DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say "well-played" by all sides!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:



    I watched every Republican debate. Except for Ron Paul, they all were ideological idiots.



    Idiots would imply they are stupid, they are not stupid they are corrupt. 

    I aree about Ron Paul though, the only guy from either major party who seems legit, who got cheers from the audience at the debates gets summarily ignored by his own party and country at large, perhaps because he was calling to end the Federal Reserve Bank which has been at the heart of bankrupting our country. 

    At least in Iceland they had the cajones to jail the bankers.




    Hey!   We agree on something!   I love Ron Paul.   Ever notice how the media tries to discredit him at every turn.  They outright laugh at him.   He truly is a challenge to the status quo.



    He gets my vote as well - he is a Libertarian so he should be on the ballot in every state....

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    It is Rand Paul

    A libertarian 3party cannot get elected

    he scares me internationally

    He has a point on the Fed but I don't think we can take the stench of a real audit until our economy is back on track

    I don't want a Senator who has never run anything

    I don't want a Gov who tells us how well he works with Dems in his own state, DC dems are a totally different breed

    I want a Gov who understands how DC works

    I want a pretty honest guy and is his own person and seen as a grown up and not scary

    It leaves me with Gov K from Ohio, but I don't know he can get elected, he would carry ohio

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:

    It is Rand Paul

    he scares me internationally

    He has a point on the Fed but I don't think we can take the stench of a real audit until our economy is back on track

    I don't want a Senator who has never run anything

    I don't want a Gov who tells us how well he works with Dems in his own state, DC dems are a totally different breed

    I want a Gov who understands how DC works

    I want a pretty honest guy and is his own person and seen as a grown up and not scary

    It leaves me with Gov K from Ohio, but I don't know he can get elected



    I would LOVE to see Jan Brewer from AZ...Picture of her finger in Obamas face is classic!

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from melswitts. Show melswitts's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to ccsjl's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

     

    Drones are here to stay.  Every country will have them.  And nanotechnology is so advanced that they can put them anywhere without being noticed.

    I know you are joking in the section I put in bold, but I posed the question to Wozzy earlier and got no answer ... if people are truly afraid that the government is going to cart them away without cause and put them in a "FEMA Concentration Camp" why would you give them a way to trace you and say "here I am - come get me"?

     



    Because your assumption is that we are "afraid."  

     



    Let me guess - in 1999 you were waiting for the year 2000 millenial end of world, then after that the fire and brimstone preacher end of world in May 2011, and then you hid in your hole Dec 2012....Please let us know when your episode of "Doomsday Preppers" will be on......sad part is the ammo shortage you insist the government is buying up, is actually being hoarded by wackos like yourself....I personally know a guy who bought 10,000 rounds of 22lr in 2012 and headed to his Maine cabin last December to await the Mayan end LOL




    None of those scenarios had a high probability of happening. The millennial computer bug was worked on for years before the time came. The preacher was perverting Scripture. The Mayan calendar merely signaled the end of an era.

    These straw men you conjure don't debunk the existence of conspiracies or lift your sheeple label.




    REPENT...REPENT UNTO THE LORD.....REPENT ALL YOU LIBERAL SINNERS....REPENTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from melswitts. Show melswitts's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    Yes the internet is full of falsehoods but what you see on TV is real...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTWY14eyMFg



    The best is at the 7 minute mark when they put on their gas masks due to a scud landing in the studio I guess..?  CNN faking news, brilliant...

    Baaah sheep... baaah



    So some people see conspiracies wherever they look...

    Yet when I post above video of CNN news correspondents faking an air raid, pretending they are in Israel taking scud missle attacks when they're actually in a news studio, there is no response from the "everyone who doesn't submit is a conspiracy nut" crew.

    Nothing... just tell me I'm crazy again.

    BTW this just happened again this past year with Nancy Grace pretending she was speaking with a fellow reporter across the country and it was revealed they were in the same parking lot. 

    But reality TV is fake, the news and politics are real and the internet is full of lies, this couldn't be the reason the governments of the World (or their banker masters) are doing everything they can to regain control of the internet and reign in the information highway.

    Some people will do everything they can to protect themselves from the ugly truth in this world, including lie to themselves, its called cognitive dissonance.




    SAYS HE HAS THE DOCUMENTS DOESNT SHOW ANYONE

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     



    Prolate, I'll give you this ... you present the "liberal argument" better than 99.99% of people who actually vote that way.

    [ Now I'll get back to showing you the flaws and fallacies of your thinking :) ]




    He presents his political arguments about as well as Rusty and UD6 present football arguments. Mostly he deals in these matters with dishonesty, springing from a warped agenda.



