GostHacked

Rue Many countries do not follow International Law. Some say they do, but the actions prove otherwise. The US does not adhear to international law just for the fact they do not subscribe to the UN. Considering every country has it's own share of criminals, it is a no brainer to conclude that many countries break 'international law' all the time. This is why there is the UN, WTO, WHO, IMF, World Bank, ICC. These are the forums where we talk about the rules that have been broken. The rhetoric towards Iran is 'ass backwards', radical muslms. The picture that is painted by the West towards Iran is a proof that Iran is not held to higher standards than say Israel. What Black Dog is saying is that not many countries can claim high ground when the actions are deplorable. Israel, Canada, the US, the UK, China, Russia, Myanmar (ect) have all done things that violate international law. Ugh .... It's been in the news. Just not on the front page. Only terrorism gets front page, anything that does not support the dogma gets thrown to the back pages. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8...1690515,00.html Rue, you bring up a great point here. So you admit there is propaganda and dissinformation when it comes to this situation with Iran. It is not about them getting a nuke (kind of) it is about getting the oil before Iran gets the nuke. Once Iran does, it makes taking Iran over much harder and much more dangerous. Iran without the bomb will eventually fall like Iraq did. So in this context, no country should be held higher that another country. But when countries claim to be a beacon of democracy, but yet break international law, no high ground can be claimed. The birth of Israel was not democratic at all. The locals had no say about where the Jews would make their new home. It was a UN mandate. I am not sure if I can call Israel democratic considering how it was created/born. And Rue .. take it easy on me.

There are bullies on the left and the right. Plain and simple. Next thread?

Watch out American Woman, you might be thrown into the tinfoil hat wearin crowd. People get taken out all the time. The mafia call it a 'hit'. People pay other people to take other people out all the time. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/03/23/...ain504460.shtml So a conspiracy must have happened between this now dead scientists and at least one other person. In the beginning the anthrax was tied to Al-Queda and another guy being detained in Pakistan. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6103001250.html But after all this, it turns out to be a simple scientists that is an American. Not only American, they were part of the military. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nati...anthrax020.html The source of the Anthrax scare?? The US Military. This comming just after 9/11, when the US is still very shaken up by the terror attack. It created more fear. This anthrax scare was terrorism ... and it was not Al-Queda.

More trees??? Cleaner air? Cleaner water? Not only that we have more cars, more planes, more ships, more people. more products, bigger cities, more waste, more toxic areas. Check the Amazon now and 50 years ago. More trees eh? Since we need to treat our water before and after we consume it, that does not tell me we have more clean water than before. The population growth of the human race and urban sprawl in the last 100 years clearly states you are absolutely wrong.

Nope, it proves that you are paying for it.

Jerry, it creeps in on both sides, on the extreme ends of the right and left. Al Gore. YOU HATE FREEDOM!!!!!! Socialism and communism get thrown around by the right when a universal health care plan is mentioned. Radical Christians > Radical Muslims.

AH aint claimed nuthin. I asked a question, which you failed to answer. Since you don't care ... pay up.

BC According to you, all my view are flawed. Your slippin BC, you usually bring out the Canada thing in your first segment. What part are you calling bullshit on? That NATO went in only 2-3 months after 9/11? Or there must have been much preparation over the previous year to get to the stage of being able to invade. And it is not Ineedajab that you should worry about. It is the people who control him. It is like Bush, we blame him and not the people who control him. Or the people who controled Blair, or the people who control Brown, or the people who control Harper, ....... *yawn*

So when the bank is in trouble, do you really think you are going to get at that money? Freddie Mac (5th largest banking firm in the US) was denying all clients access to their money. Many of them on your side of the debt curve. And some of them probably got paid by the bank. When the bank is in trouble, do you think you are going to get paid? It is not a victim's mentality, it is a realist's mentality. It is obvious Freddie Mac did not have enough money in the bank to cover all the withdrawls that would have happened. This is why Fractional Resereve Banking does not work. It is not stable. Since you don't have enough money to cover Item A, you need a loan, so you go to the bank. The bank will loan you the money (at interest), but the bank may not have the actuall cash to cover it. So they borrow from the Federal Reserve(at interest) to make up for it. So when you borrow from the Federal Reserve. ... are they lending out more money than they can account for in their coffers? Of course they are. This is why the Feds borrow from the World Bank????(at interest) and the IMF. Or you can sell your debt to foreign countries. But when they all ask for that money back, you can be in a run off situation just like Freddie Mac. But all your money is insured in case this happens. And who pays for that?

Reminds me of a tune .. might have posted it here before. http://frontalot.com/index.php/?page=lyrics&lyricid=30 One of my fave hip hop artists ever.

BC http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/b...n-program_N.htm http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Jul24/0,4...tCrisis,00.html If banks are worried, you should be too.

Ahh ok, so the security of Israel is not in jepardy then. At least not from Iran. When you have corruption cases brought against Olmert, (how many other Isreali prime ministers have been tied to corruption cases) you don't need to worry about Iran. Besides they are more threatened with rocket attacks weekly from the Palestinians. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3283691,00.html This is the case more than not. Someone is hired and says he/she will fight corruption, only to be connected to corruption/bribery cases and having to step down because of the fact. Iran should feel more threatened from Israel, for it is an open secret they have nuclear weapons. Even if they don't I am sure the US can spare a couple for this cause. Speaking of ramping up. NATO went into Afghanistan only 2-3 months after 9/11. There must have been preparation for over a year to get to that stage.

