Velvet Elvis Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 I don't know why this isn't being picked up by more news sources. We need to forward it to everyone we know before it gets burried. http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/0...al_source_.html. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 I'm not sure which was more disturbing, the news itself, or the comments from people who are cheering for the violation of the constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravenonice Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 I think I'm gonna throw up. raven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olga Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Mack is on it---the article is scarey enough, but the comments of the readers---? Whoa! Get a grip, people! We're talking about our Constitutional RIGHTS, here! Since when have we started calling the press a bunch of seditionists? And how is it that these reporters are causing soldiers to be killed?? It IS enough to make you sick.... olga Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Elvis Posted May 16, 2006 Author Share Posted May 16, 2006 http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/0...cknowledge.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMarshall Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 HOLY SH*T ! This stuff is out of control, and no one is stopping them. At all. On any point of order. They have already said that the law doesn't apply to what they do. "We aren't tracking the calls, we're backtracking". pshaw. National Security Letter: It allows ANY regular FBI agent to order anyone to divulge any information to the FBI, and you can't contest it. The letter doesn't even require a supervisor's approval. The FBI doens't track anything more than how many letters are issued. No one reviews them for abuse. This IS getting scary. a.m. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
celestia Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Compliments of that harmless lil ole Patriot Act...that no one even saw coming. I stay away from politics because I'm an ignoramous and I anger easily. "Luddo mad..." from the Labyrinth, however, I making my plans to move my operation off shore. There IS no hope, we live in a nation of sheeple. Forget about it. And yes, I vote. But it takes more than votes in numbers the size of which couldn't fill up Rhode Island. Check the water supply, Batman. S9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tallulah Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 oh.dear. well thats about all i can say regarding that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Remember back when we had that document called a constitution that had freedom of the press and protected against illegal searches? Hah! Good times. I'm glad Dick Cheney was castigating the Russians the other day for not being a real democracy. <sarcasm> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
celestia Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Remember back when we had that document called a constitution that had freedom of the press and protected against illegal searches? Hah! Good times. I'm glad Dick Cheney was castigating the Russians the other day for not being a real democracy. <sarcasm> And it's malcontents like us, no, wait--we're the crazy ones, so we get NO SAY--but if we weren't crazy, we'd be malcontents, even though we all know we're crazy malcontents--who are undermining the strength of this country with our crazy babble about invasion of privacy and constitutional violations. Take the blue pill...but there's no turning back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scream_phoenix Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 that was a damn good quote from spinoza somebody added at the end ( i couldn't make my way through 1/10th of those comments): "Better that right counsels be known to enemies than that the evil secrets of tyrants should be concealed from the citizens. They who can treat secretly the affairs of a nation have it absolutely under their authority; and as they plot against the enemy in time of war, so do they against the citizens in time of peace." -- Spinoza somehow i don't think more meds are gonna quell this dread any. i'm not even that much of a bush-hater (well wasn't before) but these guys are just trying way too hard to be evil. damn. did anybody see the fox-news montage last night on colbert report (might have been daily show) of all the fox reporters just saying " it's no big deal - they're just collecting phone numbers, not the conversations themselves" awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praxis Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Welcome to the gulag. If Resident Bush has his way, only the official pre-spun "news" will be printed. In Pravda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncc1701 Posted May 17, 2006 Share Posted May 17, 2006 Heya, What did Carolyn Parrish say? Damn Americans, I hate those bastards. Coalition of the idiots. Present company excluded, of course -- you always exclude me from damn-docs, after all Bush-lite can't be far behind. Ah crap. Glorious and free? Wait five minutes. --ncc-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realitytest Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Yeah, This is par for the course, along with planted pseudo "News" manufactured by the Admin and of course, so many human rights violatins against aliens, detained without ANY rights and often tortured. As the aunt of several great young Turkish adults now afraid to visit, this hits closer to home than for many. Anybody been following how many suicides there are at Guantanamo? A lot of it seems to be the result of the indefiniteness of their detention. I guess after they've through (and seen), they're afraid to let them go - even when they find the detainees are definitely innocent. Reminds me of Czarist Russia when one of the greatest traumas was mock executions. (Dostoyevsky went through this and it completely colored his life outlook) All in the name of Homeland Security. And in the end, is our homeland worth preserving? Next step (and this to me is even worse, if that's possible) is monitoring the Internet. This would include Boards like this too, not just emails. I've been closely following developments in China, our new ally (and State Capitalist, not socialist anymore BTW. Did you know they no longer have free medical care for all?). Many international watchdog groups track their amazing technological strides in Internet surveillance - almost all farmed out to US firms like "Don't go to the Dark Side" Google (go the green side, instead ). Proxy servers or not, it's now almost impossible to remain anonymous there. Never occurred to you theyre just practicing to apply it here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
december_brigette Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Hey all, too afraid to write too much. there are too many cars outside right now....why? every house has decent sized driveways....and the cars are on the street. part of me doesnt want to say it - but the other part does - I knew it!!! i love george w all republicans ARE right robot december Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punky Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 I keep finding more and more reasons to leave this country. I complained about this sort of thing to my pdoc, and how it makes me feel so impotent, and she said I should run for office. Umm, no. I can picture the smear campaign now, and I'd never make it. I want to move far, far away. Like Chile, or Japan. Or maybe even Norway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazynotstupid Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 I love it when something like this happens, and people pull out the Patriot Act and scream "ohmiGOD that is, like, SO unconstitutional!" Um...OK. Tell me where in the Constitution it says so? Point me to a court ruling that bans this. Something, folks, I want cites; rhetoric is passe. And wimpy. While facts rarely convince those whose minds are set in stone, I still like them. Cuz they're hard to argue with. As for the reporters...well, when you're part of an investigation, all sorts of things relevant to that investigation can be pulled. My personal opinion is, in regards to leaks of classified inof: shoot the leakers, and shoot those that published sensitive info. With the media doing half their job for them, the terrorists must be having a ball. I mean, it's been kinda hard on them, having a prez that'll actually stand up and fight them. But, I suppose we could curtail the NSA et al from their investigative activities. After all, the last 5 1/2 years have been rather boring; huge terrorist attacks with four-digit body counts adds spice to the daily humdrum, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravenonice Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 CNS, so you say shoot Bush, Cheney and Libby? raven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
