State of the Union Address
that's always been the general consensus of anyone that voiced their opinion.
we are the brand new beatniks. we are the down and outers.
we are the bleeding hearts, beating syncopated, broken rhythm.
our speed is often break neck. we need to slow it down.
tired of being sleepless. tired of being broken.
we are the bleeding hearts, beating syncopated, broken rhythm.
our speed is often break neck. we need to slow it down.
tired of being sleepless. tired of being broken.
why is chris brilliant? Sure he shows mild intelligence in being able to read other people's theories and believe them and then regurgitate that information but why is that brilliance? Are you all now brilliant for believing it too? I imagine chris comes across some information that shows the US government in good light but will ignore and disregard it. However, if the information is anti-US, then bingo, that's fact and he will study it. We choose want we want to believe. Every story can be slanted and most of the time IS slanted. How you interpret it is based on how you want to feel about it.
Example:
My girlfriend and I got in an argument about how a politician wanted to cut spending for day care in high schools. She thought that was awful and took away from chances of teen girls receiving an education. I thought it was a great idea because then the spending could go into better teaching and classroom materials. Afterall, why should I pay for someone elses mistake? She doesn't see it that way.
Difference of opinion is all. The two sides fail to see the other point of view because they interpret the information differently. However, you can't just believe something because you want it to be true. Picking apart every minor detail in your favor is overkill. In order to understand an issue, read from ALL sources, not just one party's point of view. It is my feeling that is what chris is doing.
Need I remind you chris, of the raisethefist.com issue? I rest my case.
Example:
My girlfriend and I got in an argument about how a politician wanted to cut spending for day care in high schools. She thought that was awful and took away from chances of teen girls receiving an education. I thought it was a great idea because then the spending could go into better teaching and classroom materials. Afterall, why should I pay for someone elses mistake? She doesn't see it that way.
Difference of opinion is all. The two sides fail to see the other point of view because they interpret the information differently. However, you can't just believe something because you want it to be true. Picking apart every minor detail in your favor is overkill. In order to understand an issue, read from ALL sources, not just one party's point of view. It is my feeling that is what chris is doing.
Need I remind you chris, of the raisethefist.com issue? I rest my case.
<img src="http://www.clumsymonkey.net/phpBB2/download.php?id=4500">
#define QUESTION (bb || !bb) --william shakespeare
#define QUESTION (bb || !bb) --william shakespeare
-
starvingeyes
- Posts: 2009
- Joined: 5/8/2002, 3:44 pm
- Location: california's not very far
i'm being called unoriginal in not so many words by a conservative. may i remind you, corey, that your political views are identical within an issue or two to some 50% of the american population? congratulations on thinking for yourself. you are probably the only slightly right of center moderate on the globe. o wait, there are 150 million others in north america alone. silly me.
there is no one alive, save for maybe my brother, who feels the same way i do about politics. so stop with this "regurgitating" crap. i am merely stating the facts. it's called substantiating your opinion. i could come in here and post some entirely original conspiracy theory with no factual information to back it up, but that would be pretty stupid, wouldn't it?
moving on, i see you've made some lame attempt to discredit me [ how very david corn of you ] but didn't bother addressing any of the factual information. let's try a little true or false.
true or false: the CIA, NSA and FBI all recieved seperate credible warnings about 9/11, some date and location specific, and failed to act
true or false: some very suspicious activtiy in the higher levels of government and the financial sector has occured since the 9/11 attacks
true or false: the government has shown in the past that it is capable of these things.
there is no one alive, save for maybe my brother, who feels the same way i do about politics. so stop with this "regurgitating" crap. i am merely stating the facts. it's called substantiating your opinion. i could come in here and post some entirely original conspiracy theory with no factual information to back it up, but that would be pretty stupid, wouldn't it?
moving on, i see you've made some lame attempt to discredit me [ how very david corn of you ] but didn't bother addressing any of the factual information. let's try a little true or false.
true or false: the CIA, NSA and FBI all recieved seperate credible warnings about 9/11, some date and location specific, and failed to act
true or false: some very suspicious activtiy in the higher levels of government and the financial sector has occured since the 9/11 attacks
true or false: the government has shown in the past that it is capable of these things.
I don't recall saying my views were "original"
And facts mean jack squat to me. Any "fact" can be slanted to help a case.
example:
Since it's operation there has only been a 5% accident rate.
or
Since it's operation, 10,000 employees have been injured.
Given a workforce of 200,000 employees, both these statistics say the same thing but read differently.
another example:
There hasn't been an incident for 5 years.
or
5 years ago Mr. X killed 15 people.
