[quote]pushharder wrote:
But we keep right on giving up more of our freedom so they can “try harder.”[/quote]
We need to ‘pushharder’
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am sorry were attacked, maybe there attack was not conventionally implemented but it was an attack all the same .
[/quote]
If you want to believe it was an attack go ahead but “we” were not attacked. This was an attack against the US government and its failed and corrupt foreign policy.
Te unfortunate thing, as in all government created conflict, there were some “collateral damage” which if we follow the logic of our TV masters must be completely legit - at least when it happens to brown people on the other side of the globe it is.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am sorry were attacked, maybe there attack was not conventionally implemented but it was an attack all the same .
[/quote]
If you want to believe it was an attack go ahead but “we” were not attacked. This was an attack against the US government and its failed and corrupt foreign policy.
Te unfortunate thing, as in all government created conflict, there were some “collateral damage” which if we follow the logic of our TV masters must be completely legit - at least when it happens to brown people on the other side of the globe it is.[/quote]
Targeting an office building in downtown NYC is not “collateral damage,” and fuck this apologist piffle.
About to board the third plane I’ve been on in 24 hours. Agree with most of the heavy DHS and national security criticism, but I’m pretty excited about the fact that me and everybody on board with me had to go through security, regardless of whether or not I have high “situational awareness.”
[quote]smh23 wrote:
About to board the third plane I’ve been on in 24 hours. Agree with most of the heavy DHS and national security criticism, but I’m pretty excited about the fact that me and everybody on board with me had to go through security, regardless of whether or not I have high “situational awareness.”[/quote]
Word of advice. If someone stands up yelling “Allah Akbar” go kick his ass.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am sorry were attacked, maybe there attack was not conventionally implemented but it was an attack all the same .
[/quote]
If you want to believe it was an attack go ahead but “we” were not attacked. This was an attack against the US government and its failed and corrupt foreign policy.
Te unfortunate thing, as in all government created conflict, there were some “collateral damage” which if we follow the logic of our TV masters must be completely legit - at least when it happens to brown people on the other side of the globe it is.[/quote]
Targeting an office building in downtown NYC is not “collateral damage,” and fuck this apologist piffle.[/quote]
If you apply the same logic that the nitwits who read the news on TV do it is exactly the same.
The buildings were the targets and the victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Now, take all your rage you feel at me for exposing this truth to you and multiply it by a million - that is the rage a 30something Iraqi feels right now who watched his entire family be obliterated while somehow simultaneously being delivered to freedom by US bomber jets.
LOL at your cute, lil “apologist” smokescreen.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The buildings were the targets and the victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
[/quote]
I said something the other day about something somebody wrote having been the stupidest thing I’d read in months. It no longer is.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]DirtyM wrote:
Three people were killed two days ago. How many times have we been attacked in CONUS since the War on Terror began on September 11? How many people were murdered in Boston over the previous weekend? Put this in perspective… In case anyone is hyper sensitive or likes to jump to conclusions- I am not disrespecting the victims killed or wounded one iota, and my sentiments do not belittle their suffering at all.
But…no shit. Our government cannot keep every single citizen safe on our own soil. Take a walk through US history the past, oh, 100+ years and you’ll realize Monday was relatively small potatoes regarding bombing attacks. A bombing could happen 5-10 times a year, and it still would NOT justify what our government is planning or will do to limit our freedoms/rights as a response. People have given in that they are property of the government, like goldfish in a tank.
Your first and best defense, citizens, is to be be situationally aware and dialed in. I don’t expect local or federal LE, the military or anyone else to be able to fully protect me from a bombing like Monday. But if people were a little more curious, aware of their surroundings, and not drifting through life lol’ng at bullshit on their iPhones- maybe…maybe someone might have observed something and simply asked a few questions that deterred said terrorist. But, we’re all going to live forever and Government will protect me.
[/quote]
I think you nailed it.
Today’s culture is one of Starbucks and Bieber, where those in their 30’s and older grew up with some idea of personal responsibility.
Come on, you think these skinny jean bastards are going to “man up” and protect themselves ?
Or are they more concerned that their faux-hawk stay perfect ?
[/quote]
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The buildings were the targets and the victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
[/quote]
I said something the other day about something somebody wrote having been the stupidest thing I’d read in months. It no longer is.[/quote]
Funny. I always thought of those as being the vacuous posts like this that compete with the ever-increasing amount of “stupidest things I’d read in months”.
Really, you have absolutely no ability to refute logic.
The only specified targets were inanimate symbols directed at the overlords.
It really is a shame that more people will be the victim of American Empire and people like you will help apologize for it.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am sorry were attacked, maybe there attack was not conventionally implemented but it was an attack all the same .
