Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTBiw5abqUo&feature=player_embedded

Quick ... he's about to tell the truth - RUN, er, walk out, er, as fast as you can. Where's my earmuffs?

so, your thoughts are that Ahmadinejad is less likely to be a liar than anybody who says 9-11 wasn't an inside job?

Originally posted by inimalist
so, your thoughts are that Ahmadinejad is less likely to be a liar than anybody who says 9-11 wasn't an inside job?

He didn't claim that was the truth, he pointed out the three prevalent beliefs in regards to 9/11.

Pretty much all of other things he said are 100% on the spot.

oh, right

he was "just asking questions"

I reckon he wanted to provoke a bit too....

you see the truth is too hard to handle. thats why those united states bozos ran away

Originally posted by Deano
you see the truth is too hard to handle. thats why those united states bozos ran away

No, they left for the same reason most people ignore your threads.

As for the 9/11 Conspiracy theories, they are just speculation. There's plenty of evidence al quada was behind it.

Nuclear disarmament? Good luck with that one.
Is Iran trustworthy? I don't trust any society ruled by religion.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
As for the 9/11 Conspiracy theories, they are just speculation. There's plenty of evidence al quada was behind it.

Nuclear disarmament? Good luck with that one.
Is Iran trustworthy? I don't trust any society ruled by religion.

Society run by bankers is...more trustworthy?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Society run by bankers is...more trustworthy?

Like I've said before...we have 3 choices to run our society.

1)Government
2)Corporations (IE Bankers)
3)Religion

As imperfect as it is I'd rather have government than the other 2. The US is currently run by corporations.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Society run by bankers is...more trustworthy?


They're more predictable, I'd imagine. Pogues don't randomly have visions in their sleep telling them to blow up a schoolbus or something. That wouldn't be "efficient".

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Nuclear disarmament? Good luck with that one.

see, thats the other thing

there is a whole level of political spectacle that is getting ignored here.

Iran wants nuclear disarmament? NO

its one of two things (though, probably both). For the same reason Bin Laden quotes Chomsky, these people are well aware of the "dissident" movements in western society, and by appealing to them, they feel they are weakening Western resolve and also try to sway the naive to the idea that "oh, these are just the same misunderstood freedom fighters I read about when I started a love affair with that shadowy picture of Che".

The other reason is that, in this political context, Iran has no choice BUT to build a bomb. I mean, look, Iran is going to be attacked and they were the first to extend the olive branch, but big bad USA wont disarm, so the only other option is to have a bomb. Popular opinion in the middle east already supports Iran standing up to the West, this is essentially just theatre directed at them, with the end result justifying any action Iran takes toward a bomb.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Like I've said before...we have 3 choices to run our society.

1)Government
2)Corporations (IE Bankers)
3)Religion

As imperfect as it is I'd rather have government than the other 2. The US is currently run by corporations.

I agree with you, however it is important to note that the corporations only were able to run the country by means of government. The government was weak, big and easily corruptable. So, Even though I'd prefer to be ruled by a government, it would have to follow certain rules in order to not be perverted.

Bardock, why do you hate freedom?

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Like I've said before...we have 3 choices to run our society.

1)Government
2)Corporations (IE Bankers)
3)Religion

As imperfect as it is I'd rather have government than the other 2. The US is currently run by corporations.
What about dictatorship, monarchy or communism. If implemented correctly, those would run well too, I imagine.

As far as religion or corporation goes, I just cannot see those implemented correctly, ever. Although I could be wrong about religion.

Dictatorships, monarchies and communism would fall under forms of government, though crappier ones.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Society run by bankers is...more trustworthy? Bingo^

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What about dictatorship, monarchy or communism. If implemented correctly, those would run well too, I imagine.

As far as religion or corporation goes, I just cannot see those implemented correctly, ever. Although I could be wrong about religion.

Government would seem to include democracy, monarchy, communism, minarchism, dictatorship, aristocracy, technocracy and so on.

He didn't say "correctly" he said they were the only options. They have unarguably happened in the past, though things that were blatantly corporate states tend to be small.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
They're more predictable, I'd imagine. Pogues don't randomly have visions in their sleep telling them to blow up a schoolbus or something. That wouldn't be "efficient".

Depends on which economist they worship.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Society run by bankers is...more trustworthy?

