EVE Search - Stop dreaming

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Stop dreaming

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 19:54:00 - [1] "Tricks and treachery are the practice of fools that don't have brains enough to be honest" - Benjamin Franklin
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.12.12 19:59:00 - [2] Stop posting. The worst enemy of the Ron Paul campaign is his own absurdly fanatical supporters. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! (updated)
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:01:00 - [3] why don't you just let his own words speak for themselves, that's what i do.
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:04:00 - [4] Youtube is serious business. EVE RELATED CONTENT
Lola Lollipop Gallente Snakeskin Ind.	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:04:00 - [5] no,u.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:06:00 - [6] you should really watch this too softcore it makes no fundamental difference on the message if you see him on cnn or if you see a ripped vid format posted on youtube.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:20:00 - [7] Originally by: 7shining7one7 why don't you just let his own words speak for themselves, that's what i do. Because it is a populist appeal with no discussion of the knock-on effects. No one likes paying taxes but consider some of the effects abolishing it would have. - You'd put a huge set of people out of work. The whole IRS. Tax attorneys. Accountants (lots of them). What do they do next? You are talking hundreds of thousands perhaps millions of people. - You need to decrease the budget by 1/3. Fine. How? Exactly? He mentioned getting rid of entitlements. Ok. Which ones? He mentioned reducing the military so we are not the world's police force. Ok but to what effect? Europeans may despise the US for its foreign policies on things like Iraq but like it or not the US is a stabilizing force in the world. European countries have militaries just sufficient to guard their own borders and cannot project meaningful power. Iran would almost certainly co-opt Iraq in short order. China may well have at Taiwan. North Korea may have at South Korea. Russia...who knows...they may go back to some of their old ways. Whatever the case the world becomes a far more uncertain place. - State governments would almost certainly raise taxes after the IRS was abolished. Arguing that their citizens now have more money they will feel comfortable taking some of what the US government did for themselves. Probably not as much as the federal taxes did but expect to see not so much of your new found savings as you might expect. Those are just off the top of my head but need answering. Maybe he has good answers to all that. I do not know. But simple catch phrases like "Abolish the IRS" is a disservice.
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:26:00 - [8] Underageb& oh, wait, no sorry. Politics B&. Gtfo. --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:28:00 - [9] Quote: Stop dreaming Stop hallucinating. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:29:00 - [10] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 20:34:11 ok first of all, you totally underestimate the military power of europe. so let's get that straight you also seem to totally misunderstand how europeans feel about the US messing in other peoples business without sufficient evidence. which has never showed up. and you also underestimate how us policies on lowered liberty and personal freedom has limited also the european countries. let's just say ppl aren't too happy about that. what the media tells you about how europeans feel about it is complete bollox which you see if you go out and talk to people in real life. now about the irs, i'm assuming you work as such, and i totally understand your concern. "- State governments would almost certainly raise taxes after the IRS was abolished. Arguing that their citizens now have more money they will feel comfortable taking some of what the US government did for themselves. Probably not as much as the federal taxes did but expect to see not so much of your new found savings as you might expect." no, less income tax (the income tax is inconstitutional and irs shouldn't even exist, even ppl who work in the irs have come forth and said that there is no law that says that you even should pay income tax ) = less debt = less overspending = less state debt = room for improvements such as medical care, social security and many other things that are essential. however. if you have a system that is not necessary, that has it's part in creating higher prices and such, then if it is not beneficial it has to go. and yes some will be out of a job in that sector, but you gotta weigh the greater good, and these moneys can then be spent on reeducating them in a profession they desire. Obviously you don't just remove it without taking care of the ppl standing without jobs..
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:30:00 - [11] Originally by: Tarminic Quote: Stop dreaming Stop hallucinating. stop trolling. somehow your name seems familiar, could it be that it's cause you've been called a proper troll on more than just 1 occation? only not be me, that is untill now anyways.
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:31:00 - [12] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Originally by: Tarminic Quote: Stop dreaming Stop hallucinating. stop trolling. somehow your name seems familiar, could it be that it's cause you've been called a proper troll on more than just 1 occation? only not be me, that is untill now anyways. Occation, untill. These are the kind of people who support Ron Paul. 'Nuff said. --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
Magnus Nordir Caldari	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:33:00 - [13] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Originally by: Tarminic Quote: Stop dreaming Stop hallucinating. stop trolling. somehow your name seems familiar, could it be that it's cause you've been called a proper troll on more than just 1 occation? only not be me, that is untill now anyways. laern 2 grammer kthxbai o & u sux poltitycs 2. Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it. ~Andre Gide
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:37:00 - [14] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 20:39:16 Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 Originally by: Tarminic Quote: Stop dreaming Stop hallucinating. stop trolling. somehow your name seems familiar, could it be that it's cause you've been called a proper troll on more than just 1 occation? only not be me, that is untill now anyways. Occation, untill. These are the kind of people who support Ron Paul. 'Nuff said. let's see you text up 500 words in german, or swedish or norwegian, and then i'll tear them apart for syntax and semantics. you might a a big kahuna here in eve online, but out of pod you seem rather like an obnoxious arrogant and quite ignorant guy. try having some respect for a change, or eventually you'll find someone bigger than you that doesn't like the crap your spewing and teach you it. nuff said..
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:40:00 - [15] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Occation, untill. These are the kind of people who support Ron Paul. 'Nuff said. let's see you text up 500 words in german, or swedish or norwegian, and then i'll tear them apart for syntax and semantics. nuff said.. I didn't grow up around German, Swedish or Norwegian speaking people, wheras you grew up around alot of people who speak in English. Mainland Europe learns English from the age they can speak pretty much. The UK does 3 years of one or two languages, and then the majority go '**** that' and drop them. English is all I will ever need. Prove me wrong. --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:41:00 - [16] Originally by: 7shining7one7 no, less income tax = less debt = less overspending = less state debt = room for improvements such as medical care, social security and many other things that are essential. Er...what? I really don't understand your logic here. Could you explain this a bit more thoroughly? ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:43:00 - [17] Edited by: lofty29 on 12/12/2007 20:42:58 Originally by: 7shining7one7 no, less income tax = less debt = less overspending = less state debt = room for improvements such as medical care, social security and many other things that are essential. Yeah, what does personal debt have to do with overspending? Less income tax = less government money = MORE overspending = MORE state debt = LESS room for improvements. You're an idiot. End yourself. --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:44:00 - [18] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 20:47:09 Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 Occation, untill. These are the kind of people who support Ron Paul. 'Nuff said. let's see you text up 500 words in german, or swedish or norwegian, and then i'll tear them apart for syntax and semantics. nuff said.. I didn't grow up around German, Swedish or Norwegian speaking people, wheras you grew up around alot of people who speak in English. Mainland Europe learns English from the age they can speak pretty much. The UK does 3 years of one or two languages, and then the majority go '**** that' and drop them. English is all I will ever need. Prove me wrong. what you need or don't need is irrelevant in this regard, what matters is that you do not grammar troll someone who does not have english as their native language, and then falsely use that as some sort of meassuring of their intelligence. especially since you would most likely look like a 5 year old if you were to text up something in a european language. yet i wouldn't disrepect you for that, or use it against you. think it over
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:46:00 - [19] Originally by: lofty29 Edited by: lofty29 on 12/12/2007 20:42:58 Originally by: 7shining7one7 no, less income tax = less debt = less overspending = less state debt = room for improvements such as medical care, social security and many other things that are essential. Yeah, what does personal debt have to do with overspending? Less income tax = less government money = MORE overspending = MORE state debt = LESS room for improvements. You're an idiot. End yourself. economics 101. increased spending incurs increased debt. what an arrogant little ***** you are, i'm liking you less and less, you sure don't grow on people, and no i don't think i want to "get" you either.
