Haiti earthquake may reveal major oil and gas reserves.

[kahless]

you did not attempt to pose a counter argument, but merely attempted to label us paranoid or CT

This is a logical Fallacy known as "Appeal to Emotion" and "Ad Homenim Attack"

If you do not have an argument, then do not hurl insults as a substitute.

IT makes your position look weak.

maybe our military is there, is to protect the US appointed puppet government in Haiti that keeps people poor and working.

When you cannot backup your wild conspiracy theory with facts falsely accuse those who question it as insulting or attacking you. Real nice strategy.

Instead of levying false accusations you have provided no facts to back up your wild conspiracy theory that the US triggered the earthquake in order to occupy Haiti for purpose of gaining control of oil and gas reserves.

How do you think inventing such a theory helps the US humanitarian effort?

How do you think it helps bring people into this movement?

What does your support of such a belief without any facts have to do with individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity"?

 

[dannno]

When you cannot backup your wild conspiracy theory with facts falsely accuse those who question it as insulting or attacking you. Real nice strategy.

Uh, she did, she posted an entire 'nother thread that you obviously haven't read. I have posted the link in this thread so you have NO EXCUSE.

There are plenty of facts to backup this assertion. They are listed in the links. Read them yourself, I'm not going to fill a post with information contained in another post, that's what linking is for.

 

[Cinderella]

Instead of levying false accusations you have provided no facts to back up your wild conspiracy theory that the US triggered the earthquake in order to occupy Haiti for purpose of gaining control of oil and gas reserves.

face palm**

It was never said that this Earthquake *WAS* man made.

*NOT ONCE*

It was said that it was plausible, possible, feasible, DOABLE...

 

[dannno]

kahless has this wild conspiracy theory that we keep everything that is actually happening a secret, and pretend that what the government says is true, and some how we will attain liberty.

Sorry, I prefer truth and reality.

 

[kahless]

If this was a conspiracy forum I would be debating the science and the political plausability surrounding it. However put aside for a second whether it is true or not. How does being a mouthpice for something that is a conspiracy theory helpful to getting our candidates elected that will promote "individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity"?

Cinderalla still has not answered my quote below.

How do you think inventing such a theory helps the US humanitarian effort?

How do you think it helps bring people into this movement?

What does your support of such a belief without any facts have to do with individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity"?

 

[Cinderella]

If this was a conspiracy forum I would be debating the science and the politics surrounding it. However put aside for a second whether it is true or not. How does being a mouthpice for something that is a conspiracy theory helpful to getting our candidates elected that will promote "individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity"?

so, what youre saying is the occupation of Haiti has nothing to do with a noninterventionist foreign policy

 

[KAYA]

Kahless, I don't think this "debate" is worth your time.

 

[dannno]

kahless is actually recommending that the liberty movement be ignorant regarding foreign affairs. That is literally her recommendation. According to her we have no place looking into foreign affairs or attempting to discover the truth regarding foreign affairs.


This amazes me to no end. Why does she have this goal for us to be ignorant?


She actually thinks that this is the best way to attain liberty, is through ignorance


Well, I have some news for you kahless, ignorance is not going to get you very far.

 

[Cinderella]

After reading Kahless very well rounded thought, I was inspired to pull this piece from Ron Paul's "Freedom Under Seige" (1987)

Foreign Policy options of the conservatives and the liberals are, in reality, only a variation of a single interventionist policy. It is only the direction of the intervention that is different and open to debate. Another option must be made available from which the American people may choose. The policy of neutrality is morally correct for major world powers as well as small nations. By what authority does any country interfere in the internal affairs of another? When a major power interferes, it literally becomes a bully. The excuse for intervention is usually in moralistic terms, arguing that it is for the benefit of the world or a policy of making the world "safe for democracy" and for the purpose of making poor nations prosperous. These are excuses, not reasons based on morality. Officially, getting openly involved in the internal affairs of other nations is always at the host country's request. Those interfering claim they do so by popular support, but the people are never consulted. Our foreign aid goes either to fascist or socialist nations, benefiting the rulers by solidifying their power and impeding the development of a free society and a free-market economy. The outcome of even the best motivated assistance is usually the opposite of that which was intended. When economic assistance is sent to other nations with the intention of helping the poor, the poor recieve a small fraction of what is sent. But the worst part of all this is that the assistance perpetuates the entire system that causes the impoverishment in the first place and makes it more difficult than ever for the people of that country to achieve more liberty. Even if aid and interference were handled wisely by patriotic Americans, they could not be justified on moral grounds. If we assume that it is proper for the United States government to meddle in any way in the internal affairs of other nations - even if for noble reasons - the door is then opened for the ruthless who could then intervene for the worst reasons - aiding fascism, socialism, or communism or for personal gain. Providing aid to those struggling to be free by first expropriating funds from innocent Americans cannot be justified. Freedom cannot be spread through a policy of force which violates another man's freedom. When providing assistance, it is logical to expect some national benefit in return. The policies of nations that have received aid obviously have greater significance to us than those who have not received help. If their policies do not conform to the policies of the United States administration in power, threats, and even assisting in coups, are then said to be justified. After a few decades of international intervention, with economic assistance and covert operations for "national security" the noble original purpose is entirely forgotten. The doors are then opened to almost any type of foreign involvement.......