Which reads better?
final example:
The owner of raisethefist.com's equipment was confiscated merely because he hosted an anti-government website.
or
The owner of raisethfist.com's equipment was confiscated because of the development of a worm which replaced webpages around the nation with a link to his anti-government website.
And facts mean jack squat to me. Any "fact" can be slanted to help a case.
example:
Since it's operation there has only been a 5% accident rate.
or
Since it's operation, 10,000 employees have been injured.
Given a workforce of 200,000 employees, both these statistics say the same thing but read differently.
another example:
There hasn't been an incident for 5 years.
or
5 years ago Mr. X killed 15 people.
Which reads better?
final example:
The owner of raisethefist.com's equipment was confiscated merely because he hosted an anti-government website.
or
The owner of raisethfist.com's equipment was confiscated because of the development of a worm which replaced webpages around the nation with a link to his anti-government website.
Last edited by Corey on 2/4/2003, 4:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.
<img src="http://www.clumsymonkey.net/phpBB2/download.php?id=4500">
#define QUESTION (bb || !bb) --william shakespeare
#define QUESTION (bb || !bb) --william shakespeare
-
starvingeyes
- Posts: 2009
- Joined: 5/8/2002, 3:44 pm
- Location: california's not very far
true or false: The Pentagon contains classified CIA information and would not make any sense to be a target if the CIA itself is a conspirator of 9/11
true or false: The US receives many requests from weak nations to come to their rescue.
true or false: The US has rebuilt every nation that has opposed it and ultimately defeated by it.
true or false: The US receives many requests from weak nations to come to their rescue.
true or false: The US has rebuilt every nation that has opposed it and ultimately defeated by it.
<img src="http://www.clumsymonkey.net/phpBB2/download.php?id=4500">
#define QUESTION (bb || !bb) --william shakespeare
#define QUESTION (bb || !bb) --william shakespeare
-
starvingeyes
- Posts: 2009
- Joined: 5/8/2002, 3:44 pm
- Location: california's not very far
ok, what about these facts:
Mike Vreeland handed one page of a 37 page memo to a US navy commander to a canadian prison guard which contained warnings of a terrorist attack involving bin laden and several targets on or about the date of august 12, 2001.
this information was sealed in an envelope and placed in a safety deposit box with vreeland's personal affects until september 14th, 2001, wherein the box and envelope were opened in the prescence of 5 prison employees.
the us military waited 50 minutes to scramble fighters to intercept.
the president of the united states was not moved to an undisclosed safe location after the attacks. in fact, he did not move anywhere until 30 minutes after the attacks.
and of course, there is always coleen rowley, and her much acclaimed <a href ="http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/phoenixmemo1.html">phoenix memo</a>
explain to me how i am or could be manipulating these facts?
Mike Vreeland handed one page of a 37 page memo to a US navy commander to a canadian prison guard which contained warnings of a terrorist attack involving bin laden and several targets on or about the date of august 12, 2001.
this information was sealed in an envelope and placed in a safety deposit box with vreeland's personal affects until september 14th, 2001, wherein the box and envelope were opened in the prescence of 5 prison employees.
the us military waited 50 minutes to scramble fighters to intercept.
the president of the united states was not moved to an undisclosed safe location after the attacks. in fact, he did not move anywhere until 30 minutes after the attacks.
and of course, there is always coleen rowley, and her much acclaimed <a href ="http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/phoenixmemo1.html">phoenix memo</a>
explain to me how i am or could be manipulating these facts?
-
starvingeyes
- Posts: 2009
- Joined: 5/8/2002, 3:44 pm
- Location: california's not very far
ok, well let me provide that suspicious activity for you:
Early September 2001 (J): There is a sharp increase in short selling of the stocks of American and United airlines on the New York Stock Exchange prior to 9/11. A short sell is a bet that a particular stock will drop. There is an increase of 40 percent of short selling over the previous month for these two airlines, compared to an 11 percent increase for other big airlines and one percent for the exchange overall. A significant profit was to be made: United stock dropped 43 percent and American dropped 39 percent the first day the market reopened after the attack. Short selling of Munich Re, the world's largest reinsurer, is also later noted by German investigators. Inquiries into short selling millions of Munich Re shares were made in France days before the attacks
Early September 2001 (L): Numerous other overseas investigations into insider trading before 9/11 are later established. There are investigations in Belgium, France, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Monte Carlo, Cyprus and other countries. There are particularly strong suspicions British markets were manipulated. Italy is investigating suspicious share movements on the day of the attack, as well as the previous day. Japan as well is looking into trading of futures contracts
Early September 2001 (M): After 9/11 both the SEC and the Secret Service announce probes into an unusually high volume trade of five-year US Treasury note purchases around this time. These transactions included a single $5 billion trade. The Wall Street Journal explains: "Five-year Treasury notes are among the best investments in the event of a world crisis, especially one that hits the US. The notes are prized for their safety and their backing by the US government, and usually rally when investors flee riskier investments, such as stocks." The value of these notes has risen sharply since the events of September 11. The article also points out that with these notes, "tracks would be hard to spot."
