+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 8 First ... 45678 Last
  1. #151
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    There is a difference between Al Queda and Japan. At least at Pearl Harbor we knew exactly who was bombing us and where they were. Al Queda cowardly hides amongst law abiding citizens, has no clear base of operations and so forth, enemy? absolutely, but not a clearly defined one.

    Problem with war criminal and or terrorist, even when war crimes are charged the accussed are still given a defense and a trial. KSM, while not a citizen and considered a war criminal, still goes through the same type of due process as the Nazis in Nuremberg. I would agree he shouldn't get the rights entitled to citizens, but any person brought up on war crimes had such rights.

    Go to the case of John Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo, the Beltway snipers, I would say they caused more terror in that area than committing random crimes and probably instilled more fear to Americans, than Al Queda after 9/11. Sure, because they were American citizens, they do get the due process allowed by law, but their acts could be considered terroristic, but they were not labeled as terrorists. Is there really a clear distinction between a terrorist and criminal?
    You don't give up, do you? You are outmatched again.

    Are you trying to tell us that Muhammad and Malvo are war criminals? That they were on some terrorist mission to overthrow the US government? That they were part of some organized terrorist network?

    They were punk criminals. They were delusional. They shot innocent victims for the hell of it. They did not declare war on the US. They were shooting people to get their rocks off. They get due process because they broke Maryland and Virginia law.

    KSM ran a large organized foreign terrorist network. They had declared war on the US. Their stated purpose was the complete anihilation of the US. They knew no boundaries. They struck in NYC and they struck in Yemen. They struck in the Phillipines. They struck in Lebanon. They struck in London. Their network is worldwide and consists of a huge financial component, massive personnel assets and a component that has infiltrated several foreign governments.

    And this equates in your brain to two idiots with a rifle and a 1990 Chevrolet?

    And I got news for you, we knew who was bombing us when Al Queda was bombing us, too.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  2. #152
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    As I made it clear in my first post here that I believed the comments made were stupid and idiotic, out of context or not. You're right I don't understand exactly what Rush is talking about, because I can't dumb myself down enough to listen to him. Instead of you making a reply about his comments like you did here, you believe you are the forum police, and go on in telling others what they can and can't comment on. It is a matter of opinion, same as how you talk about the media here, it is a matter of opinion. Instead you came right out on here defending your boy Rush here and saying it is satire and people are taking his comments out of context, yet that is exactly what you do all the time on here. I was pointing out how you could defend satire here, but get completely worked up about it elsewhere.
    Look Rush supported the pirates and Obama discriminates against the handicapped. Both made stupid and idiotic statements. Now what? The big difference is one is an entertainer, the other is president. SO if you think Rush was wrong you really have to hate Obama.

  3. #153
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    There is a difference between Al Queda and Japan. At least at Pearl Harbor we knew exactly who was bombing us and where they were. Al Queda cowardly hides amongst law abiding citizens, has no clear base of operations and so forth, enemy? absolutely, but not a clearly defined one.

    Problem with war criminal and or terrorist, even when war crimes are charged the accussed are still given a defense and a trial. KSM, while not a citizen and considered a war criminal, still goes through the same type of due process as the Nazis in Nuremberg. I would agree he shouldn't get the rights entitled to citizens, but any person brought up on war crimes had such rights.

    Go to the case of John Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo, the Beltway snipers, I would say they caused more terror in that area than committing random crimes and probably instilled more fear to Americans, than Al Queda after 9/11. Sure, because they were American citizens, they do get the due process allowed by law, but their acts could be considered terroristic, but they were not labeled as terrorists. Is there really a clear distinction between a terrorist and criminal?
    The difference was that Japan was a single country with a state sponsorship. Al Qaeda, comes from many countries, has no official sponsor (although several countries are supporting them), and is able to hide in the open.

