Woo ... What a Relief!

[SAYIT]

Can you tell me where you got your tin foil hat? It's looks great on you.

You like?

It's the re-purposed wrapper of the condom I used on your [censored for the sake of following board rules].

If you can get a condom wrapper to cover your head you truly are the definition of a pinhead.

 

[Capstone]

Not "researchers" but rather Stinnett whose book has been panned by credible sources who make Stinnett sound like a typical CT shill selling t-shirts. BTW, Moss had nothing to do with Stinnett's book and your attempt to connect him tells me you are aware Stinnett's book is CTBS..

As with other such conspiracy books, “Day of Deceit” received reviews in responsible academic journals like Intelligence and National Security that demolished it, citing its nonexistent documentation, misdirection, ignorance, misstatements, wormy insinuations and outright falsehoods. The consensus among intelligence scholars was “pretty much absolute,” CIA senior historian Donald Steury told me in an e-mail. Stinnett “concocted this theory pretty much from whole cloth. Those who have been able to check his alleged sources also are unanimous in their condemnation of his methodology. Basically, the author has made up his sources; when he does not make up the source, he lies about what the source says.”

Dive-bombing FDR - Salon.com

You mean to tell me Stinnet's book has been vetted and found wanting by such thoroughly objective publications as Intelligence and National Security?! Color me shocked.

Here's a site that lists some of the raw evidence (as referred to by Stinnet, Theobald, Willey, ETC.).

Here's another.

Forget about Stinnet's many interviews and other sources, the body of more than 200,000 relevant documents released in the wake of the Freedom of Information Act speaks for itself, and its voice can be heard by anyone with the will to examine the facts on their faces.

Woo. You mean whatreallyhappened supports Stinnett's conclusions? That alone is enough for any rational person to dismiss them.
The fact that many docs have been released is not proof FDR was a traitor or had foreknowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl which he withheld from Pearl military personel.

Yeah, it's not so much the fact they've been released ...as what they say.

Listen, why don't we just agree to disagree on this and most everything else, and simply not bother with each other in the future?

 

[Hossfly]

Can you tell me where you got your tin foil hat? It's looks great on you.

You like?

It's the re-purposed wrapper of the condom I used on your [censored for the sake of following board rules].

Everyone here can read your mind, Mr. Cumbubble.

 

[Roudy]

Can you tell me where you got your tin foil hat? It's looks great on you.

You like?

It's the re-purposed wrapper of the condom I used on your [censored for the sake of following board rules].

Is that the form of birth control your......used? No wonder. Ha ha ha.

 

[Capstone]

Can you tell me where you got your tin foil hat? It's looks great on you.

You like?

It's the re-purposed wrapper of the condom I used on your [censored for the sake of following board rules].

If you can get a condom wrapper to cover your head you truly are the definition of a pinhead.

Sorry, I should have clarified: it was a body condom.

Damnit. Now I've gone and bothered with you again.

 

[Roudy]

You like?

It's the re-purposed wrapper of the condom I used on your [censored for the sake of following board rules].

If you can get a condom wrapper to cover your head you truly are the definition of a pinhead.

Sorry, I should have clarified: it was a body condom.

Damnit. Now I've gone and bothered with you again.

Keep rolling your eyes, maybe you'll find a brain back there. Ha ha ha.

 

[auditor0007]

For this Administration to admit that there is a Radical Islamic Jihadist war going on... to even utter the word terrorism .... is like pulling teeth!

Not funny any more .... they are playing a very dangerous game with the American people.

Everyone knows it is out there. We just choose not to let it rule our lives as many of you seem to wish we would. It's a bit like the overprotective parent who refuses to let their child go outside to play on their own with friends, because they just might get kidnapped. The funniest thing about the overprotective parent thing is that it is safer for our kids today than it was when we were kids. It just seems more dangerous because we hear about every single abduction that takes place anywhere in the world within five minutes of it happening.

The same is true for these terrorists, we know they are out there. Are you going to lock yourself in your house and never go anywhere because one of them might kill you? Sorry, but I'm going to live my life in a normal manner. If they get me, then it's my time. That doesn't mean I am suggesting that we just be oblivious to these terrorists, but it does mean I don't want them making decisions as to what I will or will not do in my daily life.

 

[SAYIT]

For this Administration to admit that there is a Radical Islamic Jihadist war going on... to even utter the word terrorism .... is like pulling teeth!

Not funny any more .... they are playing a very dangerous game with the American people.