december_brigette Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Hi, why do i feel so scared to say I am a liberal hilliary loving democrat??? I should be able to say what i want without fear of the republican retribution. oh now it is happening again: "i love george w i am a robot" robot db Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spam purse Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 CNS, so you say shoot Bush, Cheney and Libby? raven Uhm, better not. Saying that will get you a visit from the Jack Booted Gub'mint Thugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Crap. just more to add to my paranoias. It's time to dump some tea. Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Elvis Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 I love it when something like this happens, and people pull out the Patriot Act and scream "ohmiGOD that is, like, SO unconstitutional!" Um...OK. Tell me where in the Constitution it says so? Point me to a court ruling that bans this. Something, folks, I want cites; rhetoric is passe. And wimpy. While facts rarely convince those whose minds are set in stone, I still like them. Cuz they're hard to argue with. As for the reporters...well, when you're part of an investigation, all sorts of things relevant to that investigation can be pulled. My personal opinion is, in regards to leaks of classified inof: shoot the leakers, and shoot those that published sensitive info. With the media doing half their job for them, the terrorists must be having a ball. I mean, it's been kinda hard on them, having a prez that'll actually stand up and fight them. But, I suppose we could curtail the NSA et al from their investigative activities. After all, the last 5 1/2 years have been rather boring; huge terrorist attacks with four-digit body counts adds spice to the daily humdrum, no? Oh. Please. I know you're libertarianish republican and not a bible thumper and this is a bit much even for you. Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Amendment V - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Amendment X - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazynotstupid Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 CNS, so you say shoot Bush, Cheney and Libby? raven Sorry, my bad. Instead of "sensitive" I should have specified "classified". And if the prez decides he wants it declassified (so as to leak it for positive spin) then it's declassified. For good or ill, that's how it is; essentially, by definition, if its release is authorized by the prez, no one can be held legally liable. (Morally, that's another thing) Elvis, thanks for the amendments; I'm sure they're relative, but that isn't the real point here. This is one of those situations where rampant, unfettered growth in technology runs smack into a 200+ year old legal document. We all have our opinions on whether or not it's legal in this case; I happen to believe it is. However, there are three branches of government, for the specific purpose of checks and balance. When it comes to Constitutional issues, that's the Supreme Court's jurisdiction. There's no caselaw here, that I know of; same for any precedents. Like I said, if anyone knows any, point me at 'em. My mind's not set in stone on this, but as I said, I believe it's entirely kosher, AND I think it's a good tool to track down terrorists. Or, it was. Personally I'm just sick of those people who leak this stuff in order to damage an administration they don't like, when the final cost may be paid by dozens, or hundreds, of innocents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Elvis Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 I'm fine with damaging any govenment that values security over liberty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 What if... Everyone is screaming how they wouldn't care if Bush spies on their cell phones, landlines, and whatever he wants because they are GOOD Americans. GOOD Americans don't have anything to worry about. Except one thing ... What if ... Some overtired government information collector working at midnight somehow links your phone number to a phone number to some group on a "most wanted list". What if ... You lose your cell phone at the bar and report it stolen but one morning men in suits are at your door needing to "talk with you" What if ... You call out on your land line for one number but repeatedly get your lines crossed with someone else. You call the phone company and they say they're going to check but it keeps happening. Then someone comes ... wanting to "talk with you". What if ... Your teenaged son and his buddies start calling the home of someone they go to school with of Middle Eastern origin and leave lots of stupid messages as "pranks". Your phone bill shows constant calls to someone of "that origin" and people come to you wanting to know why. What if ... You are seen leaving the grocery store and you put a dollar in a can to fight homelessness. You later find out (when the men knock at your door) that it was a "Muslim" (or whatever)organization being investigated for its practices and possible terrorist links and why were YOU donating to them? What if ... In any of these scenarios some overzealous "Anti-terrorist fighter" calls your name or puts it on a list? It'll be years, or maybe the rest of your life, before your life is normal again. All because you will not be listened to or believed. You will be belittled and humiliated. You will be held indefinitely without seeing your family. All because Georgie is paranoid and wants full control and knowledge of every word spoken by every American. There are hundreds more "what ifs". Look around, which one suits you and your town? Remember the story of the little boy whose name STILL is on a terrorist list? my personal opinion is that our "intelligence" units are clueless and we probably have enough terrorists on our soil now to wage war for several years if something were to happen. My opinion is that THEY'RE ALREADY HERE. Taking away personal freedoms isn't going to stop someone that really wants to flip out and cause some major damage. Hell people are already worried about MI people and their capabilities much less a "terrorist". Everyone is worried about "the terrorists" so they're scanning our phones, email, and cell phones(especially for anyone tan to brown skinned with an accent.) What are they going to do about the blonde-haired blue-eyed guys that are sick of America that would betray us? What then? I bet their records won't be searched with as much zeal as those "furriners" (as Bush would say). lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravenonice Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Or, in my case. we talk to our daughter in law's family in Turkey? Raven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 These are the most wanted terrorists (by the FBI) http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/fugitives.htm These are the top ten http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/fugitives.htm Of all of them only 6 are American I only skimmed them but I didn't see any men of Turkish descent. Lebanese however is another story let's hope your daughter in laws family doesn't hang out with too many Lebanese folks. (Antakya Turkey is only like 200 miles from Beirut) I have lots of friends from the Middle East. I guess I'd better watch my step. Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ehygon Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 this makes me wonder... paranoid schizophreia? or smarter than the average bear? personally, it's not a problem, but I'm sure this makes a lot of people do a double take when taking the daily meds. still, not cool america, not cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazynotstupid Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 What if... There are hundreds more "what ifs". Look around, which one suits you and your town? So...what iiiifff...a terrorist drove into the middle of your town in a Ryder truck full of tasty, nuclear deliciousness? What if your town become just a big glassy sear that no one could go near? Yeah, what-ifs sure are useful. Especially when coated with thick layers of hyperbole. Remember the story of the little boy whose name STILL is on a terrorist list?Um...no. my personal opinion is that our "intelligence" units are clueless and we probably have enough terrorists on our soil now to wage war for several years if something were to happen. My opinion is that THEY'RE ALREADY HERE. Taking away personal freedoms isn't going to stop someone that really wants to flip out and cause some major damage. Hmm...no, taking away "personal freedoms" (and I bet that most people here have a pretty broad definition of that) won't stop someone. Unless, of course, it leads agents to them (and their cronies, if any) and a plot is foiled. I agree, our intelligence agencies suck. Thank Mr. Clinton for that one. (If not for his administration's policies, Z. Moussaui [yes I know I fucked that up] could have been properly questioned, the right folks could have been informed, and we might still have a couple really tall buildings in NYC) And I'm quite sure we have terrorists on our soil. Shit, why do you think they HAVE programs like this? They don't care if you're calling 1-900-BIGTITS four times a week. They DO care if you're in regular contact with known or suspected terrorists. But what the hell. Going out in a nuclear blast ain't so bad; at least then I won't feel the need to make a cogent, rational argument with those who hate the man in thw White House and any policy or person connected to him. Now, I need to go call my alma mater and tell them to disband the forensics club, for it appears rational debate is dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Elvis Posted May 19, 2006 Author Share Posted May 19, 2006 Cancer kills millions more than terrorists. If protecting human life is such a big deal it seems like finding a cure for cancer would be a bigger priority than the "war on terror." I would gladly accept the risk of knowing my town could be wiped of the map if I knew it meant I could be sure nobody was listening to my phone calls. That's supposed to be part of what it means to be an American, accepting that risk is part of the cost of freedom and liberty. You can't be safe and free at the same time. The two are mutaly exclusive. This wiretap stuff is an extention of the mentality that started with seatbelt laws. I thought you republicans were all about the limited government and stuff? A government that makes up the law as it goes along isn't limited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
