I started this post in another thread, meaning to reply to some talk there about "Anti-Establishment" accusations, but brought it over to this thread because I think this post branches fairly far off the topic of the war on terror (the main topic of that thread). On the "anti-establishment" accusations that have been flying about: One of my closest local friends recently said that "The only people that I have seen that think the way you do about FISA and the NSA are anti-government liberals and one nutjob judge in new york". I paraphrase here because I didn't copy down the quote. I gave him a chance to retract his statement. When he didn't, he dropped some in my estimation of his character. He later apologized, once he realized that I was talking about ongoing research I was doing and what it currently seemed to point to (that Bush and the NSA, and previous administrations), rather than me trying to attack bush and say he should be impeached immediately. Still, does questioning one policy of one agency handed down by one man mean I am against the government as a whole? I am doing research in preparation for a constitutionally mandated election, and am attempting to protect and secure my rights, as they are protected in the constitution. The constitution it's self is designed to limit government, and protect citizens from the predations of the government, and the majority, while also allowing the law of the land to listen to the will of the majority. This is the core of the government, and thus the establishment in my opinion. So if I criticize the current administration on something they are doing against, what I believe to be the core of our established government, does that make me pro-establishment, anti-establishment, both, or something else all together?
here is one of ron pauls speeches talking about some of the points you are talking about here you might have read it but here is the link http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm
Hmmm. I haven' read it before. It's a rather long one and I'm at work, so I was only able to read some of it, but at least I finally know how people define Neo-Con. I personally label myself as a conservative independent, but I am not in favor of a lot of Bush's policies because they seem far from conservative to me.
Josh, so far you have shown yourself to be a thinker and using common sense. I respect your responses even if I don't always agree.
Thank you Debunked. You seem to be some of the Cream of the Crop on these forums as well. You seem to have some rather well thought out positions in general. Again, even if I don't always agree with them. I really like it when someone I disagree with at least makes me think and re-evaluate my position.
yes i really do not think neo conservetives are real conservetives at all. you can check out wiki or better yet http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html if you do a little follow up on these people you will be amazed
Not at all. In fact, it's refreshing to see people such as yourself actually putting reasonable thought behind real questions and issues. As opposed to those who hide behind the illusion of questioning their government when in fact, all they are doing is repeatedly and ceaselessly attacking it and helping to spread willfull propaganda. As such, we can't put these two different types of people under one umbrella under the guise of "just questioning their government." There are some that do and raise intelligent and rationale questions, such as yourself, then there are others who hide behind such as a shield for ceaseless attacks. The important thing here, is to identify the difference and not allow those who only ceaselessly attack hide under the shield of pretending to ask questions in the absence of any real questioning.
There was no question, only a statement/accusation to use as a shield for your own shortcomings. Would you like to ask unca GTech a question? I'll make you my personal victim
What makes you think I've claim to be said person? Really, pizzaboy, you're going to have to work on your shields to cover up your own guilt if you want to do better. You're all about self-loathing on behalf of others and projecting guilt towards everyone else, perhaps you should try self-loathing about yourself? It will make you appear to be a victim and with victimhood status, you have power!
Of course Gtech is qualified to decide what is right or wrong, after all he is an ex-corporal with vast experience in peeling potatoes and giving out pamphlets in front of high schools. Don't you think after spending so much time in front of high schools and getting ridiculed by teenagers, he has learned something by listening to them?
I always appreciate these moments. It simply confirms what I always say...that your tirades are reserved for the US, Israel, Christians, Jews, Soldiers and dmoz, but never a bad word for your terrorist buds. It's not that you don't have the bad words, you just won't use them on friends
My post was about a bigot ex-corporal, where did I mention anything about USA, Israel, Jews, Christians or dmoz?
Do you mean people who are intelligent and decent and serve their country as decent officers and not some bigot ex-corporal who cheers for killing, torture and war while hiding under his bed?
I mean exactly what I sad, gworld. Cheer up though. While a bunch of your buds have been captured and/or sentenced this week, some of your buds had some success.