Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Obama

youngandfree said:
According to your scenario, if a woman feels threatened because I am behind her and screams, that still doesn't give her the right to turn around and physically assault me. Period. That's the only way an assault would have occurred if I never had any intention of making physical or verbal contact with her, which btw, Zimmerman made neither. Martin is the one that walked up and initiated the actual contact.

You seem to keep glossing over the.point that on the 911 tape, when the dispatcher told Zimmerman not to follow, he began to make arrangements on where to meet the officer. He says on tape he lost him, and is discussing where exactly he will be when the officer arrives. You keep saying that he willfully ignored the dispatcher's request and CONTINUED to follow Martin, which isn't supported by the 911 tape in any fashion.
Click to expand...

Again and read carefully, I didn't say behind her. Follow along..."FOLLOWING HER FOR BLOCKS"....let's do this again in case you miss it, "FOLLOWING HER FOR BLOCKS", not behind her, not on the same side of the street, not at a bus stop, not in a park,but FOLLOWING HER FOR BLOCKS. I would love to see how that is interpreted by law enforcement and I'd bet the house, it wouldn't be favorable for the person doing the following in most jurisdictions outside of middle earth (Sanford).

And please don't act like you actually know what happened simply because you sympathize with Zimmerman. When it's clear as day that you do.
 
southpaw23 said:
For the love of god, FOLLOWING SOMEONE, not walking, FOLLOWING SOMEONE is viewed as an act of provocation if said person feels threatened, all this was explained at the press conference by the lead prosecutor. Zimmerman wasn't out taking a stroll, he was following a kid while trying to be community cop against the orders of the dispatcher, all of this while being armed.
Click to expand...

Yeah I gotta agree with Southpaw here. First and foremost we may NEVER know exactly what happened that night, after all one person isn't around to defend himself. Bottom line is if Zimmerman doesn't try to play action hero none of this happens. The man has a right to defend himself and if it was self defense by no means do I want him to go to jail for the rest of his life, but at the very least this whole thing was caused by him trying to take the law into his own hands.
 
southpaw23 said:
For the love of god, FOLLOWING SOMEONE, not walking, FOLLOWING SOMEONE is viewed as an act of provocation if said person feels threatened, all this was explained at the press conference by the lead prosecutor. Zimmerman wasn't out taking a stroll, he was following a kid while trying to be community cop against the orders of the dispatcher, all of this while being armed.
Click to expand...

none of which is relevant to a self defense claim under florida statute.
 
Geoforce said:
Bottom line is if Zimmerman doesn't try to play action hero none of this happens.
Click to expand...

bottom line is if trayvon's parents hadn't separated none of this would have happened
bottom line is if zimmerman had crashed into a tree earlier in the day none of this would have happened
bottom line is if trayvon had walked on the sidewalk instead of creeping along around the clubhouse none of this would have happened
bottom line is if zimmerman had made more money and lived in a nicer neighborhood none of this would have happened.

bottom line is making dumbass "none of this would have happened if" statements have 0 to do with law as you can go back a few million years with "none of this would have happened if" and its meaningless to the events that occured at that moment.
 
EasyEJL said:
none of which is relevant to a self defense claim under florida statute.
Click to expand...

Then why did the lead prosecutor claim otherwise at the press conference and decide to take the case to trial? Let me guess...conspiracy. MSNBC got to her, so did the entire liberal media. Why did the lead investigator on the scene, proclaim that he believed a crime had taken place and wanted to arrest Zimmerman that day? Please, we'll see how it plays out at trial. I actually feel bad for both sides, more so for Trayvon's family.
 
EasyEJL said:
bottom line is if trayvon's parents hadn't separated none of this would have happened
bottom line is if zimmerman had crashed into a tree earlier in the day none of this would have happened
bottom line is if trayvon had walked on the sidewalk instead of creeping along around the clubhouse none of this would have happened
bottom line is if zimmerman had made more money and lived in a nicer neighborhood none of this would have happened.

bottom line is making dumbass "none of this would have happened if" statements have 0 to do with law as you can go back a few million years with "none of this would have happened if" and its meaningless to the events that occured at that moment.
Click to expand...

