Arrest made in Times Square Bombing Attempt...

[native]

Alphie's point remains valid. That's why it was news when an administration official finally used the word "terrorist," more than two months after the fact.

It wasn't Obama himself who used the word. It was a "...senior Obama administration official, speaking on background..."

AlphaGriz is not paranoid. His observations are factual and right on target. Your posted reference article actually proved his point.

So according to Alpha, no one from the Obama administration has called it an act of terrorism? OK.

Should he come out right away and declare it a "terrorist attack" or would that be to brash like the media saying the police are interested in a white individual or that a targeting cops for an attack isn't an act of terrorism? For a guy who glamorizes domestic terrorist, Alpha sure does like to pick and choose the side of the fence he stands on.

Is that really where you want to stand, DJ? AlphaGriz used the words "...Obama and his stupid unqualified cabinet ..." Your really think that it serves a useful purpose for Obama to refuse to use the "T" word or allow his cabinet to use it for attribution, more than two months after the Fort Hood massacre?

This is not rocket science. It's not like Obama's appeasement agenda is secret. It's a conscious policy based on the theory that softer rhetoric will reduce terrorist incidents.

AG1 and I happen to disagree with you that the appeasement will work. The case of Fort Hood is an egregious example of why we think that way. Attacking Alphie's motives and perception does not change the facts or make a case for the appeasement.

[Chizzang]

Alphie and native stick pretty close to the play book..

Right Wing "Fatherland" American Nationalism - views the republic as under siege from immigrants, unions, Uppity free Loading African Americans, welfare mothers, liberals, The Media, Hollywood and a host of other devils. As a consequence, it has loyal party members who would fall on their swords before betraying their leaders...
Leaders who tell them: They are the ones who are being persecuted - even though there is no real evidence of this persecution as 95% of the American Power structure rests in their hands and always will...

It is entertaining to watch

You are mixing apples and oranges, cleets. Congratulations to your liberal college professors who successfully instilled in you the anti-American class warfare narrative, at the expense.

My college professors were scientists and spoke nothing of ideological political affiliation - but nice try...
And I'm as far from Anti-American as one can get..
That's like calling a parent who honestly evaluates a child's behavior and disciplines them as "Anti-Child"

I just see you far what you are... and you don;t like it so you call me Anti-American which by the way is right out of the same play book i mentioned earlier... when faced with any criticism call them Anti-American...

you are predictable native (very predictable)

[JMU DJ]

So according to Alpha, no one from the Obama administration has called it an act of terrorism? OK.

Should he come out right away and declare it a "terrorist attack" or would that be to brash like the media saying the police are interested in a white individual or that a targeting cops for an attack isn't an act of terrorism? For a guy who glamorizes domestic terrorist, Alpha sure does like to pick and choose the side of the fence he stands on.

Is that really where you want to stand, DJ? AlphaGriz used the words "...Obama and his stupid unqualified cabinet ..." Your really think that it serves a useful purpose for Obama to refuse to use the "T" word or allow his cabinet to use it for attribution, more than two months after the Fort Hood massacre?

This is not rocket science. It's not like Obama's appeasement agenda is secret. It's a conscious policy based on the theory that softer rhetoric will reduce terrorist incidents.

AG1 and I happen to disagree with you that the appeasement will work. The case of Fort Hood is an egregious example of why we think that way. Attacking Alphie's motives and perception does not change the facts or make a case for the appeasement.

Oh Brother.


I'm not making a case for "appeasement," nor have I ever said anything about it. I'm simply pointing out that the Obama administration has called it an act of terror. Your the one twisting and trying to turn this into another discussion.

[dbackjon]

views the republic as under siege from immigrants

It is.

and it has been that way for what, 234 years?

[grizzaholic]

Is that really where you want to stand, DJ? AlphaGriz used the words "...Obama and his stupid unqualified cabinet ..." Your really think that it serves a useful purpose for Obama to refuse to use the "T" word or allow his cabinet to use it for attribution, more than two months after the Fort Hood massacre?