  4. #154
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ScareCrow57 View Post
    Look Rush supported the pirates and Obama discriminates against the handicapped. Both made stupid and idiotic statements. Now what? The big difference is one is an entertainer, the other is president. SO if you think Rush was wrong you really have to hate Obama.
    idiotboy, Rush did NOT support the pirates. Yet another stupid statement by you.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  5. #155
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Green Bay
    Posts
    1,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    You don't give up, do you? You are outmatched again.

    Are you trying to tell us that Muhammad and Malvo are war criminals? That they were on some terrorist mission to overthrow the US government? That they were part of some organized terrorist network?

    They were punk criminals. They were delusional. They shot innocent victims for the hell of it. They did not declare war on the US. They were shooting people to get their rocks off. They get due process because they broke Maryland and Virginia law.

    KSM ran a large organized foreign terrorist network. They had declared war on the US. Their stated purpose was the complete anihilation of the US. They knew no boundaries. They struck in NYC and they struck in Yemen. They struck in the Phillipines. They struck in Lebanon. They struck in London. Their network is worldwide and consists of a huge financial component, massive personnel assets and a component that has infiltrated several foreign governments.

    And this equates in your brain to two idiots with a rifle and a 1990 Chevrolet?

    And I got news for you, we knew who was bombing us when Al Queda was bombing us, too.

    It is called a comparison Georgie, the point that there is no real clear definition of terror or terrorist and criminal. You state the pirates are criminals, but terrorists are our enemy. Thing is that our own countrymen can also be accused of causing terror and not just international entities. Then you bring up the issue about war criminals and how they shouldn't get the rights Americans get. I agreed, but the problem is that even war criminals are afforded Due Process and have representation and a trial.

    The vague definition of terrorist is one who instills terror, which is why I made the comparision with the Beltway Snipers. That was a terrorist act and instilled terror to many people, they weren't war criminals, but it brings up a nice big grey area that just does not fit in your definition of terrorist and criminal. Same thing with Oklahoma City, Nichols and McVeigh were not tried as war criminals, do not fit your same defination as KSM, they were not part of a big organization, but are considered domestic terroists and convicted under federal laws.


    Since you are big into defitions I pulled this tidbit for something to consider:

    Terrorism is, most simply, policy intended to intimidate or cause terror. It is more commonly understood as an act which is intended to create fear (terror), is perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a materialistic goal or a lone attack), and deliberately targets (or disregards the safety of) non-combatants. Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence or unconventional warfare, but at present, there is no internationally agreed upon definition of terrorism.
    A person who practices terrorism is a terrorist. Acts of terrorism are criminal acts according to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 and the domestic jurisprudence of almost all nations.

    The word “terrorism” is politically and emotionally charged, and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition.

    And I got news for you, we knew who was bombing us when Al Queda was bombing us, too.
    Sure we did, problem is, where is Al Queda? They were not flying the flag of one country like Japan was. We knew exactly where the Japanese came from, they didn't just run and hide. The Japanese didn't use Saudis, Turks, Irish, Somali, Iranian, Iraqi, American and so forth to carry out their bombing.
    The thoughts and opinions posted here are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the thoughts and or views of city or dept affiliation.

  6. #156
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    It is called a comparison Georgie, the point that there is no real clear definition of terror or terrorist and criminal. You state the pirates are criminals, but terrorists are our enemy. Thing is that our own countrymen can also be accused of causing terror and not just international entities. Then you bring up the issue about war criminals and how they shouldn't get the rights Americans get. I agreed, but the problem is that even war criminals are afforded Due Process and have representation and a trial.

    The vague definition of terrorist is one who instills terror, which is why I made the comparision with the Beltway Snipers. That was a terrorist act and instilled terror to many people, they weren't war criminals, but it brings up a nice big grey area that just does not fit in your definition of terrorist and criminal. Same thing with Oklahoma City, Nichols and McVeigh were not tried as war criminals, do not fit your same defination as KSM, they were not part of a big organization, but are considered domestic terroists and convicted under federal laws.


