Ya know what QM? You will never be a highdileeho.

My karma is different from his. I respect his decision to serve and he has to live with his life decisions like everyone else. Same with Corporal Twinkie, who is doing his brothers and sisters a grave disservice, even if he is sincere. If any of you think the war against this SCUM is anywhere near over, guess again. Jihadists don't give up until they're dead. Or you're dead. Or both.

He put his life on the line for his country, and will never have the same bloodthirst that you spout here.

My "bloodthirst" is mostly limited to jihadist fktards who want to kill Americans and other civilized peoples. That's the price I gladly pay for not being a moral relativist: recognizing there is real evil in the world, and that this world has real consequences for appeasement stupidity.

I'm a non-combat veteran...now, I don't know if that meets the high standards liberals set for everyone but themselves, and I've never had to shoot anyone, but the US GOV could've sent me into the fire and I would've gone. Unlike in Congress, military oaths to defend the Constitution mean something.

- Article 3 of Geneva conventions requires humane treatment of all persons held. Furthermore on June 12, 2008, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Boumediene v. Bush that the Guantanamo captives were entitled to the protection of the United States Constitution. International and American rights apply to them.

Well, guess what, the dumbshts in the legal system have been wrong plenty of times before. They tried this bullsht with captured Nazi spies, that is, attempting to give them Constitutional rights, but the country was more sane in the 1940s and instead they were dealt with properly.

"The ones that have been released quickly rejoin [...] their jihad."

National security expert and CNN analyst Peter Bergen, states that some of those "suspected" to have returned to terrorism are so categorized because they publicly made anti-American statements, "something that's not surprising if you've been locked up in a U.S. prison camp for several years." If all 18 people on the "confirmed" list have "returned" to the battlefield, that would amount to 4 percent of the detainees who have been released.

Ah, so that's acceptable to you, those "small" numbers? How many a-holes did it take to bring about 9-11? Oh, that's right, that doesn't count, because the 9-11 jihadist scum were from Country X and not Country Z. Brilliant reasoning, libs.

The US looked for legal loopholes to justify its detention program at Gitmo, nor could it trail them as it had torture testimony which is inadmissible in a court of law.

Well, given the choice of calling this a real war against a real enemy or "Bush's Game" I'll gladly err on the side of real war. Let the animals run wild and free over some "clever" legal ACLU wrangling and before long you won't have a society to defend.

Wouldn't you rejoin? I mean if this group of jihadists captured you and put you in a shitty hole with crappy accommodations, when you were released wouldn't you come running back and join military...well you wouldn't cause you're a pussy, but somebody with balls would...

LOOKIT ME EVERYONE!...I'M TALKIN' TOUGH...ON THE INTERNETS. I CALL YOU NAME!

It's not some alien we're dealing with...it's people. So I don't know why you act so surprised when humans follow their own nature to feel hatred when they're mistreated.

I understand the "feelings" of Gitmo detainees and nothing they do surprises me. Go to any prison in America and you'll find plenty of the same resentment, since every one of those guys is ALSO not guilty! They'll tell you so! They were set up!

Why do liberals act surprised that there is real hatred towards jihadist animals sawing off heads, homicide bombing, beating women, honor killing, etc.

Liberals are always angry and ashamed of America first and "the oppressed" last. They just don't see this, the way a fish can't see the water. Maybe they're too fking far gone to notice, who knows. NYC could be suitcase nuked tomorrow and they'd use Gitmo to justify it.

>> ^DrPawn:
Global warming is about as real as Y2K was. Is there 390 ppm CO2 now in the atmosphere, instead of 385 ppm CO2 in 1940 ? Yes. Is it warming the planet somewhat, yes a couple fractions of a degree overall. Has warming happened in the past yes. Will cooling happen in the future yes.
Are zombies like the one above overreacting yes. Any science that claims that global warming could have positive impacts on the planet is scorned. Do scientists gain from doom saying and predicting the worst possible consequences for the planet ... you bet they do. If they predicted negligible effects they would immediately lose their grants and be fired from whatever school they are in. Its not politically correct to challenge global warming.
And you cant get a grant to study how global warming might be not so bad after all.
Science is being hijacked by radical environmentalists on a political mission. Anyone that lives in the great white north knows that its so cold up there that life can barely hang on. Yet all you hear is how its killing polar bears.
Bullshit. A little warming will do the artic much more good then harm. Human beings are here to stay and yes 6 billion of us will change the world. Some species will have to deal with the sudden changes and some will not survive. Some will flourish.
I will never agree with Bill Orielly on principle, because he is a nutjob. However on this one he is less wrong then normal.