Don't know where the hostility is coming from but ok. I wasn't talking about the law anyways, merely stating that if Zimmerman hadn't tried to play police it's very likely that Trayvon would still be alive and none of this would have happened. That doesn't make Zimmerman guilty and it certainly doesn't make commenting on it something I'm not allowed to do.
 
southpaw23 said:
Then why did the lead prosecutor claim otherwise at the press conference and decide to take the case to trial? Let me guess...conspiracy. MSNBC got to her, so did the liberal media. Please, we'll see how it plays out at trial. I actually feel bad for both sides, more so for Trayvon's family.
Click to expand...

Because of the immense political pressure. Threats of riots in the streets and blood running in the gutters if they didn't. Or did you miss that part too? If they wanted to actually convict him, they would have charged him with manslaughter as it is going to be impossible to prove 2nd degree based on its definition.
 
Geoforce said:
Don't know where the hostility is coming from but ok. I wasn't talking about the law anyways, merely stating that if Zimmerman hadn't tried to play police it's very likely that Trayvon would still be alive and none of this would have happened. That doesn't make Zimmerman guilty and it certainly doesn't make commenting on it something I'm not allowed to do.
Click to expand...

No, actually let's talk about the law. The lead prosecutor on the case, said at the press conference that S.Y.G law does not in her view apply to Zimmerman, based on their findings. That's not me making that claim. That's the claim of the lead prosecutor's office.
 
EasyEJL said:
Because of the immense political pressure. Threats of riots in the streets and blood running in the gutters if they didn't. Or did you miss that part too? If they wanted to actually convict him, they would have charged him with manslaughter as it is going to be impossible to prove 2nd degree based on its definition.
Click to expand...

We'll see. The vast majority just wanted to see this thing taken to trial. No one that I'm aware of is calling for Zimmerman's head, just that Trayvon's side is presented at trial. I actually feel badly for both sides. People love to detail the transgressions of a kid, while Zimmerman had quite a few himself.
 
Invalid Link Removed

You still wont address the fact that the minute you lay hands on someone, without any prior physical contact, that you are the aggressor. If you listen to the tape, he states on the tape that Martin turns around and starts walking towards Zimmerman. Then when the dispatcher tells him not to follow Martin, he says ok. For some reason you don't act like those are relevant and important pieces to this case, when clearly they are. On the 911 tape, Zimmerman says Martin ran off. Fact. Zimmerman's statement is that while returning to his vehicle, Martin walks up to him. Martin asks Zimmerman if he has a problem, and Zimmerman says no. Then Martin says you do now, and punches him. Those are Zimmerman's sworn statements. If you removed yourself from a POTENTIAL conflict by running off like Martin, then how are you still in danger.

It is sad for Martin's parents and family and loved ones. But it is equally as sad for Zimmerman and family, along with the wrong George Zimmerman that Spike Lee gave out the address to in order for some vigilante justice to be served. Then the Black Panthers put out a bounty on Zimmerman. Yet you don't speak to those.vigilantes like you describe Zimmerman as being one.
 
Why are these stupid select court cases taking up so much news time anyways when there are so much bigger issues to address that effect far more people? People get murdered every day.
 
youngandfree said:
Invalid Link Removed

You still wont address the fact that the minute you lay hands on someone, without any prior physical contact, that you are the aggressor. If you listen to the tape, he states on the tape that Martin turns around and starts walking towards Zimmerman. Then when the dispatcher tells him not to follow Martin, he says ok. For some reason you don't act like those are relevant and important pieces to this case, when clearly they are. On the 911 tape, Zimmerman says Martin ran off. Fact. Zimmerman's statement is that while returning to his vehicle, Martin walks up to him. Martin asks Zimmerman if he has a problem, and Zimmerman says no. Then Martin says you do now, and punches him. Those are Zimmerman's sworn statements. If you removed yourself from a POTENTIAL conflict by running off like Martin, then how are you still in danger.

It is sad for Martin's parents and family and loved ones. But it is equally as sad for Zimmerman and family, along with the wrong George Zimmerman that Spike Lee gave out the address to in order for some vigilante justice to be served. Then the Black Panthers put out a bounty on Zimmerman. Yet you don't speak to those.vigilantes like you describe Zimmerman as being one.
Click to expand...

