Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
IanEye wrote:It's really not a question of whether individuals deserve to have the shit beaten out of them, it's the reality that that is what would happen to them if they voiced the opinion that Mr. Bauman is a liar out loud on the Boston Common.
But no individual will do that, because they recognize that reality.
Instead they act inappropriately on the internet, where they are safe to act like assholes.
It's boorish and boring, but no longer surprising.
University of Mobile's Cross Country Coach, who was near the finish line of the Boston Marathon when a series of explosions went off, said he thought it was odd there were bomb sniffing dogs at the start and finish lines.
"They kept making announcements on the loud speaker that it was just a drill and there was nothing to worry about," Coach Ali Stevenson told Local 15. "It seemed like there was some sort of threat, but they kept telling us it was just a drill."
http://www.sott.net/article/260912-Coin ... on-bombing
conniption wrote:Who was talking about Dave Emory?
It's an article by Dave McGowen. You know, the Laurel Canyon guy.
Canadian_watcher wrote:yeah, I recognize it, just like I recognize that there are some places an interracial couple can't go - and they mostly don't - because they might get the shit beat out of them. Exactly who are the boorish assholes in these situations?
Canadian_watcher wrote:
yeah, I recognize it, just like I recognize that there are some places an interracial couple can't go - and they mostly don't - because they might get the shit beat out of them. Exactly who are the boorish assholes in these situations?
MacCruiskeen wrote:Two questions:
1) Was there or was there not a drill at the Boston Marathon finishing-line?University of Mobile's Cross Country Coach, who was near the finish line of the Boston Marathon when a series of explosions went off, said he thought it was odd there were bomb sniffing dogs at the start and finish lines.
"They kept making announcements on the loud speaker that it was just a drill and there was nothing to worry about," Coach Ali Stevenson told Local 15. "It seemed like there was some sort of threat, but they kept telling us it was just a drill."
http://www.sott.net/article/260912-Coin ... on-bombing
2) If there was, did that drill employ crisis actors?
There is nothing absurd or offensive about either of those questions. They are perfectly reasonable questions, indeed (one would think) essential ones. Because it would be terrible if terrorists used drills as cover, right? Worth knowing about for the future. And it would also be terrible if people started seeing public safety drills as something dangerous in themselves.
And those questions should be easy enough for any concerned US citizen to find answers to. After all, the USA is not a fascist state, right? Such information is perfectly easy to come by. Why should anyone hide it?
No need to ban anyone. Just find quick answers to those two simple and perfectly reasonable questions, and you can nip the offending thread in the bud.
A quick phone call should suffice.
Off you go, US citizens. Nothing to fear.
Canadian_watcher wrote:yeah, I recognize it, just like I recognize that there are some places an interracial couple can't go - and they mostly don't - because they might get the shit beat out of them. Exactly who are the boorish assholes in these situations?
IanEye wrote:Canadian_watcher wrote:
yeah, I recognize it, just like I recognize that there are some places an interracial couple can't go - and they mostly don't - because they might get the shit beat out of them. Exactly who are the boorish assholes in these situations?
If the interracial couple happens to be on the Boston Common, and they happen to be stating that Mr. Bauman is a liar who didn't get his legs blown off, then the interracial couple are boorish assholes.
MacCruiskeen wrote: the USA is not a fascist state, right?
Canadian_watcher wrote:[Is there anywhere where it would be safe to question the official version of the story and the 'evidence' they've laid before us without being called names and harassed? IOW, where might I freely express myself in the USA these days?
barracuda wrote:
People got blowed up, that's what happened. But don't worry, just as with all the hundreds of "crisis actors" in the Sandy Hook shooting, the conspiracy photo-truther folks'll soon enough be off and running, rubbernecking and masturbating to the next "look at the pixels its a fraud!!!" tragedy while the survivors languish in hell picking up the pieces of their bodies and their lives, and the perps and their support teams saunter back to their crappy-ass mansions in the burbs.
How's that for some pious shit, huh?
Simulist wrote:In the weeks following Sandy Hook, I popped in a couple of times, and read literal craziness being promoted by a few voices here, alleging a massive hoax. This thread is a similar embarrassment.
Ever since the "no planes" stupidity began to be promoted after 9/11, this sort of wild-eyed hoax-mongering has turned into a spreading pestilence.
IanEye wrote:and they happen to be stating that Mr. Bauman is a liar who didn't get his legs blown off
http://www.usni.org/magazines/navalhistory/2008-02/truth-about-tonkin
Questions about the Gulf of Tonkin incidents have persisted for more than 40 years. But once-classified documents and tapes released in the past several years, combined with previously uncovered facts, make clear that high government officials distorted facts and deceived the American public about events that led to full U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/benghazi-talking-points_720543.html
The exchange of emails is laid out in a 43-page report from the chairmen of five committees in the House of Representatives. Although the investigation was conducted by Republicans, leading some reporters and commentators to dismiss it, the report quotes directly from emails between top administration and intelligence officials, and it includes footnotes indicating the times the messages were sent. In some cases, the report did not provide the names of the senders, but The Weekly Standard has confirmed the identities of the authors of two critical emails—one indicating the main reason for the changes and the other announcing that the talking points would receive their final substantive rewrite at a meeting of top administration officials on Saturday, September 15.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 168 guests