december_brigette Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 WOW!!! I really appreciate the intellectual info everyone here is bringing to us. this is all truth, no sarcasm. It would be nice to be registered on the "hillary in 2008" and not feel like a target. I am proud of this....but Im sure the republicans have a list - or know that I visit her site. AND my very impressionable 18 yo brother has decided to research communism quite extensively. and he thinks its a good thing. so good for him. but you know THEY are watching this kid. i'll let y'all know if THEY show up and disturb the CSI finale. december Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realitytest Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 CNS I believe it's entirely kosher, AND I think it's a good tool to track down terrorists....the final cost may be paid by dozens, or hundreds, of innocents. I have a problem with this terminology and the rationales that generally accompany it We are pitting "terrorists" against "innocents". Sounds good. But there's no clear distinction, except hypothetically. Terrorists rarely carry cards announcing their ideology and intentions. There is no blood test. They aren't tatooed with special symbols. They're mostly just people, men, of Middle Eastern origin (or who look like it), or even merely those with Muslim names. The accusations against them - often mere suspicions - are frequently flimsy based primarily on being in the wrong place at the wrong time, with no translator to explain their errand, a mosque they may have attended or company they're supposed to have kept. There are many cases of outright mistaken identity. But suddenly in the name of protecting "innocents" (Who? Me?) they have become "known terrorists" instead of mere suspects in a dubious round-up. What if they themselves are innocent of the crime they're accused of- planning to commit acts of terrorism? What is this litmus test we have to justify treating them as less than human? By a flip of terminology, we convert them from suspects into convicted or plotting killers. They aren't protected as our Bill of Rights guarantees - born equal entitled to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Nor are they granted due process of Law - no counsel to prove their innocence, often even to know what they're charged with. They're emotionally tortured by being held in indefinite detention with explicit and implicit threats against them and their families. And too often, it's more than emotional torture. We have schools to teach these things now. The underlings at AbuGhraib were guilty of being untrained, more than anything. Not many of us, would have a problem dealing very harshly with BinLaden or al-Zarqawi. But clearcut guilt is rare. Who are the terrorists? Is it all right to torture or kill an innocent man because the nets have been cast so wide? If one is OK, are 100 still OK? 1000? One step more and we might as well round up all Middle Easterners or all Muslims, and sequester them in camps. Guard our ports and our borders, hold us all up at airports - fine. But is there a limit to what we overstep in what used to be called Human Rights? Or have we redefined these so-called "terrorists" as inhuman? ...And increasingly, our own nationals, as our new laws demonstrate. Especially those ungrateful citizens who don't show a proper level of "patriotism"? Black or white thinking. Much too often, I hear accusations of treason for mere civil dissent. It's gotten to where it's not unthinkable to hear an Orwellian saying like "slavery in the defense of liberty is no crime." Our morality is slipping and sliding until the question is inescapable. Are we better than our enemies? What makes our society worth preserving if it's at "all costs"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooterman Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I keep finding more and more reasons to leave this country. I complained about this sort of thing to my pdoc, and how it makes me feel so impotent, and she said I should run for office. Umm, no. I can picture the smear campaign now, and I'd never make it. I want to move far, far away. Like Chile, or Japan. Or maybe even Norway. Lots of room in Canada. Probably not a good idea though. Our new PM(Prime Minister for those not in the know) has his head up Bushes ass. Scooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
december_brigette Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 If we build a huge wall between the USA & mexico - then we will all be safe. cuz the mexicans are terrorists, too. robot republican december Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realitytest Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 If we build a huge wall between the USA & mexico - then we will all be safe. cuz the mexicans are terrorists, too. robot republican december You read that they were thinking seriously of doing just that, right, december? Tell me you didn't just make that up! :embarassed: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/05/18/...e.ap/index.html rt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazynotstupid Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 This wiretap stuff is an extention of the mentality that started with seatbelt laws. Maybe so. I'm going to be skeptical on this particular count, but the nanny state shit that's been going on...now THAT is, IMO, the bigest threat to our freedom. (I'm waiting for the day when we're given an electronic debit-type card that lets us buy only so much food, calorie- and fat-wise, when we go to the store or out to eat. "Sir, you don't have enough points for a Big Mac, may I suggest a side salad with lite dressing instead?") Of course, a lot of that comes from the actions of trial lawyers and their lawsuit happy clientele. One might say this administration is out to do horrible things to the country, yet Bush et al's time is limited. Personally, I worry more about those who suck us dry and make new law out of whole cloth behind out backs. Anyways... I thought you republicans were all about the limited government and stuff? A government that makes up the law as it goes along isn't limited.Ack! I'm not a Republican, it's just that there's no one better to vote for. My prime concern is *fiscal* conservatism, as well as a limited government, but that lays more along the lines of getting rid of stupid, burdonsome regulations and actually deciding caselaw by following the Constitution, not, as I said above, creating new law (and rights) out of whole cloth. There's a whole lot I'd change if I could, and I'm certainly not happy with a lot of things Bush has done. (Medicare? Spending like a drunken sailor on shore leave? And lots of other stuff.) BUT--generally, I think he's done right on terror, iraq, and Afghanistan, though there certainly was a lot of room for improvement. As far as I'm concerned, he seems to be the first prez in some time to take this shit seriously. We got complacent, we paid, and now we have to find a new equilibrium. (I say nuke 'em all, but then, I'm like that...) It would be nice to be registered on the "hillary in 2008" and not feel like a target. I am proud of this....but Im sure the republicans have a list - or know that I visit her site. Now, THAT sounds...paranoid. Even if they cared, and knew...what're they gonna do? (Personally I hope Condi runs in '08... ) What makes our society worth preserving if it's at "all costs"? Legos. C'mon, join the cult! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
