• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is this funny to you?

We have a "rogue" government who are the REAL terrorists

  • Total voters
    42
sKiTzo said:
Little to no support? Why is he still in office? He has been impeachable for a long time now. If you are awake like you say you are, you would be aware that they are not necessarily his ideas...there's a corporate influence and a jewish think tank, as well. I didn't express my "beliefs" either, as you put it. I cited EO's and legislation that are in effect. Repeat after me.... I cited EO's and legislation that are in effect. I cited EO's and legislation that are in effect. I cited EO's and legislation that are in effect. I cited EO's and legislation that are in effect. I cited EO's and legislation that are in effect. I cited EO's and legislation that are in effect. I cited EO's and legislation that are in effect.
Is it getting through yet?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




What is getting through is that my initial opinion of you was right on the money.




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP
 
sKiTzo said:
I can't believe you called Snowden a whistleblower and not a wack-o conspiracy theorist!
Click to expand...
 Congratulations.
Click to expand...




I can believe that you called him a wack-o conspiracy theorist and not a whistle-blower.

Did you notice that a large majority of those who voted in your poll reject your wacky ideas?
 
Last edited:
Buck Ewer said:
I just love irrational conspiracy nonsense like this thread ...it drives rational conservatives into the moderate column and away from the right wing...
Click to expand...
Yep, sit on the sidelines and watch while your party does most the damage...sounds about right. Where did Code Pink and all the other protesters go... oh yeah, that's right, we have a liberal doing the stanky thang in the oval office... so just hold your nose til the other guys get back in...
 
Boo Radley said:
Again, that's not how it works. You say something stupid, no one has to prove you wrong. The burden is yours to convince. No counter is required.
Click to expand...
No, that is really not how it goes at all. You cannot just say [ I mean you can, its a free country, but its just your unsupported opinion ] that she is wrong and that it is all stupid... but if that is the entire weight of your argument,well, that is just a failed fluff argument.

She has very pointedly called for anyone, ANYONE, to take any, ANY, of the statements in the various documents and prove ANY part of them wrong or to be a lie... with logic, evidence or whatever you bring to bear in defense of what you believe to be the truth in the matter. I am still reading the documents and so am still analyzing, but to just come out and make a statement calling someone else's statement stupid without any accompanying reasoning... well, guess what... that is just not very smart, far less smart even, I would hazard...

And for all of you who have not read, have not done your due diligence, as is proper prior to spouting off some wasted worthless opinion... I would say, if you have already put your hands over your eyes and ears, why not do us all a favor and put one over your mouths as well, eh?
 
Dragonfly said:
snopes.com: Executive Order 13603 -- National Defense Resources Preparedness

Read the above link.

Not surprising.

But I'm sure it's a "conspiracy" isn't it?

Snopes is in on the "New Order" coming to the USofA. :lamo
Click to expand...
I compliment you in being one of the only ones here that has attempted to muster even a half-hearted real argument, and not just simply worthless and lazy opinions... but also notice that you never replied to skitzo's response to your snopes gambit... seems a valid point about emergency vs non emergency situations... so, by not answering are you signalling that you do now agree that she has a valid point, that in times of emergency while we may very well need such authority, in times of non-emergency that the government should probably not be able to have such unlimited authority?

Inquiring minds deserve to know...
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
I compliment you in being one of the only ones here that has attempted to muster even a half-hearted real argument, and not just simply worthless and lazy opinions... but also notice that you never replied to skitzo's response to your snopes gambit... seems a valid point about emergency vs non emergency situations... so, by not answering are you signalling that you do now agree that she has a valid point, that in times of emergency while we may very well need such authority, in times of non-emergency that the government should probably not be able to have such unlimited authority?

Inquiring minds deserve to know...
Click to expand...

So here's a couple of things. I've had more than enough experience with Skitzo to know she's a tinfoilhat wearing loon. I've participated in enough of her bizarro-world threads to have a good read on her.

I don't disagree that our government is slowly eroding our freedoms away from us.

