Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

I Has a Bucket: Preventing bucket theft on Bleeding Hollow | FUBU: A better BH Forum
It is currently Mon Jul 07, 2025 3:55 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 95 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 1:20 pm  
User avatar

French Faggot
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:15 pm
Posts: 5227
Location: New Jersey
Offline

Remember when Obama killed the guy we declared war on 11 years ago and it wasn't good enough?

Because I remember that.


If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 1:24 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

Ok so you are ignorant and get all your ideas from right-wing TV. Got it.

As I said, our gas costs are lower than any country except those with nationalized oil production, so regulation isn't the problem. Most of the consumer cost (as in over half) for what is a natural resource is pure profit.

Most oil production is foreign because there simply aren't untapped oil fields in the US. This is why most US drilling is offshore. To get around that and make very sub-optimal US fields economically competitive you'd have to engage in...severe regulation of the free market. Why drill in the US when you can drill much more cheaply in Russia or Nigeria? Well I guess regulation to ensure domestic production works so well with corn, we should do the same with oil. Right?

Even if it were economically competitive to drill in the US, it wouldn't help because at best, and at huge ecological cost (shale oil and similar technologies produce many times the emissions of drilling and render the land totally unusable, and also produce vast quantities of toxic wastewater that can't be dumped because it kills anything it touches - there are satellite photos that show this) you'd get maybe a half-century of oil, meaning in effect you're just kicking the bucket to the next generation because for all your blather about sacrifice all you care about is cheaper crap in the here and now.

There are two blends of gas in the US, CA and everywhere else. The reason CA has its own blends is because pollution was out of control and there was an overwhelming mandate to put a stop to the problem. Today, the Bay Area/LA has less air pollution than it did a few decades ago. I am from Sacramento and I can tell you that we still get blown all the pollution from SF/LA and it would be much worse if it wasn't for those laws. I can also tell you that I remember when they stopped selling leaded gasoline and only because the government told them to cut it out. I guess you don't think legalizing the burning of a carcinogen and neurotoxin is a problem? And I'll also tell you that the water in much of CA tastes like bilge because the gas companies dumped MBTE in the water until the government (again) stepped in and told them to cut that crap out. If you doubt any of this ask Lucinth, he's from Sacramento too.

If ever there were a case of states' rights , or your "laboratory of democracy" crap working, this is it. But funny enough all that libertarian rhetoric goes to hell when some libertarian whiner doesn't get what they want (cheap Thneeds) right here, right now.

Now these same disloyal Americans think they should tell other states how to manage their environment, that their citizens should have to live with intense pollution, put their health, safety and future at risk, oh, and dictate the conditions of the "free market", because God forbid they are paying not 50% but 75% the cost of gas of the rest of the free world, which, incidentally, are currently outperforming us economically. How about that?

All this is really about is corporate interests promising stupid and greedy Americans the moon so they can squeeze this country for a few more bucks.

Quote:
I'd build more refineries, move to using nuclear where it's possible


Image

For someone who prides themselves on an enlightened understanding of nuclear technology, you're proving the incredible profundity of your ignorance. Almost no power in the US is generated from petrol. Coal produces the overwhelming majority of this country's power. Nuclear is relevant only to petrol consumption if you mean to implement an electric car/mass transit infrastructure.

You hear on TV that reducing emissions regulations would bring power costs down because the corporate interests that underwrite the garbage you watch would sell you the moon if they thought they could make a buck doing it.

Quote:
make a contest out of alternative energy much the way the space prize thing had random citizens shooting Red Bull rockets into space it


Again this is the kind of stupid idea that comes from watching way too much right-wing TV.

Those stupid prizes and contests haven't produced results anywhere near as good as NASA and the Soviets got back in the 60s (that's 50 years, half a century, for you math freaks out there), and with far worse reliability. Moreover those efforts are by their nature fixed on winning the prize and therefore have little relevance to a wider, sustained effort. Launching from a retrofitted abandoned cruise liner, using scrounged-up Soviet surplus, with odds a crash dummy would balk at, is completely not comparable to establishing durable infrastructure suitable to productive industry.

The only sell of the "contest" approach is the prospect of a free lunch. Moon pie. Plain and simple the "contest" BS is pandering to dumb Americans who want everything for free, want low prices and advanced technology and to keep pace with the rest of the world without having to make any sacrifices at all.