September 6-10, 2001: Suspicious trading occurs on American and United, the two airlines used in the 9/11 attacks. "Between 6 and 7 September, The Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put option contracts [a speculation that the stock will go down] in UAL versus 396 call options – where a speculator bets on a price rising. Holders of the put options would have netted a profit of $5 million once the carrier's share price dived after September 11. On 10 September, more trading in Chicago saw the purchase of 4,516 put options in American Airlines, the other airline involved in the hijackings. This compares with a mere 748 call options in American purchased that day. Investigators cannot help but notice that no other airlines saw such trading in their put options." One analyst says: "I saw put-call numbers higher than I've ever seen in 10 years of following the markets, particularly the options markets."
September 6-10, 2001 (B): The Chicago Board Options Exchange sees suspicious trading on Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley, two of the largest WTC tenants. An average of 3,053 put options in Merrill Lynch are bought between September 6-10, compared to an average of 252 in the previous week. Merrill Lynch, another WTC tenant, see 12,215 put options bought between September 7-10, when the previous days had seen averages of 252 contracts a day.
1. irrelevant. the cia has copies of their documents, i'm sure.
2. true. your point?
3. "rebuilt" is an awfully gentle way of putting what the us has done to nations that have opposed them in the past. like starting up the opium trade in afghanistan.
4. i'm inclined to say false. i have seen no conclusive proof that this is true, and furthermore, it is my belief that OBL was then and still is a cia asset, however, this is based on information that i obtained from sources which lack mainstream credibility, so i will not rule out the possibility that he did it, either with the complicity of the CIA or acting on his own.
FDR, i might add, let pearl harbour happen so he could invade japan. is it not possible that the bush wanted to invade afghanistan, so he knowingly ignored and possibly aided the attacks through CIA and ONI back channels?
Early September 2001 (J): There is a sharp increase in short selling of the stocks of American and United airlines on the New York Stock Exchange prior to 9/11. A short sell is a bet that a particular stock will drop. There is an increase of 40 percent of short selling over the previous month for these two airlines, compared to an 11 percent increase for other big airlines and one percent for the exchange overall. A significant profit was to be made: United stock dropped 43 percent and American dropped 39 percent the first day the market reopened after the attack. Short selling of Munich Re, the world's largest reinsurer, is also later noted by German investigators. Inquiries into short selling millions of Munich Re shares were made in France days before the attacks
Early September 2001 (L): Numerous other overseas investigations into insider trading before 9/11 are later established. There are investigations in Belgium, France, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Monte Carlo, Cyprus and other countries. There are particularly strong suspicions British markets were manipulated. Italy is investigating suspicious share movements on the day of the attack, as well as the previous day. Japan as well is looking into trading of futures contracts
Early September 2001 (M): After 9/11 both the SEC and the Secret Service announce probes into an unusually high volume trade of five-year US Treasury note purchases around this time. These transactions included a single $5 billion trade. The Wall Street Journal explains: "Five-year Treasury notes are among the best investments in the event of a world crisis, especially one that hits the US. The notes are prized for their safety and their backing by the US government, and usually rally when investors flee riskier investments, such as stocks." The value of these notes has risen sharply since the events of September 11. The article also points out that with these notes, "tracks would be hard to spot."
September 6-10, 2001: Suspicious trading occurs on American and United, the two airlines used in the 9/11 attacks. "Between 6 and 7 September, The Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put option contracts [a speculation that the stock will go down] in UAL versus 396 call options – where a speculator bets on a price rising. Holders of the put options would have netted a profit of $5 million once the carrier's share price dived after September 11. On 10 September, more trading in Chicago saw the purchase of 4,516 put options in American Airlines, the other airline involved in the hijackings. This compares with a mere 748 call options in American purchased that day. Investigators cannot help but notice that no other airlines saw such trading in their put options." One analyst says: "I saw put-call numbers higher than I've ever seen in 10 years of following the markets, particularly the options markets."
September 6-10, 2001 (B): The Chicago Board Options Exchange sees suspicious trading on Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley, two of the largest WTC tenants. An average of 3,053 put options in Merrill Lynch are bought between September 6-10, compared to an average of 252 in the previous week. Merrill Lynch, another WTC tenant, see 12,215 put options bought between September 7-10, when the previous days had seen averages of 252 contracts a day.
1. irrelevant. the cia has copies of their documents, i'm sure.
2. true. your point?
