USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[nettrucker 142]

Operative;2046763']Source: Here

So' date=' finally the US is going after Kony. The soldiers, although combat-equipped are to assist only allied-nations troops. The US already provides help for four countries to counter the Lord's Resistance Army.

The troops are allowed to engage only in self-defence, but it's already a start I suppose.

Kony is the leader of a christian sect that wants to establish a government based in the ten commandments, but includes forced conversion, torture and genocide in it's agenda.[/quote']

with all due respect but is there someone the US is not going after?

[Dosenmais 10]

@ Dosenmais

please refrain from insulting fellow community members in case they have different opinions. Thanks for your understanding.

There is a difference between different opinions and slander.

[-GR-Operative 10]

with all due respect but is there someone the US is not going after?

Damn, but that Kony guy really deserves it. Watch his interview (EDIT: totally misundestood the video, sorry for that). People are ready to forgive the LRA to achieve peace:

uYURvl8WXFU&feature=player_detailpage#t=1175s

There are child soldiers, rapes, plundering, everything mixed with religion.

Kony argues he is not responsible for the atrocities: they were commited by Museveni to make people blame the LRA.

As far as I know, there's a bounty on his head that go for like US$1 million. There are reports of PMCs and mercenaries from all over the world going after it.

Not about what I was talking, but please watch this:

The Lord's Resistance Army Hunts Children in Sudan

Edited October 29, 2011 by [GR]Operative

[mrcash2009 0]

NOTE: Added as posted in a thread of its own which is locked so rightly posted here instead.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

A front end/back-door policy to further clamp down and blacklist websites deemed "not suitable" by authorities?

Creating site ban lists for ISP level, interesting how far the overall banning process will be measured by. For example sites searched out (for other reasons government level) that may not come directly under fire but this policy is then in place to slam a blacklist on them by finding reasons to do so, seems a very open blanket policy to use in different ways than just the front end it claims.

One interesting point that's been made, but needs more clarification is:

website only has to be “accused†of doing something the government deems unlawful to be blacklisted, there is no legal process whatsoever.

Thoughts?

[walker 0]

Hi all

Republicans have always been anti liberty and pro censorship hardly surprising that this Republican congress are eroding American's freedom even more now that they have power.

From the locked thread

Hi all

Quote: Originally Postedby HyperU2 "Dems love their censorship."

Apparently not as much as the Republican House Judiciary Committeechairman LamarSmith, who originated the bill http://www.statesman.com/business/la...y-1939648.html

but don't worry Democratic party members will be voting against that part of the bill, because they are liberal, the word comes from liberty which means freedom.

Kind regards walker

Also posted here in order to comply with moderater decision.

Kind regards walker

[GRS 10]

Yeah, the liberals are all about "liberty" :rolleyes:

[Baff1 0]

I thought Liberals were all about paying them loads of money to "help the poor".

[jblackrupert 14]

Seems that Scott Olsen fellow wasn't much of a "hero" afterall.

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=31617

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/10/good-grief-leftie-hero-scott-olsen-is-founder-of-i-hate-the-marines-com/

Website snapshot

http://web.archive.org/web/20100507023132/http://www.ihatethemarinecorps.com/

Domain

http://website.informer.com/ihatethemarinecorps.com

He was supposably discharged for cocaine use.

Edited October 31, 2011 by jblackrupert

[walker 0]

Seems that Scott Olsen fellow wasn't much of a "hero" afterall.

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=31617

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/10/good-grief-leftie-hero-scott-olsen-is-founder-of-i-hate-the-marines-com/

Website snapshot

http://web.archive.org/web/20100507023132/http://www.ihatethemarinecorps.com/

Domain

http://website.informer.com/ihatethemarinecorps.com

He was supposably discharged for cocaine use.

Hi all

In reply to jblackrupert:

Wrong Scott Olson?

The Scott Olson who registered the site is from Illinois.

The Scott Olson who lies injured and brain damaged in hospital after being shot in the head is from Wisconsin.

But the real kicker is that: when the site was registerd on January 28th 2009, the Scott Olson who lies injured and brain damaged in hospital after being shot in the head, was serving his country; deployed in Iraq for his second tour from 2008 to 2009 leaving the USMC after his second tour in November of 2009.

I wonder how many Scott Olson's there are in the US?