But we (CA) did try this approach. I've mentioned this anecdote before. GM produced the EV1 in 1996, taking a prize at the CA state fair. It was like De Beers discovered how to turn turds to diamonds using only a microwave. They freaked when they realized how revolutionary the discovery was, denied the torrent of purchase requests and destroyed all prototypes. Ten years later they were bankrupt and blamed...government regulation. Morons like you believe despite objective facts from hands-on experience because you're stupid and uninformed and prefer to get promised the moon rather than be subjected to education or make some marginal sacrifices for the good of your country.

Bottom line all your ignorant crap comes from watching right-wing TV and doesn't make sense even according to your own ignorant ideology, let alone the hard facts of what goes on in the real world.


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 1:54 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

Yuratuhl wrote:
Remember when Obama killed the guy we declared war on 11 years ago and it wasn't good enough?

Because I remember that.


I dont remember Obama graduating from SEAL school


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 2:36 pm  
User avatar

French Faggot
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:15 pm
Posts: 5227
Location: New Jersey
Offline

Usdk wrote:
Yuratuhl wrote:
Remember when Obama killed the guy we declared war on 11 years ago and it wasn't good enough?

Because I remember that.


I dont remember Obama graduating from SEAL school


I don't remember SEALs going in there and accomplishing everything of their own volition. He's commander-in-chief, he doesn't have to be Rambo on top of it.

And if Obama is "responsible" for drone strikes on terrorist-allied American citizens, he's definitely allowed to claim credit for killing Bin Laden.


If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 2:39 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

Any american would have made the same call. The only thing ballsy about it was violating pakistan's sovereignty in doing so, but since they were hiding him they can fuck off anyway.

Yes I'm glad he's dead. As for killing him, the war is still going on, embassies are still getting blowin up across the region, everything is STILL a shitstorm and its spreading. It's one bright spot in a very dark room, so while I"m happy about it, I cant say that it changed anything.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:26 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

I agree with USD. It would have happened with or without Obama. (Although I still don't understand why it took Bush seven years and Obama three more to NOT get bin Laden). The relevance of the bin Laden hit is, those same people who blame Obama for the economy and consulate bombings then turn around and deny him praise for other things that simply happened on his watch.

A President has very little power today, other than not making things even worse.


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 4:46 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:39 pm
Posts: 3686
Location: Potomac, MD
Offline

I'm beginning to think that those who don't like Aestu or what he has to say (or both) simply do not have the gray matter in between their ears to actually comprehend any of it. That, or the truth hurts and they don't have the balls to accept it and try some real introspection. Or both!

Or none, I could be completely wrong.


[✔] [item]Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the Windseeker[/item] (Three)
[✔] [item]Sulfuras, Hand of Ragnaros[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]32837[/item] & [item]32838[/item]
[✔] [item]Thori'dal, the Stars' Fury[/item]
[✔] [item]46017[/item]
[✔] [item]49623[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]71086[/item]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 10:16 pm  
User avatar

MegaFaggot 5000
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:39 pm
Posts: 4804
Location: Cinci, OH
Offline

Usdk wrote:
Yes I'm glad he's dead. As for killing him, the war is still going on, embassies are still getting blowin up across the region, everything is STILL a shitstorm and its spreading. It's one bright spot in a very dark room, so while I"m happy about it, I cant say that it changed anything.

This is true, but Obama still had a group of SEALs invade a soverign nation with a strike force and shoot one of the most universally hated men in America through the eye.

I just think its hilarious that:

a) republicans are mad that Obama is "bragging" about it (is he even bragging? I know a bunch of people were pushing it at the DNC) but if it happened under Bush, we'd still be hearing about it.
b) republicans are trying to paint this picture of Obama being weak and an apologist for America even though Osama was shot through the face, Gaddafi was probably dragged out of a bunker and butchered by a bunch of angry Libyans with american support, we're blowing up Pakistanis with sky-robots, and we're sending troops to Central Africa (i think).


RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 3:12 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

One of Obama's main successes is how effectively the military is killing bad guys under his presidency. Credit where its due.

Nobel Peace Prize.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 3:13 am  
User avatar

Old Conservative Faggot
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:19 am
Posts: 4308
Location: Winchester Virginia
Offline

Aestu wrote:
Ok so you are ignorant and get all your ideas from right-wing TV. Got it.


I thought we had all agreed that the "you don't read...oh wait, maybe you do, but you read the wrong books" argument was going to be retired?

Aestu wrote:
As I said, our gas costs are lower than any country except those with nationalized oil production, so regulation isn't the problem. Most of the consumer cost (as in over half) for what is a natural resource is pure profit.