Everyone knows it is out there. We just choose not to let it rule our lives as many of you seem to wish we would. It's a bit like the overprotective parent who refuses to let their child go outside to play on their own with friends, because they just might get kidnapped. The funniest thing about the overprotective parent thing is that it is safer for our kids today than it was when we were kids. It just seems more dangerous because we hear about every single abduction that takes place anywhere in the world within five minutes of it happening.

The same is true for these terrorists, we know they are out there. Are you going to lock yourself in your house and never go anywhere because one of them might kill you? Sorry, but I'm going to live my life in a normal manner. If they get me, then it's my time. That doesn't mean I am suggesting that we just be oblivious to these terrorists, but it does mean I don't want them making decisions as to what I will or will not do in my daily life.

This isn't about making life less enjoyable for the 98% of us not interested in slaughtering Americans. It's about making life less convenient for those who promote, plan and perpetrate the Boston Bombings and their supporters. You seem willing to accept casualties even though some relatively painless remedies are available to us. That's like willfully failing to strap a newborn into a car seat.

 

[Montrovant]

For this Administration to admit that there is a Radical Islamic Jihadist war going on... to even utter the word terrorism .... is like pulling teeth!

Not funny any more .... they are playing a very dangerous game with the American people.

Everyone knows it is out there. We just choose not to let it rule our lives as many of you seem to wish we would. It's a bit like the overprotective parent who refuses to let their child go outside to play on their own with friends, because they just might get kidnapped. The funniest thing about the overprotective parent thing is that it is safer for our kids today than it was when we were kids. It just seems more dangerous because we hear about every single abduction that takes place anywhere in the world within five minutes of it happening.

The same is true for these terrorists, we know they are out there. Are you going to lock yourself in your house and never go anywhere because one of them might kill you? Sorry, but I'm going to live my life in a normal manner. If they get me, then it's my time. That doesn't mean I am suggesting that we just be oblivious to these terrorists, but it does mean I don't want them making decisions as to what I will or will not do in my daily life.

This isn't about making life less enjoyable for the 98% of us not interested in slaughtering Americans. It's about making life less convenient for those who promote, plan and perpetrate the Boston Bombings and their supporters. You seem willing to accept casualties even though some relatively painless remedies are available to us. That's like willfully failing to strap a newborn into a car seat.

Curtailing the rights of Muslims is not relatively painless IMO. And while I believe our internment of Japanese Americans during WWII was a travesty, at least it was during an actual war which could be expected to end. The so-called war on terror is an open ended conflict. If we were to suppress the rights of Muslims in the name of safety, unlike during WWII, we could do it indefinitely. There is no way to eradicate terrorism, and I certainly don't think the religion of Islam is going away any time soon.

Now, there may be any number of ways we could try to prevent more attacks. I just don't want to see it done by unconstitutionally singling out a particular segment of the populace and depriving them of their rights. Any suggestions that don't do that, I'd love to hear.

 

[Unkotare]

In case you missed it, it was the Japanese, not the Germans who attacked us while their emissaries were in DC discussing our differences. You still haven't answered the question: did the internment of our Japanese citizens save American lives?

In case YOU missed it, not one Japanese American was ever convicted of treason or espionage during WWII (the same cannot be said of German Americans and Italian Americans). Instead, Japanese Americans, many who had been thrown in FDR's concentration camps, formed the most decorated unit in US military history. The traitor FDR had sent his own people to the West Coast before his concentration camps were set up, and they concluded that there was no basis for expecting treason from the Japanese American community. It turns out that despite having their rights as Americans completely violated, their loyalty was proven to be unparalleled. So, to answer your question: NO, it manifestly did NOT.

And in case you missed it, the lives of our Japanese American citizens ARE American lives.

In fact, it is the lives of the Japanese Americans to which I was referring, and FDR was a traitor you say?
Could you post a link to that "fact?"?

What the hell have we been talking about? He threw innocent, loyal AMERICANS into ******* concentration camps.

 

[Unkotare]

BTW, do you think that if some Muslim American rights were curtailed as a result of Muslim terror attacks on Americans that they would be loyal to the US?

I think we are not going to find out, because unless Obama is as vile a villain as FDR we're not going to repeat the same crime against AMERICAN CITIZENS.

 

[Unkotare]

Followed shortly thereafter by the spics, the spooks, the gooks, the chinks, ETC...