I agree with the bolded statements above. I disagree with your interpretation of the law and apparently so does the prosecutor's office. Also, answer this, since you're so heavy on asking questions. Why did the lead investigator on the scene want to arrest Zimmerman that day?
 
youngandfree said:
Invalid Link Removed

You still wont address the fact that the minute you lay hands on someone, without any prior physical contact, that you are the aggressor. If you listen to the tape, he states on the tape that Martin turns around and starts walking towards Zimmerman. Then when the dispatcher tells him not to follow Martin, he says ok. For some reason you don't act like those are relevant and important pieces to this case, when clearly they are. On the 911 tape, Zimmerman says Martin ran off. Fact. Zimmerman's statement is that while returning to his vehicle, Martin walks up to him. Martin asks Zimmerman if he has a problem, and Zimmerman says no. Then Martin says you do now, and punches him. Those are Zimmerman's sworn statements. If you removed yourself from a POTENTIAL conflict by running off like Martin, then how are you still in danger.

It is sad for Martin's parents and family and loved ones. But it is equally as sad for Zimmerman and family, along with the wrong George Zimmerman that Spike Lee gave out the address to in order for some vigilante justice to be served. Then the Black Panthers put out a bounty on Zimmerman. Yet you don't speak to those.vigilantes like you describe Zimmerman as being one.
Click to expand...

And yet Martin isn't around to give sworn statements and in all likelihood we will never know exactly what happened that night. I own a gun (actually multiple) and I would have no problem using it to protect myself or my family. I don't go out searching for those situations though and if I see trouble in my neighborhood tonight I will call the police and wait on them. Spike Lee or the Black Panthers or anyone else trying to take the law into their own hands is just as stupid as Zimmerman was on that night.
 
Geoforce said:
And yet Martin isn't around to give sworn statements and in all likelihood we will never know exactly what happened that night. I own a gun (actually multiple) and I would have no problem using it to protect myself or my family. I don't go out searching for those situations though and if I see trouble in my neighborhood tonight I will call the police and wait on them. Spike Lee or the Black Panthers or anyone else trying to take the law into their own hands is just as stupid as Zimmerman was on that night.
Click to expand...

Agreed and well stated.
 
I can't speak to their motives. But prosecutors have been known to wrongfully prosecute case under false pretenses. Do you recall the Duke Lacross rape case? Angela Corey has her share of controversy before and surrounding this case, so just because she wants to prosecute it still doesn't mean the evidence holds up to the charges.
 
ax1 said:
Why are these stupid select court cases taking up so much news time anyways when there are so much bigger issues to address that effect far more people? People get murdered every day.
Click to expand...

race bait.

divide the people. it's working well : )
 
Easy nailed it. Angela Corey has been criticized by other law professionals on her handling of this case. Numerous folks have said at best this is a manslaughter, not 2nd degree murder. Her history proves she is known for overcharging a.defendant in order to get a plea for a lesser charge. Why didn't she just send it to a grand jury, that has no agenda or precedence of making political theater, and let them decide if charges are warranted. Maybe the first investigator wanted to file charges just because he didn't want to deal with the fallout of a black kid being shot and not pressing charges? Maybe he just wanted to arrest him and let the courts handle it? Who knows? But when an "impartial" special prosecutor takes on a case with this much publicity that it received prior to her stepping in, she shouldn't have been holding press conferences and prayer vigils with the Martin family. That starts to muddy the waters a bit on intent of the prosecutor. Holding private masticate with the family to discuss the case is one thing, but to go out on tv and proclaim you are going to be the one to handle the case, when no one else would, its just a bit arrogant, self serving, and narcissistic.
 
Many people see the prosecution of this case as as opportunity for Trayvon's side to be presented, since he isn't here to do that. If Zimmerman walks so be it. This case will hopefully serve as a deterrent for those who seek to take action into their own hands, especially doing so while armed.
 