[/quote]
If you want to believe it was an attack go ahead but “we” were not attacked. This was an attack against the US government and its failed and corrupt foreign policy.
Te unfortunate thing, as in all government created conflict, there were some “collateral damage” which if we follow the logic of our TV masters must be completely legit - at least when it happens to brown people on the other side of the globe it is.[/quote]
semantics
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The only specified targets were inanimate symbols directed at the overlords.
[/quote]
http://www.defense.gov/news/Dec2001/d20011213ubl.pdf
“…we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all.”
– bin Laden.
“Optimistic,” as in, expecting the highest number of civilian casualties.
So, you’re, like, really really fucking wrong. I did this from an airport on a Kindle by the way. You have no excuse for being so ridiculously misinformed. And I have no excuse for wasting more time talking to you. Adios.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The buildings were the targets and the victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
[/quote]
I said something the other day about something somebody wrote having been the stupidest thing I’d read in months.
[/quote]
To your discredit, yes you did.
[/quote]
You know I don’t actually mean the the stuff I toss at you. I like arguing with you.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The buildings were the targets and the victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
[/quote]
I said something the other day about something somebody wrote having been the stupidest thing I’d read in months.
[/quote]
To your discredit, yes you did.
[/quote]
You know I don’t actually mean the the stuff I toss at you. I like arguing with you.[/quote]
I understand, and the feeling is mutual.
[/quote]
corrected that for ya.
Alright, now i’m out.
To any of the T-brothers traveling, thou shall watch out for dat ass.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The only specified targets were inanimate symbols directed at the overlords.
[/quote]
http://www.defense.gov/news/Dec2001/d20011213ubl.pdf
“…we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all.”
– bin Laden.
“Optimistic,” as in, expecting the highest number of civilian casualties.
So, you’re, like, really really fucking wrong. I did this from an airport on a Kindle by the way. You have no excuse for being so ridiculously misinformed. And I have no excuse for wasting more time talking to you. Adios.[/quote]
Funny how this little exchange just sort of…stopped, huh?
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The only specified targets were inanimate symbols directed at the overlords.
[/quote]
http://www.defense.gov/news/Dec2001/d20011213ubl.pdf
“…we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all.”
– bin Laden.
“Optimistic,” as in, expecting the highest number of civilian casualties.
So, you’re, like, really really fucking wrong. I did this from an airport on a Kindle by the way. You have no excuse for being so ridiculously misinformed. And I have no excuse for wasting more time talking to you. Adios.[/quote]
Funny how this little exchange just sort of…stopped, huh?[/quote]
I stopped because there is no point.
He was an architect that knew how to attack a building to bring it down.
That is all you have proved to me.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The only specified targets were inanimate symbols directed at the overlords.
[/quote]
http://www.defense.gov/news/Dec2001/d20011213ubl.pdf
“…we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all.”
– bin Laden.
“Optimistic,” as in, expecting the highest number of civilian casualties.
So, you’re, like, really really fucking wrong. I did this from an airport on a Kindle by the way. You have no excuse for being so ridiculously misinformed. And I have no excuse for wasting more time talking to you. Adios.[/quote]
Funny how this little exchange just sort of…stopped, huh?[/quote]
I stopped because there is no point.
He was an architect that knew how to attack a building to bring it down.
That is all you have proved to me.[/quote]
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Te [sic] unfortunate thing, as in all government created conflict, there were some “collateral damage” [on 9/11][/quote]
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The buildings were the targets and the victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
[/quote]
“…we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all.”
–Osama bin Laden.
You can say whatever you want, anybody with the ability to read can see what an idiot you’ve made of yourself here. That is, that you simply lied–you said that the people who died on 9/11 were “collateral damage” and that “the buildings were the targets and the victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time,” when in fact bin Laden himself bragged about having been “optimistic” about casualties. See–you said something that wasn’t true; that makes you a fool.
Though I will say that if one considers that your intention in doing so was to revise history in favor of the lunatics who attacked us on September 11, 2001, the word “fool” begins to feel inadequate and ones like “asshole” and “insolent dunce” are suddenly much more attractive.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The buildings were the targets and the victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
[/quote]
I said something the other day about something somebody wrote having been the stupidest thing I’d read in months. It no longer is.[/quote]
Funny. I always thought of those as being the vacuous posts like this that compete with the ever-increasing amount of “stupidest things I’d read in months”.
Really, you have absolutely no ability to refute logic.
The only specified targets were inanimate symbols directed at the overlords.
It really is a shame that more people will be the victim of American Empire and people like you will help apologize for it.[/quote]
What about when AQ or an AQ affiliate attacks a marketplace. Are their targets inanimate fruits, vegetables and structures? Come to think of it I don’t think a Pakistani walking through their local marketplace spends a whole lot of time thinking about or apologizing for the American Empire.