|
|
On October 01 2012 06:15 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 05:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 30 2012 23:28 screamingpalm wrote:
An Iranian news agency picked up — as fact — a story from the paper about a supposed Gallup survey showing an overwhelming majority of rural white Americans would rather vote for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than President Barack Obama.
[...]
The Iranian version copied the original word-for-word, even including a made-up quote from a fictional West Virginia resident who says he'd rather go to a baseball game with Ahmadinejad because "he takes national defense seriously, and he'd never let some gay protesters tell him how to run his country like Obama does."
Homosexual acts are punishable by death in Iran, and Ahmadinejad famously said during a 2007 appearance at Columbia University that "in Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."
The Iranian version of the article leaves out only The Onion's description of Ahmadinejad as "a man who has repeatedly denied the Holocaust and has had numerous political prisoners executed."
[...]
Onion editor Will Tracy put out a tongue-in-cheek statement that referred to Fars as "a subsidiary of The Onion" that has acted as the paper's Middle Eastern bureau since it was founded in the mid-1980s by Onion publisher T. Herman Zweibel.
"The Onion freely shares content with Fars and commends the journalists at Iran's Finest News Source on their superb reportage," Tracy said in jest.
It's not the first time a foreign news outlet has been duped by The Onion. In 2002, the Beijing Evening News, one of the Chinese capital's biggest newspapers, picked up a story from The Onion that claimed members of Congress were threatening to leave Washington unless the building underwent a makeover that included more bathrooms and a retractable dome.
SourceGotta love The Onion lol. This is Iran, supposedly the greatest threat to world peace. The world seems like a safer place all of a sudden. Honestly, the US has more than enough firepower to stomp Iran out of existence tomorrow, if it wanted to. You'd probably need to kill tens of millions of innocent people in the process, but you could.
Well, stomping a country out of existence isn't exactly peaceful. It would be darkly ironic and amusing though.
YOU WANT NUKES? WELL HAVE A COUPLE HUNDRED TO THE FACE.
|
On October 01 2012 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 06:15 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 05:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 30 2012 23:28 screamingpalm wrote:
An Iranian news agency picked up — as fact — a story from the paper about a supposed Gallup survey showing an overwhelming majority of rural white Americans would rather vote for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than President Barack Obama.
[...]
The Iranian version copied the original word-for-word, even including a made-up quote from a fictional West Virginia resident who says he'd rather go to a baseball game with Ahmadinejad because "he takes national defense seriously, and he'd never let some gay protesters tell him how to run his country like Obama does."
Homosexual acts are punishable by death in Iran, and Ahmadinejad famously said during a 2007 appearance at Columbia University that "in Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."
The Iranian version of the article leaves out only The Onion's description of Ahmadinejad as "a man who has repeatedly denied the Holocaust and has had numerous political prisoners executed."
[...]
Onion editor Will Tracy put out a tongue-in-cheek statement that referred to Fars as "a subsidiary of The Onion" that has acted as the paper's Middle Eastern bureau since it was founded in the mid-1980s by Onion publisher T. Herman Zweibel.
"The Onion freely shares content with Fars and commends the journalists at Iran's Finest News Source on their superb reportage," Tracy said in jest.
It's not the first time a foreign news outlet has been duped by The Onion. In 2002, the Beijing Evening News, one of the Chinese capital's biggest newspapers, picked up a story from The Onion that claimed members of Congress were threatening to leave Washington unless the building underwent a makeover that included more bathrooms and a retractable dome.
SourceGotta love The Onion lol. This is Iran, supposedly the greatest threat to world peace. The world seems like a safer place all of a sudden. Honestly, the US has more than enough firepower to stomp Iran out of existence tomorrow, if it wanted to. You'd probably need to kill tens of millions of innocent people in the process, but you could. Well, stomping a country out of existence isn't exactly peaceful. It would be darkly ironic and amusing though. YOU WANT NUKES? WELL HAVE A COUPLE HUNDRED TO THE FACE.
Iran's a threat to stability and peace in the middle east. But they are not a threat to US security. At all.
I can't find the quote, but a US General recently went on record saying that if Iran is the US' greatest threat, than the US has nothing to worry about. You'd probably be able to shut down their entire power and telecommunication network before a single Iranian missile got off the ground.
|
On October 01 2012 07:43 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 01 2012 06:15 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 05:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 30 2012 23:28 screamingpalm wrote:
An Iranian news agency picked up — as fact — a story from the paper about a supposed Gallup survey showing an overwhelming majority of rural white Americans would rather vote for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than President Barack Obama.
