The United Nations

[poncho]

You and I have had our differences to be sure SN. Sometimes it got down right ugly but we've raised ourselves above that and worked out a peace agreement between us. At no point during our battles did you resort to using dirty tricks like ITL has. You never questioned my faith in Christ because I choose to post mostly in the politics and news forums like Salty has done several times now. I believe ITL and Salty would rather see me crucified than give up their endless and mostly meaningless liberal vs conservative debates that have only encouraged both sides to ignore the restraints placed on their authority by the constitution.

I think what worries ITL and Salty most is the idea that people are beginning to realize that the old left vs right debates no longer apply in politics today. As both parties moves us ever closer to totalitarian government the real debate now is between authoritarianism vs constitutionalism.

What ever would these two do if Americans quit treating political campaigns like horse races by figuring the odds and placing their bets on the corporate backed "favorites"?

They'd be lost if people started discussing real issues and I think they know it and it scares them. Attacking the messenger is the only option left for them to protect their precious false left vs right paradigm.

It leaves me wondering what is more important them protecting a false paradigm or restoring our reuplic?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

If I can refute what he says, I do so.

... and he still won't believe you.

 

[poncho]

... and he still won't believe you.

I don't believe you simply because I put more stock in the evidence than all your red white and blue appeals to emotion.

I believe Bush and the neocons lied because that's what the evidence shows.

I believe Obama lies because that's what the evidence shows.

I believe the democrats and republicans have sold us out to the banksters and corporitos because that's what the evidence shows.

I believe democrats and republicans in congress believe their job is to come up with authoritarian solutions to the problems they have created to control us instead of protecting our liberties because that's what the evidence shows.

I believe the UN is anti American and un-democratic because that's what the evidence shows.

I believe the global banks and corporations have co copted the government because that's what the evidence shows.

I believe the war on terror is a fraud because that's what the evidence shows.

I believe Washington has used Islamic extremists as proxy forces to destabilize and balkanize other nations since the 1980's because that what the evidence shows.

I believe Washington used a false flag terror campaign to overthrow the government of Iran in 1953 because that's what the evidence shows and the CIA's confession proves.

I believe the joint chiefs of staff drew up a plan 1962 to run a false flag terror campaign which included blowing up planes and possibly killing American citizens as a pretext to invade Cuba because that's what their own document shows.

I believe the neocons at the very least used 9/11 as a pretext to start an aggressive war for global hegemony under the guise of a "global war on terror" because that's what the evidence which includes their policy papers (from corporate funded "think tanks"), their books and other documents and memos along with our recent involvement in needless interventions in the middle east and north Africa based on dubious pretexts and out right lies shows.

I believe Washington's long history of military interventions (on behalf of corporate interests from 1898) has done more to harm us than to help us because that's what the evidence shows.

I believe those in power always seek to consolidate their power because that's what the evidence and the history of the world shows.

I believe totalitarian governments are able to come to power because there are people like you that create and sustain divisions, constantly hype threats whether real or imagined, disregard individual and human rights for the "greater good" and for "security", try to give the impression that the misdeeds of your chosen camp are excusable because of the misdeeds of the "other" camp, to name a few things.

So why should I believe you when all the evidence shows you are wrong?

The only kind of arguments you can put forward to counteract all that evidence is "shooting the messenger", "appeals to emotion" such as our fear and anger, using ridicule, put downs, insults, building strawmen, using labels like swords, and just generally being mean and arrogant while doing all you can to keep people from looking at all the evidence. The one thing authoritarians fear most is an awake and informed citizenry.

Taken all together your arguments only add up to so many distractions. You have obviously chosen to camp with the authoritarians in government and the corporate monopoly men and promote their agenda of endless war abroad and a militarized police state at home instead of defending our liberties. I believe in defending our liberties, you believe in defending those trying to strip them all away.

That's why I don't believe you.

 

[FollowTheWay]

Run the UN out of the country and turn the building into a pro-life museum.

I think the world needs a place to discuss it's differences rather than run headlong into war. Why does the UN have to be pro-American? It should be neutral.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I think the world needs a place to discuss it's differences rather than run headlong into war.

It is difficult to discuss anything with fanatics, who are the primary cause of war in this world today.

Why does the UN have to be pro-American?

It doesn't have to be, nor is it, but ...

It should be neutral.

... it isn't neutral, either.

 

[poncho]

It is difficult to discuss anything with fanatics, who are the primary cause of war in this world today.