    Since you are big into defitions I pulled this tidbit for something to consider:

    Terrorism is, most simply, policy intended to intimidate or cause terror. It is more commonly understood as an act which is intended to create fear (terror), is perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a materialistic goal or a lone attack), and deliberately targets (or disregards the safety of) non-combatants. Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence or unconventional warfare, but at present, there is no internationally agreed upon definition of terrorism.
    A person who practices terrorism is a terrorist. Acts of terrorism are criminal acts according to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 and the domestic jurisprudence of almost all nations.

    The word “terrorism” is politically and emotionally charged, and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition.



    Sure we did, problem is, where is Al Queda? They were not flying the flag of one country like Japan was. We knew exactly where the Japanese came from, they didn't just run and hide. The Japanese didn't use Saudis, Turks, Irish, Somali, Iranian, Iraqi, American and so forth to carry out their bombing.
    The vague definition of a baseball player is one who plays baseball.

    My son's Little League team is 3-0. The Yanks started off 1-2. Holy crap! We are better than the Yankees!

    You can try all you want to try to engage in this intellectual discussion here. You continually prove that you lack the tools to do so. Your comparisons are inane and uninformed.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  7. #157
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    idiotboy, Rush did NOT support the pirates. Yet another stupid statement by you.
    Sarcasm you Knucklehead!! Now why don't you and StupidClown run off and play with the rest of the Kindergartners?

  8. #158
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Green Bay
    Posts
    1,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    The vague definition of a baseball player is one who plays baseball.

    My son's Little League team is 3-0. The Yanks started off 1-2. Holy crap! We are better than the Yankees!

    You can try all you want to try to engage in this intellectual discussion here. You continually prove that you lack the tools to do so. Your comparisons are inane and uninformed.

    Well Georgie, show me the clear cut definition of the terrorist and criminal and really what distinquishes them then.

    Baseball players still have the same rules, despite what level of play they are in. What is really seperating a criminal and terrorist then?
    The thoughts and opinions posted here are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the thoughts and or views of city or dept affiliation.

  9. #159
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    It is called a comparison Georgie,
    I think you may have hit on something here that expalins a lot.

    Georgie Porgie, Puddin' and Pie,
    Kissed the girls and made them cry,
    When the boys came out to play
    Georgie Porgie ran away

    the point that there is no real clear definition of terror or terrorist and criminal. You state the pirates are criminals, but terrorists are our enemy. Thing is that our own countrymen can also be accused of causing terror and not just international entities. Then you bring up the issue about war criminals and how they shouldn't get the rights Americans get. I agreed, but the problem is that even war criminals are afforded Due Process and have representation and a trial.

    The vague definition of terrorist is one who instills terror, which is why I made the comparision with the Beltway Snipers. That was a terrorist act and instilled terror to many people, they weren't war criminals, but it brings up a nice big grey area that just does not fit in your definition of terrorist and criminal. Same thing with Oklahoma City, Nichols and McVeigh were not tried as war criminals, do not fit your same defination as KSM, they were not part of a big organization, but are considered domestic terroists and convicted under federal laws.


    Since you are big into defitions I pulled this tidbit for something to consider:

    Terrorism is, most simply, policy intended to intimidate or cause terror. It is more commonly understood as an act which is intended to create fear (terror), is perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a materialistic goal or a lone attack), and deliberately targets (or disregards the safety of) non-combatants. Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence or unconventional warfare, but at present, there is no internationally agreed upon definition of terrorism.
    A person who practices terrorism is a terrorist. Acts of terrorism are criminal acts according to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 and the domestic jurisprudence of almost all nations.

    The word “terrorism” is politically and emotionally charged, and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition.