[...]
The Iranian version copied the original word-for-word, even including a made-up quote from a fictional West Virginia resident who says he'd rather go to a baseball game with Ahmadinejad because "he takes national defense seriously, and he'd never let some gay protesters tell him how to run his country like Obama does."
Homosexual acts are punishable by death in Iran, and Ahmadinejad famously said during a 2007 appearance at Columbia University that "in Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."
The Iranian version of the article leaves out only The Onion's description of Ahmadinejad as "a man who has repeatedly denied the Holocaust and has had numerous political prisoners executed."
[...]
Onion editor Will Tracy put out a tongue-in-cheek statement that referred to Fars as "a subsidiary of The Onion" that has acted as the paper's Middle Eastern bureau since it was founded in the mid-1980s by Onion publisher T. Herman Zweibel.
"The Onion freely shares content with Fars and commends the journalists at Iran's Finest News Source on their superb reportage," Tracy said in jest.
It's not the first time a foreign news outlet has been duped by The Onion. In 2002, the Beijing Evening News, one of the Chinese capital's biggest newspapers, picked up a story from The Onion that claimed members of Congress were threatening to leave Washington unless the building underwent a makeover that included more bathrooms and a retractable dome.
SourceGotta love The Onion lol. This is Iran, supposedly the greatest threat to world peace. The world seems like a safer place all of a sudden. Honestly, the US has more than enough firepower to stomp Iran out of existence tomorrow, if it wanted to. You'd probably need to kill tens of millions of innocent people in the process, but you could. Well, stomping a country out of existence isn't exactly peaceful. It would be darkly ironic and amusing though. YOU WANT NUKES? WELL HAVE A COUPLE HUNDRED TO THE FACE. Iran's a threat to stability and peace in the middle east. But they are not a threat to US security. At all. I can't find the quote, but a US General recently went on record saying that if Iran is the US' greatest threat, than the US has nothing to worry about. You'd probably be able to shut down their entire power and telecommunication network before a single Iranian missile got off the ground.
Iran doesn't want the A bomb to nuke anybody anyway. Thry want it as a powerful diplomatic tool to become the first power in the region. And probably to blackmail a bit everybody. They would also make sure nobody ever attack them which would be good news for the regime considering how many of their neighbours would love to see them out of business.
As for nuking iran, it's not very funny. Would be the first genocide in history i guess. After the native indians maybe.
|
|
|
On October 01 2012 08:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 07:43 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 01 2012 06:15 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 05:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 30 2012 23:28 screamingpalm wrote:
An Iranian news agency picked up — as fact — a story from the paper about a supposed Gallup survey showing an overwhelming majority of rural white Americans would rather vote for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than President Barack Obama.
[...]
The Iranian version copied the original word-for-word, even including a made-up quote from a fictional West Virginia resident who says he'd rather go to a baseball game with Ahmadinejad because "he takes national defense seriously, and he'd never let some gay protesters tell him how to run his country like Obama does."
Homosexual acts are punishable by death in Iran, and Ahmadinejad famously said during a 2007 appearance at Columbia University that "in Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."
The Iranian version of the article leaves out only The Onion's description of Ahmadinejad as "a man who has repeatedly denied the Holocaust and has had numerous political prisoners executed."
[...]
Onion editor Will Tracy put out a tongue-in-cheek statement that referred to Fars as "a subsidiary of The Onion" that has acted as the paper's Middle Eastern bureau since it was founded in the mid-1980s by Onion publisher T. Herman Zweibel.
"The Onion freely shares content with Fars and commends the journalists at Iran's Finest News Source on their superb reportage," Tracy said in jest.
It's not the first time a foreign news outlet has been duped by The Onion. In 2002, the Beijing Evening News, one of the Chinese capital's biggest newspapers, picked up a story from The Onion that claimed members of Congress were threatening to leave Washington unless the building underwent a makeover that included more bathrooms and a retractable dome.
SourceGotta love The Onion lol. This is Iran, supposedly the greatest threat to world peace. The world seems like a safer place all of a sudden. Honestly, the US has more than enough firepower to stomp Iran out of existence tomorrow, if it wanted to. You'd probably need to kill tens of millions of innocent people in the process, but you could. Well, stomping a country out of existence isn't exactly peaceful. It would be darkly ironic and amusing though. YOU WANT NUKES? WELL HAVE A COUPLE HUNDRED TO THE FACE. Iran's a threat to stability and peace in the middle east. But they are not a threat to US security. At all. I can't find the quote, but a US General recently went on record saying that if Iran is the US' greatest threat, than the US has nothing to worry about. You'd probably be able to shut down their entire power and telecommunication network before a single Iranian missile got off the ground. Iran doesn't want the A bomb to nuke anybody anyway. Thry want it as a powerful diplomatic tool to become the first power in the region. And probably to blackmail a bit everybody. They would also make sure nobody ever attack them which would be good news for the regime considering how many of their neighbours would love to see them out of business. As for nuking iran, it's not very funny. Would be the first genocide in history i guess. After the native indians maybe.