1) Don't know where you got your numbers but they are wrong. In 1940, the CO2 ppm was around 310 as reported by the CDIAC in this table here.

2) You apparently don't understand how science works. If someone were, as you seem to be suggesting, to put out an erroneous hypothesis for their own personal gain (i.e. to keep their job or get grant money), it would quickly be discovered since other scientists with no vested interest in the topic will examine the data and conduct experiments themselves and eventually show that the original results were falsified. Remember Hwang Woo-Suk? He tried to do exactly what you are describing and got called out on it.

3) The effects of global warming will do more good than harm? Really. Care to back that up with scientific evidence? Because the evidence that does exist points to catastrophic effects for most of the world. Rising sea levels are already flooding parts of the world like Tuvalu. Weather patterns are changing and wreaking havoc with current ecosystems. Forests in the U.S. are dying out an alarming rate due to the warming. Coral bleaching, species migration pattern disruption, increased death rates in Arctic and Antarctic species like penguins--all of these have been linked to temperature increases. You're saying these are good things?

Global warming is about as real as Y2K was. Is there 390 ppm CO2 now in the atmosphere, instead of 385 ppm CO2 in 1940 ? Yes. Is it warming the planet somewhat, yes a couple fractions of a degree overall. Has warming happened in the past yes. Will cooling happen in the future yes.

Are zombies like the one above overreacting yes. Any science that claims that global warming could have positive impacts on the planet is scorned. Do scientists gain from doom saying and predicting the worst possible consequences for the planet ... you bet they do. If they predicted negligible effects they would immediately lose their grants and be fired from whatever school they are in. Its not politically correct to challenge global warming.

And you cant get a grant to study how global warming might be not so bad after all.

Science is being hijacked by radical environmentalists on a political mission. Anyone that lives in the great white north knows that its so cold up there that life can barely hang on. Yet all you hear is how its killing polar bears.

Bullshit. A little warming will do the artic much more good then harm. Human beings are here to stay and yes 6 billion of us will change the world. Some species will have to deal with the sudden changes and some will not survive. Some will flourish.

I will never agree with Bill Orielly on principle, because he is a nutjob. However on this one he is less wrong then normal.

Do your figures account for inflation Netrunner? I mean you could do alot more with a dollar back in 1940s then today.

>> ^Kymbos:
If you want to explore the extent to which the United States supports Israel and makes their military activities possible, see this well referenced piece by Mearsheimer Walt.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html
There is no question that Israel could not undertake such actions without American financial and military aid. Where else would they get the money - export of desalination plants?


Open your eyes. From the link you provided:

Instead, the thrust of US policy in the region derives almost entirely from domestic politics, and especially the activities of the ‘Israel Lobby’. Other special-interest groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the national interest would suggest

For starters, any time you see something this identical to 'the secret jewish society' spoken of in 1940's Europe you need to be very cautious. Verify anything that group says with a third party somewhere before accepting it as fact.

But you also cited the link as demonstrating " There is no question that Israel could not undertake such actions without American financial and military aid. Where else would they get the money - export of desalination plants?" Which would seem to be saying you believe the article shows Israel wouldn't have the money for an operation like this without US aid, correct? But the review in the link you gave states "Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain." Doesn't that mean your own source refutes your claim?

