Trump Blames Freedom of the Press for Bombings

You can't take the oil and leave the middle east/Russia alone at the same time you believe in this fantasy you created. Please forget what you know.

Trumps plan is to forget about all the countries in the Middle East and go after ISIS.

How is that NOT better than Hillary's plan, which is to embolden and strengthen ISIS and meddle even more in the Middle East?

Did you not read the part about how I would prefer Ron Paul's solution above all else?

You need to make stronger arguments against what I'm actually saying. I'm not saying Donald Trump has the best solution or he is a great guy, I'm just saying his rhetoric is miles ahead of Hillary.
 
Excellent quote. Jefferson had another famous one I think applies well here:

quote-i-would-rather-be-exposed-to-the-inconveniences-attending-too-much-liberty-than-those-attending-too-thomas-jefferson-283954.jpg



Also:


images

AWESOME!

Another one I've quoted a few times lately is:

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was or ever will be.

Thomas Jefferson
 
[MENTION=10908]dannno[/MENTION]
And for the last time - violent combatants don't get first amendment protections!! Period. Let's pretend we were a better, more peaceful country and we got attacked by Japan and they had a state run newspaper that was circulating anti-US propaganda and perpetuating violence against us.. are you really saying we should avoid bombing their newspaper facility because freedom of speech???? Really?

The Japanese were set up to bomb us by FDR; he did it on purpose, so that Americans would agree to go to war.

And, when freedom of speech is restricted, it is TPTB that decides what is "terrorism" and what is not; this is a very dangerous and slippery slope. Already we have had kids shot for playing with toy guns- if freedom becomes even more restricted, people could be killed or jailed for saying any words that the Empire finds offensive.
 
[MENTION=10908]dannno[/MENTION]


The Japanese were set up to bomb us by FDR; he did it on purpose, so that Americans would agree to go to war.

And, when freedom of speech is restricted, it is TPTB that decides what is "terrorism" and what is not; this is a very dangerous and slippery slope. Already we have had kids shot for playing with toy guns- if freedom becomes even more restricted, people could be killed or jailed for saying any words that the Empire finds offensive.

I know Pearl Harbor was a false flag or LIHOP at minimum... that wasn't the situation I described.

I'm talking about an enemy who is attacking peaceful people with violence.
 
I don't think I can stand this anymore...to see members on this board, of all the fucking places on the interwebz, argue that in a time of war, a war that is never going to end, press and free speech should be restricted by government...well...for fuck's sake.

I'm ashamed of you.

We all were better than this.


"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again."
 
First of all, you do NOT have a right to determine who enters the country. If you think that then you have no concept of either how the US government is supposed to work or what property rights.

See, the US government has no rights. It is not a person. It ha s"delegated powers," things it can do because the people who have the rights to do those things have authorized it to act in their name. The government then cannot do anything that you cannot do.

Property rights say that you can prevent anyone from crossing onto land you own directly. You can absolutely regulate your own land. But you neither have the right to tell me who I can or cannot have on my land nor can you determine who can or cannot go onto land no one owns. Once you do either of those things you are violating my property rights and the rights of others to move across unowned land.

Since you do not either own all the land bordering the national boundaries you cannot authorize the government to or all the land in the country you have no rights whatsoever to limit someone else in their ability to travel across the national lines, to emigrate or immigrate. Just because you make up a giant gang that runs a protectionist scam on the public doesn't mean you have any more rights than the individual does. It just makes you a tyrant.

Secondly, are you naive when it comes to immigration? What do you think happens when the US thugs burst into your home, seize your property, steal you from your home, shatter your family, and throw you in a rape cage? What do you think happens when people are caught crossing the border? What do you think laws are? Laws are force and threats of death. You are saying that you think it is okay to kill someone who refuses to go back across an imaginary line you made up to create a huge "safe space" for your "ideals." You want to declare that you are for immigration laws? Fine. But don't be a coward. Actually face up to what it is exactly that you are doing. You are okay with killing people for a victimless crime, because they hurt no one by crossing a non-existent line on a map somewhere. That isn't justice, it is tyranny. All men are created equal with the exact same unalienable rights. Not just Americans.

It is, in essence, what ISIS does. You are threatening to torture and murder someone because they think differently about government than you do. It is sick and hypocritical.

In theory. But the federal government is the corporation. And therefore is a person with rights.
 
I don't think I can stand this anymore...to see members on this board, of all the fucking places on the interwebz, argue that in a time of war, a war that is never going to end, press and free speech should be restricted by government...well...for fuck's sake.

I'm ashamed of you.

We all were better than this.

Once upon a time on these forums had McCain or Romney said these types of things they would have been excoriated.
 
Once upon a time on these forums had McCain or Romney said these types of things they would have been excoriated.


And the people doing the excoriating would NOT have been temp banned, thus protecting the morons from the consequences of their actions.
 
Totally agreed, and like I said, I prefer the Ron Paul solution over all else by a long shot - but I also prefer the stop funding ISIS, stop trying to replace foreign leaders and meddling in the middle east and just take out ISIS of Donald Trump to Hillary's continuation of the funding of ISIS and the continuation of replacing foreign leaders and meddling in the Middle East. It's pretty simple. I don't know why you wouldn't agree with that as well.

Ever been so against meddling in the Middle East, deposing foreign leaders, and supporting ISIS that you end up agitating for meddling in the Middle East, deposing foreign leaders, and supporting ISIS?

 
So you oppose taking out ISIS?
The US has been fighting ISIS since 2004 and it has only grown. If the US stopped undermining Syria they would have taken out ISIS. The US needs to mind its own business. ISIS isn't Nazi Germany. They are a bunch of thugs with rich sugar daddies. The US doesn't go for the rich sugar daddies because they are American allies.
 
The US has been fighting ISIS since 2004 and it has only grown. If the US stopped undermining Syria they would have taken out ISIS. The US needs to mind its own business. ISIS isn't Nazi Germany. They are a bunch of thugs with rich sugar daddies. The US doesn't go for the rich sugar daddies because they are American allies.

But they're chopping off heads!!
 
Once upon a time on these forums had McCain or Romney said these types of things they would have been excoriated.

That exact same thought occurred to me, If it was anyone but Trump saying these things the Trumpertarians would be ripping them hard and rightly so. TDS is real.
 
And the people doing the excoriating would NOT have been temp banned, thus protecting the morons from the consequences of their actions.

Agreed. Just look at the Trump trolls in this thread. Reporting everything they see so the mods can come and coddle them.
 
Back
Top