Actually Iran wants a Nuke because its the only way it can defend itself from Isreal who already has a dozen of the things thanks to America.
|
Just read an article about all the polling criticism that i found funny, or at least part of it about fox's polls. Dang fox news and it leftist manipulative ways.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/28/analysis-polling-criticism-unfounded/?hpt=po_c2
A Fox News poll of Virginia voters indicated Obama had a seven point (49%-42%) advantage over Romney. A Quinnipiac University/CBS News/New York Times survey in Virginia showed Obama up only four-points (50%-46%) over Romney, while a Washington Post poll had Obama with an eight point (52%-44%) lead over Romney in the Commonwealth.
– In Ohio, a Fox News poll said Obama had a seven point (49%-42%) advantage over Romney, while an Ohio survey by The Washington Post put Obama up eight points (52%-44%) over Romney and a Quinnipiac University/CBS News/New York Times poll showed the president with a 10 point (53%-43%) lead over Romney.
– A Fox News Poll of Florida voters showed Obama with a five point (49%-44%) lead over Romney, while The Washington Post survey of Floridians said Obama was up four points (51%-47%) on Romney and a Quinnipiac/CBS News/New York Times Florida poll indicated that Obama had a nine point (53%-44%) lead on Romney.
Hardly a concerted effort to skew poll results in favor of Obama - unless you agree that Fox News is part of the conspiracy.
|
On September 30 2012 09:24 Darknat wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2012 01:19 DoubleReed wrote:On September 30 2012 01:15 Kaitlin wrote:On September 29 2012 19:26 Defacer wrote:
Edit: It's also an indicator of how much better the DNC speeches were than the RNC's ... which were just ass.
It is difficult for a party of limited government to give a speech that resonates with a bunch of people who all want something from the government and don't want to sacrifice anything to get it. So, yeah, when Democrats can simply say they are going to give everything to everybody and make the rich 1% pay for it, what's not to like, from the perspective of the Democrat base ? You know, this IS a democracy. If the majority think that we should raise taxes on the rich (yes even republicans agree on this), then isn't that what we should do? And funnily enough, this isn't what anyone is doing in congress, democrat OR republican. It's almost like it's a corrupt system... The United States was founded on limited government, not on stealing money from the rich just because some Americans have class envy.
Tax is not theft, it is the fee paid in order to live in society.
Just as you must pay fees levied by the administration of a housing complex you live in, should they choose to levy them in order to provide ongoing maintenance and services, so too must you pay the fees levied by the administration of the nation you live in, that they too may provide ongoing maintenance and services. And just as the administration of a housing complex might vary the fees for occupants in different situations to provide on average the greatest benefit to occupants for the least impact, perhaps charging more for the occupier of a penthouse than a studio, the administrators of a nation might vary the fees they levy according to the situation of each citizen.
If you do not want to take advantage of the many benefits of a housing complex - proximity to amenities, schools, or places of employment; security systems; doormen and maintenance staff; leisure facilities; inbuilt utilities such as running water, gas, electricity, phone lines; or a comfortable lifestyle - then you can give up that occupancy and find yourself a more compatible place of residence. If you do not want to take advantage of the many benefits of a nation - economic and educational opportunities. including access to schools and employment at sites within that country; police force, armed forces and judicial system to protect you from internal and external threats; emergency services to help out in times of crisis; a healthcare system; an infrastructure system; and distribution systems for food, medicine, clothing, clean water and hundreds of other goods, services and necessities that make modern life possible even in areas far above the local carrying capacity of the land or lacking in key resources - then you are free to drop your citizenship and move to a country that better meets your needs. Otherwise, pay your fees to the administration that offers you a better chance at the lifestyle you want than any other.
|
On October 01 2012 15:20 -_-Quails wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2012 09:24 Darknat wrote:On September 30 2012 01:19 DoubleReed wrote:On September 30 2012 01:15 Kaitlin wrote:On September 29 2012 19:26 Defacer wrote:
Edit: It's also an indicator of how much better the DNC speeches were than the RNC's ... which were just ass.