In some way one can say that colonial actions by the British government at the time, created a volatile situation in the post colonial world, leaving a spectre of war and instability in the same way we see played out in the creation and seperation of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Agreed on the analogy, with the added factors of WW2 going on and complicating Britain's commitments and Jewish ambitions considerably. My problem with this video is instead of portraying the complexities that led to what was a civil war within Palestine between jews and arabs, it portrays only a British supported Zionist military occupation of all of Palestine. In my book that is just as indefensible as saying that Palestinian civilians deserve to live in fear because some of their 'leaders' are some very bad mofos.


Essentially nearly three decades before, it was preordained that a Jewish state be created in Judea, the British government finding favour with Zionist interests.


But that is again only partially true. Britain simply stated they would not object to Zionist ambitions in Palestine. Later on after Balfour though some Zionist terrorists changed Britains position by killing a bunch of people they didn't like. Israel wound up arresting and deporting a hundred some such Zionists to Britain tor trial to avoid Britain becoming hostile toward them.

My other major beef with the presentation here is that it completely ignores the treatment of Jewish people in Palestine under the Arab majority from 1900 to the early 1940s. The Jews tolerated many of the same restrictions and abuses that Palestinians 'enjoy' today. I'm obviously not saying two wrongs make a right, I'm saying that both were wrong. Pretending like this video does that Zionists just decided in 1948 to chase out all the Arabs that had previously treated them kindly as equals is false. Worse, that false presentation creates a, I'll say deliberate, bias against Israel.

It was a mistake to create Israel in the first place, because there was no historic basis for it.

I'm not an expert in history, but I think you should reconsider using this argument. Arguing this particular point is nearly entirely futile because there's always further back in history to examine, and there's no way to verify proper ownership of the land. How far back should we look? The 1940's? Or around 70 CE? Or around 607 BCE? Further back? Do we believe the stories in the bible? Which bible do we believe? What about history before the bible? Are these even the same people any more?

(I hesitate to add this, but at the heart of this conflict is once again the elephant in the room - religion. If people were reasonable, this would not be nearly as bad as it is.)

This particular argument deserves NO hesitation. I think you're absolutely correct on this point, and I wish more people would consider it.

There doesn't seem to be any drop-off from Japan in the early 1940s.

Favourites

1) Season - Spring
2) Place in the world - Vancouver, BC, Canada (It's why I live here)
3) Children's book - Green Eggs and Ham
4) TV Series - Battlestar Galactica
5) Word - ??
6) Film - The Shawshank Redemption
7) Curse - Curse of 1940, I just wish it hadn't been broken...
Creature - Wolverine
9) Past time - Middle Ages
10)Person - My son

Which one?

11) Dog or cat - Cat, who doesn't like a good pussy.
12) Sweet or savoury - Savoury
13) Cereal or Toast - Toast
14) Tan or pale - Pale
15) Shoes or barefoot - Shoes
16) Desktop or laptop - Desktop
17) Drive or walk - Drive
18) Drama or comedy - Comedy
19) Sex or food - Sex
20) Futurama or Simpsons - Futurama!

The Sift

21) Your fave personal submission - Fry's 100 cups of coffee
22) A great comment on one of your vids - This one by entr0py was pretty good
23) Most off the wall member - I'd say Choggie, but he doesn't have a wall to be off of, so kronosposeidon will have to do
24) Favourite user name - fissionchips
25) Your most used channel - British Invasion
26) Personal dumbass moment - Can't think of one (I'm sure they are out there, but I've blocked them out of my memory at this point)
27) Best avatar - Firefly
28) Partner in crime - None
29) Do people offline know of your sift problem - Yes
30) Idea for the site - Channel specific search

About you

31) Where do you live - Vancouver, BC, Canada
32) Smoker/non-smoker - Non
33) Left or right handed - Right
34) Hair colour - Brown (what's left of it)
35) Relationship status - Married
36) How tall - Six feet
37) Children - 1 boy (5 years old)
38) Ever had an operation - Yes Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty with a laser! Not that much fun, but it has stopped my snoring.
39) Best feature - my brain
40) Use four words to describe yourself - Hockey mad sifting canuck