This is not rocket science. It's not like Obama's appeasement agenda is secret. It's a conscious policy based on the theory that softer rhetoric will reduce terrorist incidents.

AG1 and I happen to disagree with you that the appeasement will work. The case of Fort Hood is an egregious example of why we think that way. Attacking Alphie's motives and perception does not change the facts or make a case for the appeasement.

Oh Brother.


I'm not making a case for "appeasement," nor have I ever said anything about it. I'm simply pointing out that the Obama administration has called it an act of terror. Your the one twisting and trying to turn this into another discussion.

You are just PO'd that native is doing what a couple of your CAA brothers are famous for doing.

[JMU DJ]

Oh Brother.


I'm not making a case for "appeasement," nor have I ever said anything about it. I'm simply pointing out that the Obama administration has called it an act of terror. Your the one twisting and trying to turn this into another discussion.

You are just PO'd that native is doing what a couple of your CAA brothers are famous for doing.

You got me.

[89Hen]

Your the one twisting and trying to turn this into another discussion.

You are just PO'd that native is doing what a couple of your CAA brothers are famous for doing.

Yeah, that's a CAA thing.

[native]

You are mixing apples and oranges, cleets. Congratulations to your liberal college professors who successfully instilled in you the anti-American class warfare narrative, at the expense.

My college professors were scientists and spoke nothing of ideological political affiliation - but nice try...
And I'm as far from Anti-American as one can get..
That's like calling a parent who honestly evaluates a child's behavior and disciplines them as "Anti-Child"

I just see you far what you are... and you don;t like it so you call me Anti-American which by the way is right out of the same play book i mentioned earlier... when faced with any criticism call them Anti-American...

you are predictable native (very predictable)

I am more honest and direct about my world view than you are about yours, cleets.

Cleets, I call you anti-American only for effect. (It worked! YOU deign to call ME predictable?!?? )

I will take you at your word about your college professors, but the painfully obvious fact remains that you have some sort of class-warfare mentality which colors your judgment and intereferes with (not destroys) your ability to conduct a rational scientific inquiry.

[native]

Oh Brother.


I'm not making a case for "appeasement," nor have I ever said anything about it. I'm simply pointing out that the Obama administration has called it an act of terror. Your the one twisting and trying to turn this into another discussion.

You are just PO'd that native is doing what a couple of your CAA brothers are famous for doing.

Nah, he's just PO'd that I owned him.

[native]

Is that really where you want to stand, DJ? AlphaGriz used the words "...Obama and his stupid unqualified cabinet ..." Your really think that it serves a useful purpose for Obama to refuse to use the "T" word or allow his cabinet to use it for attribution, more than two months after the Fort Hood massacre?

This is not rocket science. It's not like Obama's appeasement agenda is secret. It's a conscious policy based on the theory that softer rhetoric will reduce terrorist incidents.

AG1 and I happen to disagree with you that the appeasement will work. The case of Fort Hood is an egregious example of why we think that way. Attacking Alphie's motives and perception does not change the facts or make a case for the appeasement.

Oh Brother.


I'm not making a case for "appeasement," nor have I ever said anything about it. I'm simply pointing out that the Obama administration has called it an act of terror. Your the one twisting and trying to turn this into another discussion.

An anonymous source is mighty thin gruel, DJ. Do you disagree that the Obama administration is exhibiting a conscious policy of appeasement towards muslims by avoiding the use of the t-word when it applies to muslims?

[death dealer]

99% is not enough and we are the most persecuted group in the country. Its just becoming acceptable to do so.....which I think you of all people should think is wrong.

Thank god this line of thinking is the vast minority in this country.

Dane, I hate to break it to you, but white males are one of the few groups it is routinely acceptable to belittle in popular culture and not be at risk of a boycott. And the only reason it's allowed is because the white males know they own everybody else's asses and in the end it's just an annoyance. Real power is concentrated in the hands of a very few white dudes, and that will not be changing in any of our lifetimes, no matter how much Alphie rants.