    C'mon Babe, you put me on ignore so you missed me telling TSWFAN how I think Obama is a crappy leader who did a bad job on the healthcare bill. 

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     



    Prolate, I'll give you this ... you present the "liberal argument" better than 99.99% of people who actually vote that way.

    [ Now I'll get back to showing you the flaws and fallacies of your thinking :) ]




    He presents his political arguments about as well as Rusty and UD6 present football arguments. Mostly he deals in these matters with dishonesty, springing from a warped agenda.




    C'mon Babe.   I don't agree with what Prolate says, but his presentation of that side is very, very, good.



    Thanks Catfish . . . I think your presentation of your side's opinion is quite good too. You see, despite what Babe thinks I'm not a "liberal ho" . . . I'm really a pragmatist.  Where I differ from conservatives is that I think government has a fairly large role to play in modern, complex societies.  Where I agree with conservatives is I think the actual American government really is (and has been for a while) crap for the most part . . . Wink

     

    Happy New Year . . . 

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to ccnsd's comment:

     

    What? The economy is well known to have been a disaster under Brezhnev. That is why he was replaced with Andropov, someone who was considered a reformer.



    More nonsense. CLEARLY that economy was robust through most of Brezhnev's tenure. From 1964 until the mid 70s it was quite strong. Near the end of his time it did falter, but only then.

    You can pick and choose your estimates but they all show that same trend which defies your spin. And though the Khanin estimates show the CIA numbers as a bit high, other examinations such as those of Michael Boretsky show they were actually low. And even in the Khanin estimates, the same trend appears.

    It clearly shows a downward trend intensifying during Reagan's jacking up of the arms race. When perestroika was placed there was some economic improvement, but the cat was out of the bag regarding freedom and the people's yearning for that by then.

    The Russian estimates are worthless as their methodology could not accurately measure an economy's growth.


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Graph_of_Soviet_National_Income_Growth.png

     

    So, you are proven wrong, again.



    Are you reading your own chart? I know nothing about Khanin but i know Brezhnev was in charge from 1964-1982 which according to your chart shows a steady decline in growth. Assuming your chart is right, when the Soviet economy was supposedly dying because of Reagan it was actually improving. Thanks Babe, you have proven our debt did not destroy Russia's economy or bring them to their knees.

    I guess it is easier calling someone wrong than it is to prove it. Like I said if you want to debate Iran-Contra or Lebanon let's go. 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to ccnsd's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to ccnsd's comment:

     

    What? The economy is well known to have been a disaster under Brezhnev. That is why he was replaced with Andropov, someone who was considered a reformer.



    More nonsense. CLEARLY that economy was robust through most of Brezhnev's tenure. From 1964 until the mid 70s it was quite strong. Near the end of his time it did falter, but only then.

    You can pick and choose your estimates but they all show that same trend which defies your spin. And though the Khanin estimates show the CIA numbers as a bit high, other examinations such as those of Michael Boretsky show they were actually low. And even in the Khanin estimates, the same trend appears.

    It clearly shows a downward trend intensifying during Reagan's jacking up of the arms race. When perestroika was placed there was some economic improvement, but the cat was out of the bag regarding freedom and the people's yearning for that by then.

    The Russian estimates are worthless as their methodology could not accurately measure an economy's growth.


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Graph_of_Soviet_National_Income_Growth.png

     

    So, you are proven wrong, again.



    Are you reading your own chart? I know nothing about Khanin but i know Brezhnev was in charge from 1964-1982 which according to your chart shows a steady decline in growth. Assuming your chart is right, when the Soviet economy was supposedly dying because of Reagan it was actually improving. Thanks Babe, you have proven our debt did not destroy Russia's economy or bring them to their knees.

    I guess it is easier calling someone wrong than it is to prove it. Like I said if you want to debate Iran-Contra or Lebanon let's go. 



    amazing simply amazing

     

    1 .First ask Gorby why Russia tanked, Second  do you know what a bubble is? None of theses GDP numbers mean anything. one also has to look at the mix of gov vs private speading, hmm such as it was in The Ussr, Did you see the USA growth before the 2008 meltdown?

    2. Iran Contra - given  Obama  revising laws all by his lonesome, Obama has done far worse. that said, theaTB effort was to stop commies from taking over a Central American country by thugs.But if you love commie dictators like Sean Penn , of course you would hate it

    3. Lebanon  240 marines down a sad day. RR in charge. but this was a tactical screw up by the  military brass. They put our soldiers in harms way. They should have known how to be in proper defensive position. and they went to war college for what?But then again Letting 4 people die in Benghazi on 9/11 was criminal by the potus and sec state

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to ccnsd's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to ccnsd's comment:

     

    What? The economy is well known to have been a disaster under Brezhnev. That is why he was replaced with Andropov, someone who was considered a reformer.