If you could...what, who, when etc

41) Bring a famous person back from the dead - Albert Einstein
42) Give 50 grand to any charity - Canuck Place
43) Send someone on a one way ticket to the moon - George Bush
44) Relive a moment in your life - My wedding and honeymoon (not to right a wrong, but just to enjoy it again)
45) Have a superpower - Flight
46) Find out one thing you've always wanted to know - Is there intelligent life somewhere out there?
47) Have the opposite gender deal with something you have to - MarineGunrock said it, pissing with morning wood.
48) Be president for one hour - Sell Air Force One
49) Delete a period in history -
50) Achieve one thing - Live to have Grandchildren

>> ^klaqua:
Just proves that if you make shit up, make a video with cool music, show some cleavage and state things as fact (that are obviously not fact), you too can have a fan club and be hailed as hero.
Hitler could not be mistaken as and was not a Christian. His god was nationalism and the hate for the Jews. A hate that had no background in religion but common street rhetoric of the time. Someone had to be blamed for the loss of the first WW.
The much praised enlightenment and the "discovery" of evolution was much more an idea from which Hitler took it's page. Hitler used Evolutionary Theory to Justify the Holocaust. http://www.straight-talk.net/evolution/hit.htm
You can deny the facts but does not make them true!
http://www.icr.org/article/285/
Now that is just one of the 'facts' that are beyond wrong. Research the crusades and some of the wars you mentioned and you will find that while people call them self "religious" doesn't make them so.
Grow up and research your "propaganda".


Wow, there are so many errors in your argument, it's kinda funny.

First of all, your first source that you site to argue that Hitler used evolution to justify the Holocaust comes from a far-right Pentacostal Christian website...this is the website that also decries the seperation of church and state and describes abortion as "The great American holocaust"... not exactly a balanced viewpoint there. Your other "source" is just as bad - 'The Institute for Creation Research'...c'mon dude, seriously? You're going to need a lot more than that to convince me.

Let's set a few facts straight here:

1) Hmm...#1...oh yeah, Hilter was a deeply devout Catholic! How about some quotes, yes?

"I say: my Christian feeling points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter. It points me towards the man who, once lonely and surrounded by only a few followers, recognized these Jews and called for battle against them."

and

"I am deeply moved to perceive that his tremendous struggle for this world against the Jewish poison was most profoundly marked by the fact that he had to bleed on the cross for it..."

2) The Nazi party was officially Christian and the majority of members were Christian! Their political policy was to make Christianity the state religion of Germany.

3) R0SENCRANTZ is right. Pope Pius XI signed, and Pope Pius XII negotiated, a concordat with Hitler that gave the church immunity while they supplied the Nazis with money and legal protection for their acts. Pope Pius XI also signed a similar one with Benito Mussolini.

4) Some of the most antisemitic European political and social movements of the 1930's and 1940's were Christian parties.

5) The role of atheists and freethinkers during that time? Well, only 1.5% of the German popluation was self-proclaimed as such, and as stated by Stewart W. Herman Jr, an American clergyman who lived in Nazi Germany during the rise of Hitler, "The athiests may immediately be discounted as exercising any perceptible influence on German religious thought today...[their influence] has been suppressed completely by the new regime which places 'godlessness' in the same category with anarchistic Bolshevism."

This was mostly taken from an article by William Sierichs, Jr., an editor for a newspaper in Louisiana. He has a degree in journalism from LSU. The article is not online, but a similar one can be found in 5 parts from a professor in sociology at the University of Wisconsinhere.
Critically acclaimed books by professors in sociology, history, and anthropology contributed to this article. Authors such as:
Moshe Herczl, Randolph Braham, and David Kertzer.

1. Comedy - 8517 votes received (comedy talk)
2. What the F*ck Just Happened? - 6775 votes received (wtf talk)
3. Politics - 3895 votes received (politics talk)
4. Election 2008 - 2529 votes received (election08 talk)
5. A Bit of Parody - 1948 votes received (parody talk)
6. What you FEAR most! - 1940 votes received (fear talk)
7. Music - 1930 votes received (music talk)
8. Cinema - 1845 votes received (cinema talk)
9. Cats and Dogs + others - 1245 votes received (catsanddogs talk)
10. One Nation Under Truthiness - 1211 votes received (lies talk)

When my father was young (1940's-50's), he and his friends would lie on a pier and speer one type of fish, just put a line down with a hook to fish another type, see huge swaths(right word?) every day. The sea around was practically bursting with life.