[native]

Thank god this line of thinking is the vast minority in this country.

Dane, I hate to break it to you, but white males are one of the few groups it is routinely acceptable to belittle in popular culture and not be at risk of a boycott. And the only reason it's allowed is because the white males know they own everybody else's asses and in the end it's just an annoyance. Real power is concentrated in the hands of a very few white dudes, and that will not be changing in any of our lifetimes, no matter how much Alphie rants.

Whether or not the most powerful and richest person in America is a white male or three headed purple Martian doesn't mean that I own anybody's ass except for my own. Get off the class and racial crap.

[death dealer]

Dane, I hate to break it to you, but white males are one of the few groups it is routinely acceptable to belittle in popular culture and not be at risk of a boycott. And the only reason it's allowed is because the white males know they own everybody else's asses and in the end it's just an annoyance. Real power is concentrated in the hands of a very few white dudes, and that will not be changing in any of our lifetimes, no matter how much Alphie rants.

Whether or not the most powerful and richest person in America is a white male or three headed purple Martian doesn't mean that I own anybody's ass except for my own. Get off the class and racial crap.

Not getting on any class or racial crap Native. Just stating the obvious. The simplest way to test this theory is to watch an hour of television. Count the number of commercials where a black man or a woman is the butt of the joke, or made to look foolish, and you will find that it is zero. The boob is always the white guy. The kicker is that these are ads written and produced predominately by white guys. Why? Because the theory is that if you make a commercial that ridicules a minority or perceived "oppressed" class, you will alienate that group, but if you make fun of a white dude, well nobody gets pissed, because why would they? The white guys watching know that shit ain't really representative of real life, and everybody else likes to laugh at white dudes on t.v. because they have to kiss their white bosses ass all day at work and secretly hate it. It's just the way it is.

[danefan]

Whether or not the most powerful and richest person in America is a white male or three headed purple Martian doesn't mean that I own anybody's ass except for my own. Get off the class and racial crap.

Not getting on any class or racial crap Native. Just stating the obvious. The simplest way to test this theory is to watch an hour of television. Count the number of commercials where a black man or a woman is the butt of the joke, or made to look foolish, and you will find that it is zero. The boob is always the white guy. The kicker is that these are ads written and produced predominately by white guys. Why? Because the theory is that if you make a commercial that ridicules a minority or perceived "oppressed" class, you will alienate that group, but if you make fun of a white dude, well nobody gets pissed, because why would they? The white guys watching know that shit ain't really representative of real life, and everybody else likes to laugh at white dudes on t.v. because they have to kiss their white bosses ass all day at work and secretly hate it. It's just the way it is.

I understand all that DD, but I still don't see how the "white man" is the most persecuted man in American as Alphie says.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

DD hits it out of the park.


100% true

[Chizzang]

I am more honest and direct about my world view than you are about yours, cleets.

Cleets, I call you anti-American only for effect. (It worked! YOU deign to call ME predictable?!?? )

I will take you at your word about your college professors, but the painfully obvious fact remains that you have some sort of class-warfare mentality which colors your judgment and intereferes with (not destroys) your ability to conduct a rational scientific inquiry.

Firstly:
Your world view is provided for you by somebody else...
Secondly:
I have simply observed the class warfare and rank hatred of the poor - pointing something out doesn't mean I'm emotionally attached to it... it's mostly a class warfare by design, it keeps people distracted from the actual issues by pitting Americans against each other...

The two party system does the same thing...

observation:
Right about the same time we eliminated the structure created by our founding fathers that allowed for diversity in our political party creation (Public Law 62-5) very succinctly and with little fan-fare completely changed American politics forever into a two party system successfully pitting A against B and forever distracting from actual progress... not long after that - and with similar goals - the Federal Reserve Act was perpetrated on Americans.. to further isolate the controlling portion of the population from the masses..

we are pawns native...
we are controlled and obliged to focus on each other as the "problem" with America... we see each other as the problem when actually you and I (right and left) have almost nothing to do with whats wrong and never have



that's a portion of the way I see things... (just a tiny fraction)

[YoUDeeMan]

Where are you guys getting the "white guy" angle from?