december_brigette Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Hi All: CNS: Im so paranoid its ridiculous. RT: A wall already exists in some parts of CA & Mexico. and I heard on the news this evening that a wall between the USA & Mexico is still a big idea. (seriously). i was just making a joke that mexicans are terrorists. good god, im the white minority in this freakin farm town where the parents live. JUST A JOKE. Any mexicans who know where i live - JUST A JOKE. of course, mexicans would never think of blowing US up. db Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 CNS said BUT--generally, I think he's done right on terror, iraq, and Afghanistan, though there certainly was a lot of room for improvement. As far as I'm concerned, he seems to be the first prez in some time to take this shit seriously. We got complacent, we paid, and now we have to find a new equilibrium. (I say nuke 'em all, but then, I'm like that...) He takes all of this shit seriously?! Low pay for our troops(yes most are eligible for food stamps), benefit cuts to the veterans,lack of medical facilities for earlier veterans with type II diabetes, no proper body armor for the troops,no proper siding for the humvees, lack of decent food for the troops, DU poisoning, lack of drinkable water during the summer season, then of course the recent revelation about sending unfit troops to fight, he's spent billions on a war that could have done so much more good here, forced tours of duties without breaks, soldier suicides from the travesties there, no exit psychological reorientation period for the vets that come home shell-shocked, friendly fire when the morale of the troops gets out of hand and MANY innocent Iraqis that die.His top military council is even saying he messed up. Oh I know they're "collateral damage". If you knew anything about Saddam or Bin Laden you'd know they HATED each other. It's highly unlikely that they came together to do 911. Better pick a different country on the map one closer to Iran for 911. and then you say NUKE THEM ALL? Very fucking nice. Great regard for human life. The Iraqis there could no more control their leader than we can ours. And Afghanistan is an unfinished toilet. Our soldiers there suffer from the same illnesses and drama as some of our troops in Iraq. I'll let you know right now if someone unilaterally invaded our country without any real proof except the hatred of the leader I'd fight my ass off just like the "insurgents" and "uncooperative Iraqis" are doing now. Once they found out that their women,old men, children whoever and whatever were targets for our soldiers they knew we weren't there to free them from anything but OUR rule. After all this time they have no jobs, money, barely any electricity, barely (and hard to come by) drinkable water, no going to school or to mosque, forget the hospital or "grocery" store (since there is barely any decent food there) and this has been going on for HOW LONG because George has no exit strategy? I guess I'll join you in your hatred for life. I hope North Korea joins with China, Iran, Syria, and Russia and nukes us right off the map. We have so many resources and this is how we use them. THIS bullshit is how we show ourselves as a world power. I also hope the dollar crashes so those billions Halliburton is sucking up turn to toilet paper and they get a dose of the life they're helping serve up to Iraq. Nuke them all that's just fucking wrong. You need to talk to the men and women that are there and have been there before spouting off about how good George has done in their regard. http://www.vaiw.org/vet/index.php http://www.ivaw.net/ oh and just to get a perspective on how people in Iraq are REALLY living http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/ I hope we fry like an egg Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncc1701 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Heya, 1. Bush-lite scares hell out of me. Into me? 2. Buncha stupid white people came to North America b/c they wanted freedom from some other government. 3. Then wrecked the place and slaughtered everyone else. 4. Bush-lite's gonna wreck the place. 5. Bush-American says no more separation of Church and State. 6. Women who want to stop their pregnancies, same-sex people who want to get married -- come over *now.* 7. B/c you never know what Bush-lite is coming up with *next.* 8. My sister works for the gubmint and tells me the staff are no longer allowed to say, "Hi howya doin," to the ministers... b/c Bush-lite says it's not okay. Just that. Also. This just in. Iran to require non-Muslim people to wear badges. When do us Canuckis get *our* badges? I want one. --ncc-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punky Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Lots of room in Canada. Probably not a good idea though. Our new PM(Prime Minister for those not in the know) has his head up Bushes ass. Scooter Thanks, Scooter, I was thinking about Canada until y'all got that new PM. I really do feel like American politics are corrupt. Not many people claim to be Republican or Democrat anymore, but just vote Democrat so the Republicans won't win or vice versa. Trying to vote for the lesser of two evils. Our government is spending so much time, effort, and money spying on our own people in the name of preventing terrorism, but they aren't asking why we are a target and how can we stop being a target. Why are we a target? Most people would say that it is because we aren't Muslim and the extreme Muslims are out to get us. But they aren't attacking other predominately non-Muslim countries like Brazil or Nigeria or Norway or Australia. No, it isn't what we are doing or who we worship in our own country that has made us a target, it is what America is doing outside of America's borders that is making us a target. The government's efforts to protect America from terrorism by invading citizens' privacy and searching for terrorist cells is comparable to chemotherapy. It is invasive and destructive to every cell (person), cancerous (terrorist) or healthy (non-terrorist). Sure, it helps get rid of the cancer. But where did the cancer come from? What we are doing is like smoking, while living in a house with radon, and eating food raised in Chernobyll, all while having chemotherapy. We cannot erradicate terrorism from the inside when we are still provoking these organizations outside our borders. They will just keep training new terrorists and sneaking them in. I don't know what we've done to piss the people off who have resorted to terrorism, but they must feel extremely disrespected to resort to suicide attacks. I'm not saying this is all our fault and we "deserved" it. We most certainly didn't deserve 9/11. But we did something that provoked it. I've tried to research it, to get to the bottom of it, but eventually I get to a dead end. I know that we sent massive amounts of weapons to Afganistan. The CIA trained Bin Laden. We did these things to get at Russia because at the time, we didn't like Russia. ("We" being American heads of power). Then what happened? What did we do to Bin Laden to make him so angry with us? I can't find the answer. I do not like this fight within. I do not like reporters' calls being monitored in order to root out their secret sources. I do not like Johnny Smith's phone being tapped because he orders falafel every week from the Middle-Eastern deli down the street. I do not like myself being on the watch list because I research Islam and terrorism and Iran and Bin Laden. I do not like that the Hindi guy who wears a turban while working at the gas station gets harrassed by ignorant white Americans who think all "towel heads" are terrorists. I do not like that when I stood up for him, I was threatened by my own fellow Americans. I like it even less that now I am afraid to stand up for him. I do not like having so much fear and hate in my country. And I DO believe that my leaders, my government, is doing most of this for even more power, not for my protection. Slight of hand. Attacking Iraq because there might be WMDs there, and Bin Laden might be there, nothing to do with oil, right? Right? Nothing to do with oil? Ugh. I'm losing my train of thought and getting lost in frustration. My point is that this is bigger than what is happening right here on our own dirt. We are out there, on their dirt, doing something that is making them angry enough to die for. What are we doing and when are we going to stop? Our leaders are distracting us from this bigger picture by drawing our attention to debates such as this one, like whether freedom or security are more important. A valid debate. An important question. But not as consequential as figuring out why this is happening in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMarshall Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 He takes all of this shit seriously?! Low pay for our troops(yes most are eligible for food stamps), benefit cuts to the veterans, lack of medical facilities for earlier veterans with type II diabetes, no proper body armor for the troops,no proper siding for the humvees, lack of decent food for the troops, DU poisoning, lack of drinkable water during the summer season, then of course the recent revelation about sending unfit troops to fight, he's spent billions on a war that could have done so much more good here, forced tours of duties without breaks, soldier suicides from the travesties there, no exit psychological