I suppose he could have registered the site from Iraq and may have had a credit card from a bank in Illinois or perhaps finished his service in Iraq in January 2009 and then been based in Illinois before being discharged.

And finally he did serve his country in Iraq, twice, so whether you agree with his politics or not, you do not get to question his heroism.

http://www.politicususa.com/en/right-smear-scott-olsen

Kind regards walker

Edited October 31, 2011 by walker
grammar

[PELHAM 10]

@Walker - you may have that wrong - Olsen brags about his site on his twitter and youtube pages? They have Internet access in Iraq you know?

Whatever Olsen is, good Marine / Bad Marine, I don't know him so can't comment either way, being shot in the head with a 40mm grenade is wrong. There is no excuse for what happened to him.

I think it's distasteful of both sides to try to use his military record / private beliefs for their own propaganda purposes. Let's focus on the issues not the BS.

[walker 0]

Hi PELHAM

I do not think we disagree on this matter.

Kind regards walker

[Tonci87 163]

NOTE: Added as posted in a thread of its own which is locked so rightly posted here instead.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

A front end/back-door policy to further clamp down and blacklist websites deemed "not suitable" by authorities?

Creating site ban lists for ISP level, interesting how far the overall banning process will be measured by. For example sites searched out (for other reasons government level) that may not come directly under fire but this policy is then in place to slam a blacklist on them by finding reasons to do so, seems a very open blanket policy to use in different ways than just the front end it claims.

One interesting point that's been made, but needs more clarification is:

Thoughts?

I think thats wrong!

Its against freedom of speech and freedom of information. Who can guarantee that this won´t be used against political sites that are against the leading partys?

All this "protect the poor entertainment industry" stuff is really going on my nerves. They are not poor! They make huge profits every year! Their only problem is that they are running out of ideas (would explain the ridiculous amount of classic film and literature beeing made again, but this time with huge explosions. Needless to say that they are bad compared to the original.)

[Fox '09 14]

NOTE: Added as posted in a thread of its own which is locked so rightly posted here instead.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

really? Breitbart's website? you couldn't find a less credible website on the internet. The guy is a complete idiot and a jerk. And of all, he is on fox news all the time..

regardless, it's a disgusting bill and our incompetent, corrupt congress might end up passing this.

It's not uprising though since nobody cares about the rule of law anymore, everyone is dumbed down from watching CNN, FOX and MSNBC. If nobody cares about the patriot act, then why would they care about this? It's such a shame if this passes.

edit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8RGKtoP18I&feature=channel_video_title down goes hermain cain?

Edited October 31, 2011 by Fox '09

[mrcash2009 0]

really? Breitbart's website? you couldn't find a less credible website on the internet. The guy is a complete idiot and a jerk. And of all, he is on fox news all the time..

You do understand the concept of sources of information, and not the "person" and to repeat - chew on meat spit out bones?

The guy is a complete idiot and a jerk. And of all, he is on fox news all the time..

It's not uprising though since nobody cares about the rule of law anymore, everyone is dumbed down from watching CNN, FOX and MSNBC.

Yet from this idiots site you are made aware of it, and was credible enough to carry the info:

regardless, it's a disgusting bill and our incompetent, corrupt congress might end up passing this.

I dont think your in a position to take that view as its from a "less credible website on the net". I dont think we are in a time to fumble about badges surrounded ascii text, its the "inform"ation. And can you not speak about the entire US on their behalf, that's just a view you have, not "everyone", this is US politics thread, so all US posting here must be thick then right?

edit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8RGK...el_video_title down goes hermain cain?

You cannot link this, its FOX news for dumbed down people. Dont worry though you can put a request and inform authorities about his website, they can block it then

I just dont see the need to smirk at a "link", when it was informative in the end anyway (the whole point), never once cared for the chap himself when linking :rolleyes:

Edited October 31, 2011 by mrcash2009

[froggyluv 2130]

Judges are for Sale And Special Interests are Buying

http://news.yahoo.com/judges-sale-special-interests-buying-100500006.html

Is it really such a wonder that young people are losing faith in our system.

[Fox '09 14]

You do understand the concept of sources of information, and not the "person" and to repeat - chew on meat spit out bones?

Yet from this idiots site you are made aware of it, and was credible enough to carry the info:

I dont think your in a position to take that view as its from a "less credible website on the net". I dont think we are in a time to fumble about badges surrounded ascii text, its the "inform"ation. And can you not speak about the entire US on their behalf, that's just a view you have, not "everyone", this is US politics thread, so all US posting here must be thick then right?