But that's where things stop for me.

This erosion of rights has been going on a long time. Not just since Obama took office. It's not a democrat owned thing either. The republicans are doing the same thing too.
The snopes article states exactly that. Obama is doing nothing different than at least the last 5 or 6 of his predecessors have done.

And guess what - the next president will continue with the erosion and policies of Obama and his predecessors. It's like layers of sedimentary rock. Slowly, ever so slowly building up over time.

This is why I have never voted for a D or an R in my life. I fully support third parties and truly believe the "two party" behemoth we've allowed to be created in the USofA now has us in a stranglehold.

All that being said - Skitzo takes things to levels of nuttery that prevent me from being anywhere near committed to responding to every one of her redonculous posts.
I occasionally think it's fun to pop into a few of her threads, but I don't subscribe to them and I refuse to follow with any attempt to care.

It's kinda the "feeding the troll" scenario. I don't desire to starve her to death, but I also won't waste good food on her either. :mrgreen::lol::2razz::lamo:2wave:
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
No, that is really not how it goes at all. You cannot just say [ I mean you can, its a free country, but its just your unsupported opinion ] that she is wrong and that it is all stupid... but if that is the entire weight of your argument,well, that is just a failed fluff argument.

She has very pointedly called for anyone, ANYONE, to take any, ANY, of the statements in the various documents and prove ANY part of them wrong or to be a lie... with logic, evidence or whatever you bring to bear in defense of what you believe to be the truth in the matter. I am still reading the documents and so am still analyzing, but to just come out and make a statement calling someone else's statement stupid without any accompanying reasoning... well, guess what... that is just not very smart, far less smart even, I would hazard...

And for all of you who have not read, have not done your due diligence, as is proper prior to spouting off some wasted worthless opinion... I would say, if you have already put your hands over your eyes and ears, why not do us all a favor and put one over your mouths as well, eh?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why some object to stupid being called what it is, stupid. But when anyone merely makes a claims, which is really what those statements amounted to too, that is not anything worth of a rebuttal. Instead, actual evidence must be presented. Largely, many misread the evidence they think they have and exaggerate the meanings of small bits, often taken out of context. But to merely say x is y is not enough for a rebuttal. You must present actual evidence.
 
Boo Radley said:
I'm not sure why some object to stupid being called what it is, stupid. But when anyone merely makes a claims, which is really what those statements amounted to too, that is not anything worth of a rebuttal. Instead, actual evidence must be presented. Largely, many misread the evidence they think they have and exaggerate the meanings of small bits, often taken out of context. But to merely say x is y is not enough for a rebuttal. You must present actual evidence.
Click to expand...
I dunno, might well be because just calling something stupid and waving a hand in its general direction is more approaching the whole stupid thing itself. If one cannot pick out a single thing and attempt to disprove it, cannot take the time to investigate it, take even the time to point out a specific thing one finds questionable, even if one does absolutely nothing further about disproving it... well, one should consider that to be a very lazy way to "debate"... plus it is a waste of everybody's time that stops to read such fluff ...
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
I dunno, might well be because just calling something stupid and waving a hand in its general direction is more approaching the whole stupid thing itself. If one cannot pick out a single thing and attempt to disprove it, cannot take the time to investigate it, take even the time to point out a specific thing one finds questionable, even if one does absolutely nothing further about disproving it... well, one should consider that to be a very lazy way to "debate"... plus it is a waste of everybody's time that stops to read such fluff ...
Click to expand...

It is what it is. We've all investigated it. I've given a link elsewhere showing this kind of claim has been repeated often in history, even in 80's under Reagan, It's not intelligent, but more a mindless reaction to not liking a president or a specific direction. So the person cherry picks a few things, misrepresents it, and then goes all chicken little. It's not new.

So, he agreed to support one, and I told him to pick one. I'm still waiting. You're free to pick up his burden if you dare.
 
sKiTzo said:
I did my best to try to turn what you said into something that made sense, but your inability to say something more than just you "disagree with me" has foiled my attempt. I never called you a conspiracy theorist, and, I really have to wonder what is your purpose posting here? There ought to be a minimum brain cell requirement to be able to post.
Click to expand...