    Sure we did, problem is, where is Al Queda? They were not flying the flag of one country like Japan was. We knew exactly where the Japanese came from, they didn't just run and hide. The Japanese didn't use Saudis, Turks, Irish, Somali, Iranian, Iraqi, American and so forth to carry out their bombing.
    Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist, Ted Kaczynski was a Terrorist, Eric Rudolph was a terrorist, Greenpeace are terrorist, The Protestors at the G-20 were terrorists, ELF are terrorists, and the list goes on and on. Al Qaeda is one of many, who just happened to do the most damage and killed 343 fellow fire fighters in the process.
    Last edited by ScareCrow57; 04-26-2009 at 10:31 AM.

  10. #160
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    Well Georgie, show me the clear cut definition of the terrorist and criminal and really what distinquishes them then.

    Baseball players still have the same rules, despite what level of play they are in. What is really seperating a criminal and terrorist then?
    Hey How about Jack the Ripper, Robert Garrow, John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy
    Ed Gein, Charles Manson, The Zodiac Kille, and Gary Leon Ridgway. They were all terrorist as well.

  11. #161
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    Well Georgie, show me the clear cut definition of the terrorist and criminal and really what distinquishes them then.

    Baseball players still have the same rules, despite what level of play they are in. What is really seperating a criminal and terrorist then?
    How is it possible that EVERY post you post is more stupid and uninformed than the one before?

    Does Major League baseball have the 10 run rule? Can Major Leaguers steal more than one base at a time? Are they limited to 5 runs per inning? Do their pitchers get pulled after a certain number of pitches based on their age? Are they allowed to steal home? Do they play on a field with 60' bases? Is the pitchers' mound 46' from home plate? Shall I go on?

    Please stop embarrassing yourself. A four-year old can understand the difference between a criminal and a terrorist.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  12. #162
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    How is it possible that EVERY post you post is more stupid and uninformed than the one before?

    Does Major League baseball have the 10 run rule? Can Major Leaguers steal more than one base at a time? Are they limited to 5 runs per inning? Do their pitchers get pulled after a certain number of pitches based on their age? Are they allowed to steal home? Do they play on a field with 60' bases? Is the pitchers' mound 46' from home plate? Shall I go on?

    Please stop embarrassing yourself. A four-year old can understand the difference between a criminal and a terrorist.
    Not yet, but the way the Yankees are going they will start imposing some of those rules. And you might be right about one thing, Your sons little league team is better than the Yankees.

    And not for nothing, terrorist are criminals.

  13. #163
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    And not for nothing, you are an idiot and a troll.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  14. #164
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Green Bay
    Posts
    1,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    How is it possible that EVERY post you post is more stupid and uninformed than the one before?

    Does Major League baseball have the 10 run rule? Can Major Leaguers steal more than one base at a time? Are they limited to 5 runs per inning? Do their pitchers get pulled after a certain number of pitches based on their age? Are they allowed to steal home? Do they play on a field with 60' bases? Is the pitchers' mound 46' from home plate? Shall I go on?

    Please stop embarrassing yourself. A four-year old can understand the difference between a criminal and a terrorist.
    Your the one that brought up comparison of little league to the majors. The leagues and divisions have differing rules due to the talent level of players. What is the difference of a big time and small time terrorist then? Show me the difference of a criminal and terrorist. Where is your clear cut definition of a criminal and terrorist, how a terrorist is the enemy and a pirate is just a criminal?

    What I find interesting is how you not once, but twice ignored the questions posed about the difference in terrorist and criminal, but instead decided to talk about baseball. Not to mention anything about Japan and Al Qaeda and the difference in the bombing.

    A four year old can understand the difference between the two, well golly gee, then there must be a clear cut definition of what a terrorist and a criminal is that you can find.
    The thoughts and opinions posted here are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the thoughts and or views of city or dept affiliation.

  15. #165
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    What I find interesting is how you not once, but twice ignored the questions posed about the difference in terrorist and criminal
    My take, not that it really matters. Here is the FBI definition of terrorism :

    The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
    My understanding, and I am by no means an expert is that terrorism is an act of war, and that piracy is a crime. It's not that there is a black/white definition, but the Somali pirates are demanding money, taking hostages, etc... they really are not seeking to terrorize a nation, a people, or trying to influence a government. Simply, they are trying to take money for themselves. They hijack a ship, they demand a ransom from a private corporation, they receive the ransom, and they sometimes release the ship and hostages.