Left wing bullies are facists?? Right wing bullies are pacifists?? I think I am missing something here. I'd consider this thread to be trolling of some type. But, I could be just another lefty bully that wears a tinfoil hat.

Well, at least those people are not deluding themselves This also puts them in a better position to ride the resession out, because they saw the warning signs and they took action before the government did. Saved some money for those emergencies, stocked up on essentials, cut back on other spending. The blind will be blindsighted and can't see the warning signs, and therfore cannot prepare for the recession because it will be too late by then. If you are not prepared, then you are screwed. Simple as that. Resessions start long before they are actually declared. So, don't be a fool and wait for the government to take action.

Army Guy So a strike on a nuclear facility in Iran won't mean the same thing then? You'd have the same scenario really. Could it be like this? : When Amadinejad says Isreal will dissapear, he might be talking about a retaliation if Iran is hit first. Which to me is 100% reasonable, and well, expected. I am not sure why it did not happen when Iraq's Osirak reactor was destroyed. Yes Isreal will be whiped off the map, only if they decide to attack first. Either way it will be used against Iran by the west. No matter what the result is.

Fortuna This is in the top 5 of the most insanely fun things I have done in my life. Not at all. It means he carries a knife. If he had a fork this guy would have done something anyways. I know people that carry knives on them. Hell, I carry a box cutter in my backpack most of the time. Large scissors are just as deadly. It was deliberate and methodical. American Woman Military personelle are trained to do just that. Kill with no remorse and to show no emotion. What I do not get is how he managed to get to 60 times before someone noticed. Only after the fact he removed the head did people notice? Wild Bill That is 100% awesome. Eyeball Wild Bill's experience is a perfect example of gun control. Blubbler Devil weed??

I used to be able to hang up my clothes to dry. I had a washer in my last place, but no dryer. I had a roomate (my cousin) for about a year. After 6 months of high electric bills, I decided to have things you are not using shut off. Just by shutting the computers off for most of the day alone, cut the electric bill in half. When we started to make a concious effort, we drastically reduced the energy consumption which translated into lower utility bills. Don't need to be a CSA techie to understand that. Now that I am in a different place, my utilities are included in my rent. However, I still have the good habit of shutting things off if I am not using them. So you like pissing your money away? Which at the same time is pissing oil away?

The best sentence he could get is a shame to what I'd want. I'd have him die the same way his victim died.

The thing about recessions is , that it hits the average citizen first. It really hits the poor first and pretty dramatically. So the numbers the eggheads put out always lag behind what the real deal is. Or they only look at certain numbers to present their case. Most of the time it is picking and choosing data to support a view.

So how do we change it?

Well, it is hard to when it is in our face all the time .... but go ahead and ignore Canada whenever you want. Eyball Lisa "If I told you this rock keeps bears away, would you buy it?" Homer "I'll give you five dollars for it." Lisa *sighs*. Fool and money are parted. Right now HLS can claim that they are doing the job. The People can claim it as well. But when (not if) the next terror attack on US soil happens, people will be saying that HLS is not effective. This is my line of thinking as well.

But in another thread you have indicated that more deceit should have happened in the ramp up to invade Iraq. So I really doubt you are looking for facts, you might be more looking for 'talking points'. Jerry But they claim to be 'Fair and Balanced'. All media sources have bias. Plain and simple. CNN is center left. Cafertey does go on Bush rants, just like Lou Dobbs. MSNBC, yep, left. Or is being critical of the governments hypocracies considered a 'left' thing? CBC - Left. CTVnews - middle from what I can tell. Foxnews - right. I really do not know what other 'right' media outlets there are. We can also look at newspapers, they sure do have bias. .... and that's the memo.

Well we may have some good news south of the border. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/30/fra...uana/index.html Looking to decriminalize people who have pot in their possession. But you must have under 100 grams. Damn that is just about 3.5 ounces of it. That would last me like 4 months. Who the hell carries around 4 months of supply on them for personal reasons? It does not happen. IF you have 3.5 ounces on you ... chances are you are selling and this is not a personal stash. It might get accepted if you have under 50 grams. Which is still a large amount for personal use. But then again, sometimes I have 2-3 cases of beer in the fridge. I applaude the effort though. It does not stand much of a chance of getting passed, but at least the effort is made and awareness is made.

19uote name='DogOnPorch' date='Jul 27 2008, 07:10 PM' post='325793'] lol...you know so much about nuclear weapons and what the "spooks" are doing that they should hire you. Seems you'd be able to point out the obvious to these moronic louts at HLS and CSIS. It is not a point of me knowing more about nuclear weapons (I really don't know much about them) , but one can EASILY look at the date of the article and can come to a conclusion that the border is not prepared to intercept dirty bombs. Don't take MY word for it. Take theirs. I guess I need to know the 1978 reference and what happened then. I'll get back to you. There was a ship that blew up in the Halifax harbour in the early part of the 1900's. This boat has munitions on it. It caught fire then just blew. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Explosion. A nuclear device would do a lot more damage. Could this re-emerging Cold War II, be a distration on the failed war on terror?? When terrorism goes away, what will be there to replace it?

Check the date of the article. It was just over one year ago when they did the tests. So today's detection gear is either not adequate, or not even in place. Even with a beaurocratic government it would take years before anything was really done about it. I recall those tests when they were done. Now you are right as time goes on the technology should be there to detect these types of things. It could be that case now. But they also indicate that the US/Mexico border is more secure. I don't think they are reliving a glorious past. Nor do I think they want to. Like the US , Russia has interests around the planet. It's hey if they can do it .. so can we. It would not be hard to put missles back into cuba.