You must have missed the other thread.

[YoUDeeMan]

Firstly:
Your world view is provided for you by somebody else...
Secondly:
I have simply observed the class warfare and rank hatred of the poor - pointing something out doesn't mean I'm emotionally attached to it... it's mostly a class warfare by design, it keeps people distracted from the actual issues by pitting Americans against each other...

The two party system does the same thing...

observation:
Right about the same time we eliminated the structure created by our founding fathers that allowed for diversity in our political party creation (Public Law 62-5) very succinctly and with little fan-fare completely changed American politics forever into a two party system successfully pitting A against B and forever distracting from actual progress... not long after that - and with similar goals - the Federal Reserve Act was perpetrated on Americans.. to further isolate the controlling portion of the population from the masses..

we are pawns native...
we are controlled and obliged to focus on each other as the "problem" with America... we see each other as the problem when actually you and I (right and left) have almost nothing to do with whats wrong and never have



that's a portion of the way I see things... (just a tiny fraction)

Hey Chizzburger, how much say do you think people actually have in Britain, Italy, Iraq, Thailand, Sudan, or any of those other countries with different governments or multiple parties? Neither America nor white people have a monopoly on class warfare.

[Chizzang]

Firstly:
Your world view is provided for you by somebody else...
Secondly:
I have simply observed the class warfare and rank hatred of the poor - pointing something out doesn't mean I'm emotionally attached to it... it's mostly a class warfare by design, it keeps people distracted from the actual issues by pitting Americans against each other...

The two party system does the same thing...

observation:
Right about the same time we eliminated the structure created by our founding fathers that allowed for diversity in our political party creation (Public Law 62-5) very succinctly and with little fan-fare completely changed American politics forever into a two party system successfully pitting A against B and forever distracting from actual progress... not long after that - and with similar goals - the Federal Reserve Act was perpetrated on Americans.. to further isolate the controlling portion of the population from the masses..

we are pawns native...
we are controlled and obliged to focus on each other as the "problem" with America... we see each other as the problem when actually you and I (right and left) have almost nothing to do with whats wrong and never have



that's a portion of the way I see things... (just a tiny fraction)

Hey Chizzburger, how much say do you think people actually have in Britain, Italy, Iraq, Thailand, Sudan, or any of those other countries with different governments or multiple parties? Neither America nor white people have a monopoly on class warfare.

You've successfully submitted a post that references my post - yet - has nothing to do with my post...

[death dealer]

Not getting on any class or racial crap Native. Just stating the obvious. The simplest way to test this theory is to watch an hour of television. Count the number of commercials where a black man or a woman is the butt of the joke, or made to look foolish, and you will find that it is zero. The boob is always the white guy. The kicker is that these are ads written and produced predominately by white guys. Why? Because the theory is that if you make a commercial that ridicules a minority or perceived "oppressed" class, you will alienate that group, but if you make fun of a white dude, well nobody gets pissed, because why would they? The white guys watching know that shit ain't really representative of real life, and everybody else likes to laugh at white dudes on t.v. because they have to kiss their white bosses ass all day at work and secretly hate it. It's just the way it is.

I understand all that DD, but I still don't see how the "white man" is the most persecuted man in American as Alphie says.

I never said we were. As you state, that was Alphie. I am simply pointing out that it's acceptable to persecute straight white males because in the end, we really run everything and own almost all of it.

[danefan]

I understand all that DD, but I still don't see how the "white man" is the most persecuted man in American as Alphie says.

I never said we were. As you state, that was Alphie. I am simply pointing out that it's acceptable to persecute straight white males because in the end, we really run everything and own almost all of it.

Gotcha.