When I went to the same pier in my childhood(80-90's) I didn't see any fish right below, I fished maybe 1-3 during a 3-4 hour stay, with a fishing rod.

We've been fucking future generations over for quite some time now, and we won't stop until it's too late. The world is too preoccupied with petty politics to notice that what's really needed is to band together as a human race and progress to the next stage.

Why the hell am I not seeing the whole world working together on a reliable clean energy source? Why are countries working on space programs on each corner, trying to make pew pew lazers to shoot each others rockets down?

GROW THE FUCK UP WORLD.

>> ^Psychologic:
Wouldn't it be more likely that high crime and poor living conditions would cause more religious faith rather than the faith causing the crime? Hardship is a very strong reason for seeking a blissful afterlife.
That would certainly fit the findings of the study. He never really suggested causation.



I quote from Quirkology by Richard Wiseman (an awesome read, by the way): Chapter 3 "Believing six impossible things before breakfast: Psychology enters the twilight zone.", pg 102-103

"By the middle 1920s, inflation in Germany was so high that paper money was carried in shopping bags, and people were eager to spend any money the moment that they had it, for fear that it would be severely devalued the following day. By 1932, almost half of the population were unemployed. In 1982, Vernon Padgett from Marshall Universty and Dale Jorgenson from the California State University published a paper comparing the number of articles on astrology, mysticism, and cults, appearing in the major German magazines and newspapers between the two world wars, and the degree of economic threat each year.* Articles on gardening and cooking were also counted as controls. An index of economic threat was calculated on the basis of wages, percentage of unemployed trade union members, and industrial production. When people were suffering an economic downturn, the number of articles on superstition increased. When things were going better, they decreased. The strong relationship between the two factors caused the authors to conclude that:

'... just as Trobriand islanders surrounded their more dangerous deep sea fishing with superstitions, Germans in the 1920s and 1930s became more superstitious during times of economic threat.'

The authors link their findings with much broader social issues, noting that in times of increased uncertainty, people look for a sense of certaintity and this need can cause them to support strong leadership regimes, and believe in various irrational determinants of their fate, such as superstition and mysticism."

*V.R. Padgett & D.O. Jorgenson - 'Superstition and economic threat: Germany, 1918-1940', Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin #8, pages 736-74. 1982.

I guess you could look at the above study, and then look at what may occur within areas of the United States during this coming time of harsh economic crisis as well. Will it create an increase in religious belief/ferver and a higher degree of trust into other areas of superstition, the supernatural, and mysticism?

When times are hard, which I'm sure they are in some of the countries used in the study conducted which is discussed in the video, more people will want some sort of "control" in their out-of-control lives. They find that sense of "comfort" in handing control over to forces they believe to be "more powerful" than just mortal men and women.

I keep hearing his
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vito_Acconci ´s (born in 1940)
saliva sounds, which makes listening a bit unbearable to me.
>> ^cheesemoo:
Any idea who the narrator is? His voice is neat.

And the MGM lion is probably already dead..and so are most(?) of the actors in the film fragments..

Doc Holliday (1851-1887)

DocJohn Henry Holliday was born in Georgia in 1851. An educated man, John learned mathematics, the sciences, and earned a degree in dentistry (hence his nickname, “Doc”). He disliked the teeth trade, preferring to spend his time playing poker, and after being diagnosed with tuberculosis, he went west to partake of the dry climate.

Despite his genteel upbringing, what Doc really liked to do was have a good time. His idea of a good time involved gambling on cards, drinking whiskey, and enjoying the attentions of a lady or two. A really good time featured all three at once. It has been said that he drank three quarts of whiskey on an average day, and when he got serious about the job, could kill five or six.