    Terrorists, and terror acts are used to make a political statement, topple a government, hold a population at bay, or aren't motivated by money, but rather "politically motivated objectives".


    I personally believe international terrorism needs to be a military matter, to be handled by the military. The reason being is, how do we pursue these animals, if our law enforcement has no jurisdiction where ever they choose to hide? Who has the better resources to locate, pursue and hunt down internationally, or world wide?

    Domestically, it can be an entirely different issue, because it is here, within our borders and the jurisdiction of the FBI. McVeigh is different from Al-Quada because he was "home-grown", and he was a US citizen.
    US citizens are different from non-US citizens, unless that US citizen takes up arms against the United States.

  16. #166
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    The leagues and divisions have differing rules due to the talent level of players.
    Baseball players still have the same rules, despite what level of play they are in.
    How are you possibly this dumb? Both of the above quotes are yours. You have no idea what you are even saying. Please stop embarrasing yourself.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  17. #167
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jasper45 View Post
    My take, not that it really matters. Here is the FBI definition of terrorism :



    My understanding, and I am by no means an expert is that terrorism is an act of war, and that piracy is a crime. It's not that there is a black/white definition, but the Somali pirates are demanding money, taking hostages, etc... they really are not seeking to terrorize a nation, a people, or trying to influence a government. Simply, they are trying to take money for themselves. They hijack a ship, they demand a ransom from a private corporation, they receive the ransom, and they sometimes release the ship and hostages.

    Terrorists, and terror acts are used to make a political statement, topple a government, hold a population at bay, or aren't motivated by money, but rather "politically motivated objectives".


    I personally believe international terrorism needs to be a military matter, to be handled by the military. The reason being is, how do we pursue these animals, if our law enforcement has no jurisdiction where ever they choose to hide? Who has the better resources to locate, pursue and hunt down internationally, or world wide?

    Domestically, it can be an entirely different issue, because it is here, within our borders and the jurisdiction of the FBI. McVeigh is different from Al-Quada because he was "home-grown", and he was a US citizen.
    US citizens are different from non-US citizens, unless that US citizen takes up arms against the United States.
    I couldn't possibly agree with you more. You could even break this dfown further by splitting the difference between domestic and international terrorism.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  18. #168
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    Your the one that brought up comparison of little league to the majors. The leagues and divisions have differing rules due to the talent level of players. What is the difference of a big time and small time terrorist then? Show me the difference of a criminal and terrorist. Where is your clear cut definition of a criminal and terrorist, how a terrorist is the enemy and a pirate is just a criminal?

    What I find interesting is how you not once, but twice ignored the questions posed about the difference in terrorist and criminal, but instead decided to talk about baseball. Not to mention anything about Japan and Al Qaeda and the difference in the bombing.

    A four year old can understand the difference between the two, well golly gee, then there must be a clear cut definition of what a terrorist and a criminal is that you can find.
    I see you have given up trying to use logic on a person who cannot comprehend logic. Good move. I tend to ignore the idiots as well. I read their posts and wonder how they have made it this far in life.

  19. #169
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ScareCrow57 View Post
    I see you have given up trying to use logic on a person who cannot comprehend logic. Good move. I tend to ignore the idiots as well. I read their posts and wonder how they have made it this far in life.
    I bet none of the idiots you ignore never went BK.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  20. #170
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StupidClown View Post
    I bet none of the idiots you ignore never went BK.
    I see you are still on the meds, another meaningless and stupid statement. I didn't have any government bailouts available to help me. Heck even our useless welfare and food stamps wouldn't help. Out of a job, still got the same bills, but you own a home, too bad. You have unemployment insurance which is 25% of what you were making and we are going to tax that at 43% as well. And the Credit Card companies raise your rate for absolutely no reason. FYI, I did the more responsible chapter 13. Which means I paid off my car, I made my home payments. The only people who got screwed were the CC companies who got 10%. They got what they deserved.