When they become the highest percentage of attacks against American civilians? Yes

I know it's become a bit of a cliché, but the famous Franklin quotation has never rung truer: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.". Suspending the rights of legal residents on the basis of religion, race, age, sex, or any combination of demographic categories is something that should NEVER be tolerated in a free and open society, and here's a good place for a "period". The fact that this point is now considered debatable is a clear indication of just how far American society has fallen from some of the highest principles on which this country was founded.

On a related note: the younger brother was discovered by a citizen who then notified the police of his whereabouts; the capture was in NO WAY the fruition of the trampled rights of the million or so residents of Boston and its surrounding vicinities.

Searching your house for a few minutes because a murderous terrorist might be hiding there is not "trampling on your rights." Confiscating your house, business, and holdings then throwing you into a concentration camp for years is "trampling on your rights."

 

[Hossfly]

BTW, do you think that if some Muslim American rights were curtailed as a result of Muslim terror attacks on Americans that they would be loyal to the US?

I think we are not going to find out, because unless Obama is as vile a villain as FDR we're not going to repeat the same crime against AMERICAN CITIZENS.

100% correct! Sheikh O'Bama will do nothing to curb Islamic terrorism. It is against Koranic Law for a Muslim to harm another Muslim(s).

 

[SAYIT]

Everyone knows it is out there. We just choose not to let it rule our lives as many of you seem to wish we would. It's a bit like the overprotective parent who refuses to let their child go outside to play on their own with friends, because they just might get kidnapped. The funniest thing about the overprotective parent thing is that it is safer for our kids today than it was when we were kids. It just seems more dangerous because we hear about every single abduction that takes place anywhere in the world within five minutes of it happening.

The same is true for these terrorists, we know they are out there. Are you going to lock yourself in your house and never go anywhere because one of them might kill you? Sorry, but I'm going to live my life in a normal manner. If they get me, then it's my time. That doesn't mean I am suggesting that we just be oblivious to these terrorists, but it does mean I don't want them making decisions as to what I will or will not do in my daily life.

This isn't about making life less enjoyable for the 98% of us not interested in slaughtering Americans. It's about making life less convenient for those who promote, plan and perpetrate the Boston Bombings and their supporters. You seem willing to accept casualties even though some relatively painless remedies are available to us. That's like willfully failing to strap a newborn into a car seat.

Curtailing the rights of Muslims is not relatively painless IMO. And while I believe our internment of Japanese Americans during WWII was a travesty, at least it was during an actual war which could be expected to end. The so-called war on terror is an open ended conflict. If we were to suppress the rights of Muslims in the name of safety, unlike during WWII, we could do it indefinitely. There is no way to eradicate terrorism, and I certainly don't think the religion of Islam is going away any time soon.

Now, there may be any number of ways we could try to prevent more attacks. I just don't want to see it done by unconstitutionally singling out a particular segment of the populace and depriving them of their rights. Any suggestions that don't do that, I'd love to hear.

I'm not suggesting internment nor am I suggesting we restrict the rights of all American Muslims but restricting the rights of some is better than picking up the dead and broken bodies after the next attack. I am saying we should be considering what extrajudicial actions we are willing to take now to reduce the risk of that attack because it is in the works as we speak.
It's kinda like why we strap the baby into a car seat. Precaution.

 

[Unkotare]

This isn't about making life less enjoyable for the 98% of us not interested in slaughtering Americans. It's about making life less convenient for those who promote, plan and perpetrate the Boston Bombings and their supporters. You seem willing to accept casualties even though some relatively painless remedies are available to us. That's like willfully failing to strap a newborn into a car seat.

Curtailing the rights of Muslims is not relatively painless IMO. And while I believe our internment of Japanese Americans during WWII was a travesty, at least it was during an actual war which could be expected to end. The so-called war on terror is an open ended conflict. If we were to suppress the rights of Muslims in the name of safety, unlike during WWII, we could do it indefinitely. There is no way to eradicate terrorism, and I certainly don't think the religion of Islam is going away any time soon.

Now, there may be any number of ways we could try to prevent more attacks. I just don't want to see it done by unconstitutionally singling out a particular segment of the populace and depriving them of their rights. Any suggestions that don't do that, I'd love to hear.

I'm not suggesting internment nor am I suggesting we restrict the rights of all American Muslims but restricting the rights of some is better than picking up the dead and broken bodies after the next attack.

"Some" who? American citizens?