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:48:00 - [20] Originally by: 7shining7one7 economics 101. increased spending incurs increased debt. what an arrogant little ***** you are, i'm liking you less and less, you sure don't grow on people, and no i don't think i want to "get" you either. Logic 101, if you have more money to spend, you won't run into debt. --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:49:00 - [21] Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 economics 101. increased spending incurs increased debt. what an arrogant little ***** you are, i'm liking you less and less, you sure don't grow on people, and no i don't think i want to "get" you either. Logic 101, if you have more money to spend, you won't run into debt. so tell me, do you have any loans?
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:50:00 - [22] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 economics 101. increased spending incurs increased debt. what an arrogant little ***** you are, i'm liking you less and less, you sure don't grow on people, and no i don't think i want to "get" you either. Logic 101, if you have more money to spend, you won't run into debt. so tell me, do you have any loans? Being 16, it's quite hard to find a reason. Listen, you just argued that because people had more money in their pockets, they would spend more and run themselves into even greater debt. Increased income does not = increased debt, ever. God damn --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:53:00 - [23] Originally by: lofty29 Listen, you just argued that because people had more money in their pockets, they would spend more and run themselves into even greater debt. Increased income does not = increased debt, ever. God damn This. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:54:00 - [24] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 20:34:11 ok first of all, you totally underestimate the military power of europe. so let's get that straight Not at all. They have very professional and well equipped forces and invading them would be quite painful for an attacker. They also have almost no ability to project power in any substantial way. The Brits are probably most able yet going after the Falkland Islands was even a bit of a stretch for them. So if trouble happens far away from their borders they are largely helpless to send their military in to correct things (assuming they wanted to). Quote: you also seem to totally misunderstand how europeans feel about the US messing in other peoples business without sufficient evidence. which has never showed up. and you also underestimate how us policies on lowered liberty and personal freedom has limited also the european countries. let's just say ppl aren't too happy about that. what the media tells you about how europeans feel about it is complete bollox which you see if you go out and talk to people in real life. I am aware that Europeans are not happy with the current US administration (not that any are very popular but this one is particularly reviled). Hell, I join them in that assessment. But while they may not admit to it explicitly they also benefit from the US playing the boogeyman in world politics. It draws the ire of terror groups towards the US and they need not spend vast amounts of money on a military. Again, imagine the US withdrew and became 100% isolationist and let the rest of the world to itself. Then imagine Iran gains control of all mid-east oil. China takes over SE Asia. The Russians re-acquire states that peeled off after the USSR broke up. Would be a mess. Quote: now about the irs, i'm assuming you work as such, and i totally understand your concern. I hate the IRS as much as the next guy and certainly do not work for them. Quote: no, less income tax (the income tax is inconstitutional and irs shouldn't even exist, even ppl who work in the irs have come forth and said that there is no law that says that you even should pay income tax ) = less debt = less overspending = less state debt = room for improvements such as medical care, social security and many other things that are essential. I'm with Tarminic on this. I would like to see the logical gymnastics needed to make that work. Quote: however. if you have a system that is not necessary, that has it's part in creating higher prices and such, then if it is not beneficial it has to go. and yes some will be out of a job in that sector, but you gotta weigh the greater good, and these moneys can then be spent on reeducating them in a profession they desire. Obviously you don't just remove it without taking care of the ppl standing without jobs.. Well...in general I'd love to not pay taxes again. I just think you are glossing over other effects this would have. Re-train a 45 year old tax accountant? To do what? He'd be starting as a newbie on any other field.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:55:00 - [25] Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 economics 101. increased spending incurs increased debt. what an arrogant little ***** you are, i'm liking you less and less, you sure don't grow on people, and no i don't think i want to "get" you either. Logic 101, if you have more money to spend, you won't run into debt. so tell me, do you have any loans? Being 16, it's quite hard to find a reason. Listen, you just argued that because people had more money in their pockets, they would spend more and run themselves into even greater debt. Increased income does not = increased debt, ever. God damn no i didn't you see what you don't understand is that it is among other things taxes that increases the price of items you buy, because everyone from production and manufacturing up to the sales has to get the various components that are in themselves artificially raised in price due to tax and inflation (which correlate on several levels) so this means you pay more for each item, and this also means that you will incur greater debt each time you want to buy something big. an eve analogy: base mineral price vs production and sales price. now impose an income tax on top of all this and u'll understand where i'm going with this. everything becomes more expensive.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 20:58:00 - [26] Edited by: Tarminic on 12/12/2007 20:58:21 Originally by: 7shining7one7 no i didn't you see what you don't understand is that it is among other things taxes that increases the price of items you buy, because everyone from production and manufacturing up to the sales has to get the various components that are in themselves artificially raised in price due to tax and inflation (which correlate on several levels) so this means you pay more for each item, and this also means that you will incur greater debt each time you want to buy something big. So how will removing personal income tax change any of that? ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:00:00 - [27] Originally by: 7shining7one7 an eve analogy: base mineral price vs production and sales price. now impose an income tax on top of all this and u'll understand where i'm going with this. everything becomes more expensive. So if you do what you and Ron Paul want, and remove income taxes, prices will drop. Uhuh, debt is much easier to get into when you have more money AND things are cheaper! --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:02:00 - [28] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h good stuff yeah definately, no executed plan without preparation and due logic implicated in this preparation. that is offcourse a must. but it's doable, the banks just don't like it cause u'll then lend less money from them. yes i know there will be some inherent side effects of that, but this is hardly any different than a few big companies that go bankrupt (due to mass dept and over investment i might add) and then ppl will have to find out what they can then do with their lives this is hardly any news, this happens all the time, you just may or may not hear about it much. what if companies wouldn't have to overspend so much with so high risk of bankrupcy and the likes, you gotta weigh the benefit of all against the benefit of few, but offcourse provide a transition plan for this (using some of the money not spend on the irs for instance). the way i see it the goal is not that the irs employees should be left out on the street, but reintegrated into doing something they prefer to do instead. and the irs isn't the only place that deals with economics.. you can't tell me they cannot be reschooled to do another thing without loosing all their assets. i think that would be underestimating the common intelligence of people in general.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:02:00 - [29] Originally by: 7shining7one7 no i didn't you see what you don't understand is that it is among other things taxes that increases the price of items you buy, because everyone from production and manufacturing up to the sales has to get the various components that are in themselves artificially raised in price due to tax and inflation (which correlate on several levels) so this means you pay more for each item, and this also means that you will incur greater debt each time you want to buy something big. As I understand it he wants to abolish personal income taxes. Sales taxes would still remain (especially since a large part of those taxes are locally applied). Oh, just occurred to me with no federal income tax companies may well see fit to cut salaries. Maybe not as much as you lost in taxes but they could argue that you are taking more home so they should have to pay you less. Certainly it would depress salaries and in the end we may all find our take home pay the same as it is today. The winners of course being the investors who get even more wealthy furthering the split between the have's and have nots.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:05:00 - [30] Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 an eve analogy: base mineral price vs production and sales price. now impose an income tax on top of all this and u'll understand where i'm going with this. everything becomes more expensive. So if you do what you and Ron Paul want, and remove income taxes, prices will drop. Uhuh, debt is much easier to get into when you have more money AND things are cheaper! with all due respect lofty, when u get a little older you'll understand how things connect much easier, because you'll have more knowledge of how things work. the more money and things are cheaper scenario you are suggesting, is a false image of what will happen. in fact you'll have less money but the prices will also be less. it will balance itself out. offcourse over consumption is what the banks prey on. so if you want to go down that road, that's a personal choice. but from a hollistic viewpoint it would balance out inflation very nicely to do such a thing. or what ron paul calls inflation tax. (which is what i've talked about above, offcourse not in sufficient detail, but just enough to get the idea about what it means)
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:07:00 - [31] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 21:09:15 Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: 7shining7one7 no i didn't you see what you don't understand is that it is among other things taxes that increases the price of items you buy, because everyone from production and manufacturing up to the sales has to get the various components that are in themselves artificially raised in price due to tax and inflation (which correlate on several levels) so this means you pay more for each item, and this also means that you will incur greater debt each time you want to buy something big. As I understand it he wants to abolish personal income taxes. Sales taxes would still remain (especially since a large part of those taxes are locally applied). Oh, just occurred to me with no federal income tax companies may well see fit to cut salaries. Maybe not as much as you lost in taxes but they could argue that you are taking more home so they should have to pay you less. Certainly it would depress salaries and in the end we may all find our take home pay the same as it is today. The winners of course being the investors who get even more wealthy furthering the split between the have's and have nots. he wants more than that, but it's just the first step, obviously it takes more careful planning to be able to stop big business from profitting from this in an unreasonable manner, and those would naturally be the next steps to insure ppl don't get screwed over by greedy investors. we are talking about a total paradigm shift from the current in my oppinion, unbeneficial, unrealistic and unaccountable way of spending and consuming, and incurring debt. so obviously this will take some time and will be done in several steps. but you gotta start somewhere. but i totally understand your concern and wish that more people would actually start to question and ask these important questions, to whichever local representative and so forth, your oppinion matters, they represent you! not only themselves, you should be their puppeteers, not the other way around.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:10:00 - [32] Originally by: 7shining7one7 in fact you'll have less money but the prices will also be less. it will balance itself out. Once again, how will removing personal income tax cause this in any way? ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:13:00 - [33] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 21:17:09 Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: 7shining7one7 in fact you'll have less money but the prices will also be less. it will balance itself out. Once again, how will removing personal income tax cause this in any way? you got an "inflation tax" as you could call it, applying pressure to trades and goods and personal income and by relieving this pressure the inflated price will balance itself and ppl will spend less money on getting what they desire. this will result in ppl not needing to amass mass amounts of wealth (meaning fewer loans both private and corporate), it will stop the devaluing of the currency due to not incurring that much national debt on overspending and so on and so forth (which means no need to raise taxes), this along with other proposals, starts a chain reaction, just like any other adjustment in a economic structure. the only ones that wouldn't benefit from this are the banks, since they make their money by having ppl in debt because their income is made by charging interest from that debt.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:24:00 - [34] Originally by: 7shining7one7 you got an "inflation tax" as you could call it, applying pressure to trades and goods and personal income and by relieving this pressure the inflated price will balance itself and ppl will spend less money on getting what they desire. How is Income tax an "inflation tax" exactly? Quote: this will result in ppl not needing to amass mass amounts of wealth (meaning fewer loans both private and corporate) Wait, how does taking out loans correlate with amassing wealth? Just because people don't "need" to have wealth doesn't mean they won't amass it anyway. And even assuming that inflation ceases to exist, why would that affect the amount of loans being taken out? Quote: it will stop the devaluing of the currency due to not incurring that much national debt on overspending Why? How will instantly eliminating over a third of the government's income reduce national debt or have any effect on inflation? I'm not an economist but this doesn't really make a lot of sense to me. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:28:00 - [35] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: 7shining7one7 you got an "inflation tax" as you could call it, applying pressure to trades and goods and personal income and by relieving this pressure the inflated price will balance itself and ppl will spend less money on getting what they desire. How is Income tax an "inflation tax" exactly? Quote: this will result in ppl not needing to amass mass amounts of wealth (meaning fewer loans both private and corporate) Wait, how does taking out loans correlate with amassing wealth? Just because people don't "need" to have wealth doesn't mean they won't amass it anyway. And even assuming that inflation ceases to exist, why would that affect the amount of loans being taken out? Quote: it will stop the devaluing of the currency due to not incurring that much national debt on overspending Why? How will instantly eliminating over a third of the government's income reduce national debt or have any effect on inflation? I'm not an economist but this doesn't really make a lot of sense to me. the income tax is not the same as the "inflation tax" the inflation tax is incurred by state debt through loans, which is caused by ridiculous and unreasonable budgetting by the administrations. something ron paul has allways voted against in the congress. as for the income tax, after that is changed then ppl would be urged to cut spending, as the economic system balances itself, and when it has then does so, then prices and the likes will be normalized/stabilized.
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:39:00 - [36] Reasons why Ron Paul sucks: All of his support comes from the internets. When a politicians demographic is SlashDot, DeviantArt and SomethingAwful you know they are talking **. EVE RELATED CONTENT**
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:41:00 - [37] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 21:42:53 Originally by: SoftRevolution Reasons why Ron Paul sucks: All of his support comes from the internets. When a politicians demographic is SlashDot, DeviantArt and SomethingAwful you know they are talking ****. oh i see so you deem a political candidate but not what he says, but of how many supporters the mainSTrEAM media makes him out to have. in other words you deem his competence on the amount of supporters, not on the competence of his plans and oppinions? grand. gl with that, guess your voting for hillary clinton then. little good that will do you. but offcourse, as long as the media tells you she's got a lot of supporters, that's what matters, not if she's competent or if she has the best intentions in mind for the people.. right?
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:44:00 - [38] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 21:42:53 Originally by: SoftRevolution Reasons why Ron Paul sucks: All of his support comes from the internets. When a politicians demographic is SlashDot, DeviantArt and SomethingAwful you know they are talking **. oh i see so you deem a political candidate but not what he says, but of how many supporters the mainSTrEAM media makes him out to have. in other words you deem his competence on the amount of supporters, not on the competence of his plans and oppinions? grand. gl with that, guess your voting for hillary clinton then. little good that will do you. but offcourse, as long as the media tells you she's got a lot of supporters, that's what matters, not if she's competent or if she has the best intentions in mind for the people.. right? Not entirely, but it's a quick way to spot *pots. EVE RELATED CONTENT**
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:44:00 - [39] Originally by: 7shining7one7 and i'll say again as i did before, the income tax is unconstitutional, and there is in fact no law written or spoken that forces americans to pay income tax. ORLY?! Your statement kinda made me think of this - Quote: The term tax protester as used in the United States has been defined as a term applying to "persons who claim the tax laws are unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, *and who therefore fail to file a tax return or file returns with no income or tax data supplied."[1] Legal commentator Daniel B. Evans has defined tax protesters as people who "refuse to pay taxes or file tax returns out of a mistaken belief that the federal income tax is unconstitutional, invalid, voluntary, or otherwise does not apply to them under one of a number of bizarre arguments ___________________________ Originally by:* ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:45:00 - [40] Originally by: 7shining7one7 with all due respect lofty, when u get a little older you'll understand how things connect much easier, because you'll have more knowledge of how things work. the more money and things are cheaper scenario you are suggesting, is a false image of what will happen. in fact you'll have less money but the prices will also be less. it will balance itself out. You were the one who suggested it --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:47:00 - [41] Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 with all due respect lofty, when u get a little older you'll understand how things connect much easier, because you'll have more knowledge of how things work. the more money and things are cheaper scenario you are suggesting, is a false image of what will happen. in fact you'll have less money but the prices will also be less. it will balance itself out. You were the one who suggested it I like how he got on your case with the grammar bit then he gets ya back saying your too young to understand. ___________________________ Originally by: ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:48:00 - [42] Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 with all due respect lofty, when u get a little older you'll understand how things connect much easier, because you'll have more knowledge of how things work. the more money and things are cheaper scenario you are suggesting, is a false image of what will happen. in fact you'll have less money but the prices will also be less. it will balance itself out. You were the one who suggested it I like how he got on your case with the grammar bit then he gets ya back saying your too young to understand. Yeah. Obviously I can't be smart, I'm younger than him --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:48:00 - [43] i understand where your coming from, but i honestly can't agree, i suggest you check out what exactly it is they want to do and look at their competence instead. let's take guillani, who was the guy who owned the wtc towers and said openly on bbc/cnn that he agreed with the firechief that they decided to pull wtc 7 since there had been so much damage allready (pulling a building takes weeks of planning, and is lingo for a controlled demolition) somethign that is completely omitted in the official report. so much for his credibility not to mention that he recieved a BIG PHAT INSURANCE CHECK on the building that was RECENTLY FULLY RENOVATED FOR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS just before 9/11. or hillary who just wants to continue the "war on terror" and decrease your liberties and continue with the insane military budgets that incurred the trillions of dollars in us debt and continue to send the US currency down the path to a fullblown economic chrisis. or ron paul who wants to abolish all of the above and reclaim freedom and unconstitutional acts, where the president actually has to make a vote to see if u should go to war. but do research this.
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:50:00 - [44] Originally by: 7shining7one7 i understand where your coming from, but i honestly can't agree, i suggest you check out what exactly it is they want to do and look at their competence instead. let's take guillani, who was the guy who owned the wtc towers and said openly on bbc/cnn that he agreed with the firechief that they decided to pull wtc 7 since there had been so much damage allready (pulling a building takes weeks of planning, and is lingo for a controlled demolition) somethign that is completely omitted in the official report. so much for his credibility not to mention that he recieved a BIG PHAT INSURANCE CHECK on the building that was RECENTLY FULLY RENOVATED FOR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS just before 9/11. or hillary who just wants to continue the "war on terror" and decrease your liberties and continue with the insane military budgets that incurred the trillions of dollars in us debt and continue to send the US currency down the path to a fullblown economic chrisis. or ron paul who wants to abolish all of the above and reclaim freedom and unconstitutional acts, where the president actually has to make a vote to see if u should go to war. but do research this. OH **** IT'S JIMS ALT! --- Latest Video : FAT- Camp
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:50:00 - [45] Originally by: 7shining7one7 and i'll say again as i did before, the income tax is unconstitutional, and there is in fact no law written or spoken that forces americans to pay income tax. This is quite wrong: Quote: Amendment XVI of the United States Constitution The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. Seems pretty clear to me and challenges to this Amendment have been comprehensively rejected by the courts many, many times and quite explicitly too. Add to that the power to impose taxes is listed in Article I, section 8, clause 1 of the constitution and other parts deal with it as well. In short, despite your beliefs, avoiding taxes is most definitely against the law and will see you in jail.
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:51:00 - [46] Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: 7shining7one7 i understand where your coming from, but i honestly can't agree, i suggest you check out what exactly it is they want to do and look at their competence instead. let's take guillani, who was the guy who owned the wtc towers and said openly on bbc/cnn that he agreed with the firechief that they decided to pull wtc 7 since there had been so much damage allready (pulling a building takes weeks of planning, and is lingo for a controlled demolition) somethign that is completely omitted in the official report. so much for his credibility not to mention that he recieved a BIG PHAT INSURANCE CHECK on the building that was RECENTLY FULLY RENOVATED FOR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS just before 9/11. or hillary who just wants to continue the "war on terror" and decrease your liberties and continue with the insane military budgets that incurred the trillions of dollars in us debt and continue to send the US currency down the path to a fullblown economic chrisis. or ron paul who wants to abolish all of the above and reclaim freedom and unconstitutional acts, where the president actually has to make a vote to see if u should go to war. but do research this. OH ** IT'S JIMS ALT! Tin Hattery at it's finest! ___________________________ Originally by:** ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 21:52:00 - [47] Originally by: 7shining7one7 i understand where your coming from, but i honestly can't agree, i suggest you check out what exactly it is they want to do and look at their competence instead. let's take guillani, who was the guy who owned the wtc towers and said openly on bbc/cnn that he agreed with the firechief that they decided to pull wtc 7 since there had been so much damage allready (pulling a building takes weeks of planning, and is lingo for a controlled demolition) somethign that is completely omitted in the official report. so much for his credibility not to mention that he recieved a BIG PHAT INSURANCE CHECK on the building that was RECENTLY FULLY RENOVATED FOR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS just before 9/11. or hillary who just wants to continue the "war on terror" and decrease your liberties and continue with the insane military budgets that incurred the trillions of dollars in us debt and continue to send the US currency down the path to a fullblown economic chrisis. WHAT. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:01:00 - [48] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 22:06:38 Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: 7shining7one7 i understand where your coming from, but i honestly can't agree, i suggest you check out what exactly it is they want to do and look at their competence instead. let's take guillani, who was the guy who owned the wtc towers and said openly on bbc/cnn that he agreed with the firechief that they decided to pull wtc 7 since there had been so much damage allready (pulling a building takes weeks of planning, and is lingo for a controlled demolition) somethign that is completely omitted in the official report. so much for his credibility not to mention that he recieved a BIG PHAT INSURANCE CHECK on the building that was RECENTLY FULLY RENOVATED FOR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS just before 9/11. or hillary who just wants to continue the "war on terror" and decrease your liberties and continue with the insane military budgets that incurred the trillions of dollars in us debt and continue to send the US currency down the path to a fullblown economic chrisis. WHAT. oh sry that was larry silverstein, sry i mixed it up, guilliani was the one who praised the official report. my bad, i don't mind being wrong. cause i allways make it right again. here is silverstein saying they decided to pull it. and here's some stuff on guilliani that u might not've known. here
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:01:00 - [49] Originally by: 7shining7one7 or ron paul who wants to abolish all of the above and reclaim freedom and unconstitutional acts, where the president actually has to make a vote to see if u should go to war. but do research this. Ok...I did research this. Atricle I, Section 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Article I, section 8, clause 11 To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; Now add the War Powers Act where the president has 90 days after introducing troops into hostilities to obtain congressional approval of that action. That a republican congress did not exercise its constitutional authority in this matter is a different issue but I do not see what Ron Paul suggests on doing that already hasn't been tried in this regard.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:14:00 - [50] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 22:15:46 Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: 7shining7one7 or ron paul who wants to abolish all of the above and reclaim freedom and unconstitutional acts, where the president actually has to make a vote to see if u should go to war. but do research this. Ok...I did research this. Atricle I, Section 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Article I, section 8, clause 11 To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; Now add the War Powers Act where the president has 90 days after introducing troops into hostilities to obtain congressional approval of that action. That a republican congress did not exercise its constitutional authority in this matter is a different issue but I do not see what Ron Paul suggests on doing that already hasn't been tried in this regard. well what he wants to do is to go with the constitution in this regard with the part that says to not police the world and all that, and have a foreign policy of non intervention instead. and take care of the home base and do trade with other nations but not get involved in their policies and not get involved in nation building. and let's be honest.. the US has no trouble defending itself against any and all invaders, it don't need to go blow up iran to defend against incoming nukes, US has probably the best anti nuke defence system in the entire world, infact you have the best military in the world, and you don't need any budget for it really, why? cause u allready got all that you need. it's all a load of bullox. and it's dragging the economy down the drain through increased debt to the banking cartels that get a higher and higher influence in politics as a result.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:20:00 - [51] Originally by: 7shining7one7 the US has no trouble defending itself against any and all invaders, it don't need to go blow up iran to defend against incoming nukes, US has probably the best anti nuke defence system in the entire world, Best anti-nuke system in that you mean absolutely NO anti-nuke system? It doesn't exist. Sure they have been working on various methods but none of them really viable as yet and none are deployed.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:23:00 - [52] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 22:28:38 lol are you serious haha if u only knew where the trillions of dollars go, but offcourse, if ur being told that there is none eventhough there is, then offcourse that's carte blanche to take even more trillion dollar loans and put the US in more debt to the banking cartels, wonderful how that works ain't it. but offcourse your not stupid in any way, your actually a quite smart bloke the reason ppl don't know this is cause most of the "black budgets" does not allow ppl to know what they are for, or how much money goes to so and so. it's all cloak and dagger.. that allows 2 things. 1. public deniability 2. manipulation into increased funding. the real question is offcourse.. will they activate it if a nuke comes flying towards the US, or will they make a stand down order similar to that of 9/11 mascueraded as a flight drill that sent the pilot flying in circles. that's the real question. and that's also why it's imperative to stop the most of this cloak and dagger bs, and consider if these agencies and the likes should even recieve funding, or exist as all, as ron paul proposes to do. same as what jfk wanted to do before he was assasinated.. (let's not go there though), but if ron indeed becomes president let's hope he pulls that off, it'll be good to get a public vote on that, atleast in my oppinion.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:32:00 - [53] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 22:25:00 lol are you serious haha if u only knew where the trillions of dollars go, but offcourse, if ur being told that there is none eventhough there is, then offcourse that's carte blanche to take even more trillion dollar loans and put the US in more debt to the banking cartels, wonderful how that works ain't it. but offcourse your not stupid in any way, your actually a quite smart bloke the reason ppl don't know this is cause most of the "black budgets" does not allow ppl to know what they are for, or how much money goes to so and so. it's all cloak and dagger.. that allows 2 things. 1. public deniability 2. manipulation into increased funding. If you can point me to a working nuclear missile defense system anywhere in the world I am all ears. I love that stuff. You will find lots of research into it and some have been test fired successfully but none rise to the level of viable anti-missile defense systems for various reasons. And if the US really has one (I certainly hope they do) you'd think they'd advertise the fact. The best defense is discouraging the enemy from attacking in the first place. I'd rather someone not lob a missile at us then try and hope the missile defense works as advertised. If an enemy believes they have little chance of success at nuking a US city chances are they will not try because if they did they have to know the US will come steaming in with everything they've got.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:35:00 - [54] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 22:36:32 Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: 7shining7one7 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 22:25:00 lol are you serious haha if u only knew where the trillions of dollars go, but offcourse, if ur being told that there is none eventhough there is, then offcourse that's carte blanche to take even more trillion dollar loans and put the US in more debt to the banking cartels, wonderful how that works ain't it. but offcourse your not stupid in any way, your actually a quite smart bloke the reason ppl don't know this is cause most of the "black budgets" does not allow ppl to know what they are for, or how much money goes to so and so. it's all cloak and dagger.. that allows 2 things. 1. public deniability 2. manipulation into increased funding. If you can point me to a working nuclear missile defense system anywhere in the world I am all ears. I love that stuff. You will find lots of research into it and some have been test fired successfully but none rise to the level of viable anti-missile defense systems for various reasons. And if the US really has one (I certainly hope they do) you'd think they'd advertise the fact. The best defense is discouraging the enemy from attacking in the first place. I'd rather someone not lob a missile at us then try and hope the missile defense works as advertised. If an enemy believes they have little chance of success at nuking a US city chances are they will not try because if they did they have to know the US will come steaming in with everything they've got. haarp (covername high altitude aurora program), the most effective one (see if you can find the publicly available patents for weather manipulation, earth quake and or directed beams for missile defence (burning ionosphere using thousands of directed megawatts and directing the beam anywhere - the chem trail thing isn't some kind of big conspiracy with germ warfare, it's a grid to see the effects of haarp when they test and fine tune it) and the other is the laser sattelite grid aka starwars program capable of defence both from asteroids/meteorites and global missile defence, that offcourse are not supposed to exist either. that who was it, reagan talked about and pushed for back in the day.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:38:00 - [55] Originally by: 7shining7one7 the real question is offcourse.. will they activate it if a nuke comes flying towards the US, or will they make a stand down order similar to that of 9/11 mascueraded as a flight drill that sent the scrambled pilots flying in circles. (thankfully some disobeyed their stand down orders and one of the planes was shot down, the one destined to hit washington dc, u just only hear officially that it somehow crashed in a field unexplainably, effectively foiling the plan of increased funding to the military industrial project to a certain degree) Stand down a missile defense? Not a chance. First anyone operating that would have to go nuts and blow the whistle if they knew the President allowed a whole city to be vaporized. I cannot believe of all the people needed to operate such a thing that there isn't at least one who would find that just too much to swallow and spill the beans. Besides, just shooting nuke at the US will be more than sufficient to galvanize the country into kicking the attacker's ass. Even if the missile is shot down I doubt there is an American who wouldn't be screaming to have the attacker's heads on a platter. At least in my book trying to nuke one of our cities is more than sufficient provocation for all out war. Bet even the Europeans would agree with that.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:41:00 - [56] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 22:41:38 Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: 7shining7one7 the real question is offcourse.. will they activate it if a nuke comes flying towards the US, or will they make a stand down order similar to that of 9/11 mascueraded as a flight drill that sent the scrambled pilots flying in circles. (thankfully some disobeyed their stand down orders and one of the planes was shot down, the one destined to hit washington dc, u just only hear officially that it somehow crashed in a field unexplainably, effectively foiling the plan of increased funding to the military industrial project to a certain degree) Stand down a missile defense? Not a chance. First anyone operating that would have to go nuts and blow the whistle if they knew the President allowed a whole city to be vaporized. I cannot believe of all the people needed to operate such a thing that there isn't at least one who would find that just too much to swallow and spill the beans. Besides, just shooting nuke at the US will be more than sufficient to galvanize the country into kicking the attacker's ass. Even if the missile is shot down I doubt there is an American who wouldn't be screaming to have the attacker's heads on a platter. At least in my book trying to nuke one of our cities is more than sufficient provocation for all out war. Bet even the Europeans would agree with that. EXACTLY, and that's exactly what 9/11 did, and what did that mean again, increased spending in the military industrial complex. It don't matter if the attack was true or not (which explains why it has never been proven, in fact the official history has been disproven), as long as ppl believe it.
das licht Gallente	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:42:00 - [57] Chemtrails and missile defense FTW!
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:44:00 - [58] Oh god, this thread has gone right off the deep end... ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:48:00 - [59] Unless a lot has changed there's still no comprehensive ABM system as you're describing it. There's various limited systems in use or in development. Russia has the A-135 system and the US has the GMD. I'd be really dubious about the ability of either system to counter a real nuclear attack by ICBMs using MIRV warheads. A lot of this is simply down to various engineering problems with tracking, intercepting and killing ICBMs particularly in the re-entry phase when they're **ting mulitple warheads in all directions. That Airborne Laser system is interesting (lasers have zero flight time and are much simpler to aim provided you have LOS) because I think it's designed to hit missiles in the launch phase but it's really intended as a tactical system and like the GMD it's still in testing. That leaves what... Ronnie Ray-Gun's abortive Star Wars efforts? EVE RELATED CONTENT**
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:48:00 - [60] Originally by: 7shining7one7 EXACTLY, and that's exactly what 9/11 did, and what did that mean again, increased spending in the military industrial complex. It don't matter if the attack was true or not (which explains why it has never been proven, in fact the official history has been disproven), as long as ppl believe it. The attack is more than sufficiently proven. I have been to New York since then. The towers are no longer there. I think the world community was fine with the US going after Bin Laden and so on. I do not think Bin Laden denies any of it. That part is all well and fine and what we should have stuck to. The Iraq bit of course is all BS and we never should have gone there.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:51:00 - [61] Clearly, ***** Bin Laden is a figurehead installed by the CIA, in fact the entire religion of Islam was actually created by the NSA and their time travel machine in order to promote the military-industrial complex in modern times! ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:55:00 - [62] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: 7shining7one7 EXACTLY, and that's exactly what 9/11 did, and what did that mean again, increased spending in the military industrial complex. It don't matter if the attack was true or not (which explains why it has never been proven, in fact the official history has been disproven), as long as ppl believe it. The attack is more than sufficiently proven. I have been to New York since then. The towers are no longer there. I think the world community was fine with the US going after Bin Laden and so on. I do not think Bin Laden denies any of it. That part is all well and fine and what we should have stuck to. The Iraq bit of course is all BS and we never should have gone there. yes the towers went down, that's about all that was proven m8.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:56:00 - [63] Well, passenger planes hit them...I think it's safe to say that was also proven, at least. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 22:58:00 - [64] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 23:08:12 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 23:05:52 and a passport from one of the victims fell out of the window and landed on the ground and wasn't burned whatsoever. and they used it in the investigation of the hijackers. fancy that huh. and even if that's not true then actually it is not proven that passenger planes hit them. there are eye witnesses describing that there were no visible windows. but offcourse they could be lying ^_^ (was just after they had hit the towers though) and even if it was passenger planes, then besides the fact that the tanks were only half full and most of the fuel evaporated upon impact, and that jet fuel (kerosine or what's it called) can't reach a high enough temperature to melt structural steel (which the official report also indicates), and the fact that the wrong tower collapsed first, it's a pretty good story. and obviously not worthy of any research whatsoever, cause it was the invisible terrorists that can strike you down at any moment, that done it! "misdirection stan, misdirection. what the ears hear and the eyes see, the mind believes." taken from a movie banned in the US btw. known as swordfish, pretty cool movie actually, hugh jackman and travolta plays marvelously in it.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:06:00 - [65] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 23:00:45 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 22:59:10 and a passport from one of the victims fell out of the window and landed on the ground and wasn't burned whatsoever. and they used it in the investigation of the hijackers. fancy that huh. and actually it is not proven that passenger planes hit them. there are eye witnesses describing that there were no visible windows. but offcourse they could be lying ^_^ (was just after they had hit the towers though) and besides the fact that the tanks were only half full and most of the fuel evaporated upon impact, and that jet fuel (kerosine or what's it called) can't reach a high enough temperature to melt structural steel (which the official report also indicates) it's a pretty good story. Good grief... There were something like 80 separate videotapes of the first plane hitting. By the time the second plane hit there were several hundred videos recording the event. Videos from news media on down to people recording on their cell phones. Not to mention several hundred thousand New Yorkers who saw it all. But I suppose the government got to all of them to shut them up. And you do not need to melt the steel. Just weaken it. Add in massive damage from a big hole in one side and the rather remarkable forces a skyscraper experiences from wind (they sway) and it was just a matter of time (add to that the unique construction of the Towers...the Sears Tower in Chicago for instance likely would not have collapsed).
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:09:00 - [66] Yaknow, one of the stories was that it was not planes at all that hit the towers but in fact missiles and several witnesses can attest to that too. I looked into HAARP since I've never heard of anything like it for a missile defense and I found the reason why, cause it's not. It's a glorified communications center researching the use of the ionosphere as a means to 'bend' the LOS of communications. It doesn't 'burn' anything. The only 2 items that I can think of that we have for missile defense is the aeges cruiser and a jet that has a high powered laser in it's nose but that won't be out for a couple years yet. ___________________________ Originally by: ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:13:00 - [67] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 23:16:00 Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: 7shining7one7 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 23:00:45 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 22:59:10 and a passport from one of the victims fell out of the window and landed on the ground and wasn't burned whatsoever. and they used it in the investigation of the hijackers. fancy that huh. and actually it is not proven that passenger planes hit them. there are eye witnesses describing that there were no visible windows. but offcourse they could be lying ^_^ (was just after they had hit the towers though) and besides the fact that the tanks were only half full and most of the fuel evaporated upon impact, and that jet fuel (kerosine or what's it called) can't reach a high enough temperature to melt structural steel (which the official report also indicates) it's a pretty good story. Good grief... There were something like 80 separate videotapes of the first plane hitting. By the time the second plane hit there were several hundred videos recording the event. Videos from news media on down to people recording on their cell phones. Not to mention several hundred thousand New Yorkers who saw it all. But I suppose the government got to all of them to shut them up. And you do not need to melt the steel. Just weaken it. Add in massive damage from a big hole in one side and the rather remarkable forces a skyscraper experiences from wind (they sway) and it was just a matter of time (add to that the unique construction of the Towers...the Sears Tower in Chicago for instance likely would not have collapsed). what unique construction, it had 27 massive steel columns, that should still be standing if the floors collapsed with the pancake theory. yeah they changed it from 4 steel columns that were first showed on cnn, cause yeah, ppl wised up. u should check out a video called the building of the world trade center, it's from the 80's i believe, i think u'll find it pretty interesting, it's a bit old so it's a little fuzzy, u know vhs and all that. as for the planes, take the official 9/11 memorial dvd and zoom in on the planes. do a frame by frame analysis, and then compare with other videos. but offcourse if u can weak the top of these massive 27 steel columsn they can just sway in the wind right.. why was there then molten lava conditions at the foundation of the towers, weeks after they went down? jet fuel burns away pretty fast, so what melted the structural steel then? they didn't just break, they melted.. completely.. what about wtc7, it wasn't hit by anything. and it came down just as fast, oh yeah, that's cause they decided to pull it (takes weeks of planning), eventhough the official explanation was that it came down as a result of fire which the official reports say is still highly unlikely but it was their best bid. huh? come again? not to mention that all 3 of them dropped in free fall speed, something that is impossible even with the pancake theory.
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:15:00 - [68] Oh dear god. Did he just start another "Spare Coinage" thread? EVE RELATED CONTENT
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:15:00 - [69] Originally by: 7shining7one7 "misdirection stan, misdirection. what the ears hear and the eyes see, the mind believes." taken from a movie banned in the US btw. known as swordfish, pretty cool movie actually, hugh jackman and travolta plays marvelously in it. For a banned movie I sure see it alot in the wal-mart savings bin. Does this mean i'll be arrested for having a copy at home? ___________________________ Originally by: ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:17:00 - [70] Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Originally by: 7shining7one7 "misdirection stan, misdirection. what the ears hear and the eyes see, the mind believes." taken from a movie banned in the US btw. known as swordfish, pretty cool movie actually, hugh jackman and travolta plays marvelously in it. For a banned movie I sure see it alot in the wal-mart savings bin. Does this mean i'll be arrested for having a copy at home? if u research it it was banned from the movies in the US as a result of 9/11, it was released much later on.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:20:00 - [71] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 23:24:24 Originally by: SoftRevolution Oh dear god. Did he just start another "Spare Coinage" thread? lollerskates, why would they do that? u don't believe it right, besides killing him will only turn him into a martyr. it would be pwning yourself in the eye in a remarkable way to do that. oh btw. nice circular logic and an incredibly well documented conclusion at the bottom of that page. obviously the guy that made the page is completely spot on man! this page is more fun. at any rate, i don't remember bringing all this up, i'd rather talk the economic aspects that we talked about earlier. i remember responding to some questions and then we somehow ended up here oh well..
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:20:00 - [72] Originally by: SoftRevolution Oh dear god. Did he just start another "Spare Coinage" thread? Actually it started off as a Ron Paul thread, but then it was surprise buttsexed by an injection of 9/11 and thus grew a baby Spare Change thread. That thread has now torn open the stomach of it's mother and is feasting on it's corpse. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:23:00 - [73] This thread has done wonders for my opinion of Ron Paul, I must day. EVE RELATED CONTENT
Ademaro Imre Caldari Eye of God	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:24:00 - [74] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: 7shining7one7 why don't you just let his own words speak for themselves, that's what i do. Because it is a populist appeal with no discussion of the knock-on effects. No one likes paying taxes but consider some of the effects abolishing it would have. Perhaps I am wrong, but I believe Ron Paul shares a common interest as many other peopel do, that is to not need the IRS at all in that taxes would be converted to any of the federal sales tax or flat tax proposals. The IRS really is screwed up. I once made a tax payment made out to "Internal Revenue Service" because that was where I was mailing my payment and paperwork to, when I should have made the check to "United States Department of the Treasury." Not only was I given a returned check fee, I was given a late fee. I believe the tax code for the federal government is something like 17,000 pages. When they say, and I assume even Ron Paul, they mean getting rid of all those complicated tax rules. The tax rules are so bad, that any changes to taxes THIS (or maybe it was next year) have to be done before August in order for the IRS to program their computers to accepts returns by the end of the year.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:30:00 - [75] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 23:37:40 Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Yaknow, one of the stories was that it was not planes at all that hit the towers but in fact missiles and several witnesses can attest to that too. I looked into HAARP since I've never heard of anything like it for a missile defense and I found the reason why, cause it's not. It's a glorified communications center researching the use of the ionosphere as a means to 'bend' the LOS of communications. It doesn't 'burn' anything. The only 2 items that I can think of that we have for missile defense is the aeges cruiser and a jet that has a high powered laser in it's nose but that won't be out for a couple years yet. haarp (high altitude auroral research project) is the cover name yes. and it does certainly burn the ionosphere, that's what the thousands of megawatt focused energy array is for. unless you think it just kinda sends a fuzzy beam up there that kinda tingles the inner atmosphere, and yes it can be used for communication too. do you honestly think that if it had military application, that it was something that they would come out directly and say what it really was. even a sceptic like you must surely concede to that. here's a link for u to know more about haarp since u seem interested. it is quite interesting actually. little hint, changes in the ionosphere affects weather. the technology itself is based on tesla principles and technology that has been labeled officially as crazy and the works of a disturbed and insane genious that seemed too crazy to be true.
Ademaro Imre Caldari Eye of God	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:37:00 - [76] Originally by: 7shining7one7 if u research it it was banned from the movies in the US as a result of 9/11, it was released much later on. No, it was not banned. The publishers did not release it because it was on schedule to be releases close to 9/11/01 because it would not be good PR.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:41:00 - [77] Originally by: Ademaro Imre Originally by: 7shining7one7 if u research it it was banned from the movies in the US as a result of 9/11, it was released much later on. No, it was not banned. The publishers did not release it because it was on schedule to be releases close to 9/11/01 because it would not be good PR. granted, but it's kinda the same thing isn't it. what happened to free speech and liberty and different oppinions. oh yes i forgot, gw bush said no "conspiracy theories" are tolerated cause they are simply all malicious lies that attempts to shift the blame away from the terrorists, away from the guilty.
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:44:00 - [78] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Yaknow, one of the stories was that it was not planes at all that hit the towers but in fact missiles and several witnesses can attest to that too. I looked into HAARP since I've never heard of anything like it for a missile defense and I found the reason why, cause it's not. It's a glorified communications center researching the use of the ionosphere as a means to 'bend' the LOS of communications. It doesn't 'burn' anything. The only 2 items that I can think of that we have for missile defense is the aeges cruiser and a jet that has a high powered laser in it's nose but that won't be out for a couple years yet. haarp (high altitude auroral project) is the cover name yes. and it does certainly burn the ionosphere, that's what the thousands of megawatt focused energy array is for. unless you think it just kinda sends a fuzzy beam up there that kinda tingles the inner atmosphere, and yes it can be used for communication too. do you honestly think that if it had military application, that it was something that they would come out directly and say what it really was. even a sceptic like you must surely concede to that. And do you think if they were really trying to cover it up, then maybe they wouldn't be holding open houses during the summertime? Or how about the fact that it contracts alot of it's work to colleges and even has a program with the alaskan community college? Not to mention location. I mean alaska? I would think a MDS would be better suited in say, Colorado if you were going with static defense. Oh, and it's 3.6 million watts of radio frequency power. Not even the ABL requires that kind of power to fire a laser. ___________________________ Originally by: ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:45:00 - [79] Edited by: Tarminic on 12/12/2007 23:45:04 Originally by: 7shining7one7 granted, but it's kinda the same thing isn't it. what happened to free speech and liberty and different oppinions. oh yes i forgot, gw bush said no "conspiracy theories" are tolerated cause they are simply all malicious lies that attempts to shift the blame away from the terrorists, away from the guilty. They chose not to release it, they were not forced or coerced into it by anyone. So no, it's not really the same thing. Since you were clearly twisting the truth on that one, I'm a bit more disinclined to take your other arguments seriously. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:49:00 - [80] granted, but it's kinda the same thing isn't it. what happened to free speech and liberty and different oppinions. oh yes i forgot, gw bush said no "conspiracy theories" are tolerated cause they are simply all malicious lies that attempts to shift the blame away from the terrorists, away from the guilty. They chose not to release it, they were not forced or coerced into it by anyone. So no, it's not really the same thing. Since you were clearly twisting the truth on that one, I'm a bit more disinclined to take your other arguments seriously. i didn't twist it i just submit that if the president tells the people, do not tolerate such things, then it will be quite easy to follow those guidelines. but i also submit that they weren't forced to. but in a sence it's release was banned, albeit willingly, and for a while. it was fully available in europe afaik.
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:50:00 - [81] Originally by: 7shining7one7 here's a link for u to know more about haarp since u seem interested. it is quite interesting actually. Oh that is good. I like how harp can control the weather, knock planes and missiles out of the air, can create a 'hole' in the atmosphere and allowing any place to get fried with solar radiation. The visuals were rather weak though I must say. I quietly laughed to myself when I saw a link to that video showing proof that HAARP shot down a u.f.o. This threads a winner! ___________________________ Originally by: ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.12 23:52:00 - [82] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/12/2007 23:55:17 Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Originally by: 7shining7one7 here's a link for u to know more about haarp since u seem interested. it is quite interesting actually. Oh that is good. I like how harp can control the weather, knock planes and missiles out of the air, can create a 'hole' in the atmosphere and allowing any place to get fried with solar radiation. The visuals were rather weak though I must say. I quietly laughed to myself when I saw a link to that video showing proof that HAARP shot down a u.f.o. This threads a winner! oh i'm sorry, did u expect a hollywood feature film to explain to you highly classified military projects that you had no idea even existed before i mentioned the name in the first place. and then u could say afterwards that it was just a movie. anyways just sharing some stuff, it's pretty nifty the potentials in it, but definately not something that should be messed around with lightly, even the official site says they heat up the ionosphere to study it, i think that would be enough for you to consider potential military application under the guise of haarp. well i'm glad your enjoying yourself with it. but considering that you were not aware of these potentials before you watched the video, i would say that you atleast were a little bit more informed than you were before watching it. or do you purport to say that changes in the ionosphere cannot affect weather?
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:00:00 - [83] Originally by: 7shining7one7 oh i'm sorry, did u expect a hollywood feature film to explain to you highly classified military projects that you had no idea even existed before i mentioned the name in the first place. and then u could say afterwards that it was just a movie. anyways just sharing some stuff, it's pretty nifty the potentials in it, but definately not something that should be messed around with lightly, even the official site says they heat up the ionosphere to study it, i think that would be enough for you to consider potential military application under the guise of haarp. well i'm glad your enjoying yourself with it. but considering that you were not aware of these potentials before you watched the video, i would say that you atleast were a little bit more informed than you were before watching it. or do you purport to say that changes in the ionosphere cannot affect weather? I'm aware that I can use my field walkie as a dangerous weapon now yes. I'll keep it on me in case anymore UFO's fly by. ___________________________ Originally by: ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:03:00 - [84] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 13/12/2007 00:06:39 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 13/12/2007 00:03:04 Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Originally by: 7shining7one7 oh i'm sorry, did u expect a hollywood feature film to explain to you highly classified military projects that you had no idea even existed before i mentioned the name in the first place. and then u could say afterwards that it was just a movie. anyways just sharing some stuff, it's pretty nifty the potentials in it, but definately not something that should be messed around with lightly, even the official site says they heat up the ionosphere to study it, i think that would be enough for you to consider potential military application under the guise of haarp. well i'm glad your enjoying yourself with it. but considering that you were not aware of these potentials before you watched the video, i would say that you atleast were a little bit more informed than you were before watching it. or do you purport to say that changes in the ionosphere cannot affect weather? I'm aware that I can use my field walkie as a dangerous weapon now yes. I'll keep it on me in case anymore UFO's fly by. you'll need thousands of gigawats for extended periods of time mate, but gl with the walkie experiement, whatever that is furthermore, you really need to stop and think how good it is that we can talk about this stuff, that no agency as of yet has official global authority to hunt you down and arrest you on suspicion of being a terrorist. take a look at the patriot act and similar, and then imagine in a year or so if someone were to say, we can't tolerate conspiracy theorists (we can't tolerate different oppinions and viewpoints and analysises, or rather, the story can't bare to be scrutinized) and then the covert agencies would then knock on your door for subverting the war on terror.. vote ron paul mate..
me bored	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:06:00 - [85] Edited by: me bored on 13/12/2007 00:07:02 Originally by: 7shining7one7 Stop dreaming Somewhat ironic coming from a ron paul supporter.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:09:00 - [86] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 13/12/2007 00:10:16 Originally by: me bored Edited by: me bored on 13/12/2007 00:07:02 Originally by: 7shining7one7 Stop dreaming Somewhat ironic coming from a ron paul supporter. wow that's fascinating, it couldn't mean stop dreaming and do something instead could it by any chance? incredible wisdom you have, you should write a paper detailing exactly why ron paul is wrong, we'd all like to see it. atleast i would.
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:12:00 - [87] Originally by: 7shining7one7 furthermore, you really need to stop and think how good it is that we can talk about this stuff, that no agency as of yet has official global authority to hunt you down and arrest you on suspicion of being a terrorist. vote ron paul mate.. You guys would know. I mean, conspiracy theorists are always thinking the government is out to get them. But then again you would think that a government wouldn't worry about authority, look at the K.G.B. And not just no but Hell No. ___________________________ Originally by: ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:15:00 - [88] Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 13/12/2007 00:18:18 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 13/12/2007 00:17:53 Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Originally by: 7shining7one7 furthermore, you really need to stop and think how good it is that we can talk about this stuff, that no agency as of yet has official global authority to hunt you down and arrest you on suspicion of being a terrorist. vote ron paul mate.. You guys would know. I mean, conspiracy theorists are always thinking the government is out to get them. But then again you would think that a government wouldn't worry about authority, look at the K.G.B. And not just no but Hell No. i'm not worried about anyone coming to get me, i think what your trying to say is that you have a preconcieved notion that i do but i do have the belief that says live free or die. and untill that freedom is no more (which i don't think is likely cause there's a lot going on and i'm quite sure that things are changing for the better behind the scenes aswell as publicly) then that's the way i'll continue to live. and if u got a problem with that, then.. whatever floats your boat mate..
Glarion Garnier Solar Wind STELLAR LEGION	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:21:00 - [89] "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order." - David Rockefeller choise is ours to make ! Layla Kayleigh interviews Ron Paul Ron Paul is president in 2009 - can you feel it - it could be -RonP 2008-
Glarion Garnier Solar Wind STELLAR LEGION	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:33:00 - [90] Edited by: Glarion Garnier on 13/12/2007 00:33:30 Originally by: SoftRevolution Reasons why Ron Paul sucks: All of his support comes from the internets. When a politicians demographic is SlashDot, DeviantArt and SomethingAwful you know they are talking ****. Try harder neocon sheep. Your line blinds no one. -RonP 2008-
me bored	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:50:00 - [91] Originally by: 7shining7one7 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 13/12/2007 00:10:16 Originally by: me bored Edited by: me bored on 13/12/2007 00:07:02 Originally by: 7shining7one7 Stop dreaming Somewhat ironic coming from a ron paul supporter. wow that's fascinating, it couldn't mean stop dreaming and do something instead could it by any chance? incredible wisdom you have, you should write a paper detailing exactly why ron paul is wrong, we'd all like to see it. atleast i would. Calm down nutjob I never said that he was wrong or right. The fact is that you're supporting a candidate that has performed poorly in polling. But of course facts don't matter to you do they?
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:53:00 - [92] Originally by: me bored Calm down nutjob I never said that he was wrong or right. The fact is that you're supporting a candidate that has performed poorly in polling. But of course facts don't matter to you do they? When did facts ever matter to tin foil people? ___________________________ Originally by: ISD Santiago Cortes Locked Blew through off-topic boulevard and ended up in flamebait crescent.
Magnus Nordir Caldari	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:53:00 - [93] politics: tl;dr Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it. ~Andre Gide
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.13 00:54:00 - [94] Originally by: me bored The fact is that you're supporting a candidate that has performed poorly in polling. But of course facts don't matter to you do they? I wouldn't count on polls too much. They are notoriously inaccurate. Besides, popularity says nothing about the candidate's ideas. They could be brilliant ideas but they may lose the race anyway. We got Bush afterall...nuff said. Not saying Paul's ideas are brilliant or anything. Just saying a poll is iffy to base why you do or do not like a candidate.
Atama Cardel GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.13 01:09:00 - [95] I like his ideas of lowering taxes but eliminating them altogether, in my opinion, isn't a good idea.
Mr Friendly That it Should Come to This Derek Knows Us	Posted - 2007.12.13 01:43:00 - [96] OP, shills should be banned. there are forums intended for your propaganda. use them... Save EveTV, please. Sign to ask CCP to fund EveTV!
Lawrences Dragon Amarr Zantiu Braun	Posted - 2007.12.13 05:00:00 - [97] Originally by: Atama Cardel I like his ideas of lowering taxes but eliminating them altogether, in my opinion, isn't a good idea. The idea of lower taxes is appealing to everyone as it means more money for the individual, however taxes are a necessary evil in todays economy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax Taxation is a tool used by the government to indirectly control the economy as an aspect of Fiscal policy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_policy Government spending is funded by taxation. The primary source of this taxation is Income tax. Income tax is a proportional rate payed out depending on the amount of income that you earn. Income tax is a complicated matter, which is why the IRS exists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Service The IRS is unpopular, but it is their job to ensure everyone pays their tax fairly inaccordence to their income. If you were to remove income tax alltogether, you would remove one of the most powerfull tools used to combat inflation (fiscal policy), the government would go bankrupt due to a lack of funding, millions of government employees would loose their jobs due to a lack of government funding and the economy would fall into a recesetion bigger than the Great Depression.

ISD Santiago Cortes Caldari ISD Interstellar Correspondents	Posted - 2007.12.13 07:57:00 - [98] Locked Please don't continue to post Ron Paul or any political stuff. forum rules \| mailto:[email protected]


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.