|
On September 08 2012 10:52 OsoVega wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2012 10:35 Dryzt wrote:On September 08 2012 09:51 blinken wrote:On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote:
Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner. Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu. was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie. Netanyahu congradulates Canada: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4278496,00.htmlmake no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests... Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories.
The Feds are not controlled by the government. They are led by a group of private bankers.
Is it me or does every single one of your post sound like sarcasm.
EDIT: Ironically, no central bank to my knowledge in the West is controlled by the government. Only in the glorious democracy that is China that banks and government form one entity.
|
On September 08 2012 11:56 NeMeSiS3 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2012 11:33 OsoVega wrote:On September 08 2012 11:04 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On September 08 2012 10:52 OsoVega wrote:On September 08 2012 10:35 Dryzt wrote:On September 08 2012 09:51 blinken wrote:On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote:
Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner. Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu. was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie. Netanyahu congradulates Canada: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4278496,00.htmlmake no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests... Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories. I don't think you understand how a republic works and that throughout the years the imperfect system of voting has been abused time and time again, now to argue that a "conspiracy" exists without backing proof is about as naive and stupid as arguing that they don't exist or at least are non-likely based off personal assumptions. To go into more detail, I would say that one could connect a few dots here and there over the years and argue that conspiracies "The action of plotting or conspiring" have not only happened on multiple occasions, but are happening frequently. If I want that promotion I may conspire to undermine my colleague in an attempt to elevate my position, a company may conspire with other companies to corner the market and remove a specific organization and a country may conspire with another country to hit an end goal that another country may find unjust or plain wrong and yet they do it everyday. "Small groups of conspirators" When has a large group of conspirators ever existed? Do you think Stalin when he was overthrowing his superiors conspired with the public, or Hitler with his public with regards to conspiring against millions of jews? Conspiracies are always small groups with big plans that play off the naive and they've happened since before Caesar whispered "Et tu, Brutus" (or so the lore goes) "by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas." Arguably this is a false assumption, what if we have 2 candidates to vote for and we're forced to vote, if our candidates are Hitler and Stalin (used in a previous example, might as well carry it) then when they kill millions of people, was it the people who decided those deaths? Arguably yes yet they were elected to power because of power and propaganda... I doubt many average joes who voted for Hitler's party assumed he'd attempt to exterminate an entire race of people, so it's their fault for not having that assumption. The government may be chosen by the people, but the actions of the government are not always of the people and when this occurs it is the duty of the people to either take back control of the government or overthrow it entirely but in today's world that is a near impossibility so we're stuck between choosing the white cat and the black cat (someone might get that reference ^^) I know how a Republic works but Canada and America are not Republics. America used to be a Republic, but unfortunately, democracy has taken over and it's not anymore. Imperfections in the voting systems are minor. Flaws in campaign laws are more serious but the effects are still minor compared to the ideas held by the majority. If you conspire to undermine a colleague, you're not going to have much of an affect on an entire country. A company may conspire to corner a market, but it will only be successful if it has government backing either through direct cronyism/bribery and the lack of a vigilant public or through the use of regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies. Stalin might have conspired to take over the USSR but if it wasn't him, it would have been another communist murderer. Hitler may not have informed the public about the Holocaust, but they knew they were voting for and supporting a totaltarian dictator. I don't deny that individuals can have large effects, but it is always the ideas of the general populace which controls the direction and this is especially true where there is sustained democracy. The only individuals who have truly drastic effects are the philosophers who come up with and popularize ideas. The only way that a democracy will ever have two dictators as the only viable candidates to vote for, is if the people are in favor of dictators. Just look at America. It's not at the point of dictatorship but they are stuck choosing between two statists because the American people are in favor of statism. Third parties exist, but they will never win because they are not in line with mainstream ideology. A country which largely rejects dictatorship can't just have it forced upon itself from within. Remember, no matter how powerful the military, it is still made up of people who will generally share the ideas of the general populace. The only exception would be a foreign take over but that wouldn't be conspiracy, that would be brought about through the ideas of the people of the invading nation. I would like to make a point to note you really didn't argue anything in this ... rebuttal? but I will bite anyway as this is TL and posting standards can be low at times. "I know how a Republic works but Canada and America are not Republics." Actually it is a constitutional Republic or is being heralded as one more frequently (Utah, which passed a bill to teach that the US is a Republic and not a Democracy, although they can be closely related, The House voted 57-17) + Show Spoiler +http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51248409-76/government-republic-bill-rep.html.csp So firstly your initial comment is either wrong or such a small truth that using it as a statement is arguably misleading. I would like to split your next few sentences up although they all related to my comparison between people/companies/nations. Show nested quote +
" you conspire to undermine a colleague, you're not going to have much of an affect on an entire country."