[JMU DJ]

An anonymous source is mighty thin gruel,

Alpha's favorite: Janet Napolitano

DJ. Do you disagree that the Obama administration is exhibiting a conscious policy of appeasement towards muslims by avoiding the use of the t-word when it applies to muslims?

No, I don't disagree. When it applies to Muslims or any religion, race, nationality, etc and it is a legitimate act of terrorism, let's call it what it is once we have enough information about the event. Its use in daily rhetoric as it pertains to foreign policy, I don't see it necessary.

[YoUDeeMan]

The two party system does the same thing...

observation:
Right about the same time we eliminated the structure created by our founding fathers that allowed for diversity in our political party creation (Public Law 62-5) very succinctly and with little fan-fare completely changed American politics forever into a two party system successfully pitting A against B and forever distracting from actual progress...
we are pawns native...
we are controlled and obliged to focus on each other as the "problem" with America... we see each other as the problem when actually you and I (right and left) have almost nothing to do with whats wrong and never have



You've successfully submitted a post that references my post - yet - has nothing to do with my post...

Let me help...

Alphie and native stick pretty close to the play book..

Right Wing "Fatherland" American Nationalism - views the republic as under siege from immigrants, unions, Uppity free Loading African Americans, welfare mothers, liberals, The Media, Hollywood and a host of other devils. As a consequence, it has loyal party members who would fall on their swords before betraying their leaders...
Leaders who tell them: They are the ones who are being persecuted - even though there is no real evidence of this persecution as 95% of the American Power structure rests in their hands and always will...

It is entertaining to watch

In one thread, you manage to crap on right wing folks (presumably white, since you mentioned their aversion to immigration)...then backpeddle to saying that the American two party system was set up (as if a three party system, or any political system, would make a difference ) to make us focus on each other instead of the wealthy (mostly white) elite.

So...I post that every country's government, and wealthy class, is essentially the same...controlling the masses is not an American, nor white, monopoly...and you don't find that relevent to the topic?

[YoUDeeMan]

I never said we were. As you state, that was Alphie. I am simply pointing out that it's acceptable to persecute straight white males because in the end, we really run everything and own almost all of it.

There's the rub. When you say, "we really run everything and own almost all of it", you are not referring to whites in general...you are referring to a handful of individuals. I do well, but I certainly am not one of the behind the door puppet masters, yet it is OK for people to bash white males in general?

Go tell a poor white kid in Appalachia that he is the subject of ridicule because his "kind" owns everything...and then tell him that he can't make it into college because a spot was held for someone else whose "kind" didn't own everything.

Yup, a handful of black people are involved in shoot outs...yet it would be OK for me to crap on black people as violent thugs?

[native]

I am more honest and direct about my world view than you are about yours, cleets.

Cleets, I call you anti-American only for effect. (It worked! YOU deign to call ME predictable?!?? )

I will take you at your word about your college professors, but the painfully obvious fact remains that you have some sort of class-warfare mentality which colors your judgment and intereferes with (not destroys) your ability to conduct a rational scientific inquiry.

Firstly:
Your world view is provided for you by somebody else...
Secondly:
I have simply observed the class warfare and rank hatred of the poor - pointing something out doesn't mean I'm emotionally attached to it... it's mostly a class warfare by design, it keeps people distracted from the actual issues by pitting Americans against each other...

The two party system does the same thing...

observation:
Right about the same time we eliminated the structure created by our founding fathers that allowed for diversity in our political party creation (Public Law 62-5) very succinctly and with little fan-fare completely changed American politics forever into a two party system successfully pitting A against B and forever distracting from actual progress... not long after that - and with similar goals - the Federal Reserve Act was perpetrated on Americans.. to further isolate the controlling portion of the population from the masses..

we are pawns native...
we are controlled and obliged to focus on each other as the "problem" with America... we see each other as the problem when actually you and I (right and left) have almost nothing to do with whats wrong and never have



that's a portion of the way I see things... (just a tiny fraction)

So many gems buried in so much bullsh!t.

You are interesting and eclectic, cleets, I'll give you that.