Fortunately posting anywhere I want on this board isnt your decision.

It is interesting that you believe that I have low intelligence for disagreeing with you. I feel even less compelled to believe any of your claims when you engage in ad hominem tactics. I mean really even if I were a 7 year old that really doesnt provide any argument for your claims.


Of course I see many problems with certain acts, laws and rules in this country. But I simply do not fall for the entire 9/11 conspiracy theorists line. And it is quite obvious that truthers have taken the NDAA into the folds of their fantasy world.

IF a president declared marshal law without or took away peoples property without just cause all hell would break lose (so to speak). That is reality. No administration would survive more than a few days if they actually tried to do such things. It would not only be political suicide but would also get them put in a Federal prison if not dead. Has the president declared marshal law in either of his terms? Is there any real evidence of false flag operations that cannot be disputed that involve the last few presidents? I know what your answers will be but you will still lack any evidence. SO logically there are rational reasons to reject your opinions. No offence dude but you havent made a good argument. Perhaps you should go back to the Conspiracy echo chamber forum where you wont have to face reality.
 
sKiTzo said:
Hannity: Obama Can ‘Declare Martial Law’ in Peacetime!

Due to the fact that so many here appear completely unaware that they have laughed themselves out of freedom, due process, and a government with checks and balances, I challenge anybody to refute any of the information from the above link. While you people laughed at "conspiracy theorists" who paid close attention to executive orders and bills such as the NDAA that were quietly signed with little to no media attention, the legal framework for totalitarian dictatorship was passed into law.

I suspect people don't believe it because they haven't read all the documents, and they haven't seen the implementation of it. Of course, they also completely ignore things like the DHS and every other agency arming itself to the teeth, and Obama firing 11 military generals in one day (apparently weeding out the patriots), false flag operations in Boston, Colorado, and Connecticut (all attempts to try to get Americans to demand gun confiscation and abolishment of the 2nd amendment).

Obama, and all members of congress have broken their oaths and committed treason, yet NOTHING is done about it. You're either unaware or you just don't care about you, your family, and future generations. If you don't believe it, you can read it all and see that it's there in black and white (you can link to the actual documents from the above link).

I urge you to accept my challenge and disprove any statement from the above link. Please don't dismiss it just because you can walk outside right now and see a bunch of "freedom" going on. They're no doubt making final preparations and deciding on an "event" to use as a hammer-dropper. If Americans were smart, there would be indictments and recalls, and impeachment. More likely, they're going to sit idle until the NWO has everything in place. It's very near that point, and then it's too late.
Click to expand...

What sounds right is that government and those entrusted with power to do the job are the probably largest danger to the populous. That makes it extremely important to keep a close watch, implement continously better controls and punish misbehior ruthlessly. That will not guarantee safty, but will make it a little better,while the terrorists are hunted down.
 
Dragonfly said:
So here's a couple of things. I've had more than enough experience with Skitzo to know she's a tinfoilhat wearing loon. I've participated in enough of her bizarro-world threads to have a good read on her.

I don't disagree that our government is slowly eroding our freedoms away from us.

But that's where things stop for me.

This erosion of rights has been going on a long time. Not just since Obama took office. It's not a democrat owned thing either. The republicans are doing the same thing too.
The snopes article states exactly that. Obama is doing nothing different than at least the last 5 or 6 of his predecessors have done.

And guess what - the next president will continue with the erosion and policies of Obama and his predecessors. It's like layers of sedimentary rock. Slowly, ever so slowly building up over time.

This is why I have never voted for a D or an R in my life. I fully support third parties and truly believe the "two party" behemoth we've allowed to be created in the USofA now has us in a stranglehold.

All that being said - Skitzo takes things to levels of nuttery that prevent me from being anywhere near committed to responding to every one of her redonculous posts.
I occasionally think it's fun to pop into a few of her threads, but I don't subscribe to them and I refuse to follow with any attempt to care.