3. "rebuilt" is an awfully gentle way of putting what the us has done to nations that have opposed them in the past. like starting up the opium trade in afghanistan.
4. i'm inclined to say false. i have seen no conclusive proof that this is true, and furthermore, it is my belief that OBL was then and still is a cia asset, however, this is based on information that i obtained from sources which lack mainstream credibility, so i will not rule out the possibility that he did it, either with the complicity of the CIA or acting on his own.
FDR, i might add, let pearl harbour happen so he could invade japan. is it not possible that the bush wanted to invade afghanistan, so he knowingly ignored and possibly aided the attacks through CIA and ONI back channels?
-
call me andrew
- Posts: 788
- Joined: 3/13/2002, 8:43 am
- Location: your mama
- Contact:
for everyone's reading pleasure:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0403/p01s01-wome.html
http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/020311.htm
http://uspolitics.about.com/library/blconfession.htm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 53,00.html
http://uspolitics.about.com/library/wee ... 10302a.htm
http://uspolitics.about.com/library/wee ... 22102a.htm
Do I also need to mention the Shoebomber and the shooting at the LA airport?
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0403/p01s01-wome.html
http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/020311.htm
http://uspolitics.about.com/library/blconfession.htm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 53,00.html
http://uspolitics.about.com/library/wee ... 10302a.htm
http://uspolitics.about.com/library/wee ... 22102a.htm
Do I also need to mention the Shoebomber and the shooting at the LA airport?
<img src="http://www.clumsymonkey.net/phpBB2/download.php?id=4500">
#define QUESTION (bb || !bb) --william shakespeare
#define QUESTION (bb || !bb) --william shakespeare
-
Venom
- Posts: 678
- Joined: 1/14/2003, 3:27 pm
- Location: Reality....you should all try it sometime
- Contact:
the us military waited 50 minutes to scramble fighters to intercept.
Thats 50 mins AFTER the first notice of the planes losing radio contact. No one knew what was going on. In a crisis like that you think you could think clearly and authorize the killing of a couple plane loads of innocents when you have no F-in clue why these planes have diverted or what is going on?? I think not.
the president of the united states was not moved to an undisclosed safe location after the attacks. in fact, he did not move anywhere until 30 minutes after the attacks.
The first attacks were in NEW YORK!!! Why would he have to be moved. Again no on knew what was going on......when it was believed to be terrorism then he was moved. The Pentagon plane come quite a bit later than the WTC planes. Also who knew if there wasn't a terrorist bomber, sniper, etc waiting outside for the President to do just that....move. Do you have any idea what has to be done and looked at before any of these decisions can be made??
-
Venom
- Posts: 678
- Joined: 1/14/2003, 3:27 pm
- Location: Reality....you should all try it sometime
- Contact:
and skippy - don't fucking talk to me about palestine. those people are hardly terrorists. they're fighting for their lives.
Let me give you a little history lesson pal since you obviously don't have a clue. Jews and Muslims have always lived in the area of Israel/Palestine and there has always been a conflict over who has the rights to different areas. In 1915 the British (who held control of the land) granted the Jews their own state for their support in WWI. The Muslims because of their hatred for the Jews wanted none of this. The British set up 2 districts....one Jewish and one Muslim (Transjordan). In fact the Muslim district was much larger and better (75% of Jewish land was desert), but they didn't want the Jews there at all. They not only rejected these divided areas, but attacked the Jews from all sides. The Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Al Husseini stated, "I declare a holy war, my Moslem brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!" The armies of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq invaded the tiny new country with the declared intent of destroying it. Nice people huh?? This was the war of 1948. Israel went on to defeat the attack and even gained more land, however they gave it back!! The Arab coutries weren't done. They were planning another attack however this time Isreal struck first pushing the Egyptian and Syrian troops backward taking more land. (again they eventually returned it). Then shortly after midday on Saturday, October 6, 1973, Egypt and Syria launched a concerted military attack against Israel. They had chosen to attack on Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, a day when most Israelis were in synagogues praying and fasting. Again the Jews were the victors. Now we fast forward to present day where there are still constant suicide attacks on innocent Jews. The Arabs had their chances to have their own state!! They decided instead to attack and attack again to try and eradicate the Jews from the area. People argue today that they use these suicide attacks because they don't have the military that Israel does. Well fine but attack military targets not innocent civilians. The people that carry out these attacks are TERRORISTS not the military. Israel has struck back with curfews and yes some innocent Arabs have died, but what can they do when hundreds of their own civilians are being attacked everyday. At least Israel targets terrorists and the government of the Palestinian Authority. They could have taken out Yasser Arafat when they stormed his compound but they didn't. Do you think the Palastinian terrorists would have let Sharon live??? Nope.