reorientation period for the vets that come home shell-shocked, friendly fire when the morale of the troops gets out of hand and Lillie, your are throwing so much stuff against the wall, hoping something is gonna stick, true or not. I'll rebut a few items. - Food stamps: False. The latest figures I can find for 1999 show that only 6,300 members out of 1.4 million were recieving food stamps, well less than 1%. - Low Pay: Actually military pay is pretty good. Go find a major corporation that will hire someone with no education, and no skills, and pay them and train them. They get guaranteed pay raises every 2 years, in addtion to annual cost of living increases, and not count actuall promotions. About 1/3 of their monthly pay is non-taxable. While in combat zones all pay is tax free. They get 30 days vacation, free medical, minimal charge family medical, dental, prescriptions with $2 - $10 copays, a defined benefit retirement plan with no member contribution, guaranteed for life with cost of living allowance after 20 years, survivor benefit plan at nominal cost, and $500k insurance policy for $32 a month. Can you find me a civilian company I can work for like this? Food & Water: Are you really claiming that soldiers in Iraq are not getting fed? Come on. Friendly Fire: You are claiming that unhappy troops are shooting each other? Psychological Reorientation Period: Huh? You want to tell thousands of troops that after a year of combat they can't go home and see their families? They tried to do that with the Vietnam POW's in 1974 and they almost mutinied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 Okay if you want a list of articles you can have them but I can't even believe you don't remember when women across the U.S. were having bake sales and everything else to buy their sons and daughter armor. But if you want articles I'll get them for you. Easier than that if you'd write a person in combat or two you could hear it directly from them. to write to a soldier http://www.forgottensoldiers.org/write-soldier.shtml lack of humvee armor http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20...n9rumsfeld.html military food requests http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/what/latest.html buying their own body armor http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/20...ody-armor_x.htm Du poisoning http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12903.htm unfit troops to fight http://www.courant.com/news/specials/hc-me...0,6150281.story cost of war http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?op...pper&Itemid=182 agent orange linked to diabetes http://www.veterans.state.ny.us/diabeteslinked%20toao.htm cuts to veterans benefits http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,600110455,00.html soldier suicides http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/101503B.shtml soldiers needing food http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m23143&hd=0&size=1&l=e friendly fire http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/29/...ain609179.shtml shell shocked soldiers http://msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=3868907&p1=0 soldier pay and food stamps http://www.alternet.org/story/18313 va hospitals closing (and mind you the ones that were supposedly supposed to be built haven't been yet) http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...va-system_x.htm military ignores mental illness http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,97221,00.html poor screening by medical providers http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/?page=article&id=1645 Now check the dates on these articles and add the years more men and women that are suffering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMarshall Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 Lillie, its pointless and ultimately self destructive to try to take on the pain of the whole world. Yes, bad things happen, not everything goes right, and its unfortunate. The military is ALWAYS going to have shortages of material and operations that don't go right. (Hell Ford has shortages and operations that don't go right, you just don't read about it in the paper). That doesn't mean that everyone is evil or that we should stop trying to do good. I don't disagree with everything that you have posted. However not all of them are correct and even contradict the statements. Some of your sources are highly biased (including one being an Iraqi website) written by people with big axes to grind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 there is a very simple way for you to get the answers you need. very simple. forget the papers, forget the media. WRITE THE TROOPS.NOW. Then tell THEM what they suffer through and don't suffer through. There are many sites that provide addresses to send letters to troops. use them. lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazynotstupid Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 Oh my. Got my work cut out, I see. S'all good, I don't mind. (In rough order of arguments presented...) no proper body armor for the troops,no proper siding for the humvees ... DU poisoningBody armor...did you know that the troops want LESS, not more? See, body armor is hot and heavy, kinda like a good make-out session. The problems: Iraq is, well, pretty warm. And heavy body armor restricts mobility--which is often considered more important by the troops than whatever protection it may provide. Ditto Humvee up-armoring--slower Humvees are easier to shoot at. If a bad guy pops up with an RPG, would you rather skedaddle outta there, or wait and see if the armor can take the hit? By DU, I assume you mean depleted uranium. It's an absolute myth that DU is harmful, unless you're the target of whoever happens to be shooting such rounds. http://www.fumento.com/military/depleteduranium.html soldier suicides from the travesties Suicide rates are comparable to Clinton's time in office. It may be they'd be lower were there no war, but we'll never know, will we? ...and MANY innocent Iraqis that dieWhat, like the 300,000 that died under Saddam? I have to wonder how many you think have died; God knows, there's been a few...exaggerations put forth in the past. and then you say NUKE THEM ALL? Very fucking nice. Great regard for human life. Yes, I said that, along with "but then, I'm like that". The level of my regard for human life goes up and down a sliding scale daily; however, for you to take that statement seriously... (sigh) Oh well. I shouldn't have said that. Nukes are bad, they make it tougher to go and get the oil. Fuck it; kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out. Just, y'know, without nukes. The Iraqis there could no more control their leader than we can ours.Now that's funny. I don't see Bush gassing those who oppose him, and I doubt he'll still be in office two or three decades down the road. See, we got this thing called "the ballot", and that means we decide who's in office. Also, as I said before--checks and balances. There are limits to what Bush can do (re: Social Security reform flop) I'll let you know right now if someone unilaterally invaded our country without any real proof except the hatred of the leader I'd fight my ass off just like the "insurgents" and "uncooperative Iraqis" are doing now. Once they found out that their women,old men, children whoever and whatever were targets for our soldiers they knew we weren't there to free them from anything but OUR rule. After all this time they have no jobs, money, barely any electricity, barely (and hard to come by) drinkable water, no going to school or to mosque, forget the hospital or "grocery" store (since there is barely any decent food there) and this has been going on for HOW LONG because George has no exit strategy? Hoo boy--ya did know that most of the insurgents are non-Iraqi, right? Lotsa Iranians, fer instance. I doubt they ever found out that their citizens were targets for are soldiers, unless these "citzens" had weapons that they were pointing at the troops... Christ, you make it sound like the troops are sl;aughtering civilians for sport! No jobs? Read: http://instapundit.com/archives/030404.php And "why is there no going to school or mosque?" Hell, the insurgents love blowing up mosques! (Like, for instance, when they try to start a sectarian civil war. And fail. Miserably.) Why? Cuz there's people there! (Check out: http://www.helenair.com/articles/2006/04/0...01040806_02.txt "... as they left the Buratha mosque after Friday prayers, killing at least 79 people and wounding more than 160." Yeah, they're definitely staying outta the mosques) And they have far more electricty now than under Saddam, where only the favored cities (like Tikrit and Baghdad) had regular electricity. But boy, take some of Baghdad's power away to light up other places, and all of a sudden the whole country is powerless! You need to talk to the men and women that are there and have been there before spouting off about how good George has done in their regard.http://www.fumento.com/military/bandofbrothers.html I don't know what we've done to piss the people off who have resorted to terrorism, but they must feel extremely