It is difficult for a party of limited government to give a speech that resonates with a bunch of people who all want something from the government and don't want to sacrifice anything to get it. So, yeah, when Democrats can simply say they are going to give everything to everybody and make the rich 1% pay for it, what's not to like, from the perspective of the Democrat base ? You know, this IS a democracy. If the majority think that we should raise taxes on the rich (yes even republicans agree on this), then isn't that what we should do? And funnily enough, this isn't what anyone is doing in congress, democrat OR republican. It's almost like it's a corrupt system... The United States was founded on limited government, not on stealing money from the rich just because some Americans have class envy. Tax is not theft, it is the fee paid in order to live in society. Just as you must pay fees levied by the administration of a housing complex you live in, should they choose to levy them in order to provide ongoing maintenance and services, so too must you pay the fees levied by the administration of the nation you live in, that they too may provide ongoing maintenance and services. And just as the administration of a housing complex might vary the fees for occupants in different situations to provide on average the greatest benefit to occupants for the least impact, perhaps charging more for the occupier of a penthouse than a studio, the administrators of a nation might vary the fees they levy according to the situation of each citizen. If you do not want to take advantage of the many benefits of a housing complex - proximity to amenities, schools, or places of employment; security systems; doormen and maintenance staff; leisure facilities; inbuilt utilities such as running water, gas, electricity, phone lines; or a comfortable lifestyle - then you can give up that occupancy and find yourself a more compatible place of residence. If you do not want to take advantage of the many benefits of a nation - economic and educational opportunities. including access to schools and employment at sites within that country; police force, armed forces and judicial system to protect you from internal and external threats; emergency services to help out in times of crisis; a healthcare system; an infrastructure system; and distribution systems for food, medicine, clothing, clean water and hundreds of other goods, services and necessities that make modern life possible even in areas far above the local carrying capacity of the land or lacking in key resources - then you are free to drop your citizenship and move to a country that better meets your needs. Otherwise, pay your fees to the administration that offers you a better chance at the lifestyle you want than any other.
That is the dumbest comparison I have ever heard of. A housing complex and the U.S. government are NOT comparable in any way. I have never understood why it is considered greed to keep what you have earned, but not considered greed to take from others.
|
Australia8532 Posts
On October 01 2012 08:37 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 08:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 01 2012 07:43 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 01 2012 06:15 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 05:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 30 2012 23:28 screamingpalm wrote:
An Iranian news agency picked up — as fact — a story from the paper about a supposed Gallup survey showing an overwhelming majority of rural white Americans would rather vote for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than President Barack Obama.
[...]
The Iranian version copied the original word-for-word, even including a made-up quote from a fictional West Virginia resident who says he'd rather go to a baseball game with Ahmadinejad because "he takes national defense seriously, and he'd never let some gay protesters tell him how to run his country like Obama does."
Homosexual acts are punishable by death in Iran, and Ahmadinejad famously said during a 2007 appearance at Columbia University that "in Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."
The Iranian version of the article leaves out only The Onion's description of Ahmadinejad as "a man who has repeatedly denied the Holocaust and has had numerous political prisoners executed."
[...]
Onion editor Will Tracy put out a tongue-in-cheek statement that referred to Fars as "a subsidiary of The Onion" that has acted as the paper's Middle Eastern bureau since it was founded in the mid-1980s by Onion publisher T. Herman Zweibel.
"The Onion freely shares content with Fars and commends the journalists at Iran's Finest News Source on their superb reportage," Tracy said in jest.
It's not the first time a foreign news outlet has been duped by The Onion. In 2002, the Beijing Evening News, one of the Chinese capital's biggest newspapers, picked up a story from The Onion that claimed members of Congress were threatening to leave Washington unless the building underwent a makeover that included more bathrooms and a retractable dome.
SourceGotta love The Onion lol. This is Iran, supposedly the greatest threat to world peace. The world seems like a safer place all of a sudden. Honestly, the US has more than enough firepower to stomp Iran out of existence tomorrow, if it wanted to. You'd probably need to kill tens of millions of innocent people in the process, but you could. Well, stomping a country out of existence isn't exactly peaceful. It would be darkly ironic and amusing though. YOU WANT NUKES? WELL HAVE A COUPLE HUNDRED TO THE FACE. Iran's a threat to stability and peace in the middle east. But they are not a threat to US security. At all. I can't find the quote, but a US General recently went on record saying that if Iran is the US' greatest threat, than the US has nothing to worry about. You'd probably be able to shut down their entire power and telecommunication network before a single Iranian missile got off the ground. Iran doesn't want the A bomb to nuke anybody anyway. Thry want it as a powerful diplomatic tool to become the first power in the region. And probably to blackmail a bit everybody. They would also make sure nobody ever attack them which would be good news for the regime considering how many of their neighbours would love to see them out of business. As for nuking iran, it's not very funny. Would be the first genocide in history i guess. After the native indians maybe. Actually Iran wants a Nuke because its the only way it can defend itself from Isreal who already has a dozen of the things thanks to America.