Firstly the text I wrote was used to show the escalation of possibilities with regards to how anyone (or anything be it company/country) can and usually will conspire to get ahead. Secondly you agree that conspiring against a colleague is a possibility thus your next statement holds no merit in the conversation thus let's just say "We can conspire on a personal level (between people)" Show nested quote +
"A company may conspire to corner a market, but it will only be successful if it has government backing either through direct cronyism/bribery and the lack of a vigilant public or through the use of regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies."
Firstly again, you say a company "may" conspire to corner a market so without government involvement you agree that the possibility of companies conspiring exists which leads us to the next level, and we'll simplify it to "We can conspire on monopolistic ideals, such as companies attempting to corner a market" To continue into your counter argument you state that it "will only be successful",which note agrees that the possibility again exists, "if it has government backing either through direct bribery (lobbying) and/or (paraphrased) the lack of a vigilant public or through regulations which the people don't realize lead to monopolies." I would not try to argue that you're wrong, I would simply state that in all three of your examples (I will use America as the prime example since it is really the head of any debate with regards to conspiracies) America has hit the head on the nail with failing to stop such things from happening by having lobbying (bribing), a non vigilant public (allowing multiple occasions of "security over freedom" style acts etc etc and a community of peoples who simply don't follow politics closely enough (not that it matters since they don't vote on every issue, just who can decide upon that issue) to be able to defend or approve of a regulation that would lead or stop monopolies. Show nested quote +"Stalin might have conspired to take over the USSR but if it wasn't him, it would have been another communist murderer. Hitler may not have informed the public about the Holocaust, but they knew they were voting for and supporting a totaltarian dictator. I don't deny that individuals can have large effects, but it is always the ideas of the general populace which controls the direction and this is especially true where there is sustained democracy. The only individuals who have truly drastic effects are the philosophers who come up with and popularize ideas." This entire statement is completely opinionated based, you state how if Stalin didn't exist another one would fill his place and that the German people "knew they were voting for and supporting a totalitarian dictator" which again is another opinion based off zero proof other then your own reasoning such that I can't argue if this is true or not because most Germans voted for charisma, not dictatorship and the "National Socialist" party really doesn't come off as Ghengis Khan to me, would you think that? Hitler was voted in for saying he'd bring them out of one of the (if not the) greatest depression Germany ever had, not ruling the world or killing jews. Show nested quote +"The only way that a democracy will ever have two dictators as the only viable candidates to vote for, is if the people are in favor of dictators. Just look at America. It's not at the point of dictatorship but they are stuck choosing between two statists because the American people are in favor of statism. Third parties exist, but they will never win because they are not in line with mainstream ideology. A country which largely rejects dictatorship can't just have it forced upon itself from within. Remember, no matter how powerful the military, it is still made up of people who will generally share the ideas of the general populace. The only exception would be a foreign take over but that wouldn't be conspiracy, that would be brought about through the ideas of the people of the invading nation." So I quoted the above, but frankly you go from accusing America of being a statism (which frankly could be true but it seems to be an opinion to stating how the only way two dictators can be the only viable candidates (often times only one has to be while showing off good charisma) is wrong as well because again using the hitler example a single dictator who hid under being for "socialism" was elected, not by dictator supporters but everyday people trying to get their four square meals. I hope this helps clear up some of your comments, again it was hard to go through.
I know that America was founded as a Constitutional Republic but what I was getting at is that America has effectively (but not officially) abandoned it's roots and descended into democracy. I think it is good to teach kids that America is a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy, because that is an ideal which is not officially lost and should be restored. When they see America operating as a democracy, hopefully they will realize that something is wrong and this is not what Ameica was supposed to be.
As for the rest of your response, let me first make clear my main idea which is: Conspirators don't determine the direction of nations, the ideas of the people do. In your first response to me, your main point seemed to be that "conspiracies "The action of plotting or conspiring" have not only happened on multiple occasions, but are happening frequently". I conceeded this but the point of my response was to demonstrate how these conspiracies are unimportant.