No one looks at the cost when they discuss gasoline, they look at the price (and price is not always a reflection of the true cost due to subsidies and taxation). Our fuel prices are lower than in most other countries, but in a lot of cases this is a matter of tax policy and is not a reflection of any of the tangible costs associated with production and distribution.

Aestu wrote:
Most oil production is foreign because there simply aren't untapped oil fields in the US. This is why most US drilling is offshore. To get around that and make very sub-optimal US fields economically competitive you'd have to engage in...severe regulation of the free market. Why drill in the US when you can drill much more cheaply in Russia or Nigeria? Well I guess regulation to ensure domestic production works so well with corn, we should do the same with oil. Right?


Well, if you're not watching Fox News to get your information, you're still reading the wrong books. Not only are there untapped resources, but the oil industry isn't drilling on some leases because they claim it isn't economically viable to do so (which leads many of their critics to suggest they're leaving those sources untapped to keep prices up). You're also forgetting that until the BP disaster, even President Obama was on board with opening drilling in the Atlantic off the coast of states like VA and NC (a move that was pushed by our former democrat governor and current senate candidate Tim Kaine). There is a lot of untapped fuel, and not just because it's being blocked by regulation and the oil industry hedging bets. The U.S. is sitting on the world's largest, untapped oil reserves which energy experts know exist, but which have not yet been tapped because they cannot be utilized with current technology.


Aestu wrote:
Even if it were economically competitive to drill in the US, it wouldn't help because at best, and at huge ecological cost (shale oil and similar technologies produce many times the emissions of drilling and render the land totally unusable, and also produce vast quantities of toxic wastewater that can't be dumped because it kills anything it touches - there are satellite photos that show this) you'd get maybe a half-century of oil, meaning in effect you're just kicking the bucket to the next generation because for all your blather about sacrifice all you care about is cheaper crap in the here and now.


A half century may be all we need while we change our infrastructure to accept new alternatives. Electric cars are finally being built that aren't complete crap, and with a switch to nuclear and other sources, wouldn't rely on coal and oil for fuel. I've even started seeing charging stations in and around the area where I work for these cars. One of the local restaurants here (a chain place, surprisingly) has a designated spot out front for an electric vehicle that has a charging station.

Cheaper crap in the here and now isn't just for own personal enjoyment. When we bring the cost of any good or service down, it expands the pool of people capable of enjoying the benefits of those goods and services...you know, poor people.

Aestu wrote:
There are two blends of gas in the US, CA and everywhere else. The reason CA has its own blends is because pollution was out of control and there was an overwhelming mandate to put a stop to the problem. Today, the Bay Area/LA has less air pollution than it did a few decades ago. I am from Sacramento and I can tell you that we still get blown all the pollution from SF/LA and it would be much worse if it wasn't for those laws.


I guess the BBC isn't doing as good a job "educating" you as Fox News has done "brainwashing" me. According to the GAO:

GAO wrote:
There were 12 distinct gasoline blends in use in the United States during
the summer of 2004: 11 special gasoline blends and the conventional
gasoline used everywhere a special blend is not used. When different
grades of gasoline, special blends used in winter, and other factors are
considered, the number of gasoline blends rises to at least 45. New ozone
standards and other factors may further increase the number or the use of
special gasoline blends in the future, in part because EPA must approve any
state’s application to require use of a special gasoline blend as long as the
proposed fuel meets EPA’s environmental standards.


Aestu wrote:
If ever there were a case of states' rights , or your "laboratory of democracy" crap working, this is it. But funny enough all that libertarian rhetoric goes to hell when some libertarian whiner doesn't get what they want (cheap Thneeds) right here, right now.


One state forcing all the others into a certain state of affairs by strong-arming multiple industries is the antithesis of the "laboratories of democracy" idea, and is actually even worse than top-down federal regulation because at least every state/citizen has representation in the federal system.

Aestu wrote:
All this is really about is corporate interests promising stupid and greedy Americans the moon so they can squeeze this country for a few more bucks.


CORPORATIONS!!!! rabblerabblerabblerabble 1%!!!! rabblerabblerabble---this is beneath you.

Aestu wrote:
Quote:
I'd build more refineries, move to using nuclear where it's possible


Image

For someone who prides themselves on an enlightened understanding of nuclear technology, you're proving the incredible profundity of your ignorance. Almost no power in the US is generated from petrol. Coal produces the overwhelming majority of this country's power. Nuclear is relevant only to petrol consumption if you mean to implement an electric car/mass transit infrastructure.