You cannot link this, its FOX news for dumbed down people. Dont worry though you can put a request and inform authorities about his website, they can block it then

I just dont see the need to smirk at a "link", when it was informative in the end anyway (the whole point), never once cared for the chap himself when linking :rolleyes:

The information may be credible but the site sure as hell isn't. my point is it would be better to post articles from credible websites. I never said all articles on the site are fraudulent, so don't take it the wrong way.

I was made aware of the bill from the website you sent, but I looked at other sources to make sure because as I said, the website has no credibility.

I can trust that you are linking credible articles though, I just think it would make the debate healthier if you used only reputable sites.

Edited October 31, 2011 by Fox '09

[walker 0]

Judges are for Sale And Special Interests are Buying

http://news.yahoo.com/judges-sale-special-interests-buying-100500006.html

Is it really such a wonder that young people are losing faith in our system.

Hi froggyluv

Shocking to read, it means US justice is more akin to that which you find in a third world country.

That degree of bribery and corruption is what one would expect in a failed state or failing state.

No wonder people are protesting on the streets.

:(

Sadly walker

Edited October 31, 2011 by walker
grammar

[mrcash2009 0]

the website has no credibility.

I can trust that you are linking credible articles though, I just think it would make the debate healthier if you used only reputable sites.

It was taken the wrong way becuase as I say article is an article, it may only be a non credible site in your view, much as to say "dont look here its not a credible link" by stating the site its linked too isn't credible with other people who read and might not know either way. Lets face it Mainstream isn't credible much either but we use it :) Credible is subjective based on what people want to like in some cases.

Please list "reputable" as I have no understanding of your levels of this and where you draw the line personally, is that FOX etc that are for the dumbed down? (that was my point). One mans reputable is another's conspiracy or propaganda site. What if some information is new and mainstream wont touch it becuase they are slanted (its not something they are instructed to cover and just be silent on), thats happened enough times, if you then link a site with this information that isnt in someone "reputable" list then is it then false or not credible .... etc.

Ironicly non credible/reputable could then be, false claimed, or misleading, or propaganda / slanted, negative, bad ... and then "rogue" ... *quick blacklist it* .. yet it does supply information that's relevant also (another point I was trying to make about the actual articles content itself).

I do see your point so wont go on about it again, but in some ways your response was a good example of how something "deemed" could quite easily have this law used on it later on, and the question is .. should it? Isn't that up to individuals to "block" or not use with their own choices.

Edited October 31, 2011 by mrcash2009

[Tonci87 163]

Judges are for Sale And Special Interests are Buying

http://news.yahoo.com/judges-sale-special-interests-buying-100500006.html

Is it really such a wonder that young people are losing faith in our system.

Now that is a real shame! It seems that everybody who get elected into a powerfull position in the US is totally corrupt. Those people usually need money for their campaigns, they get that money by corporations who afterwards demand a little favour.

Totally Mafia style if you ask me.

[jblackrupert 14]

Whatever Olsen is, good Marine / Bad Marine, I don't know him so can't comment either way, being shot in the head with a 40mm grenade is wrong. There is no excuse for what happened to him

Sure there is.

He was by his own admission anti-authority and participating in a riot with anarchists

who were throwing bottles, sticks, garbage cans, paint cans and other objects at police.

Unless you've been living under a rock it's common knowledge that doing such thing

leads to getting your assed kicked.

His website postings make it clear that he was more pissed at having to take orders

then being sent to Iraq to fight a bogus war.

He wasn't there defending people's right to free speech and protest. He was there because he had an axe to grind with people in uniform and authority.

He was also in job working with electronics on base. Not dodging bullets.

As far as I know, despite all the cameras on site it has not been confirmed that he was ever hit by anything fired by the police. It could have been a bottle thrown by his fellow rioters.

Should the police be firing flashbangs and rubber bullets are people heads? NO of course not but Olsen choose to play with fire and got burnt. end of story.

He was also an admitted Cocaine user..... nuff said.

Edited October 31, 2011 by jblackrupert

[walker 0]

Hi all

Scott Olson was standing picket along with other veterans to protect peaceful protesters.

The extremists of the 1%ers have a long history of smearing veterans.