So one of, if not the, most radical regime in the region. Who has a history of ZERO regard for human rights and the rule of law. A regime who openly stated that "there are no gays in Iran" (because they are stoned, hung or too afraid to be open about it) and has the lowest regard for human life...
Only wants nuclear weapons for self-defence reasons. Feel free to hate on Israel, but even that is stretch...
|
On October 01 2012 17:31 bkrow wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 08:37 Gorsameth wrote:On October 01 2012 08:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 01 2012 07:43 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 01 2012 06:15 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 05:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 30 2012 23:28 screamingpalm wrote:
An Iranian news agency picked up — as fact — a story from the paper about a supposed Gallup survey showing an overwhelming majority of rural white Americans would rather vote for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than President Barack Obama.
[...]
The Iranian version copied the original word-for-word, even including a made-up quote from a fictional West Virginia resident who says he'd rather go to a baseball game with Ahmadinejad because "he takes national defense seriously, and he'd never let some gay protesters tell him how to run his country like Obama does."
Homosexual acts are punishable by death in Iran, and Ahmadinejad famously said during a 2007 appearance at Columbia University that "in Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."
The Iranian version of the article leaves out only The Onion's description of Ahmadinejad as "a man who has repeatedly denied the Holocaust and has had numerous political prisoners executed."
[...]
Onion editor Will Tracy put out a tongue-in-cheek statement that referred to Fars as "a subsidiary of The Onion" that has acted as the paper's Middle Eastern bureau since it was founded in the mid-1980s by Onion publisher T. Herman Zweibel.
"The Onion freely shares content with Fars and commends the journalists at Iran's Finest News Source on their superb reportage," Tracy said in jest.
It's not the first time a foreign news outlet has been duped by The Onion. In 2002, the Beijing Evening News, one of the Chinese capital's biggest newspapers, picked up a story from The Onion that claimed members of Congress were threatening to leave Washington unless the building underwent a makeover that included more bathrooms and a retractable dome.
SourceGotta love The Onion lol. This is Iran, supposedly the greatest threat to world peace. The world seems like a safer place all of a sudden. Honestly, the US has more than enough firepower to stomp Iran out of existence tomorrow, if it wanted to. You'd probably need to kill tens of millions of innocent people in the process, but you could. Well, stomping a country out of existence isn't exactly peaceful. It would be darkly ironic and amusing though. YOU WANT NUKES? WELL HAVE A COUPLE HUNDRED TO THE FACE. Iran's a threat to stability and peace in the middle east. But they are not a threat to US security. At all. I can't find the quote, but a US General recently went on record saying that if Iran is the US' greatest threat, than the US has nothing to worry about. You'd probably be able to shut down their entire power and telecommunication network before a single Iranian missile got off the ground. Iran doesn't want the A bomb to nuke anybody anyway. Thry want it as a powerful diplomatic tool to become the first power in the region. And probably to blackmail a bit everybody. They would also make sure nobody ever attack them which would be good news for the regime considering how many of their neighbours would love to see them out of business. As for nuking iran, it's not very funny. Would be the first genocide in history i guess. After the native indians maybe. Actually Iran wants a Nuke because its the only way it can defend itself from Isreal who already has a dozen of the things thanks to America. So one of, if not the, most radical regime in the region. Who has a history of ZERO regard for human rights and the rule of law. A regime who openly stated that "there are no gays in Iran" (because they are stoned, hung or too afraid to be open about it) and has the lowest regard for human life... Only wants nuclear weapons for self-defence reasons. Feel free to hate on Israel, but even that is stretch...
You know that aside from the gay part that also describes Isreal right?
Im not saying Iran is a nice nation. Im not saying that them having a nuke is a good thing for the world but stop and think about the situation they find themselves in with Isreal near aswell before casting them as the worst thing on earth.
|
Australia8532 Posts
On October 01 2012 17:34 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 17:31 bkrow wrote:On October 01 2012 08:37 Gorsameth wrote:On October 01 2012 08:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 01 2012 07:43 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 01 2012 06:15 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 05:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 30 2012 23:28 screamingpalm wrote:
An Iranian news agency picked up — as fact — a story from the paper about a supposed Gallup survey showing an overwhelming majority of rural white Americans would rather vote for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than President Barack Obama.