If you haven't read the book...you should.

 

[dannno]

^She's not going to read that

Especially the words that are bolded or in color.

 

[Cinderella]

^She's not going to read that

Especially the words that are bolded or in color.

i tried to make the points a little easier to see...i wouldnt expect her to read the whole thing

 

[dannno]

The biggest problem with kahless is that when the establishment media comes out and says, "oh haiz we're going to rebuild Haiti and bring capitalism and a better future!" she actually believes that some semblance of a free market system will come in and some how benefit the poor people there.

Even Ron Paul knows that is ridiculous, he wrote about it back in the 80s.

kahless equates the big world banking establishment corporatism with capitalism. That is really her biggest flaw. She doesn't realize that there is a concerted effort by the banks to take over developing nations in order to put them into debt so that they can steal their resources. This is all documented, there's no conspiracy theory, but kahless will tell you that if you believe this you must hate America. Not sure how she reaches that conclusion, that is some big time propaganda if I've ever heard it before.

 

[Vessol]

US occupation of France WWII

That wasn't an occupation. That was pushing out occupiers. After the Germans were pushed out, U.S soldiers did not stay in the region long.

Remember my definition of occupation?

SEIZURE and CONTROL

American forces did seize parts of France from German control, but they did not CONTROL it.

Now the U.S, UK and USSR DID occupy Germany. They divided it up as well. None of this went well.

 

[kahless]

Was going to take Kaya's advice but for the record I do not hold the beliefs being attributed to my handle by Danno and Cinderella.

My comment was solely based on my belief that it is bad for the movement to start speculating about man made causes of the earthquake for the purpose of a resource grab. Cinderalla says it was never said but the fact is when I raised this issue Danno continually defended the theory.

 

[Vessol]

Was going to take Kaya's advice but for the record I do not hold the beliefs being attributed to my handle by Danno and Cinderella.

My comment was solely based on my belief that it is bad for the movement to start speculating about man made causes of the earthquake for the purpose of a resource grab. Cinderalla says it was never said but the fact is when I raised this issue Danno continually defended the theory.

Ignore the idea that it is man-made or natural. It's really not an issue, it's an opinion. How is it "bad for the movement" when a few people think that it might be man-made? It's not like Ron Paul is endorsing that idea. basically what you are saying is a bad argument method of "I disagree with your idea, and not only that, but your idea is BAD and you are hurting 'the movement'". A rather cheap argument.

 

[kahless]

Ignore the idea that it is man-made or natural. It's really not an issue, it's an opinion. How is it "bad for the movement" when a few people think that it might be man-made? It's not like Ron Paul is endorsing that idea. basically what you are saying is a bad argument method of "I disagree with your idea, and not only that, but your idea is BAD and you are hurting 'the movement'".

Unless it starts to dominate the forum. Also RP is always asked about his "crazy" supporters and this is a forum with his name on it which ranks high in SE.

We do have people that run for office post here and new comers you do not want to drive away. I do agree with what you are saying and perhaps I knee jerked since looking back people were only dancing around it. (until Danno who appears to me as defending the theory). I think if this was a standalone incident I probably would not have posted but you get conspiracy fatigued after awhile.

 

[Cinderella]

the simple fact of the matter is the quake made an entire nation of people helpless. the US and other interested parties can walk in and hand out houses and ipods and demand the nation and its people to industrialize and work to pay off the money. of course it wont look that way. i can see the reports on the news. American companies opening new factories under the guise of "Helping out". giving these poor people the means to buy food and housing. it will create a sub culture of the American blue collar worker (if they are lucky **cough sweatshops**). And while all of America is out of work, we will be sending more jobs over to Haiti.

 

[kahless]

the simple fact of the matter is the quake made an entire nation of people helpless. the US and other interested parties can walk in and hand out houses and ipods and demand the nation and its people to industrialize and work to pay off the money. of course it wont look that way. i can see the reports on the news. American companies opening new factories under the guise of "Helping out". giving these poor people the means to buy food and housing. it will create a sub culture of the American blue collar worker (if they are lucky **cough sweatshops**). And while all of America is out of work, we will be sending more jobs over to Haiti.

I do not think Ron would have a problem with that considering his comments in the Russia Today interview.

They need to be introduced to the philosophy of free markets and sound money, so they can be more prosperous, build better houses. But in the meantime, if we’re in the region and nearby and people are suffering, some of our ability, whether it’s military or not, could be useful in helping them out just in a humanitarian sense. That would be a lot better than using the military personnel over in the Middle East lobbing bombs on different countries. So, under the circumstances I would say that would be a better use of the military.

In the short term this is one case considering their hellish existance and so close to our shores I do not think that is a bad thing. I would rather some of our jobs go there rather than China. It would be far worse having an influx of Hiatians coming here, taking jobs or living off our welfare system.

Although Ron seems ok in the short term using troops long term is another issue.
http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-01-22/ron-paul-on-haiti-condolences-yes-occupation-no/

 

[Cinderella]

...

 

[Cinderella]

In the short term this is one case considering their hellish existance and so close to our shores I do not think that is a bad thing. I would rather some of our jobs go there rather than China.