And for someone who fails at reading comprehension on the regular, I guess I should not be surprised that you completely overlook the first half of that sentence. Refining capacity is one of the factors driving the at-the-pump price of fuel, which is why special blends are a problem. Nuclear is relevant because I got off on a tangent and went into what would make for good overall energy policy, but as you point out, as we move to electric vehicles nuclear is going to become important, especially if we want to start migrating away from coal-fired electrical plants.

Aestu wrote:
Again this is the kind of stupid idea that comes from watching way too much right-wing TV...


Wow, that was a refreshingly nutty and trite recycling of almost every "it's corporations/rich people/dumb Americans/Fox News" argument I'v ever heard. You should organize for the Occupy movement...turn it into a cult. You'd make a killing, and wouldn't even have to pay for your live-in harem.

Your Pal,
Jubber


AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 7:53 am  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 9:47 pm
Posts: 787
Location: Australia
Offline

I'm getting the impression that you all think the people choose.

hahahahhahahha


If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little.
Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 8:47 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

OK, so your response is to twist facts that you're too uneducated to put into proper context, so they fit your selfish nonsense.

You have absolutely no idea how tax policy supposedly causes oil prices to rise, especially since as I said, most of the end-user cost is pure profit (hence the refining argument is also BS), and our pump prices are lower than anywhere else in the civilized world, but you're sure it's true.

Your response about American oil reserves is an echo of exactly what I said. The poorly written right-wing op-ed you Googled gives a bunch of numbers but it doesn't cite any of them. It corroborates my initial claims about why extracting those barrels doesn't make environmental or ecological sense, but it doesn't explain why those reasons aren't valid other than promising some sort of free lunch if we just let corporations do whatever they want.

Further proof that the article's claims are bullshit is that these same issues apply with gold and silver. Nevada has a ton of silver reserves and there's still some untapped gold in California, but no one makes a point of getting to it because it's not economically viable. All that means is that the market is working as intended.

The GAO report, which you didn't read, says that 1) the laws were driven by low air quality and 2) their findings are entirely correlation-based. So to change things up means we must sacrifice air quality (why? so we can be miserable like the Chinese and wear gas masks wherever we go?) and since the findings are correlation based (the "supply argument" falls flat when one considers that most of the cost is pure profit and these companies flatly refuse to build infrastructure) there is no reason to believe that gas companies won't just continue to play the shell game.

Mexico is right next door and has no regulation but they refuse to build refineries there either. Why should they, when they can convince dumb Americans like you to let them sacrifice our health, safety, and national security so they can continue to cash in without having to make any investment?

The argument that opening up domestic oil will tide us over while we make the transition to other fuels is asinine because the point of doing so would be to reduce fuel prices, which would increase our dependence on oil. Obviously if the price of oil begins to rise then other fuel sources become more attractive. If the price of oil falls then oil becomes more attractive, justifying continued investment in oil-based infrastructure. Like a lot of people who squawk about the free market because they think it will somehow get them a free lunch, you don't understand the extreme basics of how it works. All the market blather amounts to is pandering to disloyal Americans who refuse to make sacrifices for their country and want everything, for free, right now.

The biggest proof it's all bull is why the hell would we build refining stations if the goal is to move AWAY from oil? If the issue is fuel standardization then why not just standardize on electric? The moment that electrical infrastructure starts to appear, demand for oil will drop.

30 years ago no one had a PC, today everyone does, same with LCDs, HDTVs, etc. Were we building more vacuum tube factories? The "transition" argument is garbage. Clearly this isn't about supply or demand at all, it's about corporate greed and American ignorance.

Quote:
One state forcing all the others into a certain state of affairs by strong-arming multiple industries is the antithesis of the "laboratories of democracy" idea


That's politics. QQ your side lost. Disloyal libertarians hate America and don't care about anything other than their own greedy selfish asses.

Quote:
electric cars are finally being built that aren't complete crap


Electric cars have been fine for decades. Electric motors are the most proven of proven technologies and haven't changed in a century. The only part of the electric car that has ever been problematic is the battery and that hasn't been a serious consideration since the development of NiMH batteries. Now that lithium-ion technology is widely available (and anyone who knows anything about chemistry or physics understands why that is the acme of energy storage), fully optimized electric cars are superior in most respects to gas-powered cars (better acceleration, smoother handling, more responsive, lighter, quieter - their only weakness is a lack of horsepower which doesn't matter for most users).

None of that matters however because American industry is determined to not do anything to rock the boat. Why should they? Why challenge powerful interests by introducing cars that don't need the fuel (or replacement parts etc) hawked by the companies that control the country, so any dolt can power up his car by plugging it in?