    These are also the same rotten corporations that we just gave trillions of dollars too because they didn't know hot to run their businesses. With those kinds of decisions forcing people to file BK, it is no wonder they went under. Even the mortgage company was inflexible. The system works good for those in cushy government jobs where they never let anyone go. But these banks and the government need to realize that peoples situations can change. And they need to be able to adapt or risk loosing everything. I tried to work with them and they wouldn't budge. I offered a modification that would have allowed me to keep paying and they would have gotten all of their money. They would rather force you into a BK. So F&&& em all. Probably has something to do wit the bitter attitude I have about these scum sucking banks and our idiot leaders. They aren't looking out for the people.

  21. #171
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    They got what they deserved.
    So...

    You irresponsibly run up your credit cards, don't pay the bill, then when the credit card company operates according to the agreement you signed (all say they will raise the interest rate after a period of delinquency), you say that they are a "rotten corporation"? You don't fulfill your legal obligation but THEY don't know how to run a business?
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  22. #172
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idiotboy
    I see you are still on the meds, another meaningless and stupid statement. I didn't have any government bailouts available to help me. Heck even our useless welfare and food stamps wouldn't help. Out of a job, still got the same bills, but you own a home, too bad. You have unemployment insurance which is 25% of what you were making and we are going to tax that at 43% as well. And the Credit Card companies raise your rate for absolutely no reason. FYI, I did the more responsible chapter 13. Which means I paid off my car, I made my home payments. The only people who got screwed were the CC companies who got 10%. They got what they deserved.
    Yet you justified the bonuses being paid to bailed out banker because a contract is a contract and should be honored. I guess you don't believe that principle applied to you in paying the debts no one forced you to undertake.

    Keep talking idiotboy. We love ya.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  23. #173
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Green Bay
    Posts
    1,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    You could even break this dfown further by splitting the difference between domestic and international terrorism.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    Pirates are criminals.

    Terrorists are our enemy. No different than the Japanese when they bombed Pearl Harbor..
    Once again Georgie you have ignored the question and wanted to talk baseball instead. You want to try and be so sly with the difference in major leagues and little league. Do you want to see the Yankees get a game handed to them by a little league team? Yet you stated before terrorists are the enemy, no different than Japan. No different, none, really? You wanted to point out all the differences in baseball...where are all the similarities with terrorists and Japan? C'mon Georgie, you are the self proclaimed smartest person on these forums, where are these similarities?

    So wait, Jasper has a good post, addresses the issue, but then again now you want to split terrorists into domestic and international. So what is going to define what constitutes a domestic and international terrorist? I brought up the comparison with Nichols and McVeigh, both of whom were charged as criminals. What about extremist groups within our own borders like the KKK or NeoNazis? Afterall they use terrorist type of activities and have a politically charged agenda, much like Al Qeada does, so why are we not going after these groups? Are they not terrorists? are they not the enemy? Just like Japan was after it bombed Pearl Harbor?

    Nevermind Georgie, I already have my answer from you, three times now, where all you want to talk about is baseball. You want to try and bust my chops for my comments...whoopity do, I work in a firehouse where chops are busted more times than what a butcher can do at a meat plant. Some stranger on the internet isn't going to affect me. I have thick skin and a sense of humor, which is why I find it comical you still have averted the questions. You think there is a clearly defined difference between terrorist and criminal, so clear a four year old knows the difference, but haven't supplied one yet. Heck you can't even tell me the strong similarities between Japan at Pearl Harbor and terrorists today...after all terrorists are our enemy, just like Japan...No different. Go on, make another snide remark, go ahead and talk about baseball again, but maybe, just maybe, you can find it through that thick ego to show the clear definitions of criminal and terrorist and the similarity of terrorist and Japan, circa WWII.
    The thoughts and opinions posted here are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the thoughts and or views of city or dept affiliation.

