In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Are You Afraid Yet?
HAIRY
Member Posts: 23,606
Link: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/may2004/ash-m28.shtml
Article questioning the current rash of "terror warnings." Gotta keep them drums beating. [:(]
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
Article questioning the current rash of "terror warnings." Gotta keep them drums beating. [:(]
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
Comments
If conditions are right for storms, floods, tornados etc. then the weatherman issues a warning. Doesnt mean it will happen or is gonna happen and more times than not he is wrong but they contiue to issue warnings. Terrorism is just a storm of a different nature.
Rather be forewarned than not.
JuJu(the weather watcher)
If conditions are right for storms, floods, tornados etc. then the weatherman issues a warning.
I believe "warnings" are when the storm has been verified already, but a "watch" is when conditions are right.
www.awbansunset.com
Link: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/may2004/ash-m28.shtml
Article questioning the current rash of "terror warnings." Gotta keep them drums beating. [:(]
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
I take it you never criticized them for not taking the threats prior to 9/11 seriously.
Woods
"... there is much truth in the Italian saying, 'Make yourselves sheep, and the wolves will eat you.'" -- Benjamin Franklin
1. Before and up to 9/11 there were no warnings. Bush gets accused of knowing about the attacks, doing nothing to stop them, and it's for political reasons.
2. After 9/11. Periodically the administration issues warnings. Now, they're lying, and it's still for political reasons.
"The Greatest Battle Implement Ever Devised!"
-- Gen. George S. Patton
referring to the M1 Garand
But hoza * the Homeland Department didn't raise the alert level if the news by Ashcroft and Company warranted the "dog and pony" show? Who, in this Administration, knows what is going on?
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
________________________________________________________________________
Before they can convince you that rights emanate from them (the government), they must first eliminate God. They are working 24/7 to accomplish this.
"If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" -Thomas Paine
If the people have become so apathetic that they will not vote out all the liberal scum (republican and democrat alike), the only solution is Constitutional Convention II the sequel. Let's get it right this time.
Rebel James: Not saying there is any lying going on, just pointing out the confusion being sown by the Administration. They just don't have their act together--and it makes one wonder why the sudden clamoring about being vigilent and alert.
And despite the fact that the CIA (who receives such intel to help issue alerts) has nothing to do with and is not appointed by the "Administration", its still the "Administrations" fault, right?
www.awbansunset.com
"I will no longer debate a liberal because I feel they are beneath contempt. Just communicating with one contaminates a person." - whiteclouder
Now we know where Hairy gets his "news" from..
Isnt the head of the FBI an appointed government official??
Your know FEDERAL B.I.
I know the head of the Secrete Service is,
So I would say the CIA is government run.......Maybe- Maybe not
Classic (the Ugly Biker)
"I dont care how thin you make a pancake, it still has two sides"
"A wise man is a man that realizes just how little he knows.
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
Some morons do.[;)]
PS Glad to see ya' back DWS![:D]
How you doin'!
World Socialist Web Site?
Now we know where Hairy gets his "news" from..
Thanks for pointing out that out. HAIRY, if you want people to take you seriously, you'll have to come up with some sources that aren't admittedly socialist.
Jacqueline
www.gratuitouslylongdomainname.net
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants and the creed of slaves." -- William Pitt (1783)
Yet, when O'Neil came out with his charges against Bush, it was unacceptable; when Clarke came out with his charges against Bush, it was unacceptable; when Kay came out with his testimony re: WMD, it was unacceptable; when Zinni comes out with his comments, it was unacceptable; when ......... Sorta getting to think I'm showing things to a flock of Ostriches. [:D]
Guess you guys think that as long as it comes from the Republican Committee to Elect Bush it is okay; anything else is taboo. (Darn truth hurts, doesn't it?) [;)][}:)]
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
Guess you guys think that as long as it comes from the Republican Committee to Elect Bush it is okay; anything else is taboo. (Darn truth hurts, doesn't it?) [;)][}:)]
Before you go jumping to conclusions, I am not a Republican. (Nor am I a Democrat.) I have just as much a problem with obviously biased rightist sources as I have with obviously biased leftist sources.
All I ask is that you find some objective material. If your goal is to "enlighten" us, you can't expect stuff quoted from a socialist website to be taken seriously.
Jacqueline
www.gratuitouslylongdomainname.net
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants and the creed of slaves." -- William Pitt (1783)
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
Cripes--that's like asking what beauty is--your suggestion as what constitutes "objective material" please.
objective, adj.: expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
Some sites that are not objective sources of information:
? Any socialist website.
? Sites belonging to any political party
? Sites belonging to any religious group
Jacqueline
www.gratuitouslylongdomainname.net
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants and the creed of slaves." -- William Pitt (1783)
...expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
Logically impossible; as perceived is precisely the problem. I say we should all speak in atomic sentences (e.g., Chair here now). Who is right about rainbows, Newton or Wordsworth?
Logically impossible; as perceived is precisely the problem. I say we should all speak in atomic sentences (e.g., Chair here now). Who is right about rainbows, Newton or Wordsworth?
Art is one thing, but reality exists outside of our senses and can be described without inserting one's political agenda.
Jacqueline
www.gratuitouslylongdomainname.net
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants and the creed of slaves." -- William Pitt (1783)
...reality exists outside of our senses and can be described without inserting one's political agenda.
If reality exists outside our senses, how is it perceived?
"Been around the world and seen that only stupid people are breeding.The cretins cloning and feeding,and I don't even own a T.V."---Harvey Danger
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
One of the purposes of reading a variety of sources is to see the same information presented in different guises. True, depending upon one's biases and preconceptions, a particular guise may be more attractive than another, but sometimes, just sometimes, one does learn something that changes one's opinion. [;)][}:)]
So, until there is a source that is totally objective AND TRUTHFUL, I'll be forced to read and compare the different versions of our world. May I suggest, respectfully, you join me on this quest for the truth? [;)]
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
If reality exists outside our senses, how is it perceived?
Perception implies both a perceiver and that which is perceived. That which is perceived must be outside of ourselves.
quote:Originally posted by HAIRY
So, until there is a source that is totally objective AND TRUTHFUL, I'll be forced to read and compare the different versions of our world.
Because everyone is biased to some extent, there is no 100% objective, truthful source. (That seems to be what you are inferring from my previous posts.) The expression "even a stopped clock is right twice a day," has some truth in it.
However, some sources of information are more objective than other sources. Many sources (e.g., the World Socialist Web Site) make no attempt at being objective. Time is better spent seeking information from a reliable source rather than wading through a mountain of BS hoping to find some grain of truth.
Jacqueline
www.gratuitouslylongdomainname.net
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants and the creed of slaves." -- William Pitt (1783)
Perception implies both a perceiver and that which is perceived. That which is perceived must be outside of ourselves.
If Helen Keller falls in the forest and nobody hears her, does she make a noise?