The only action taken that involved a firearm came after Zimmerman was first punched by Martin and was on his back with Martin pounding his head. So it should serve to those who decide to be a big boy and pick a fight with a stranger, because you never know if they are armed. Zimmerman wasn't walking the grounds with his gun out hunting anyone, so don't make it out like he was.
 
youngandfree said:
The only action taken that involved a firearm came after Zimmerman was first punched by Martin and was on his back with Martin pounding his head. So it should serve to those who decide to be a big boy and pick a fight with a stranger, because you never know if they are armed. Zimmerman wasn't walking the grounds with his gun out hunting anyone, so don't make it out like he was.
Click to expand...

Uh huh.
 
youngandfree said:
The only action taken that involved a firearm came after Zimmerman was first punched by Martin and was on his back with Martin pounding his head. So it should serve to those who decide to be a big boy and pick a fight with a stranger, because you never know if they are armed. Zimmerman wasn't walking the grounds with his gun out hunting anyone, so don't make it out like he was.
Click to expand...

Luckily we have you who knows exactly what happened to keep things straight. It certainly helps to have an eye witness such as yourself right there the whole time. When will you be called to testify? :thinking:
 
southpaw23 said:
Lol and you "automatically/reflexively" believe him. Seems in line with most of your comments.
Click to expand...

and apparently you "automatically/reflexively" believe he's lying, which seems in line with most of your comments. Police officers at the scene thought enough of the evidence they saw with their own eyes matched his statement, which is why he wasn't arrested.
 
EasyEJL said:
and apparently you "automatically/reflexively" believe he's lying, which seems in line with most of your comments. Police officers at the scene thought enough of the evidence they saw with their own eyes matched his statement, which is why he wasn't arrested.
Click to expand...

Right, except for the lead investigator on the scene who went on record stating that he didn't believe Zimmerman's account, and wanted to arrest him that day. And I've been to Sanford, numerous times, good ole' boy's mentality down there. It's like a sequel to the Hills Have Eyes 14. The point is there is only ONE account and it's Zimmerman's. None of us were there, nor are we privy to the information that the lead prosecutor's office has collected.
 
southpaw23 said:
Right, except for the lead investigator on the scene who went on record stating that he didn't believe Zimmerman's account, and wanted to arrest him that day. And I've been to Sanford, numerous times, good ole' boy's mentality down there. It's like a sequel to the Hills Have Eyes 14. The point is there is only ONE account and it's Zimmerman's. None of us were there, nor are we privy to the information that the lead prosecutor's office has collected.
Click to expand...

We have the eye witness who said Zimmerman was on the ground getting punched by Trevone. It is sickening was the media did. Also the 911 tape that the media said it was Trevone yelling help has now been shown it wax Zimmerman.

You liberal's will spew and twist facts around to justify your cause. Thank God only 20% of the population is liberal.
 
dallasboy22 said:
We have the eye witness who said Zimmerman was on the ground getting punched by Trevone. It is sickening was the media did. Also the 911 tape that the media said it was Trevone yelling help has now been shown it wax Zimmerman.

You liberal's will spew and twist facts around to justify your cause. Thank God only 20% of the population is liberal.
Click to expand...

And you conservatives will always almost by sheer reflex take the side of those not like Trayvon, and pretend as if you know the facts of the case, it's predictable and FAR more telling to me than anything else. But hey I know you guys love the "reverse racism" charge, ya know because you guys have had it so bad all these years....opposite day. Your historical perspective likely comes from years of study, and by that I mean you saw a Lil Wayne video late at night and formed an opinion.
 
Blacks hate white, white hate blacks, liberals hate conservatives, conservatives hate liberals...

Really, is it any different?
 
ax1 said:
Blacks hate white, white hate blacks, liberals hate conservatives, conservatives hate liberals...

Really, is it any different?
Click to expand...

And yet another reason to rid ourselves of the two party system. It creates lines and people won't think for themselves and go past those lines.

"I'm conservative so tell me what conservatives think on new issue X and I think that. Plus I hate liberals."

"I'm liberal so tell me what liberals think on new issue X and I think that. Plus I hate conservatives."