Together with his occasional paramour, “Big Nose” Kate Elder, Holliday went on a violent, lucrative, and whiskey-soaked spree through the territories. He tended to leave town under threat of arrest or one step ahead of a posse, and at one time was wanted for various crimes in Kansas, Texas, Missouri and Arizona. He holed up for a time in Tombstone, Arizona, arriving shortly before the Earp brothers, with whom he became embroiled in the animosity which led to the gunfight at the OK Corral.

His TB worsened, causing him to regularly cough up blood. Strong whiskey seemed to stem the hacking, so Doc drank from dawn to dusk. He checked into a hospital for consumptives in Glenwood Springs, Colorado, where, as a wealthy man, he bribed nurses to bring him his self-prescribed medicine. Otherwise, he remained a model patient until he died. He was 36 years old.

Big Nose Kate (1850-1940)

Known at various times as Kate Fisher, Kate Elder, or Kate Cummings, Mary Katherine Haroney was born in Budapest, Hungary, the oldest child of a wealthy physician. Her father moved to Mexico in 1862 to act as the personal physician for Emperor Maximilian I. In 1865, when the Mexican government imploded, the Haroney family relocated to Davenport, Iowa, where Dr. and Mrs. Haroney managed to die within the year, leaving Kate an orphan.

The intervening years are a blur, but by 1874 Kate was living in Dodge City, Kansas, where she sold her charms in a brothel owned by Nellie Earp, wife of James Earp, the less famous older brother of Virgil, Morgan and Wyatt. While living in Dodge, Kate met Doc Holliday, who would be part of her life for many years.

Kate could match Doc drink for drink, and her temper was, if anything, even more volatile than his. She carried a derringer in an ankle holster, and when crossed, could curse a trailhand back into church. After she’d had a few, her verbal tirades took on a cosmopolitan flavor as she assaulted her opponents in a hair-raising potpourri of Hungarian, French and English. Many times, sadly, when Kate slipped into banshee-mode, her target was Doc Holliday.

They were quite the couple. The phrase “love birds” can share space in the same sentence as the words “Doc” and “Kate” only as a means of defining what they absolutely were not. We’ve all had friends like Holliday and Big Nose (hopefully without the shootings and stabbings), or witnessed their like. You know, they start the night acting like Siamese twins attached at the lips, drinking and dancing without a care in the world, then, for reasons even they probably don’t understand, they spend the next few hours auditioning for the Springer show—yelling, chasing, crying, slapping, pouting—until, just at the very apogee of ugliness, they make up and sneak off to screw in the laundry room. Such was the daily reality of Kate’s relationship with Doc Holliday.

Kate’s epic drinking habits once got her and Holliday in a whole hill of trouble. They had been fighting and Kate, in a cloud of rage, went to a saloon, where she encountered Tombstone sheriff Johnny Behan. He was sitting with members of the feared outlaw gang, the Cowboys, lead by a rancid little psycho called Curley Bill Brocious and his frequent partner in crime, the gunman Johnny Ringo. (At a saloon in Prescott, Arizona, Ringo, a specialist at shooting unarmed men, offered to buy a man a whiskey, but when the man ordered a beer instead, Ringo shot him dead.)

The Cowboys were involved in a feud with the Earp brothers and Doc Holliday, a feud that Sheriff Behan encouraged because he was a weasel and felt threatened by the Earps’ influence in “his” town. When Kate thundered into the saloon, the boys saw an opportunity. Someone, surely one or more of the Cowboys, had recently robbed a Wells-Fargo wagon and murdered the driver. The Cowboys and Behan bought Kate as much whiskey as she could drink and persuaded her to swear that it was Doc Holliday who had done the deed, which she did right on the spot.

Kate recanted after she sobered up. Doc forgave her, and their relationship continued along its usual tempestuous course until Doc finally became so ill he required hospitalization. They never saw each other again, and Kate returned to Arizona, where she lived well into her 90s.

The building that was once the Grand Hotel in Tombstone is, today, Big Nose Kate’s Saloon. Numerous visitors have claimed that Kate’s ghost haunts its back rooms and corridors. Big Nose Kate was a hellion in life, a free spirit, an ass kicker and a name taker, so her lingering spirit is likely one spitfire of a spook.
-Modern Drunkard