disrespected to resort to suicide attacks. Well, y'know--there's that whole success thing (cars in garages, chickens in pots and all that). We let women walk arounf unescorted and not only are their faces uncovered, but by God sometimes their whole bodies are barely covered! You do realize these Islamofascists generally belong to the Wahhabi sect? As far as they're concerned, if you're not a Muslim, you're a target. For that matter, if you're a Muslim that doesn't subscribe to their school of thought, you're a target. These guys want nothing less than the return of the Caliphate, and then control of the world. One reason why they are so intent on attacking *us* is that we refuse (for now, at least) to back down. I mean, look at Europe. Bastion of tolerance. Yet, wuth their low birthrate (and the high rate amongst Muslims), in 50 years Europe may well be an Islamic state. they don't need to blow shit up (in terrorist actions, I should specify); there's enough of a presence that they can cow most countries there. French riots, anyone? Suicide bombers? We'll never really know their mentality, but mostly it's young, poor folk who are full of hate and love death more than life. Maybe they feel disrespected, but they don't have any self-respect. And let's not forget that martyrs get a free pass to paradise! Anyway, regarding the original topic: http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/05/leaks_leaks_and.html And more good news on Iraq (yes Virginia, good things DO happen there!) http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/05/brookings_quagm.html It's not a disaster. Things are going quite well in Iraq. As for here, again, I see no problems, which puts me in the 61% majority of Americans who support or at least don't care about the whole phone number business. Oh, yeah, I hear the whole "well if they don't care about their rights..." or "sure, thet don't care NOW..." mantra. I guess it really boils down to what you think a "right" is. After all, in some places, it is a man's "right" to beat his wife or kill a female member of the family after she has been raped, to preserve the family's "honor". Interesting things, these "rights". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 CNS the same suggestion I had for Air Marshall I have for you. Talk to the troops that are there. And not just ONE blog to form an opinion from ONE soldier. I notice you didn't say anything about the Veterans Against the Iraq War and Iraq Veterans Against the war. (Yes they are two separate things). Like I said write the troops. Just like Air Marshall thinks my articles have an agenda I think yours hav an agenda so we'll have to agree to disagree unless you've spoken, actually had CONTACT with people over there right now. I have spoken with soldiers from the first Iraq war and now this one. Their letters are disheartening. But I leave it up to you to learn for yourself. Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddy Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 I didn't read everything because I'm lazy like that. So I'll get in trouble. But I had to say it cuz I always felt CNS was a bit of an emotional terrorist himself, all that anger napalm falling willy nilly on the boards, but when I find myself sorta kinda agreeing (for different reasons) with someone, I gotta jump in cuz it's good to be wrong every once in awhile with someone, seein' as how it builds character and all, so I had to say, uh... Dear old honest Abe did all this same Bush-whacking crap during his administration...he put suspected Confederate sympathizers in prison and held them without representation for the entirety of the Civil War. We had the same constitution then, folks. Granted, the Civil War was more justified (imho) than this one. He got all kinds of information illegally. If they had had phones in his day, he woulda tapped 'em, I guarantee you. Because the Union was NOT winning at first, lemme tell ya. And that's how he justified it all. By saying that the "terrorists" of his day were just right around the corner. That the only way the good folk would win the war would be to fight dirty against the very Americans he was supposed to be protecting, even if they was lowdown, no good-n-dirty, seceded Confederates. They were still Americans, no? They were WHITE and NON-ARAB, yeah? I suppose we could justify his actions all up and down if we wanted to, considering he was Abraham Lincoln, yeah? He went down in history as a hero to most. For the record, I voted for Kerry. I'm not fond of Bush. But I do so love controversy. And if I find myself agreeing with CNS, well...one has to speak up in that situation, because it doesn't come along very often. I just feel like as horrible as it seems to YOU, you can find someone in the past who you think is a hero who's doing the same thing as Bush and you'll find all kinds of reasons to justify it. I hate it that things are relative. Unfortunately, I believe they are. Especially when it comes to politics. But I also agree with Velvet Elvis. If you think it's horrible, knock down the doors of Congress waving your rifles! (Which are also in our constitution, hello!) But don't act, for heaven's sake, all shocked and horrified, like it's new and Bush is the highest form of evil. He's just the next evil bastard in line. Are y'all really that naive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croix Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 Ok, my two cents. I'm more worried about our port security and our airport security than our mexican borders. All those ports are still VERY unsecure. And build a wall across the southern US? Sure, look how well all the other walls have done in the past (Great Wall, Berlin Wall) We need to change the immigration laws and enforce them, not build a damn wall. Lillie, the military men and women are not starving and impovershed. Back when hubby was in the Corps (just a few years ago) we had all that we needed. And we had a child. Got extra pay when he was deployed. Right after 9/11, the military got a hugh pay raise. They also get extra danger pay during wartime when they're overseas. Believe me, they're fine. The phone thing....I'm not really sure where I stand on that. I do know that about 26 million veterns names, DOB's, and SS #'s have been stolen from a database and are floating around out there somewhere. And alot of their spouses. Anyone hear about that? So hubby's info is out there, and possibly mine. Lovely. Croix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 Croix not to be disrespectful but just because YOU were taken care of doesn't mean they're ALL taken care of. A portion of the article above says: "Military families on food stamps? It's not an urban myth. About 25,000 families of servicemen and women are eligible, and this may be an underestimate, since the most recent Defense Department report on the financial condition of the armed forces -- from 1999 -- found that 40 percent of lower-ranking soldiers face "substantial financial difficulties." Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, reports hearing from constituents that the Army now includes applications for food stamps in its orientation packet for new recruits." Now are you saying that the Defense Department is lying? Why couldn't they just say everyone is perfectly taken care of and all needs met? Like you said they supposedly got these big raises after 911. why is it still an issue now? and as far as abe lincoln is concerned from him to the kennedys to Bush: ILLEGAL SPYING IS WRONG. The only difference between dear old Abe and dear old Bush is that Bush can torch the entire planet if he gets his panties in a sociopathic psychotic bunch. and yes I'd LOVE to knock on the doors of congress waving my rifle but truthfully I'd be the only one doing it and I'd be arrested and put away forever because when it really comes down to it there are very few ACTIVE patriots in this country as far as protesting, lobbying, and travelling to DC(especially with guns blazing) There are a shitload of armchair warriors though. Americans are going to bend over and take it and they're going to experience what the older continents before them have experienced throughout the history of this world: fiscal ruin, massive bloodshed (911 is going to look like a day in the park), war on their own soil, devastation of their cities, and another country as a political, financial, and military superpower. Yeah yeah I know America will conquer all but the enemies it faces are MUCH older and have fought many more wars. When the neighborhood kids get together to kick the local bullies ass it's never pretty. America has been flexing it's muscles and begging for fights with everyone around it. I guarantee you one day the bullying will be responded to. Kim Jong II, Vicente Fox, Hugo Chavez, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are just as wacko as Bush. And, if the news serves to be true, North Korea and Iran have nukes ( I doubt it but it wouldn't stop them from beating their chests and saying they do) and Mexico and Venezuela could really hurt us oil wise if they want to. And then what of China, Japan, Syria, and Russia? or India and Pakistan? Think