As for companies conspiring to corner a market, yes, they can try to do it without government backing. This is irrelevant to my point because they will always fail. When they do succeed, it is irrelevant to my point because it is the ideas of the people which led to the cronyist government which made their success possible. Do you think, that if the majority of Americans suddenly became vehemently opposed to government having the powers for lobbyists to buy, that it would not cause a return to fair market competition within several years?
As for Stalin, I think it's pretty obvious that it would have been him or another. The most obvious evidence is the leaders who preceeded, succeeded him and competed with him. As for Germany, there happens to be a great book on this very topic called The Ominous Parallels. It demonstrates the philosophic ideas that led to Nazism, their historical roots, their widespread acceptance amongst the German culture and how Nazism was a logical conclusion of these ideas. A preview is available on google books. Of course, you probably won't read it so I'll just make a couple concrete points. Lebensraum, among other heinous ideas, was detailed in Mein Kampf which was widely distributed and known before Hitler's rise to power. With the knowledge of the Lebensraum (again, among other heinous ideas), millions of men still volunteered and fought proudly for their country. Regardless of Hitler, there were thousands of would be dictators who could have taken his place, from his high command, who actually would have in the case of his death, or the obidient SS murderers who shared his spirit. These scenarios don't just come about by a charismatic man fooling a down and out people.
P.S. I didn't adress this comment, because I do not follow the logic. "Secondly you agree that conspiring against a colleague is a possibility thus your next statement holds no merit in the conversation thus let's just say "We can conspire on a personal level (between people)"
|
Why did people need to elect Harper and the dumbass conservatives again  I like it much better when we just mind our own business and try to help people when they need it. I know for a fact that almost everyone (if not everyone) I know would be opposed to us sticking our nose into this business. We need Chretien back, he was a political genius. He knew how to tow the line between US ally and independant nation so so well. The Liberal party really needs to get its shit together and find a suitable leader.
|
On September 08 2012 14:59 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2012 10:52 OsoVega wrote:On September 08 2012 10:35 Dryzt wrote:On September 08 2012 09:51 blinken wrote:On September 08 2012 09:49 StyLeD wrote:
Probably were pushed and heavily rewarded by the US government. They are our biggest trade partner. Harper is a shill for Israeli interests, and I'm sure the only reward Canada got for this was a thank you call from Netanyahu. was going to quote exactly that, this is just proof that Israel has infiltrated Canada as badly as it has the united states. John Bhaird is thee worst foriegn relations minister Canada has ever had, it is painfully obvious where his allegences lie. Netanyahu congradulates Canada: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4278496,00.htmlmake no mistake, the assault on Iran is nothing more than the states protecting their petro dollar and the international bankers destroying the last government controlled central bank in the world. After which all central banks will be in the hands of private interests... Believe it or not, Canada, the United States and Israel are democracies and your conspircy theories are the most anti-intellectual ideas possible. You blame small groups of conspirators who have the magic ability to hijack democracies when it has alwyas been the popular ideas of the people that has decided the fate of countries. Central banks exist because people think they work and even if they are technically private, it is undeniable that they are controlled by government. The USD is doomed (which you probably don't realize) because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and which is controlled by government which is controlled by voters who vote based on their ideas. It is those ideas that matter, not your imaginary conspiracy theories. The Feds are not controlled by the government. They are led by a group of private bankers. Is it me or does every single one of your post sound like sarcasm. EDIT: Ironically, no central bank to my knowledge in the West is controlled by the government. Only in the glorious democracy that is China that banks and government form one entity.
The Fed is not led by a group of private bankers. Private bankers own the stock of the Federal Reserve. Their ownership of Fed stock is not like other private stocks. It entails no actual ownership of the institution nor any control over it. The Fed is controlled by a Board of Governors who are appointed by the President and Senate and it pays all excess earnings to the US Treasury. The central bank and government are not technically one entity but, so what? Taking this back to my original point, the actions of the Federal Reserve are still controlled by the ideas of the people. The people think it is good that the Fed exists and they think it is it's place to stimulate the economy. That is why it exists and it is why we have QE.
|
ww3 needs to hurry up, i want to get on with my life and having to worry about this noise is annoying. Just get it over with and lets move on. The victor alway writes history so go go go
|
On September 08 2012 15:46 Cornstarched wrote:
ww3 needs to hurry up, i want to get on with my life and having to worry about this noise is annoying. Just get it over with and lets move on. The victor alway writes history so go go go
I guess you will be one of the first to enlist if you're so eager for a war?
|
Terrorist State/State sponsored Terrorism. Harbouring Terrorists. Funding, providing equipment, weapons, training and giving sanctuary to Terrorists. Terrorist descent.