It's like Chris Rock says, I'm liberal on some stuff, I'm conservative on others. Anyone who makes up their mind before they hear the question is an idiot. Yet that's what the majority of us do so we can keep in line with our "crowd."
 
southpaw23 said:
And you conservatives will always almost by sheer reflex take the side of those not like Trayvon, and pretend as if you know the facts of the case, it's predictable and FAR more telling to me than anything else. But hey I know you guys love the "reverse racism" charge, ya know because you guys have had it so bad all these years....opposite day. Your historical perspective likely comes from years of study, and by that I mean you once a Lil Wayne video late at night and formed an opinion.
Click to expand...



Talk about emoting. You must be as stupid as you said I am. Check the grammar on your last sentence. I misspelled a name and you had to point out my inferiority.
 
youngandfree said:
Talk about emoting. You must be as stupid as you said I am. Check the grammar on your last sentence. I misspelled a name and you had to point out my inferiority.
Click to expand...

Says the guy who misspells and misquotes his own sources. I was responding to his rant, not fact checking sources.
 
Once again I am just pointing out your hipocrasy. I mistyped a name, and you get all high and mighty and explain how dumb I am. I simply point out a similar lapse on your part, and you deflect the point and just mock.
 
People keep saying zimmerman should not have had the gun when it was the police who told him he should carry one.People say he kept following after being told not to.He was never told not to.He said he was following martin and was told, "we don't need you to do that".Zimmerman says he stopped following after that statement (which seems backed up by what you can and can't hear on the tape of the 911 call)and started walking back to his car when martin came up to him from the side.Not saying that is true,but in the bail hearing the lead investigator was asked if he had any proof that was not what happened and he said,"no".If that is true there should be no way they will convict beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
ax1 said:
Im just a "naive conspiracy theorist" so why do you care for my opinion?

If you really know what has changed for me though, if thats what your asking you dont know me or my purpose. Thats fine because its hard to know someone on the internetz. My activism isnt about me. Im upset and saddened at the suffering of others, not my own.

Nobody should take Alex Jones or any other media source, political mind set or belief, philosophy or religion and cling to it. Ive stated this in the past and Ill state it now again. I dont believe or conclude on everything I post, I think about it and want people to think about it. There are many alarming things out there, and nobody including especially myself is a know all. All we can do is think, speculate and try to make the world a better informed place.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think you've done a damn good job in expressing your views in a calm, professional and presentful manner. I think AE is basically just trying to overrule everything you say and bully his way into making it appear he is right. For example, I've seen him call you "x" amount of names personally, while you have stuck to point and discussed only the topic at hand.

Of course, I will be dog piled for putting my two cents in, but that's just how I feel and I agree 100% we function better as an isolated nation. We've done just fine since we were created in 1776, why change it now? The answer isn't a one world bank, it's to get a damn President that doesn't spend all of our money on stupid $hit and knows what the fxck he's doing.
 
ax1 said:
Blacks hate white, white hate blacks, liberals hate conservatives, conservatives hate liberals...

Really, is it any different?
Click to expand...

No, because you can only be charged for a hate crime if you're a white, straight, conservative.
 
kingk0ng said:
Of course, I will be dog piled for putting my two cents in, but that's just how I feel and I agree 100% we function better as an isolated nation. We've done just fine since we were created in 1776, why change it now?
Click to expand...

Well I'm not dog piling you and I'm not really disagreeing on the point, but what world you living in?! Since when have we been an isolated nation? Libya conflict, Afghanistan, Iraq, Euro zone, foreign aid, free trade, gulf war, vietnam, cold war, etc. Hell most of what you own probably came from somewhere else or a combination of other places and here. I know most of my stuff does. We are the kings of having our noses in other people's **** and having other people make our ****. We are about as far from isolated as it could get and it certainly didn't start anytime recently.

(If you're arguing for the merits of being isolated that's a different argument, but we haven't been close to isolated in forever). It certainly isn't something that we are "changing now."

I could be completely missing the point of what you were trying to say :)
 
Geoforce said:
Well I'm not dog piling you and I'm not really disagreeing on the point, but what world you living in?! Since when have we been an isolated nation? Libya conflict, Afghanistan, Iraq, Euro zone, foreign aid, free trade, gulf war, vietnam, cold war, etc. Hell most of what you own probably came from somewhere else or a combination of other places and here. I know most of my stuff does. We are the kings of having our noses in other people's **** and having other people make our ****. We are about as far from isolated as it could get and it certainly didn't start anytime recently.