And why do you think electric cars were "complete crap"? Ever driven one? Have you even ever seen one? They have amazing acceleration (tap the pedal and the car silently takes off at full speed, like an upsized toy racer) and the ride is much smoother.

This is much funnier when you see it from my father's point of view. He walks about in fear of electric and hybrid cars.

The only reason you believe they are crap is because you get all your ideas from right-wing media. Why don't you go test-drive a hybrid? Seriously, you could go to the local dealer and try it out.

(The drive is actually kind of surreal and takes some getting used to.)

Quote:
Cheaper crap in the here and now isn't just for own personal enjoyment. When we bring the cost of any good or service down, it expands the pool of people capable of enjoying the benefits of those goods and services...you know, poor people.


Wrong. Again you talk about the free market but because you are uneducated you have no idea how it works.

The rule of pricing is to charge what the market will bear. If oil costs go down that will have absolutely no impact on end-user prices - most of the end-user cost of oil is pure profit therefore any reduction in production cost will only increase profit margins. Competition doesn't apply because oil production is run by cartels and you can't very well just start your own oil company. The only common theme to what you say is right-wing propaganda sold on the expectation of a free lunch.

In sum, your response is pretty much the same as the Communists talking about collectivized agriculture. It's a shitty system that everyone hates and gets terrible results, while other countries have solutions that work, but one is just determined to warp every fact to fit the ideology. If you point out the system doesn't work they will spout quotations from the Little Red Book or right-wing memes.

Meanwhile the EU continues to prosper but these ignorant, selfish, lazy, disloyal Americans are determined to drag this nation down to the level of a third-world country, in search of that free lunch.

PS: Another important economic factor all this ignores is the health and infrastructure costs associated with gas-powered cars such as building gas stations (which are toxic waste sites that are costly to clean up), health problems (everything from asthma to cancer), and even maintenance of roads and buildings (vehicle emissions are corrosive). If you doubt the latter is a serious issue, you can google "melting" statues in Greece or Italy, which have lower emissions laws than the rest of the EU (or US).

All those costs would disappear if oil prices rose, auto companies were (again) forced to by the government to do things they don't want to do, and Americans went electric. Within a generation, there would be substantial savings.


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 8:54 am  
User avatar

Old Conservative Faggot
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:19 am
Posts: 4308
Location: Winchester Virginia
Offline

Aestu wrote:
TL;DR: I'm right and you're wrong because I said so.


Image

Your Pal,
Jubber


AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 8:57 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

afterthought: it's funny to consider that one of the repercussions of transition to electric cars would be the resuscitation of the sleigh bell industry


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: @arab spring
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 5:05 am  
User avatar

Old Conservative Faggot
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:19 am
Posts: 4308
Location: Winchester Virginia
Offline

I found two paragraphs in an article this morning that I think sum up the problem with the "apology"/"don't offend Muslims" response:

WSJ wrote:
Ms. Rice's reference to the 1988 novel "The Satanic Verses" is especially unfortunate since Iran issued a fatwa urging the murder of author Salman Rushdie. Ms. Rice is suggesting that what matters is whether Muslims take offense against some Western statement or work, regardless of its value as art or free-expression. We wonder how Mr. Rushdie feels about having his work linked to the trashy and insulting video "Innocence of Muslims" as a provocation for violence.


What bothers me about this about the "don't offend Muslims" line is that a) it excuses the piss-poor behavior on the grounds that it's justified, and b) it sets a precedent for others to follow. What if (God forbid) the idiot evangelical extremists/WBC/pick your poison pick up on this "riot and get what you want" mentality?

WSJ wrote:
It's one thing for the U.S. government to say it isn't responsible for and disapproves of an anti-Islamic video. But it's another to say the video is the reason for anti-American violence. Eleven years after 9/11 and 33 years after the Iranian revolution, it should be obvious that there is no end to the insults that Islamic radicals can imagine or cite as an excuse to foment anti-American, anti-Western protests and violence.


It doesn't matter what we say/do over here, someone over there is going to find something to be offended about because much like gender studies students on college campuses, they're actively looking for something to be pissed off and obnoxious about and will make something up if they can't find something.

Your Pal,
Jubber


AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 95 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

World of Warcraft phpBB template "WoWMoonclaw" created by MAËVAH (ex-MOONCLAW) (v3.0.8.0) - wowcr.net : World of Warcraft styles & videos
© World of Warcraft and Blizzard Entertainment are trademarks or registered trademarks of Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries. wowcr.net is in no way associated with Blizzard Entertainment.
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group