It's kinda the "feeding the troll" scenario. I don't desire to starve her to death, but I also won't waste good food on her either. :mrgreen::lol::2razz::lamo:2wave:
Click to expand...

Here's your problem with me: I'm not a fool and you know if you engage in a true debate with me, I'll shred you like burnt hash browns. This is because there's no true substance to your argument. You are incapable of focusing on the subject matter of the debate. If I make a valid point, you countering it with a comment regarding your fascination with tin foil hats is not going to score you points. You calling me wack-o and running away, is no match for my brilliant forensic analysis such as when I showed you exactly how snopes tried to deceptively twist a few words in an attempt to downplay the seriousness of it all. You responded the way you always do - by pretending my exposure of snopes as biased insiders never happened.
 
sKiTzo said:
Here's your problem with me: I'm not a fool and you know if you engage in a true debate with me, I'll shred you like burnt hash browns. This is because there's no true substance to your argument. You are incapable of focusing on the subject matter of the debate. If I make a valid point, you countering it with a comment regarding your fascination with tin foil hats is not going to score you points. You calling me wack-o and running away, is no match for my brilliant forensic analysis such as when I showed you exactly how snopes tried to deceptively twist a few words in an attempt to downplay the seriousness of it all. You responded the way you always do - by pretending my exposure of snopes as biased insiders never happened.
Click to expand...

Mitt-Romney-Laughing.gif
 
Dragonfly said:
Mitt-Romney-Laughing.gif
Click to expand...

Come, now, Dragonfly-- sanity is just SO yesterday.

It is time to get with the program and realize that nothing in this world happens that doesn't involve shadowy groups of people conspiring against you. It is high time for you to realize that your life sucks, you are a worthless good for nothing in every sense of the word, and it is all on account of the Jews, and the new world order and the free masons and the neo cons and the socialists and the girl scouts. They are making your life a living Hell and if it weren't for all their conspiracies against you, who knows. You might even amount to something.

It's just not fair! :boohoo:
 
Boo Radley said:
It is what it is. We've all investigated it. I've given a link elsewhere showing this kind of claim has been repeated often in history, even in 80's under Reagan, It's not intelligent, but more a mindless reaction to not liking a president or a specific direction. So the person cherry picks a few things, misrepresents it, and then goes all chicken little. It's not new.

So, he agreed to support one, and I told him to pick one. I'm still waiting. You're free to pick up his burden if you dare.
Click to expand...
I don't remember the least hint of a partisan approach being given in the OP or after, actually.

Well, lets see what we have here... lets just go with Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness | The White House Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness

Are you comfortable with those NDERs... the National Defense Executive Reserve Units? They are not military, so presumably not subject to Posse Comitatus restrictions... so a paramilitary arm of the Executive branch... not liking that much, myself.

Is this that scary thing BO was talking about all the way back in 2008 civilian national security force - YouTube

I mean the left is always talking about the brown shirts, is this now them, perhaps? When has a president in the US needed his own private military unit?

According to the order, In times of emergency and, more importantly, ...in times of no emergency... they can take total control of food resources, water supplies, energy resources, transportation, health, commerce... I mean the list is long...what exactly is that all about, do you think? What triggers this?

We usually have these type laws come up after something just happened... or as we are preparing for something to happen... so what is going on, then?


Plus, it gives no time limit as to how long this can be in place, has no congressional oversight ever mentioned... so they could go on indefinitely without anybody even knowing much of anything...

You have no problems with any of that at all... its all just the normal course of business and we should just turn a blind eye to it, shirk our responsibilities to keep our eyes on our hired hands, make sure they are doing the right things...
 
Jango said:
If you think that executive order is hair raising, go through the 'emergency preparedness' EO's starting with President Kennedy.

Executive Orders Disposition Tables Index
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to peruse this index but time constraints do not allow. I'd be willing to bet, however, that none of the earlier Eo's have the words "during peacetime"....
 
sKiTzo said:
It would be interesting to peruse this index but time constraints do not allow. I'd be willing to bet, however, that none of the earlier Eo's have the words "during peacetime"....
Click to expand...