At least Americans have the FDIC.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Depends on which economist they worship.

What Would Marx Do?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Government would seem to include democracy, monarchy, communism, minarchism, dictatorship, aristocracy, technocracy and so on.

He didn't say "correctly" he said they were the only options. They have unarguably happened in the past, though things that were blatantly corporate states tend to be small.

He didn't say correctly, I did. It was a response that although imperfect, if implemented correctly, it may be more than what has been seen in the past.

And yes, I am aware that theocracy is a form of government, but seeing how he has divided corporatism and theocracy away from government, it was more than obvious that he was referring to Iran (theocracy/religion) and America (republic and/or bankers)

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Bardock, why do you hate freedom?

It killed my family.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What about dictatorship, monarchy or communism. If implemented correctly, those would run well too, I imagine.

As far as religion or corporation goes, I just cannot see those implemented correctly, ever. Although I could be wrong about religion.

I also think most of those would fall under "government" which is why I think (as would the US right now of course) you should see shades of government, just saying "government should run it" says nothing since you can basically redefine government as "the thing running society" and then you just said "the thing running society should run it" (I know you didn't say that I mean the general "you"

Makes sense?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, they left for the same reason most people ignore your threads.

no.

you actually love being ignorant don't you?

Originally posted by Deano
no.

you actually love being ignorant don't you?

I did what I could to help get your thread going. You should be thanking me.

Originally posted by Bardock42
It killed my family.



I also think most of those would fall under "government" which is why I think (as would the US right now of course) you should see shades of government, just saying "government should run it" says nothing since you can basically redefine government as "the thing running society" and then you just said "the thing running society should run it" (I know you didn't say that I mean the general "you"

Makes sense?

Ok, here is what makes zero sense - I was responding to a post of a person who made such distinctions. I have, at no point said those are not shades of government or refused to acknowledge them. I have understood what the original poster was getting at and used how he classified systems to pose further questions.

So the thing that makes no sense to me, is you and Symmetric Chaos trying to explain something extremely banal to me that I have neither expressed misunderstanding in, nor claimed it untrue.

EDIT: That sounded harsher than I intended it to.

my thoughts on, essentially, the exact same situation a few years back:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=507345&pagenumber=1

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Ok, here is what makes zero sense - I was responding to a post of a person who made such distinctions. I have, at no point said those are not shades of government or refused to acknowledge them. I have understood what the original poster was getting at and used how he classified systems to pose further questions.

So the thing that makes no sense to me, is you and Symmetric Chaos trying to explain something extremely banal to me that I have neither expressed misunderstanding in, nor claimed it untrue.

EDIT: That sounded harsher than I intended it to. Liar. What did poor old Bardock and Sym ever do to you?!

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Liar. What did poor old Bardock and Sym ever do to you?!

This shame! I will stand in the corner think about what I've done.

Typical. I'm sure in the States they were quick to dismantle his claims, or barely report on it at all.

Not saying Ahmadinejad's a good guy, he's a typical oppressive ruler using religion as a means of control.

But the arguement was made, a religiously controlled country is just as (un)trustworthy as a country ruled by bankers.

They're both ****in' idiots and they know it.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Ok, here is what makes zero sense - I was responding to a post of a person who made such distinctions. I have, at no point said those are not shades of government or refused to acknowledge them. I have understood what the original poster was getting at and used how he classified systems to pose further questions.

So the thing that makes no sense to me, is you and Symmetric Chaos trying to explain something extremely banal to me that I have neither expressed misunderstanding in, nor claimed it untrue.

EDIT: That sounded harsher than I intended it to.

Ouch. Haha, I didn't mean to explain that to you I just used your post to start off mine, obviously it was meant as an argument aimed at Dark Cloud, I mean we agree in essence, his separation into these three categories is too simplistic. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

Funny how they left the second he mentioned "zionist regime". Can't stand anyone hearing about the influence Israel has on them? Its not really much of a secret..

Ahmadinejad is a RL political troll. He's best ignored.
Originally posted by SamZED
Funny how they left the second he mentioned "zionist regime". Can't stand anyone hearing about the influence Israel has on them? Its not really much of a secret..
Heh, its like walking out when they the words "...that whore you're seeing.." get mentioned.