to suggest your over-simplification of buddhism/christianity may not be close to a reality but rather closer to the western worlds abridged and condensed version.
western philosophy/theosophy could not exist without eastern philosophy/theosophy, not the other way around.

i pointed out that many in the western world take a myopic stance,not intentionally i would presume but rather one set by culture.i was not implying that you are myopic but that you were espousing certain well-grooved tracks used by many concerning buddhism.soundbytes usually perpetrated by the church itself and then parroted.

it is interesting to note that even teillhard de chardin remarked on the similarities of christs teachings and buddha.this was rejected by the church but i tend to agree with chardin.

while i agree that text is not a suitable and contextual medium to express such dynamic concepts and philosophies let me make a few observations and you tell me what you think.
1.you stated that buddhism does not recognize the "changing soul".this is an incorrect statement due to the fact that just about every precept of buddhism stems from ones journey and the self realization that one must change,grow to move on to a greater consciousness.
the primary vehicle for this is forgiveness,but while in buddhism this is a starting point and eventually should lead to an awareness where forgiveness is moot due to the fact that your choices will no longer need to be forgiven,christianity tends to view forgiveness in the latter stages of awareness.
which one is correct?that is for you to decide.
2.you stated that KARMA is not a vehicle of divine salvation,but that is a misnomer,it is very much a vehicle of divine salvation due to the fact that buddhist view all life as divine.while christianity views humans as dirt,sinful and unclean and the only path to salvation is through jesus christ.this is a very complex paradigm and i do not do this subject justice but that can wait for another conversation.while the concept in itself is simple,to express it in all its simplicity takes volumes.(just look at all the writings on this subject,many many perspectives).

these are only a few points.points i make to show that coming from a christian perspective may color the beauty and depth of buddhism.i do not feel you are a fundamentalist and that is a good thing because the teachings of jesus are beautiful as they are succinct but if viewed only from the eyes of the church i have always felt the meat of jeus christ's teachings have gone either misinterpreted or outright twisted.then again,i view religion with a suspicious eye and read the teachings from a different vantage point.
does this mean i am right and my views infallible?
no..that would arrogant.
but it does mean i have the ability to glean understanding that is not tainted by the church because i view the teachings from a different angle.
studying cultural religious history has given me context to better understand those teachings.
that has been a work in progress for 25 years and im still going,still learning and still fascinated by it all.
as always my friend..a pleasure discussing my favorite subject with you.
till our next conversation.
namaste.

"2) Quit mentioning that no building has collapsed due to fire before. It's irrelevant."




I would argue its not irilivent

Granted other buildings didn't have plans fly into them and they were also different buildings. However it would be foolish to ignore the fact that no other steel building has fallen down from fire as there are still aspects of the buildings that are similar evan more so with bulding 7. ( I would be prepared to ignore them if infarct it was the case that other buildings r infact not analogous to building 7 I don't know enough to make an informed desisoin on the issue)

So yes I would not make a big point of no other steal buildings falling down as its only partiality relivent and could not be used as an argument in itself , it dose however help with determining a lose grounding and basses for what sort of temperatures and fire damage general steal structures can withstand.
(and as i said the other buildings might in reality be compleatly different structures so it could be 100% irelivent as you say )


and yeah crotch flame your totally right about the eyewitness accounts , this is the thing that annoys me the most you simply cannot trust what people say from an event , even more so when its something like this where they will be in shock and the fact that so much of what eye witness have said has been taken out of context. having said that I don't think you should ignore eye witnesses outright and many of the comments talking about audible explosions should still be considered however as I say be treated as a very low form of evidence and likely to be wrong.


IT is important to maintain proper application of scientific method and as you say I don't think this is that well written but then again these people are structural enganears not scientists and they do make manny valid points/ points of interest . At a minimum this is far more "scientific" than 99% of the other talks and videos on 9.11 but it could defiantly be allot better.

>> ^BoneyD:
This video makes some very good points, pointing out Obama's incredible hypocrisy...
But ROFL! Did they just use David Icke for reference material in there? That's seriously pathetic.


I repeat...

>> ^EndAll:
Same here.. he's much too melodramatic. But he was simply stating the facts, just like Icke was. Reptilian overlords aside, there was valid information being presented there. Thanks for the quality!


Icke's inclusion is irrelevant. I'd bet that clip was only used because there weren't many others listing off that information, on video at least. He didn't make that stuff up. It has little to do with his usual baloney.

This video makes some very good points, pointing out Obama's incredible hypocrisy...

But ROFL! Did they just use David Icke for reference material in there? That's seriously pathetic.

>> ^NordlichReiter:
You cant pick and choose your rules. Either you enforce em, or you do not.

Indeed, dag, it is well put. It's also a fucking shame that it's completely untrue in this situation. It's a shame that despite repeated siftquisitions in which I and others have begged for a consistent and even handed approach, that "justice" here is meted out with a capriciousness that would make Stalin blush.

Someone please explain to me how CumPouch420's repeatedly inappropriate channel invocations over weeks (months!?) is in any way consistent with the ban placed on berticus. This is some of the worst hypocrisy I've seen here yet, and it's making me physically ill. CP was given every bit of slack we could find to change his ways. Berticus is banned summarily, without discussion, without warning, without a second chance, or even a chance to apologize. One time he finally gets so pissed off at the abusive use of the 'gay' tag that he retaliates in kind, having never seen anyone even reprimanded, much less punished for what is clearly outlawed in the FAQ. Bam. Bye bye faggot.

Oh, wait I get it now. It only happens if someone points it out and writes up a sift talk post about it. Oh what a fool berticus was for not simply calling for a siftquisition in the first place. Because clearly, it's only when one gets fucking whiny enough about abuses that anything will be done. God forbid they be reasonable and quietly suggest that people stop being dicks. Don't you dare try to make a fucking point.

*useless
*self-congratulatory
*cunts

Um, oh yeah, I guess I didn't make a clear point...

Point was this; evolution is an idea that jives with every scrap of evidence we've tossed at it. Significant challengers have risen, but further research has explained away the apparent contradictions to the 'natural selection' program.

Its incumbent on the current generation to inspire the next to keep piling up more clues and delving deeper into the intricacies of our natural world. In other words, one way science fails is by giving value to ideas that have little to no evidence to support them. And another way science fails is by allowing a neglect of critical thinking to flourish.

It is important to know that the earth revolves around the sun; we can then begin to understand seasons, shooting stars, other planets, the moon... etc. Similarly it is important to know that evolution occurs by natural selection; we can then begin to understand why there are hundreds of thousands of non-interbreeding beetle species, how ants know what to do, why my great grandfather looks just like me but was a foot shorter, why our bananas are in danger of being wiped out by a fungus, and why squirrels and cats can climb trees while little dogs can not!

what did she do??

*clap *clap *point *point