[...]
The Iranian version copied the original word-for-word, even including a made-up quote from a fictional West Virginia resident who says he'd rather go to a baseball game with Ahmadinejad because "he takes national defense seriously, and he'd never let some gay protesters tell him how to run his country like Obama does."
Homosexual acts are punishable by death in Iran, and Ahmadinejad famously said during a 2007 appearance at Columbia University that "in Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."
The Iranian version of the article leaves out only The Onion's description of Ahmadinejad as "a man who has repeatedly denied the Holocaust and has had numerous political prisoners executed."
[...]
Onion editor Will Tracy put out a tongue-in-cheek statement that referred to Fars as "a subsidiary of The Onion" that has acted as the paper's Middle Eastern bureau since it was founded in the mid-1980s by Onion publisher T. Herman Zweibel.
"The Onion freely shares content with Fars and commends the journalists at Iran's Finest News Source on their superb reportage," Tracy said in jest.
It's not the first time a foreign news outlet has been duped by The Onion. In 2002, the Beijing Evening News, one of the Chinese capital's biggest newspapers, picked up a story from The Onion that claimed members of Congress were threatening to leave Washington unless the building underwent a makeover that included more bathrooms and a retractable dome.
SourceGotta love The Onion lol. This is Iran, supposedly the greatest threat to world peace. The world seems like a safer place all of a sudden. Honestly, the US has more than enough firepower to stomp Iran out of existence tomorrow, if it wanted to. You'd probably need to kill tens of millions of innocent people in the process, but you could. Well, stomping a country out of existence isn't exactly peaceful. It would be darkly ironic and amusing though. YOU WANT NUKES? WELL HAVE A COUPLE HUNDRED TO THE FACE. Iran's a threat to stability and peace in the middle east. But they are not a threat to US security. At all. I can't find the quote, but a US General recently went on record saying that if Iran is the US' greatest threat, than the US has nothing to worry about. You'd probably be able to shut down their entire power and telecommunication network before a single Iranian missile got off the ground. Iran doesn't want the A bomb to nuke anybody anyway. Thry want it as a powerful diplomatic tool to become the first power in the region. And probably to blackmail a bit everybody. They would also make sure nobody ever attack them which would be good news for the regime considering how many of their neighbours would love to see them out of business. As for nuking iran, it's not very funny. Would be the first genocide in history i guess. After the native indians maybe. Actually Iran wants a Nuke because its the only way it can defend itself from Isreal who already has a dozen of the things thanks to America. So one of, if not the, most radical regime in the region. Who has a history of ZERO regard for human rights and the rule of law. A regime who openly stated that "there are no gays in Iran" (because they are stoned, hung or too afraid to be open about it) and has the lowest regard for human life... Only wants nuclear weapons for self-defence reasons. Feel free to hate on Israel, but even that is stretch... You know that aside from the gay part that also describes Isreal right? Im not saying Iran is a nice nation. Im not saying that them having a nuke is a good thing for the world but stop and think about the situation they find themselves in with Isreal near aswell before casting them as the worst thing on earth.
What?
Haha... no i don't "know" that and the fact that you think you "know" that is pretty hilarious. Considering the fact that Israel has the highest standards of human rights in the middle east in regards to women, gays, individual rights etc including an independent high court. This isn't a thread about Israel but i really think you need to research a little more beyond the "headlines" that sound "cool"
|
Tax is not theft, it is the fee paid in order to live in society.
Just as you must pay fees levied by the administration of a housing complex you live in, should they choose to levy them in order to provide ongoing maintenance and services, so too must you pay the fees levied by the administration of the nation you live in, that they too may provide ongoing maintenance and services. And just as the administration of a housing complex might vary the fees for occupants in different situations to provide on average the greatest benefit to occupants for the least impact, perhaps charging more for the occupier of a penthouse than a studio, the administrators of a nation might vary the fees they levy according to the situation of each citizen.
If you do not want to take advantage of the many benefits of a housing complex - proximity to amenities, schools, or places of employment; security systems; doormen and maintenance staff; leisure facilities; inbuilt utilities such as running water, gas, electricity, phone lines; or a comfortable lifestyle - then you can give up that occupancy and find yourself a more compatible place of residence. If you do not want to take advantage of the many benefits of a nation - economic and educational opportunities. including access to schools and employment at sites within that country; police force, armed forces and judicial system to protect you from internal and external threats; emergency services to help out in times of crisis; a healthcare system; an infrastructure system; and distribution systems for food, medicine, clothing, clean water and hundreds of other goods, services and necessities that make modern life possible even in areas far above the local carrying capacity of the land or lacking in key resources - then you are free to drop your citizenship and move to a country that better meets your needs. Otherwise, pay your fees to the administration that offers you a better chance at the lifestyle you want than any other.