Finally you said something I can agree with. I must admit though it does sound a bit strange coming from a neocon that has been pushing for war on Syria since coming here to BB.

Neocons have been fanatical war mongers since Donald Rumsfeld falsely claimed the Russians had an invisible submarine. All the intell people said "but Don there is no proof of that" and he replied, "Exactly! The lack of proof is the proof!"

You are right it is almost impossible to discuss anything with fanatics especially neocon fanatics. They're addicted to war.

 

[saturneptune]

I think the world needs a place to discuss it's differences rather than run headlong into war. Why does the UN have to be pro-American? It should be neutral.

Are you goofy or what? The UN does not have to be pro-American. Neither does it have to have its headquarters on US soil, nor does the American tax payer need to fund it. Why don't you donate a few million to such a worthy cause.

 

[Revmitchell]

I think the world needs a place to discuss it's differences rather than run headlong into war. Why does the UN have to be pro-American? It should be neutral.

First no one said it needs to be pro American, it just needs not be anti-American. Second when despots only want to conquer and get their way no amount of talking will solve anything. And third the UN is now controlled by people who have values far different from ours. We no longer have any common ground with which to begin any conversations.

 

[Rippon]

He is not a person that I would put on ignore, like the first two I ever did it to last week.

You have spoken about putting me on ignore so many times in the last five days it is hilarious! LOL!

S/N : "I have only put two on ignore in eight years." 9/14/13 1:31 AM.

S/N : "I am really trying to use the ignore feature." 9/11/13 1:36 PM

S/N : "I have two ignores." 9/11/13 1:14 PM

S/N : "I told the story about putting two on ignore the other night." 9/10/13 8:53 PM

S/N : "I literally put my first two on ignore the other night." 9/10/13 8:06 PM

S/N : "I put two on the ignore list.I finally put two on ignore. I should have put them on ignore years ago. 9/10/13 1:34 PM

At the very least ignore means paying no attention to someone. But there you go in your playground MO advertizing that you will pay no attention, yet paying me a great deal of attention. You are a trip!

 

[FollowTheWay]

It is difficult to discuss anything with fanatics, who are the primary cause of war in this world today.

It doesn't have to be, nor is it, but ...

... it isn't neutral, either.

The problem is WE are the fanatics who are the primary cause of war.

 

[Revmitchell]

The problem is WE are the fanatics who are the primary cause of war.

You either have no clue what you are talking about or are such an ideologue that you do not care.

 

[saturneptune]

You either have no clue what you are talking about or are such an ideologue that you do not care.

That is correct. IMO, the United States' problem is not being the cause of war. It is just the opposite. It is the fact we feel obligated to stop every war that every other nation decides to fight. I cannot think of one time in our history we have encouraged a war. The only time that it might have come close was the Spanish-American War, and the USS Maine.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

The problem is WE are the fanatics who are the primary cause of war.

You either have no clue what you are talking about or are such an ideologue that you do not care.

That is correct. IMO, the United States' problem is not being the cause of war. It is just the opposite. It is the fact we feel obligated to stop every war that every other nation decides to fight. I cannot think of one time in our history we have encouraged a war. The only time that it might have come close was the Spanish-American War, and the USS Maine.

Rev, Saturn, thanks. Now I can keep calmly drinking my coffee and getting ready for my day.

 

[poncho]

That is correct. IMO, the United States' problem is not being the cause of war. It is just the opposite. It is the fact we feel obligated to stop every war that every other nation decides to fight. I cannot think of one time in our history we have encouraged a war. The only time that it might have come close was the Spanish-American War, and the USS Maine.

And yet we have documented proof that the joint chiefs of staff were willing and ready to shoot down American airliners, gun down American citizens in our cities streets, blow up ships and strafe Cuban refuge boats and blame it on Castro to gain public support for a war on Cuba.

See the Northwoods document. http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=92662

That seems pretty fanatical to me.

Then we have TND that has been here calling for an attack on Syria that would be helping the same Al Qaeda "rebels" that fought against American troops in Iraq. That seems pretty fanatical to me as well. He has also sided with Dianne Feinstein in saying only corporate or state funded journalists are "real" journalists.

The idea of having a state run media seems a bit radical to me after we have demonized every country that has a state run media.

He seems to be in agreement with some very radical and fanatical democrats as they seek to use military force for regime change and undermining the US constitution. That seems quite the departure from the idea of having a constitutional republic and follows the path to a dictatorship. That is very radical if not fanatical.