(If you're arguing for the merits of being isolated that's a different argument, but we haven't been close to isolated in forever). It certainly isn't something that we are "changing now."

I could be completely missing the point of what you were trying to say :)
Click to expand...

Maybe he just used the wrong word....America being "sovereign" is better word to use rather than "isolated." Not dealing away the power of our elected officials and constitutional laws to one world government (United Nations, Nato, overseas banks, interests, etc....) isnt being isolated, its just being America.

There is no reason to be isolated, we can have friends, have open talks, open trade, etc...its good to have friends around the globe. This can all be done while protecting our fundamentals, liberties and keeping our troops from going into un-necessary illegal preemptive wars.
 
ax1 said:
Maybe he just used the wrong word....America being "sovereign" is better word to use rather than "isolated." Not dealing away the power of our elected officials and constitutional laws to one world government (United Nations, Nato, overseas banks, interests, etc....) isnt being isolated, its just being America.

There is no reason to be isolated, we can have friends, have open talks, open trade, etc...its good to have friends around the globe. This can all be done while protecting our fundamentals, liberties and keeping our troops from going into un-necessary illegal preemptive wars.
Click to expand...

Yeah I figured he may have been using it in a different sense or meant a different word. I completely agree with your last paragraph that it can be done...but I'm not sure I see left or right getting it done in their current sense. The differences between parties in foreign policy as you know is almost non existent. Both long to feed the war machine and the corporate interests that go with it. Both hijack our liberties under the guise of keeping us safe.
 
By "isolated", I mean I am not for a one world bank. Maybe that's not even the point you guys are trying to make?

Exchanging things from countries I am fine with, but I do think we should start considering making merchandise right here in the US as well. I only buy American automobiles (a lot of that is probably because I only buy trucks and there aren't many foreign trucks).

Coal, gas, oil, etc. are all sold to other countries, so I don't think we should hog all of our natural resources.
 
kingk0ng said:
Personally, I think you've done a damn good job in expressing your views in a calm, professional and presentful manner. I think AE is basically just trying to overrule everything you say and bully his way into making it appear he is right. For example, I've seen him call you "x" amount of names personally, while you have stuck to point and discussed only the topic at hand.

Of course, I will be dog piled for putting my two cents in, but that's just how I feel and I agree 100% we function better as an isolated nation. We've done just fine since we were created in 1776, why change it now? The answer isn't a one world bank, it's to get a damn President that doesn't spend all of our money on stupid $hit and knows what the fxck he's doing.
Click to expand...

I think you are quite confused as evidenced by this post. Ax and I have gone back and forth for a long period of time. I have called him a conspiracy guy for longer than I can remember, and he has done the same with the globalist thing.

In terms of me bullying? I would love to see that example and know how it is done on an internet forum. I have gone against a lot of what ax posts, based on using Alex Jones as a source for a good portion. Also, lets make sure to utilize our reading comprehension here my friend, as Ax himself has acknowledged that he doesnt believe a lot of what he posts.

Now...onto the isolationist idea, in 2012? You cannot be serious. We live and are a major component of a global community whether we like it or not. In order to be successful in that community, we need to be certain that certain business decisions are made. That is the beauty of the capitalist system that we have instituted. Are all of our decisions correct? Of course not....Every President and member of the house will make boat loads of mistakes, but that is the "beauty" of our system. There is no way in hell we can back away from it now.

I appreciate all points of view...regardless of how ridiculous they are :)
 
kingk0ng said:
By "isolated", I mean I am not for a one world bank. Maybe that's not even the point you guys are trying to make?

Exchanging things from countries I am fine with, but I do think we should start considering making merchandise right here in the US as well. I only buy American automobiles (a lot of that is probably because I only buy trucks and there aren't many foreign trucks).

Coal, gas, oil, etc. are all sold to other countries, so I don't think we should hog all of our natural resources.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree Im not into having a one world bank and a one world currency system which has been in the talks. Its possible we can have some type of "world bank" that can do positive things, but it shouldnt have control over our currency system and law our the USA or other countries unless their people decide to sign up for it.