You might be surprised; besides, if you have enough time to post on an Internet message board then why don't you have time to research historical executive orders of the United States? But if that's truly the case, then that is why they call it a "to do" list.
 
I'd say that we have a rouge Administration and Congressional leaders. I don't think that they're terrorists at this time.
 
Oftencold said:
I'd say that we have a rouge Administration and Congressional leaders. I don't think that they're terrorists at this time.
Click to expand...

Of course, they are not the terrorists themselves. They are the architects. Their modus operandi of manipulation is so old and over-used by now, that, it's become predictable. It's called "Problem>Reaction>Solution", and it's based on using fear to accomplish their goals. How many of us didn't know there would be a string of highly publicized shootings sparking calls for gun bans? I certainly did, and when the Batman theatre shootings occurred, it had their signature all over it, and I knew it was just the beginning.

It's clear that the "agenda" is to delibertize America and the rest of the world to bring it all under the control of a totalitarian one-world government with everybody chipped with chips that replace currency. This is not a theory, and it's certainly no secret either. It was written in stone for all to see on the Georgia Guide Stones. They know that in order to fulfill this agenda, they have to disarm the people FTRST.

Problem>reaction>solution has been routine protocol to these architects for a long time now. The "solution" is the specific goal they want to attain, and the "problem" is the tailored "event" that happens that will make people demand the "solution". Because we don't naturally have the kinds of problems required to induce the people to call for actions that will ultimately remove basic rights and liberties, they have to be created . Welcome to the world of false flag terrorism.
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
I don't remember the least hint of a partisan approach being given in the OP or after, actually.

Well, lets see what we have here... lets just go with Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness | The White House Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness

Are you comfortable with those NDERs... the National Defense Executive Reserve Units? They are not military, so presumably not subject to Posse Comitatus restrictions... so a paramilitary arm of the Executive branch... not liking that much, myself.

Is this that scary thing BO was talking about all the way back in 2008 civilian national security force - YouTube

I mean the left is always talking about the brown shirts, is this now them, perhaps? When has a president in the US needed his own private military unit?

According to the order, In times of emergency and, more importantly, ...in times of no emergency... they can take total control of food resources, water supplies, energy resources, transportation, health, commerce... I mean the list is long...what exactly is that all about, do you think? What triggers this?

We usually have these type laws come up after something just happened... or as we are preparing for something to happen... so what is going on, then?


Plus, it gives no time limit as to how long this can be in place, has no congressional oversight ever mentioned... so they could go on indefinitely without anybody even knowing much of anything...

You have no problems with any of that at all... its all just the normal course of business and we should just turn a blind eye to it, shirk our responsibilities to keep our eyes on our hired hands, make sure they are doing the right things...
Click to expand...

A: This false claim is a badly distorted version of Obama’s call for doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service.

Obama’s ‘National Security Force?’

A: No. Contrary to false Internet rumors, the new Ready Reserve Corps of doctors and other health workers will report to the surgeon general and be like the "ready reserves" in other uniformed services. They will be used during health emergencies.

Obama’s “Private Army”

See, you're facts are wrong. You've bough into nonsense, and somehow expect someone to treat it as if it reasonable. I don't how to do that. Inaccurate facts are simply inaccurate. There is no debate about that.
 
Boo Radley said:
A: This false claim is a badly distorted version of Obama’s call for doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service.

Obama’s ‘National Security Force?’

A: No. Contrary to false Internet rumors, the new Ready Reserve Corps of doctors and other health workers will report to the surgeon general and be like the "ready reserves" in other uniformed services. They will be used during health emergencies.