  24. #174
    Forum Member
    Firegod343's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    The other Washington
    Posts
    255

    Default

    Gentlemen,

    It's all a moot point........terrorist, criminal....meet the US Navy.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    IACOJ.... "Carpe Elkhartem"
    (Seize the Nozzle)


    "Victorious warriors win first,
    and then go to war,
    while defeated warriors go to war first,
    and then seek to win."

    SUN TZU

  25. #175
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jccrabby3084 View Post
    Once again Georgie you have ignored the question and wanted to talk baseball instead. You want to try and be so sly with the difference in major leagues and little league. Do you want to see the Yankees get a game handed to them by a little league team? Yet you stated before terrorists are the enemy, no different than Japan. No different, none, really? You wanted to point out all the differences in baseball...where are all the similarities with terrorists and Japan? C'mon Georgie, you are the self proclaimed smartest person on these forums, where are these similarities?

    So wait, Jasper has a good post, addresses the issue, but then again now you want to split terrorists into domestic and international. So what is going to define what constitutes a domestic and international terrorist? I brought up the comparison with Nichols and McVeigh, both of whom were charged as criminals. What about extremist groups within our own borders like the KKK or NeoNazis? Afterall they use terrorist type of activities and have a politically charged agenda, much like Al Qeada does, so why are we not going after these groups? Are they not terrorists? are they not the enemy? Just like Japan was after it bombed Pearl Harbor?

    Nevermind Georgie, I already have my answer from you, three times now, where all you want to talk about is baseball. You want to try and bust my chops for my comments...whoopity do, I work in a firehouse where chops are busted more times than what a butcher can do at a meat plant. Some stranger on the internet isn't going to affect me. I have thick skin and a sense of humor, which is why I find it comical you still have averted the questions. You think there is a clearly defined difference between terrorist and criminal, so clear a four year old knows the difference, but haven't supplied one yet. Heck you can't even tell me the strong similarities between Japan at Pearl Harbor and terrorists today...after all terrorists are our enemy, just like Japan...No different. Go on, make another snide remark, go ahead and talk about baseball again, but maybe, just maybe, you can find it through that thick ego to show the clear definitions of criminal and terrorist and the similarity of terrorist and Japan, circa WWII.
    Genius.

    I already answered this question WWWWAAAAAYYYY back in the first few posts. But for those who can't retain information, I'll try again.

    Al Queda and Japan are exactly the same in this sense. They both decided that they wanted to declare war on the US. Both conducted an organized, synchronized, military unprovoked sneak attack on US assets. Both attacks killed thousands and injured tens of thousands. Both entities had the same motivation; to destroy the US and to expand the empire and sphere of influence. Both failed and had their *** handed to them by the US military.

    It's not that I want to split terrorism into domestic and international. It is the FB friggin I who does it. There are terrorism statutes on both the state and federal level. But they are not generally used for US citizens who commit crimes on US soil. Examples of domestic terrorism include, abortion rights extremists, animal rights extremists and environmental extremists. They are not used when foreign operatives execute acts of war on our soil.

    It completely astounds me that an adult in this day and age can be so grossly misinformed. It's pathetic. I tried to dumb it down with the baseball analogies, but even that didn't work. I'll try to work on analogies involving Sponge Bob or The Wiggles.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 8 First ... 45678 Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Royal Navy Engages Pirates
    By MalahatTwo7 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 424
    Last Post: 05-25-2010, 09:41 AM
  2. Fire chief defends grant
    By CaptainS in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 10-28-2005, 11:44 AM
  3. Is every Marine a rifleman? Not according to Limbaugh
    By scfire86 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 08-09-2005, 08:43 AM
  4. The Pirates may stink...but you'll NEVER take away 1979...
    By StayBack500FT in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-29-2005, 03:18 PM
  5. An interesting perspective from Rush Limbaugh
    By stm4710 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-17-2005, 09:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register