You're seeking to address
The United States was founded on limited government, not on stealing money from the rich just because some Americans have class envy.
with this?
Wholly inadequate. Blatant twisting of the debate. The consent to taxation is for necessary government services such as a standing army and, at a local level, police and fire force. The topic is the expanded role of government as regulating every industry it casts its gaze on in a micromanagement role, and the payment of such is assigned to the most prosperous of us as a punishment for their perceived wrongs. Whether these services are desirable or just a massive waste of money. How it is justifiable to levy taxes to punish the successful people to fund assundry programs as representatives and bureaucracies, some of whom unelected, see fit.
|
On October 01 2012 17:37 bkrow wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 17:34 Gorsameth wrote:On October 01 2012 17:31 bkrow wrote:On October 01 2012 08:37 Gorsameth wrote:On October 01 2012 08:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 01 2012 07:43 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 01 2012 06:15 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 05:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On September 30 2012 23:28 screamingpalm wrote:[quote] SourceGotta love The Onion lol. This is Iran, supposedly the greatest threat to world peace. The world seems like a safer place all of a sudden. Honestly, the US has more than enough firepower to stomp Iran out of existence tomorrow, if it wanted to. You'd probably need to kill tens of millions of innocent people in the process, but you could. Well, stomping a country out of existence isn't exactly peaceful. It would be darkly ironic and amusing though. YOU WANT NUKES? WELL HAVE A COUPLE HUNDRED TO THE FACE. Iran's a threat to stability and peace in the middle east. But they are not a threat to US security. At all. I can't find the quote, but a US General recently went on record saying that if Iran is the US' greatest threat, than the US has nothing to worry about. You'd probably be able to shut down their entire power and telecommunication network before a single Iranian missile got off the ground. Iran doesn't want the A bomb to nuke anybody anyway. Thry want it as a powerful diplomatic tool to become the first power in the region. And probably to blackmail a bit everybody. They would also make sure nobody ever attack them which would be good news for the regime considering how many of their neighbours would love to see them out of business. As for nuking iran, it's not very funny. Would be the first genocide in history i guess. After the native indians maybe. Actually Iran wants a Nuke because its the only way it can defend itself from Isreal who already has a dozen of the things thanks to America. So one of, if not the, most radical regime in the region. Who has a history of ZERO regard for human rights and the rule of law. A regime who openly stated that "there are no gays in Iran" (because they are stoned, hung or too afraid to be open about it) and has the lowest regard for human life... Only wants nuclear weapons for self-defence reasons. Feel free to hate on Israel, but even that is stretch... You know that aside from the gay part that also describes Isreal right? Im not saying Iran is a nice nation. Im not saying that them having a nuke is a good thing for the world but stop and think about the situation they find themselves in with Isreal near aswell before casting them as the worst thing on earth. What? Haha... no i don't "know" that and the fact that you think you "know" that is pretty hilarious. Considering the fact that Israel has the highest standards of human rights in the middle east in regards to women, gays, individual rights etc including an independent high court. This isn't a thread about Israel but i really think you need to research a little more beyond the "headlines" that sound "cool"
I am sorry but I must heavily disagree with that. Israel might be a model state in many regards, but considering their treatment of Palestine and the fact that they are the one of the few countries in the world which still occupies foreign territory their regards for human rights is not that high.
You disagree? Change your name to Barrakat and try visiting Israel. A friend of mine spent 2 weeks in jail simply because he shares a last name with someone they consider a terrorist, instead of spending it lying on a beach (note that my friend was an Austrian and has nothing to do with their conflict).
In some ways Israel is the perfect example of double standards, if you are a Jew you might enjoy many civil rights and liberties, but if you are a Palestinian you won't have many rights at all.
|
Just thought I'd point out that the document you linked showing the party IDs looking good for the GOP this cycle makes this statement:
"NOTE: A CAVEAT ABOUT THIS DATA FROM DR. MICHAEL McDONALD OF THE EARLY VOTING PROJECT http://elections.gmu.edu/early_vote_2012.html" "If you are not aware, Ohio does not truly have party registration, it is simply a record of the last party primary a voter participated in. For a number of reasons then, a comparison of 2008 and 2012 ""party"" is not particularly informative. .... For these reasons, I do not think the absentee ballot stats are particularly informative at this early stage as to what will happen in Ohio, much like I do not think the wildly pro-Democratic Iowa statistics are informative as to what will happen in that state.
|
|
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
I just don't argue against it. People who say that generally have some kind of twisted ideological rational that has no practical basis in the real world.
|
Well, argue against or mock it... I'd like to come up with something witty...
|
On October 01 2012 21:08 Souma wrote:I just don't argue against it. People who say that generally have some kind of twisted ideological rational that has no practical basis in the real world.