they're our bosom buddies? Don't think so. Japan will never forget Hiroshima no matter how nice we are to them. (trust me on this. would you trust the country that nuked yours during your grandfathers time?) China is getting our money like theres no tomorrow from our intense purchasing of their wares (while we export nothing close to what they're exporting) Syria is watching the Iraq war knowing soon their asses will be in the fryer and Russia is making money hand over fist selling arms to Iran. When India and Pakistan renew hostilities(like they always do)all of our lovely companies that have made overseas offices over there are going to watch them go up in flames. It's a cash only set of relationships that getting more strained everytime Bush opens his mouth. and the 26.5 million "stolen bits of info"? The article said:"Thieves took sensitive personal information on 26.5 million U.S. veterans, including Social Security numbers and birth dates, after a Veterans Affairs employee improperly brought the material home, the government said Monday." What VA employee brings home 26.5 million bits of data unless he has nefarious plans for it? Then he says it was magically "stolen"? Sounds like Somebody has a bank account with some money in it offshore. And he'll be getting a crapload more when the identity looting starts. Don't worry the government will take care of it. and you. That spying is going to keep you SAFE. yep... Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazynotstupid Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 Croix not to be disrespectful but just because YOU were taken care of doesn't mean they're ALL taken care of. A portion of the article above says: "Military families on food stamps? It's not an urban myth. About 25,000 families of servicemen and women are eligible, and this may be an underestimate, since the most recent Defense Department report on the financial condition of the armed forces -- from 1999 -- found that 40 percent of lower-ranking soldiers face "substantial financial difficulties." Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, reports hearing from constituents that the Army now includes applications for food stamps in its orientation packet for new recruits." Now are you saying that the Defense Department is lying? Why couldn't they just say everyone is perfectly taken care of and all needs met? Like you said they supposedly got these big raises after 911. why is it still an issue now? Wait...I'm confused...to bitch about military pay in 2006, you cite an article that relies on stats from... 1999? You ask why it's still an issue. I wonder too, after all, if nobody can provide recent stats to back up their claims of military paucity, then they should quit bitching and go out and GET some. And, OK, here I go all economist-y:25,000 is a low percentage considering the number of people in the armed services. In the military, as in civilian life, some positions just pay less. And as for 40% of the lower ranks facing financial difficulties--well shitballs. What, precisely, ARE those difficulties? I mean, there's a difference between "I can't afford food or heat" and "Aw shit, all my credit cards are maxed out and I can't make the car payment. Maybe I shoulda quit buying shit on eBay and got a used car instead of that '06 Excalade." I mean, I've had "finacial difficulties" too. They're of the first kind now, but used to be of the second. But I also agree with Velvet Elvis. If you think it's horrible, knock down the doors of Congress waving your rifles! (Which are also in our constitution, hello!) Listen Teddy--don't tempt me! Of course, I can't own a rifle. It may be in the Constitution, but thanks to Mr. Clinton and company, you can have your Second Amendment rights stripped away for a misdemeanor. Actually, not just you, but any one that shares the same household, regardless of how spotless their criminal record is. Swear to God, someday I'm gonna get me a gun so's I can be arrested and become a test case. Everyone wants to talk about how the EEEEEvil McHaliBusHitler administration is stripping rights away left and, well, right... Look to the lefties for true Constitutional shredding. If they're allowed, you can kiss away the First and Second Amendments, for starters. And dammit I'm no "emotional terrorist". I'm an emotional jihadist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 military pay charts for army active duty 2006 http://www.military.com/military/benefits/..._charts,00.html pick whatever branch and whatever rank here http://www.military.com/Registration/Pay_C...tary_pay_charts and as far as carrying guns is concerned you can buy one on any street corner (if its the RIGHT street corner) at one a.m. if you really wanted one. that's what the black market is for. If you really want something you get it. That includes guns to fight with. Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazynotstupid Posted May 24, 2006 Share Posted May 24, 2006 military pay charts for army active duty 2006 http://www.military.com/military/benefits/..._charts,00.html pick whatever branch and whatever rank here http://www.military.com/Registration/Pay_C...tary_pay_charts Ah, good. Actual facts, this I can deal with. and as far as carrying guns is concerned you can buy one on any street corner (if its the RIGHT street corner) at one a.m. if you really wanted one. that's what the black market is for. If you really want something you get it. That includes guns to fight with. WTF??? Argh... OK. A:no I can NOT buy a gun on any street corner, we don't play that way here. I might know a couple people who'd buy for me, but I kinda doubt it. After all, for possessing a firearm I get locked up and so does the person who procured it for me, should their identity be discovered. If I really wanted a gun, I'd have to steal it. However, you missed the whole point of what I was saying. It's so far off the mark I'd almost thing it was a deliberate, willful misinterpretation. What I was saying, is that my Constitutional rights were stripped away, and this was done at the behest of rabid lefties who want to turn the Second Amendment into toilet paper. Whetehr or not I can find a way to come into possession of a firearm was never the point. It's that, while some rights can be stripped away from those who commit felonies, in this case people lose a right for a misdemeanor. It's kinda like having a driver who gets in wrecks, gets speeding and reckless tickets etc. and he loses his license. This is fair and good. (Oh, yes, he can still drive, but will get fined and/or jailed if caught) Now, here's you. You accidentally run a stop sign. The legislature of your syaye, in its infinite wisdom, has deemed that those who run stop signs are a danger, and thus must be stripped of their licenses. For life. Not an exact analogy, but I hope you get the idea. At any rate, I guess it doesn't matter that rights are stolen from certain people as long as you like neither the rights nor the people. And just to re-emphasize--I do not believe that any rights HAVE been violated by the whole phone record thing. But I guess we'll see, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 25, 2006 Share Posted May 25, 2006 Yep we will Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croix Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 EXACTLY CNS! We had plenty for food, electricity, gas, heating, cable, phone. We did NOT have extra for credit card bills we might have run up, a car note, flights back home to visit, decorating, etc. The military supplied us with housing, basic pay, and free medical care (including free prescriptions). Hubby got a clothing allowance. You get a little extra money when you get married and have a child, but they are not gonna pay for you to have a personal vehicle. And we lived on Marine Corps pay! Ya know, what's left over from the Navy? It was ENOUGH! I LIVED IT! If we wanted extra, I had to go get a job to pay for any extras or hubby had to get a part time job. We had to save up to go out to eat occasionally. We rented movies once a month for entertainment. No, the DOD wasn't lying. The new recruits are just fuckups with their money, like more and more Americans. CNS got it right. Don't believe stupid articles. Take it from someone who was there. It was enough. You just gotta budget. Croix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Not to be disrespectful Croix but your family isn't the ONLY family in the military. You act like you know every story from every branch and every level of enlistment in all of the armed forces. You don't know all of their stories. You shouldn't generalize. All new recruits aren't fuckups. Maybe they DO have situations that cause them to need assistance. What if it wasn't just about their immediate family? what if they had elders to take care of somewhere? what if they had serious medical bills for them or something that just doesn't go to "lack of budgeting skills"? Some people DO care for extended family or have other situations that take precedence. Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croix Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 You got a lot of nerve lady. Don't tell me what I'm acting like when you have no clue of which you speak. Reading a couple of news articles does not mean you know shit about it. The military is not there to pay for your extended family!!!! IF they had elders to take care of, or other situations that take precedence they shouldn't have enlisted, cuz the military ain't gonna pay for them! Don't blame the military for these kids needing to be on food stamps. It ain't the military's fault! They let you know up front what they will pay you for, it's up to the recruit to decide if he can afford to live off the pay. Now, you can always put in for a hardship discharge if you have family that needs you to earn more money to help out. That's an option if such a situation comes up after you've already enlisted. But you might not get it. I wasn't speaking for the whole military. I was speaking for the POOREST branch of the whole military, which I grew up in, then married into. I was not generalizing. Like I said, I lived it, I know. You don't. Croix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Now see YOU'RE the one who doesn't know of what she speaks. I didn't mention my history because I didn't want to generalize but since you need to know my father was Army, my grandfather was Army, my ex was Navy, My cousin Gary is Navy his wife was Army My cousin Gabby is Navy My best friend is Army My other best friend was Navy so don't YOU tell ME about military life. Every one of them spent at minimum ten years in their own branch of the service. I grew up with it and that's how I knew not to generalize. Every family is different every enlisted persons priorities are different. There is no shame to taking care of elders and no its not the militaries responsibility to take care of them. I was naming THAT as a circumstance that many families face that doesn't go into the "irresponsible new recruit with their credit cards" category. None of my friends and family went into the military for extended family. It was something that happens over time. Your parents, aunts, uncles or whoever get older and need extra help. There's no sin or shame in helping them and that doesn't make servicepeople "irresponsible". So like I SAID don't be so quick to judge. You DON'T know everyones story. Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croix Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 I don't need to know your history to know that ITS STILL NOT THE MILITARY"S RESPONSIBILITY TO PAY FOR EXTENDED FAMILY MEMBER"S MEDICAL EXPENSES OR PROBLEMS. So, yes if the recruit decides it's more important to spend their food allowance on extended family expenses, they may need further assistance. There's no shame in it. But don't say that the military doesn't pay enough!!!! Because it provides all that the recruit and their immediate family needs to get by. That's been my whole point all along. Croix (Who isn't hearing this from her cousin's husband's second ex-wife, but firsthand having lived on base and shopped at the px her ownself every week) Happy Memorial Day to you and yours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 You missed the point entirely and probably on purpose. It was just an example of a circumstance that doesn't go with your " irresponsible with credit card" story. You passed judgment based on your history and refused to hear anyone. Thats your choice. And like I said (since you missed it the first time) I am the CHILD of an army person (who also shopped with her mom and were not the highest paid in the military) and ex-wife of a man in the Navy. So hear what you want to hear. I guess since your experience is the most important I'll let it go. I guess no one else in the militarys story is more important than you and your husbands. Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croix Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 No I didn't. You weren't clear. (I'm not going to insult you by adding Probably on purpose). Yes you said your dad was in the Army but that could have been before you were born. Like I said you weren't clear. But don't talk to me like I'm stupid. The government provides for ALL it's military personnel. Period. It doesn't provide for extended families. I said SOME are irresponsible with their money and need assistance. And that's the truth. I agree'd with you in that SOME have special circumstances that come up (such as ailing family members that need help) and there are special provisions in place for that as well. They give interest-free loans for those recruits in times of need. There are additional programs out there as well I'm sure I'm not aware of. They DO provide food stamps for those that decide their money is needed elsewhere. You only provided me with ONE example of where a recruit might need additional funds (other than being a fuck up with his money, which is way more likely the case), so what else do I have to go on? What is your point btw? Croix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazynotstupid Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Hmm. Lemee see here... So, if a recruit signs up, knowing how much he'll get, and then for whatever reason that ain't enough...it's Uncle Sam's fault? Um. Seriously. Admittedly, when I apply for jobs now, I go for anything cuz dammit I NEED a job. But, when I had a job (temp, dangit) I only applied for those that paid a salary I could live on. It is a matter of budgeting. The military does provide the necessities, and I dunno how they figure military pay for suchlike as foodstamps. I mean, does provided housing count as income? etc. (Believe me, believe me, I know food stamps...) Sometimes shit happens, sometimes you need to support your parents or whatever. But tell me--does that happen more often in the military than in civilian life? If I find a job that pays the bills and leaves a little extra, but then my parents get all ill or whatever and I have to help out, does that mean that suddenly my employer doesn't pay enough? Well, some people think so. The fact of the matter is that it's all about money management; unforeseen financial disasters are rare. Note that one of my best friends did two hitches in the army. He got out and became a trucker (having driven tanks while in). He wasn't hurting, and ain't hurting now. Why? Because he knows how to manage money. OK, his dad's an accountant, but hey--so is mine. And I'm up financial shit creek. You can't use statistical outliers to prove a point. It's not sound. It's...well, it's generalizing. And we all know that generalizing is...bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilie Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Oh please cut the bullshit all I was saying was that every soldiers story is different. I never said the miltary had to do anything. Since you're riding to the rescue of Croix she was the one that said and I quote "The new recruits are just fuckups with their money, like more and more Americans". All I was saying was that that's not everybodies story so not to generalize. So you and Croix can be happy that you made your point while trashing mine. Good job. Lilie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazynotstupid Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Oh please cut the bullshit... I'm sorry, I didn't see much in the way of bullshit; that is unless by "bullshit" you mean something other than the generally accepted definition of nigh-worthless crap that stinks to high Heaven. Simply anecdotes and observations of economic/financial realities. So you and Croix can be happy that you made your point while trashing mine. Good job. Well, I can't speak for Croix, but I do believe the whole point of a debate, civilized or not, is to trash the opposing party's points, while firmly making your own. When one side is down to invective, choler, and vitriol, rather than facts and sober, calm observations, then the other side is usually considered to have won, at least by neutral bystanders. At any rate, I'm sorry you're so angry about this. While not a trivial issue, it's not good to get so worked up about mit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Elvis Posted May 30, 2006 Author Share Posted May 30, 2006 Can we please stick to bashing politicians and not each other? This has gotten way off topic anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croix Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Who's bashing each other? Where? I thought we just had a lively debate going on. Albeit it was just going round and round in circles. I'll give you that. And it did get rather ugly. But, I expect that when it comes to this particular board. Politics gets people riled up. Just for the record, I'd like to clarify a couple of things, then I'll shut up about it. One, unfortunately whenever a serviceman reaches a particular rank, he automatically becomes a politician. Two, I do not trust the president to make decisions about phone tapping, border patrol, etc. However, I do trust the military to make those decisions. Third, not every serviceman is called a "soldier", that's army. (That word's blasphemous in my house) Croix Who's not apologizing for anything she said, but is now back on topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.