In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.
Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.
User was warned for this post
|
On September 08 2012 15:56 forestry wrote:
Terrorist State/State sponsored Terrorism. Harbouring Terrorists. Funding, providing equipment, weapons, training and giving sanctuary to Terrorists. Terrorist descent.
In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.
Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.
I did not realize that civilized men endorse apartheid.
Or state terrorism.
Let's not pretend that anyone's hands are clean in this conflict.
|
On September 08 2012 15:56 forestry wrote:
Terrorist State/State sponsored Terrorism. Harbouring Terrorists. Funding, providing equipment, weapons, training and giving sanctuary to Terrorists. Terrorist descent.
In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.
Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.
Ever thought about blowing up your computer and never buy another one again?
|
havent there been enough wars in the past century?
why completely remove the only way of comunication with a country that despises its leader so much, with a little help from the west the green revolution might have happened.
But western countries seem to have forgotten how to resolve a conflict peacefully anymore, everywhere we see its terrorists and WMD. we know how that turned out in Iraq.
does no one else get mad when they read lines from OsoVega: "you don't just hit them back eye for an eye, you have a moral obligation to utterly and completely obliterate them if you have the means"
Zealot extremism of any kind is not helping at all, while small revolutions like the epyptian and tunisian one are actually a way of civilizing countries that previously had no democracy. But then again people like OsoVega think democracy is a bad thing...
i`m really wondering why there are so many ideological warmongers in the northern part of America. is it something in the water?
|
Why would Iran be a threat to the world? Right now USA, Israel, the Gulf states and the American occupied Afghanistan are sieging Iran with drone strikes, malicious computer virus and agent assassinations. I would suggest that the those countries are a threat to the world. American forces has used nuclear bombs on civilians and I fear that they might use it on Iran. The Iranian civilization has lasted thousands of years and has done some by playing their cards right.
|
Even if Iran wanted nuclear weapons, they are a defensive weapon anyways. All it will mean is that Israel won't be able to use force to get their way in the region.
Israel has hundreds of nukes, and they are a far more hostile and warmongering nation than any other.
All Iranian spending is in defensive weapon systems because they just want to be left alone. It would be great if they did acquire nuclear weapons, because that would bring stability to the region.
|
Two years ago I wrote on my facebook that Iran would be the next country invaded by the US. Bold, maybe, but I wouldnt throw it out of the water quite yet.
|
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote:
Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
Yeah war is awesome. I think Iran and their allies should realize they should have declared war on canada years ago! There is oil and natural gas to steal, men to kill and women to rape. Buildings to send rockets at, maybe they will be in a helicopter gunning down civilians and journalists too? I heard thats np.
Seriously though Iran is under attack on all side, trade embargos, usa sponsored terrorism on their land, computer hacking, drone strikes... hell yeah they are trying to defend themselves!
|
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote:
Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
There is no country on earth that can attack Iran, conventionally, without use of weapons of mass destruction, and succeed without paying STEEP costs, and lose an entire generation of their young. So shut up and take your warmongering else where.
On a side note, I am fucked now. My girlfriend and I were going to visit my relatives in Iran next year butt now there is a damn obstacle in the way....
I can still go, I have an Iranian passport as well as a Canadian passport. But my gf is white Canadian and she would need a Visa to go and now I don't know wtf we are going to do...
Why cant everyone just god DAMNED get along?
|
On September 08 2012 19:45 DarkGeneral wrote:
Why cant everyone just god DAMNED get along?
It's because our governments are controlled by Zionists. The wars in the middle east have been instigated on behalf of Israel.
Ex-Zionist Benjamin Freedman speaks at the Willard Hotel, Washington D.C., in 1961"The Zionists and their coreligionists rule these United States as though they were the absolute monarchs of this country." http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Ben_Freedman.html
He speaks about America, but the same is true of Canada and most of the nations participating in middle eastern wars.
|
Iran is a bigger threat to world peace than the US ?
I guess you learn something new everyday.
|
Excellent. There is nothing remaining between us and Iran until our companions awaken and understand that we should have announced war on and damaged them ten decades ago.
|
On September 08 2012 20:40 james5 wrote:
Excellent. There is nothing remaining between us and Iran until our companions awaken and understand that we should have announced war on and damaged them ten decades ago.
On September 08 2012 09:50 OsoVega wrote:
Good. There is nothing left between us and Iran until our allies wake up and realize that we should have declared war on and destroyed them ten years ago.
?????
What's going on here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