 

[SAYIT]

When they become the highest percentage of attacks against American civilians? Yes

I know it's become a bit of a cliché, but the famous Franklin quotation has never rung truer: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.". Suspending the rights of legal residents on the basis of religion, race, age, sex, or any combination of demographic categories is something that should NEVER be tolerated in a free and open society, and here's a good place for a "period". The fact that this point is now considered debatable is a clear indication of just how far American society has fallen from some of the highest principles on which this country was founded.

On a related note: the younger brother was discovered by a citizen who then notified the police of his whereabouts; the capture was in NO WAY the fruition of the trampled rights of the million or so residents of Boston and its surrounding vicinities.

Searching your house for a few minutes because a murderous terrorist might be hiding there is not "trampling on your rights." Confiscating your house, business, and holdings then throwing you into a concentration camp for years is "trampling on your rights."

Now this is the conversation I had in mind. You clearly accept extrajudicial searches as something we should endure as the price of security while Cap believes it represents the trampling of our civil rights. I'm saying we should be using those extrajudicial powers not just after the next attack in an effort to capture the perps but rather beforehand to stop the attack altogether.
In this case we are talking a matter of degree. You want some, Cap wants none and I want more of it selectively applied.
I hope you now understand I was not talking about opening camps but rather using them as an example of what we have done in the past in the face of this clear and present danger to Americans.

 

[Unkotare]

I know it's become a bit of a cliché, but the famous Franklin quotation has never rung truer: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.". Suspending the rights of legal residents on the basis of religion, race, age, sex, or any combination of demographic categories is something that should NEVER be tolerated in a free and open society, and here's a good place for a "period". The fact that this point is now considered debatable is a clear indication of just how far American society has fallen from some of the highest principles on which this country was founded.

On a related note: the younger brother was discovered by a citizen who then notified the police of his whereabouts; the capture was in NO WAY the fruition of the trampled rights of the million or so residents of Boston and its surrounding vicinities.

Searching your house for a few minutes because a murderous terrorist might be hiding there is not "trampling on your rights." Confiscating your house, business, and holdings then throwing you into a concentration camp for years is "trampling on your rights."

Now this is the conversation I had in mind. You clearly accept extrajudicial searches as something we should endure as the price of security .

No, I don't. Do not try to put words in my mouth. Those searches were not "extrajudicial."

 

[SAYIT]

Searching your house for a few minutes because a murderous terrorist might be hiding there is not "trampling on your rights." Confiscating your house, business, and holdings then throwing you into a concentration camp for years is "trampling on your rights."

Now this is the conversation I had in mind. You clearly accept extrajudicial searches as something we should endure as the price of security .

No, I don't. Do not try to put words in my mouth. Those searches were not "extrajudicial."

According to Cap they were and he has a valid argument. No warrant - no legal search.

 

[Unkotare]

Now this is the conversation I had in mind. You clearly accept extrajudicial searches as something we should endure as the price of security .

No, I don't. Do not try to put words in my mouth. Those searches were not "extrajudicial."

According to Cap they were and he has a valid argument. No warrant - no legal search.

That is not accurate.

 

[SAYIT]

In case YOU missed it, not one Japanese American was ever convicted of treason or espionage during WWII (the same cannot be said of German Americans and Italian Americans). Instead, Japanese Americans, many who had been thrown in FDR's concentration camps, formed the most decorated unit in US military history. The traitor FDR had sent his own people to the West Coast before his concentration camps were set up, and they concluded that there was no basis for expecting treason from the Japanese American community. It turns out that despite having their rights as Americans completely violated, their loyalty was proven to be unparalleled. So, to answer your question: NO, it manifestly did NOT.

And in case you missed it, the lives of our Japanese American citizens ARE American lives.

In fact, it is the lives of the Japanese Americans to which I was referring, and FDR was a traitor you say?
Could you post a link to that "fact?"?

What the hell have we been talking about? He threw innocent, loyal AMERICANS into ******* concentration camps.

Concentration camps? Traitor? I can see I've touched a nerve but I am not suggesting we reopen those camps and I reject your characterization of FDR as a traitor.
I used the camps as an example of how far we have at times strayed from constitutionality (perhaps misguidedly) to insure public safety. It ain't pretty and it ain't right yet sometimes it seems necessary.
I'd say given the anti-Japanese sentiment of the 1st half of the 20th Century that Japanese American lives may well have been saved by those camps.
BTW, you've read my posts long enough to know you are willfully trying to portray me as something you must know I am not and I'd appreciate if you'd cut the crap.