Oh I appreciate you sticking up for me, I cant leave you positive reps right now. I totally agree that focusing on sticking to the topics to win debates puts me on top but Im slightly biased :) Its ok, I didnt excactly feel bullied, I felt a bit frustrated that the focus was going directly at me and discarding info due to bias of where the source comes from but we all have to just not take it personal.

AE14 said:
I think you are quite confused as evidenced by this post. Ax and I have gone back and forth for a long period of time. I have called him a conspiracy guy for longer than I can remember, and he has done the same with the globalist thing.

In terms of me bullying? I would love to see that example and know how it is done on an internet forum. I have gone against a lot of what ax posts, based on using Alex Jones as a source for a good portion. Also, lets make sure to utilize our reading comprehension here my friend, as Ax himself has acknowledged that he doesnt believe a lot of what he posts.

Now...onto the isolationist idea, in 2012? You cannot be serious. We live and are a major component of a global community whether we like it or not. In order to be successful in that community, we need to be certain that certain business decisions are made. That is the beauty of the capitalist system that we have instituted. Are all of our decisions correct? Of course not....Every President and member of the house will make boat loads of mistakes, but that is the "beauty" of our system. There is no way in hell we can back away from it now.

I appreciate all points of view...regardless of how ridiculous they are :)
Click to expand...

Yes, you globalist nwo, CFR butt kisser on the board here, its all good. Nothing wrong with heated and challenged debates and some name calling it makes these threads far less boring and is good exercise for the mind.

I just want to clarify your statement of my claim "Ax himself has acknowledged that he doesnt believe a lot of what he posts."

I dont want to use the words "I dont belive alot of what I post." Its not accurate of what I was trying to say.
Its rather always being cautious and not not concluding on any information no matter how convincing a topic or post may be. Some may certainly be a farther stretch to believe based on lack of evidence. I just try to avoid extreme yes and no decisions, at the same time have flexibility to lean one way or another which should be apparent on the forums. Dunno if that makes sense, but its not a matter of not believing most of what I post.
 
ax1 said:
Yes, I agree Im not into having a one world bank and a one world currency system which has been in the talks. Its possible we can have some type of "world bank" that can do positive things, but it shouldnt have control over our currency system and law our the USA or other countries unless their people decide to sign up for it.

Oh I appreciate you sticking up for me, I cant leave you positive reps right now. I totally agree that focusing on sticking to the topics to win debates puts me on top but Im slightly biased :) Its ok, I didnt excactly feel bullied, I felt a bit frustrated that the focus was going directly at me and discarding info due to bias of where the source comes from but we all have to just not take it personal.



Yes, you globalist nwo, CFR butt kisser on the board here, its all good. Nothing wrong with heated and challenged debates it makes these threads far less boring and is good exercise for the mind.

I just want to clarify your statement of my claim "Ax himself has acknowledged that he doesnt believe a lot of what he posts."

I dont want to use the words "I dont belive alot of what I post." Its not accurate of what I was trying to say.
Its rather always being cautious and not not concluding on any information no matter how convincing a topic or post may be. Some may certainly be a farther stretch to believe based on lack of evidence. I just try to avoid extreme yes and no decisions, at the same time have flexibility to lean one way or another which should be apparent on the forums. Dunno if that makes sense.
Click to expand...
<smooch for the NWO> :lol:

It is always all good, never a personal issue in my book

I get what you are saying, and I was not trying to misrepresent anything purposefully. However you have acknowledged that you post things you dont agree or believe, for informational purposes.
 
AE14 said:
<smooch for the NWO> :lol:

It is always all good, never a personal issue in my book

I get what you are saying, and I was not trying to misrepresent anything purposefully. However you have acknowledged that you post things you dont agree or believe, for informational purposes.
Click to expand...

Yes, there are some things Im far from believing, and I will post points of view either politically or philosophically that I dont exactly agree. For example, Ive posted multiple times about going back to a gold currency and its positives. It comes across as if thats what I totally support just because I posted about it but personally I want to move away from currency as a whole, although I have mixed feelings on that too lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top