Obama’s “Private Army”

See, you're facts are wrong. You've bough into nonsense, and somehow expect someone to treat it as if it reasonable. I don't how to do that. Inaccurate facts are simply inaccurate. There is no debate about that.
Click to expand...
Taking it directly from the EO, fellow citizen: Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness | The White House

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue necessary guidance for the NDER program, including appropriate guidance for establishment, recruitment, training, monitoring, and activation of NDER units and shall be responsible for the overall coordination of the NDER program. The authority of the President under section 710(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(e), to determine periods of national defense emergency is delegated to the Secretary of Homeland Security.

(c) The head of any agency may implement section 501(a) of this order with respect to NDER operations in such agency.

(d) The head of each agency with an NDER unit may exercise the authority under section 703 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2153, to employ civilian personnel when activating all or a part of its NDER unit. The exercise of this authority shall be subject to the provisions of sections 501(e) and (f) of this order and shall not be redelegated.

(e) The head of an agency may activate an NDER unit, in whole or in part, upon the written determination of the Secretary of Homeland Security that an emergency affecting the national defense exists and that the activation of the unit is necessary to carry out the emergency program functions of the agency.

So, from the order itself it contradicts what you say that is only doctors and other health workers who will report to the surgeon general. As it states, the head of any, ANY, of the agencies can activate units, etc...

And you have them, in times of peace as well as in times of emergency, able to take over all food resources, all energy resources, all water resources, health, commerce, I mean the list goes on and on...

Again, you do not address this either, there is no time limit for ending these operations set, no time limit for involvement of Congressional oversight...

That second link has absolutely nothing to do with this EO, and the first link is tenuous at best. I don't trust the out of Chicago, Annenberg Foundation [FACTCHECK.ORG] which Obama was funded/worked for/with/under previously. Questionable at the very least. You are gonna have to do a little more of your homework there boo... you are scaring me...
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
Taking it directly from the EO, fellow citizen: Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness | The White House

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue necessary guidance for the NDER program, including appropriate guidance for establishment, recruitment, training, monitoring, and activation of NDER units and shall be responsible for the overall coordination of the NDER program. The authority of the President under section 710(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(e), to determine periods of national defense emergency is delegated to the Secretary of Homeland Security.

(c) The head of any agency may implement section 501(a) of this order with respect to NDER operations in such agency.

(d) The head of each agency with an NDER unit may exercise the authority under section 703 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2153, to employ civilian personnel when activating all or a part of its NDER unit. The exercise of this authority shall be subject to the provisions of sections 501(e) and (f) of this order and shall not be redelegated.

(e) The head of an agency may activate an NDER unit, in whole or in part, upon the written determination of the Secretary of Homeland Security that an emergency affecting the national defense exists and that the activation of the unit is necessary to carry out the emergency program functions of the agency.

So, from the order itself it contradicts what you say that is only doctors and other health workers who will report to the surgeon general. As it states, the head of any, ANY, of the agencies can activate units, etc...

And you have them, in times of peace as well as in times of emergency, able to take over all food resources, all energy resources, all water resources, health, commerce, I mean the list goes on and on...

Again, you do not address this either, there is no time limit for ending these operations set, no time limit for involvement of Congressional oversight...

That second link has absolutely nothing to do with this EO, and the first link is tenuous at best. I don't trust the out of Chicago, Annenberg Foundation [FACTCHECK.ORG] which Obama was funded/worked for/with/under previously. Questionable at the very least. You are gonna have to do a little more of your homework there boo... you are scaring me...
Click to expand...

Your interpretation is factually inaccurate. What you quote doesn't mean what you think it means. It doesn't specify anyone in that link. And people to help doctors and such would not meet your sky is falling interpretation. And we have for a fact not seen any Obama troopers do anything. It's sheer fiction on your part.

I only took the first two entries, but you can find many many more.
 
Boo Radley said:
Your interpretation is factually inaccurate. What you quote doesn't mean what you think it means. It doesn't specify anyone in that link. And people to help doctors and such would not meet your sky is falling interpretation. And we have for a fact not seen any Obama troopers do anything. It's sheer fiction on your part.

I only took the first two entries, but you can find many many more.
Click to expand...
Okay, I guess you can go back to sleep now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom