Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Guest ArtvandaL

Israel Airstrike july 22, 2002 Gaza Strip Refugee Camp

Recommended Posts

Originally posted by seeking

 

i did think about it, and i decided.... fuck a israel. if they dont agree with how its being handled, and they're chicken shit bitches for allowing it to go down like it is. in the last 22 months, almost 2000 palestinians, and 1000 israeli's have been killed, for what? so israel can occupy some bullshit land that is not rightfully theirs? so there can constantly be war, so no one can enjoy their 'lives'? obviously the palestinians are not completely innocent, but their only goal is to have their homes back, and their freedom. the israeli's have all sorts of wacky bullshit reasons for their actions. reasons that time after time, have destroyed their peace talks.

 

if clinton were still in office, shit wouldnt be going down like this.

 

I agree with you for the most part... except your numbers, though be it close... the truth should be known: 3640 Palestinians have been killed, where in some 1372 Israelies. About 3/4 of the Palestinians killed have been innocent bystanders who were just trying to get away, that is 2,730 men, women, and children. Though 1372 is a large number of civilian casualties, who is doing it? Hamas, Al Whathefuckever, and other terrorist organizations. Who is killing the Palestinians? Ariel Sharon - the leader of Israel. The recognized president of Israel. Besides, what happened during World War II? Does anybody remember Euro History? The Jews were given Israel as a gift of refuge. Who's land was it? The majority of it was Palestine. I think that Ariel Sharon, now that Benjamin Netanyaho is out of office, is doing what he wanted to do when he was a military commander - exterminate the Palestinians like the scum he thinks they are. But when in reality he is playing wargames like Slogadon Milosovic or even Adolf Hitler, just in smaller quantities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
Originally posted by CAPS

Fuck the world, they all owe us money (no bullshit) Quit trying to solve the worlds problems and send that money twards school teachers wages, homeless training facilities, and HOLY SHIT a REAL TAX CUT. We are the most powerful nation on earth and we can't even clean up our social issues but we sure can police everybody elses.

 

Hmm... you got your reply in before mine.. and i would have quoted you. School teachers wages are not federal problems, they are state. I live in dumb southern state and we have faced 300 cuts in our metro school system. But that is State issue, not Federal. A real tax cut is unprobable... it is a republican government (i feel you might be one or close to one... so we might be talking a little more in the future).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no offense caps, but i wont even bother to begin discussing anything with someone who honestly believes that reaganomics was a success, and that the lack of funding for american programs comes from our foreign raping, i mean aid policies.

those two ideas are so ridiculous, that at first i thought you were being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by binaryheresy

School teachers wages are not federal problems, they are state. I live in dumb southern state and we have faced 300 cuts in our metro school system. But that is State issue, not Federal.

 

You are right but fedral grants can pump millions of dollars into the school systems that they may use at there own discression. As far as a taxcut, improbible yes but with a focus on redirection of government and its 1000's of programs.... and the IRS being WAY outa hand.... and the rich getting taxed 40% ........ and and and ..... you wonder why the rich hide money and don't give it to charities or gift programs they beleive in. It's because they have been FUCKED for TOO LONG and they are ready to pull the dick out. Just because the rich have money, and in many cases self made from rags, doesn't mean they should be penalized for our governments blatent misuse of funds. If a corperation ran like the government, it would have been belly up 10 fold.

 

P.S. I am libertarian.... if you hadn't guessed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by seeking

no offense caps, but i wont even bother to begin discussing anything with someone who honestly believes that reaganomics was a success,

 

K..... regan cut taxes for the rich. His anylists beleived that by doing so it would spark the rich to invest in AMERICA instead of the onslaught of foreign projects that where going on at the time so they could keep the money out of the country that was robbing them.

 

The anylists said that we would not truely see the effects of these cuts for some 10-15 years. It takes a while to build a new factory let alone get all the ducks in rows to due so....human services, permits, location, funding etc... so when all these LOCAL companies started hiring massive amounts of LOCALS IN THE STATES for high tech and low tech jobs and not indonesian's or chinese in some far off place, it was a few years later that the unemployment rate was the lowest in history and the economy was off the hook because we had money to spend from all the new higher paying factory and industry jobs that developed the previous 10 years.

 

Shall I get deeper?

 

Oh yeah and Clinton just so happend to be in office when we started rocking so it looked to the sheep that vote like he was responsible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by seeking

my ex girlfriend had a friend who inherited 200million dollars on his 21st birthday. anytime something like this comes up, i automaticaly think of him, and how if i had his money, i would make an informercial each week, and i would air it on a major station all over the country, just talking about all the fucked up stuff that happend throughout the week that no one wants to talk about. then id also have a corresponding web site, filled with links and info on stuff.

 

i would change the world.

 

I don't think you could get that past Lawrence Salentine...and your funds would run out a lot quicker than you think...especially if his friend Martin Mutford had anything to say about it.

(To understand what the hell I'm talking about, read a very good novel by Mario Puzo entitled "The Fourth K". A very insightful work of fiction, and a plain old good read, fast-paced, etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by CAPS

 

K..... regan cut taxes for the rich. His anylists beleived that by doing so it would spark the rich to invest in AMERICA instead of the onslaught of foreign projects that where going on at the time so they could keep the money out of the country that was robbing them.

 

The anylists said that we would not truely see the effects of these cuts for some 10-15 years. It takes a while to build a new factory let alone get all the ducks in rows to due so....human services, permits, location, funding etc... so when all these LOCAL companies started hiring massive amounts of LOCALS IN THE STATES for high tech and low tech jobs and not indonesian's or chinese in some far off place, it was a few years later that the unemployment rate was the lowest in history and the economy was off the hook because we had money to spend from all the new higher paying factory and industry jobs that developed the previous 10 years.

 

Shall I get deeper?

 

Oh yeah and Clinton just so happend to be in office when we started rocking so it looked to the sheep that vote like he was responsible.

 

your wasting your breath. that whole argument is so wridden with holes, it would make a terrible fish net, let alone argument.

if reaganomics were so great, why did he and bush more than tripple the national debt in a matter of 12 years? that means to say that in 12 years, they managed to tripple what had taken some 200 years of governmental spending to acrue. why did the gap between rich and poor widen at an unprecidented rate, while the unemployment rate also rose, as did the number of jobs shipped off to mexico, south america and taiwan? the boost in the economy during clintons term had far more to do with the dawning of the 'information age' and little to nothing to do with reagan.

 

this will be all i have to say on the subject

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by CAPS

So Clinton fucked off a great economy that the reagnomics

 

AHAHAHAHAHAHA... the REAL effects of Reaganomics negated everything the Carter administration did to balance the budget and pull us out of a huge inflationary period... In his first term Regan TRIPLED the national debt, something previously unheard of and generally thought of as impossible... In his second term, just to prove he knew what he was doing, he TRIPLED it AGAIN! Regan CUBED the national debt, approved illegal arms sales to the Iranians to fund the rebel insurgents in Nicaragua...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6. Between 1980 and 1992, the average income of the wealthiest 1

percent of households in the U.S.

 

(d) more than tripled

 

 

8. Over the past twenty years, average earnings of the nation's top

executives

 

(e) grew at five times the inflation rate

 

9. Over the past twenty years, average earnings of blue collar and

white collar workers in private industry

 

(a) did not keep up with inflation

 

15. You can earn more than $200,000 a year and owe no federal

income tax at all.

 

True

 

16. In a recent year, you could earn $25,000 - $30,000, and owe

federal income tax at about

 

(e) double the rate paid by thousands whose

incomes are more than $200,000

 

17. American manufacturing workers earn a lower average hourly

compensation than those of workers across most of the

industrialized world.

 

True

 

18. Americans are nearly $2 in debt for every $1 they receive in

their paychecks.

 

True

 

30. Some companies have lobbied for and gained special

exemptions - worth millions of dollars - written into U.S. tax laws,

exclusively for them.

 

True

 

 

 

tell me again about how dope reaganomics was?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by CAPS

Quit trying to solve the worlds problems and send that money homeless training facilities

 

FUCK THAT NOISE! I'm not paying my taxes to train people to be homeless... damn you Republicans are fuckin bloodthirsty, the homeless need JOBS!

 

you wonder why the rich hide money and don't give it to charities or gift programs they beleive in

 

oh yeah, it's important to rich people to avoid tax breaks...

 

P.S. I am libertarian.... if you hadn't guessed

 

of course I hadn't guessed, you want to expand the federal government's role in our schools (democrat), lift the tax on the rich (republican) and you think Reganomics worked (delusional)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

K---- again you are right on A LOT of things.. regan spent the shit outta money and did fuck the debt.... but the outlying goal was to build a POWERFUL nation. You have to spend money to defend as well as build. We had a serious nuclear threat at the time. Like none we have known and regan was spending MASSIVE money to try to protect us and yes that drove the debt to oblivion. As far as the tax cuts for the rich..... THE RICH BUILD JOBS...... bluecollar is truely the oil in the gears but who pays for those gears. I beleive the rich will continue to be rich and it is ignorant to think we can "build a bridge" to gap this. We should give them the money they erned and trust they will BUILD like they did in the mid 80's thru the mid 90's before they got slapped the fuck around and started downsizing all over the place. INFORMATION AGE? Man the bull market that ended in 97 started in 85-86 when we still had very little info traveling like it does now. The market was a direct reflection of what was going on in the economy. yes it blacked out for a bit but then came back stronger than anybody had figured. I am not gonna argue that regan had HUGE flaws but his goal idealy was to give the rich a break which they fuckin deserved. They built the fuckin country and all of a sudden they are penalized for giving people JOBS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

christ, you seriously are fucking dilusional!

 

"We had a serious nuclear threat at the time. Like none we have known and regan was spending MASSIVE money to try to protect us"

 

there was no threat of nuclear war! reagan invented the 'cold war' to scare us all into believing in his fight of the 'evil' of comunism. the russians didnt want to fight us, they wanted to feed their damn citizens and to keep their totalitarian dictatoriship we self-servingly refer to as communism, in power. ever see the movie 'canadian bacon'? not so far off the mark unfortunitly.

 

 

"As far as the tax cuts for the rich..... THE RICH BUILD JOBS...... bluecollar is truely the oil in the gears but who pays for those gears. I beleive the rich will continue to be rich and it is ignorant to think we can "build a bridge" to gap this. We should give them the money they erned and trust they will BUILD like they did in the mid 80's thru the mid 90's before they got slapped the fuck around and started downsizing all over the place"

 

earned? like enron? like worldcom? like bush? built jobs in the 80's? WHERE THE FUCK ARE YOUR FACTS COMING FROM? the 80's had more layoffs than anytime since the depression. continue to pay their workers? you mean continue to pay them less and less with each passing year? people made more in 1950 than they do now (with inflation). got slapped around and started downsizing? billions of dollars in tax deductions, shelters and private sector legislation was being 'slapped around'? being allowed to interview, propose and approve of the hiring of the very 'watchdogs' that are supposed to keep them in line, is being 'slapped around'? the companies didnt downsize, they moved to fucking honduras where they could pay a 50th of the money and get the same product!

"I am not gonna argue that regan had HUGE flaws but his goal idealy was to give the rich a break which they fuckin deserved. They built the fuckin country and all of a sudden they are penalized for giving people JOBS."

 

that they earned? again, like enron and worldcom and all the countless thousands of multi national companies that set up their 'office' in the virgin islands to avoid paying the taxes that you and i have no way of escaping?! that they earned by lying to their stock holders and employees, thereby flatout stealing every penny they had, while the brass walked away with hundreds of millions of dollars in profit? they deserve a break for that? for using child labor in third world countries so as to avoid paying a living wage to americans? giving people jobs? they didnt give people shit. anything that the working class blue collar worker has these days, is fought for tooth and fucking nail.

this is why i didnt want to get into it, because honestly, you're 'argument' doesnt even deserve this much of a response. its a stretch of the truth at best, and a completely fanciful fabrication at worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ArtvandaL

you two fuckers got waaaaay off topic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sir are lumping all corprates together as if corprates are all EVIL AND DEMONIC AND OUT TO FUCK THE WORLD. Man yes, buisness can be dirty. But not all buisness is dirty. You seem to think that the economy just solved itself. The thing about economic planning is it is VERY long term. Again, regan planned for growth but first he had to start the growth by giving back money to the only people that where gonna grow the country. You are right that corps took shitloads of jobs overseas and such. Yes they head to the virgin islands to avoid taxes. Shit seek can you blame them? The tax system has gone back to FUCKED. My grandfather died a very wealthy man and to his dying day he paid 40% of everthing he made in a year to the government. Picture this seek, every 10 dollars you make, you have to hand 4 of it to a guy who is gonna turn around and send it overseas to some third world cause we should have nothing to do with. Your missing the fact that it takes 10-15 years to see a presidents legacy. Funny how 10-15 after Regan/Bush we see the strogest economy in history. That is just curious to me. And now coming up on 10 years since Clinton got in office....oh..... Market is crashing, corps are shutting ops and taking them overseas, ....etc. I am saying that when all the "surplus" talk was happening Clinton made no effort to cut taxes. In fact he fucking RAISED them to pay for his socialist bullshit. They are getting more money than they need by 250+ million a year and they still figured out a way to spend it instead of giving it back. Don't get me wrong, W. had a retarded budget and I can't realy stand him as it is because he will not stand up to anyone.

 

Anyway.... we will never end this seek. You are very well informed. I tend to blow things up I know. I just come from a long, LONG line of buisness men and I have seen what they did to help the country so I haven't lost faith in corps just yet. I see how the rich are often misconceived and the few bad apples taint the shine of the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6. Between 1980 and 1992, the average income of the wealthiest 1

percent of households in the U.S.

 

(d) more than tripled

 

This true.... and I explained why it needed to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is my impression of me not getting involved in this discussion...

 

 

"You seem to think that the economy just solved itself. The thing about economic planning is it is VERY long term. Again, regan planned for growth but first he had to start the growth by giving back money to the only people that where gonna grow the country."

 

19% of the population, holds what, 95% of the countries wealth? ok, now tell me again how it makes more sense to give breaks to the 19%, instead of the 81%? because we 'trust' that they will do 'good' things with it? that they will create jobs? but who is supposed to buy the products, when the 81% cant even afford to buy food? reagans chief finacial advisors sent him memos stating he knew that there was no way this would work. that it would just widen the chasm between the classes. this is reagans own cabinet were talking about. this was disclosed a couple years ago, with the freedom of information act.

the economy boomed in the mid 90's, because your average joe citizen had more money to put back into the economy. this was not due to reagan, this was do to the whole sector of jobs created by the internet, intellectual properties, and the communications markets. all things that did not exist (for the most part) in the 80's, so they could not possibly, have been the product of reagans planning. yes, alot of that money did come from wealthy business men, but it was not because of the 'trickle down' effect, it was because they either were enamoured by the idea of the 'get rich quick' scheme, or because they invested in and started companies that dealt with these new markets. companies, that would have been started regardless of reagans tax breaks.

 

"you are right that corps took shitloads of jobs overseas and such. Yes they head to the virgin islands to avoid taxes. Shit seek can you blame them? The tax system has gone back to FUCKED. My grandfather died a very wealthy man and to his dying day he paid 40% of everthing he made in a year to the government. Picture this seek, every 10 dollars you make, you have to hand 4 of it to a guy who is gonna turn around and send it overseas to some third world cause we should have nothing to do with."

 

 

heres some facts i pulled off the internet for you:

 

Average taxpayers pick up an expensive tab for corporate welfare expenditures. Government spending for corporate welfare programs far exceeds government spending for social programs.

 

1. Fact: Spending for corporate welfare programs outweighs spending for low-income programs by more than three to one: $167 billion to $51.7 billion (source: Aid for Dependent Corporations, from the Corporate Welfare Project and How Much Do We Spend on Welfare?, from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, FY 95 figures)

2. Fact: Total federal spending on a safety net for the poor costs the average taxpayer about $400 a year, while spending on corporate welfare programs costs the same taxpayer about $1400 a year. (source: CBO figures)

 

Corporate welfare programs are protected at the expense of the poor and powerless. In the last Congress, spending for the needy absorbed the majority of spending cuts, while corporate welfare spending was barely touched.

 

1. Fact: Over 90% of the budget cuts passed by the last Congress cut spending for the poor -- programs that ensure food for the needy, housing for the homeless, job training for the unemployed, community health care for the sick. (source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Bearing Most of the Burden, 1996).

2. Fact: Only 3.9% of total federal outlays go to programs that solely benefit poor people.

 

 

tell me again how the rich are getting screwed and the little man has it easy? i paid 1400 dollars last year, so ameritech, coca-cola, enron, etc, could receive millions and millions in tax breaks.

 

 

"Funny how 10-15 after Regan/Bush we see the strogest economy in history. That is just curious to me. And now coming up on 10 years since Clinton got in office....oh..... Market is crashing, corps are shutting ops and taking them overseas, ....etc."

 

funny how again, as i said, the world went through another 'revolution' like we did as we entered the industrial age, where we also saw an incredible boom in the economy. look at the most wealthy men in the world, and what do they own? two computer corporations (microsoft and dell). that there alone proves reagan didnt have shit to do with it.

 

 

"I am saying that when all the "surplus" talk was happening Clinton made no effort to cut taxes. In fact he fucking RAISED them to pay for his socialist bullshit. They are getting more money than they need by 250+ million a year and they still figured out a way to spend it instead of giving it back. "

 

you're right, they should have given it back, like bush did, so that they have to borrow from social security just to run the fucking government. yeah, way to go dubya.

not to mention, how can you have a 'surplus' when your trillions of dollars in debt? clinton balanced the budget so we were no longer going into debt, like your heros were doing. we didnt have a surplus, it just wasnt getting worse.

 

 

"I just come from a long, LONG line of buisness men and I have seen what they did to help the country so I haven't lost faith in corps just yet. I see how the rich are often misconceived and the few bad apples taint the shine of the rest."

 

now things make much more sense. i figured you were reciting someone elses politics, i just wasnt sure who, and didnt want to make the assumption that you came from money.

no offense man, but i really think you need to take a look at the fact for yourself, and not just blindly trust what im sure you've been fed your whole life by your father, and his father, etc. reaganomics benefited NO ONE but the rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by CAPS

 

Well your right sorta. Clinton made it a point to get his nose in on the palestine/isreal BS and this included shoveling MASSIVE amounts of OUR money to diferent BS concerning isreal/palestine BS. So Clinton fucked off a great economy that the reagnomics built by inserting all these little BS programs and overseas shit and taxing the FUCK outta the rich to pay for it. Fuck the world, they all owe us money (no bullshit) Quit trying to solve the worlds problems and send that money twards school teachers wages, homeless training facilities, and HOLY SHIT a REAL TAX CUT. We are the most powerful nation on earth and we can't even clean up our social issues but we sure can police everybody elses.

 

I could go on about the Clinton years and the real effects of reganomics but I will save that for another thread.

 

REAGANOMICS!? Are you fucking for real?!

 

(sorry, I'm a little late on the topic. That's my only reaction.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dont worry roo, i completely obliterated any and all make believe argument he tried to pass off as fact (or even educated opinion)

 

 

seeks/making the world safe for anti-american sentiments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by seeking

now things make much more sense. i figured you were reciting someone elses politics, i just wasnt sure who, and didnt want to make the assumption that you came from money.

no offense man, but i really think you need to take a look at the fact for yourself, and not just blindly trust what im sure you've been fed your whole life by your father, and his father, etc. reaganomics benefited NO ONE but the rich.

 

Trust me pal, I am self made. I have refused every cent ever offered me because I don't want that rederick that you just spit. For your info, My father and his father are deep south and are democrat. We go rounds constently.

 

"etc. reaganomics benefited NO ONE but the rich. "

at first yes. but I beg to differ trickle down didn't work.

 

K I'm done seek.... this has been good. If you want to keep going, e-mail me. Believe it or not, you make sense.

 

hahhahaha.

 

 

CAPS.... serious tho, e-mail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People in this country are so DUPED.

 

People voted for Bush because he promised 300 measly bucks tax "refund"....

 

Just wait till he starts asking for it back - quadrupletimesten!

 

I wonder how long it'll take them to make that "surplus" a deficit? Six more months? Two?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by CAPS

 

Trust me pal, I am self made. I have refused every cent ever offered me because I don't want that rederick that you just spit. For your info, My father and his father are deep south and are democrat. We go rounds constently.

 

"etc. reaganomics benefited NO ONE but the rich. "

at first yes. but I beg to differ trickle down didn't work.

 

K I'm done seek.... this has been good. If you want to keep going, e-mail me. Believe it or not, you make sense.

 

hahhahaha.

 

 

CAPS.... serious tho, e-mail.

 

Is rederick slang for r-h-e-t-o-r-i-c ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by CAPS

 

Trust me pal, I am self made. I have refused every cent ever offered me because I don't want that rederick that you just spit. For your info, My father and his father are deep south and are democrat. We go rounds constently.

 

"etc. reaganomics benefited NO ONE but the rich. "

at first yes. but I beg to differ trickle down didn't work.

 

i wasnt implying that you got anything other than your views from your parents. if that isnt the case, then unfortunitly, that means you somehow came to the conclusion that reaganomics was right, on your own, and thats just baffeling.

 

you can beg to differ that it did work, but you have no proof of it. at the same time, i have no 'proof' that it didnt work, other than the fact that the recent boom in the economy was centered around the media and information markets, wich simply did not exist in the 80's. you can deny their impact if you want to, but i cant. all the biggest companies in the world right now, with the exception of the auto industry, and the health/insurange industry, are technology based. unless reagan invented the computer, he had nothing to do with the current (or recent) positive state of the economy.

 

i am done as well. this topic has been beaten into the ground.

it was nice discussing it with you, sorry if at anypoint i came off like an asshole, i dont mean it, arguing just brings it out of me, nothing personal...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by I Luv Roo

 

Is rederick slang for r-h-e-t-o-r-i-c ??

 

hey now, atleast be fair. if you're gonna pick on his spelling errors, alteast mock mine as well. i spell like a dyslexic third grader with one eye and stump for a hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...