It is part of the reason the numbers of veteran supporters for the Occupy Wall Street is on the increase.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/occupy-veterans-movement-growing/story?id=14848003

People should also be aware that certain police officers have been caught sending drunken and violent people into the protests to pretext assaults on the protesters.

http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/New-York-Police-Are-Redire-in-General_News-111031-355.html

In other news the tea party is on the wain, with many of its supporters switching to the occupy movement after the Republican party started openly supporting the bonus bankers and The Welfare Queens of Wall Street.

Ron Paul's and the Republican party's open support of the 1%ers is also driving away voters. Even the right wing press have noted the evaporation of the tea party.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/584/where_the_party_at_

The truth is that the tea party is being replaced by peoples real anger at the 1%ers.

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/opinion/article_496764f0-02a6-11e1-91b9-001cc4c002e0.html

Kind Regards walker

Edited November 1, 2011 by walker

[Macadam Cow 1]

Seems that Scott Olsen fellow wasn't much of a "hero" afterall.

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=31617

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/10/good-grief-leftie-hero-scott-olsen-is-founder-of-i-hate-the-marines-com/

Website snapshot

http://web.archive.org/web/20100507023132/http://www.ihatethemarinecorps.com/

Domain

http://website.informer.com/ihatethemarinecorps.com

He was supposably discharged for cocaine use.

I just can't stand this kind of behaviour.

No matter who he is, what he did, what he took, that's his business and that doesn't give to anyone any right to shoot a gas canister at him. I'm not saying it was intentional but the way you're trying to find argument that would legitimate this is just disgusting.

Bringing his past up in the discussion does not add a new dimension to the story. It's completely irrelevant.

This kind of attitude, always trying to make your "enemies" look like the worst scumbags on earth, is pathetic.

A few weeks ago, here in Belgium, we had protesters from all over Europe.

One greek girl was arrested and handcuffed. She was sitting on the ground and a cop came at her and punched her in the face.

The next day that cop was suspended and the incident was investigated.

No one tried to investigate the girl's past. No one came with "hey, 3 years ago she posted a video on Youtube saying the meat eaters were mass murderers" or "yeah, but she was anarchist and smoked a lot of pot"

In my opinion, that's how it should be.

On a completely different note I've been quite surprised by the decision of the USA to take their money back from the UNESCO because they didn't like the result of the vote about palestinians admission in the UNESCO.

And then they want to teach other countries about democracy and freedom ? Yeah, right...

Edited November 1, 2011 by Macadam Cow

[Fox '09 14]

@mrcash2009

I hear you. Breitbarts website set me off cause of the whole Shirley Sherrod and other junk he's pulled in the past, so I'm more inclined to yell at someone for posting a link to his site unless they're referencing something frivolous. I shall show restraint :D

I do think you have a point about the MSM. Especially the websites, they're generally neutral unless you get into politics, but that's natural.

Anyways, at the post above, I don think the US really cares about peace there to be honest, they've never worked towards it in a meaningful way, and neither has israel. Even if they reach a peace agreement, I dont see secular violence ending for a long time.. though, the Palestinians seem more inclined to end it than israel.

[Tonci87 163]

Israels intentions are very unclear. They claim to be working on a peacefull agreement, but on the other hand they provoke the palestinans by constantly building new settlements on palestinian turf. Attacking those humanitarian ships from Turkey didn't really help to bring peace to the region.

I think Israel is going to continue extending its land until there is no palestina left. Of course they will claim to be working on a peacefull agreement all the time.

Palestina entering the Unesco is a big step forward for them. Israel will now have a harder time pushing them around.

The US must have a very strong Zionist loby to cancel support for the unesco because of something like this...

[mrcash2009 0]

No matter who he is, what he did, what he took, that's his business and that doesn't give to anyone any right to shoot a gas canister at him. I'm not saying it was intentional but the way you're trying to find argument that would legitimate this is just disgusting.

Anything to discredit or demonise & undermine the protests is the "game"

What you have to look at is this protest, no matter what your stance is, must be having an effect and worrying officials becuase they are trying to pull these stunts out of the hat (or their ass depending on the content).

The problem then is the people who suck this information up, think ... "yeh, look at him the failure" (never once having a balanced view and looking at thier own lives that could be raked up if they ever stepped up to the plate for anything) ... and then switch over to MTV and use it as a way to switch off and assume its all crap.

Which, is the results wanted & what your supposed to do, on mass if possible.