I like what Elisabeth Warren had to say about this:
"There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own – nobody. ... You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea. God bless – keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along."
|
On October 01 2012 20:39 Tula wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 17:37 bkrow wrote:On October 01 2012 17:34 Gorsameth wrote:On October 01 2012 17:31 bkrow wrote:On October 01 2012 08:37 Gorsameth wrote:On October 01 2012 08:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 01 2012 07:43 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 01 2012 06:15 Defacer wrote:On October 01 2012 05:37 ticklishmusic wrote:
[quote]
This is Iran, supposedly the greatest threat to world peace. The world seems like a safer place all of a sudden. Honestly, the US has more than enough firepower to stomp Iran out of existence tomorrow, if it wanted to. You'd probably need to kill tens of millions of innocent people in the process, but you could. Well, stomping a country out of existence isn't exactly peaceful. It would be darkly ironic and amusing though. YOU WANT NUKES? WELL HAVE A COUPLE HUNDRED TO THE FACE. Iran's a threat to stability and peace in the middle east. But they are not a threat to US security. At all. I can't find the quote, but a US General recently went on record saying that if Iran is the US' greatest threat, than the US has nothing to worry about. You'd probably be able to shut down their entire power and telecommunication network before a single Iranian missile got off the ground. Iran doesn't want the A bomb to nuke anybody anyway. Thry want it as a powerful diplomatic tool to become the first power in the region. And probably to blackmail a bit everybody. They would also make sure nobody ever attack them which would be good news for the regime considering how many of their neighbours would love to see them out of business. As for nuking iran, it's not very funny. Would be the first genocide in history i guess. After the native indians maybe. Actually Iran wants a Nuke because its the only way it can defend itself from Isreal who already has a dozen of the things thanks to America. So one of, if not the, most radical regime in the region. Who has a history of ZERO regard for human rights and the rule of law. A regime who openly stated that "there are no gays in Iran" (because they are stoned, hung or too afraid to be open about it) and has the lowest regard for human life... Only wants nuclear weapons for self-defence reasons. Feel free to hate on Israel, but even that is stretch... You know that aside from the gay part that also describes Isreal right? Im not saying Iran is a nice nation. Im not saying that them having a nuke is a good thing for the world but stop and think about the situation they find themselves in with Isreal near aswell before casting them as the worst thing on earth. What? Haha... no i don't "know" that and the fact that you think you "know" that is pretty hilarious. Considering the fact that Israel has the highest standards of human rights in the middle east in regards to women, gays, individual rights etc including an independent high court. This isn't a thread about Israel but i really think you need to research a little more beyond the "headlines" that sound "cool" I am sorry but I must heavily disagree with that. Israel might be a model state in many regards, but considering their treatment of Palestine and the fact that they are the one of the few countries in the world which still occupies foreign territory their regards for human rights is not that high. You disagree? Change your name to Barrakat and try visiting Israel. A friend of mine spent 2 weeks in jail simply because he shares a last name with someone they consider a terrorist, instead of spending it lying on a beach (note that my friend was an Austrian and has nothing to do with their conflict). In some ways Israel is the perfect example of double standards, if you are a Jew you might enjoy many civil rights and liberties, but if you are a Palestinian you won't have many rights at all.
I like also how people are horrified about Iran's violation of human rights while there is no category of Iranian population, and that includes the jews, that is treated as fucking horrendously as Palestinians are by Israel.
Israel is great when you are an Israeli. But the state of Israel behaves like a pig with Palestinian. Daily humiliations, arbitrary emprisonment, theft of ressources, theft of territory, latent and generalized racism, destruction of economic ressources, destruction of houses, illegal and murderous blocades, everything is in the picture.
But of course, nobody gives a flying fuck about the fact that they have nuclear weapons. Seriously, someone like Lieberman is AT LEAST as fucked up, racist and fascist as our good old Ahmadinedjad. Who is a son of a b****, I won't argue with that.
|
Wow, I never said that taxing was theft. I said excessive taxing is theft.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