    More nonsense. CLEARLY that economy was robust through most of Brezhnev's tenure. From 1964 until the mid 70s it was quite strong. Near the end of his time it did falter, but only then.

    You can pick and choose your estimates but they all show that same trend which defies your spin. And though the Khanin estimates show the CIA numbers as a bit high, other examinations such as those of Michael Boretsky show they were actually low. And even in the Khanin estimates, the same trend appears.

    It clearly shows a downward trend intensifying during Reagan's jacking up of the arms race. When perestroika was placed there was some economic improvement, but the cat was out of the bag regarding freedom and the people's yearning for that by then.

    The Russian estimates are worthless as their methodology could not accurately measure an economy's growth.


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Graph_of_Soviet_National_Income_Growth.png

     

    So, you are proven wrong, again.



    Are you reading your own chart? I know nothing about Khanin but i know Brezhnev was in charge from 1964-1982 which according to your chart shows a steady decline in growth. Assuming your chart is right, when the Soviet economy was supposedly dying because of Reagan it was actually improving. Thanks Babe, you have proven our debt did not destroy Russia's economy or bring them to their knees.

    I guess it is easier calling someone wrong than it is to prove it. Like I said if you want to debate Iran-Contra or Lebanon let's go. 



    Is english a second language for you? What don't you understand about "shows a downward trend intensifying during Reagan's jacking up of the arms race"?

    You claimed that (see above) "The economy is well known to have been a disaster under Brezhnev."

    I just proved that statement wrong.

    It had started to stagnate when Reagan got in and his increased spending on the arms race did not allow the Soviets to cut back to aid the economy. The chart shows a decade of robust Soviet economy under Brezhnev and a tapering off in the next 5 years after that, then a further severe reduction when Reagan started spending - exactly as I portrayed it.

    Their economy didn't improve again until the perestroika reforms injected some capitalism into it, and that freedom allowed the whole house of cards to fall because the only thing that had held it together was repression anyway.

    You're about as honest as pro, Rusty and UD6. I mean, the damned facts are right before your eyes and your trying to lie and squirm out of them.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to ccsjl's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to ccsjl's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to ccsjl's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

     

    Drones are here to stay.  Every country will have them.  And nanotechnology is so advanced that they can put them anywhere without being noticed.

    I know you are joking in the section I put in bold, but I posed the question to Wozzy earlier and got no answer ... if people are truly afraid that the government is going to cart them away without cause and put them in a "FEMA Concentration Camp" why would you give them a way to trace you and say "here I am - come get me"?

     



    Because your assumption is that we are "afraid."  

     



    Let me guess - in 1999 you were waiting for the year 2000 millenial end of world, then after that the fire and brimstone preacher end of world in May 2011, and then you hid in your hole Dec 2012....Please let us know when your episode of "Doomsday Preppers" will be on......sad part is the ammo shortage you insist the government is buying up, is actually being hoarded by wackos like yourself....I personally know a guy who bought 10,000 rounds of 22lr in 2012 and headed to his Maine cabin last December to await the Mayan end LOL




    None of those scenarios had a high probability of happening. The millennial computer bug was worked on for years before the time came. The preacher was perverting Scripture. The Mayan calendar merely signaled the end of an era.

    These straw men you conjure don't debunk the existence of conspiracies or lift your sheeple label.



    Sorry I have an IQ - obviously the American people do not. How else would the National Enquirer still be in business since 1957 if the average American had an education.




    Some people believe conspiracies with no basis whatsoever. Then some see no conspiracy when there is ample reason to suspect. In either case, stupidity runs rampant.

     

    http://ufologie.patrickgross.org/etpics/aliensbackbush02.jpg



    W has the IQ of a typical National Inquirer reader - Ive said for years the only Bush with an IQ is Barbara.....




    You don't need an IQ to do the bidding of your masters.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:



    I watched every Republican debate. Except for Ron Paul, they all were ideological idiots.



    Idiots would imply they are stupid, they are not stupid they are corrupt. 

    I aree about Ron Paul though, the only guy from either major party who seems legit, who got cheers from the audience at the debates gets summarily ignored by his own party and country at large, perhaps because he was calling to end the Federal Reserve Bank which has been at the heart of bankrupting our country. 

    At least in Iceland they had the cajones to jail the bankers.




    Hey!   We agree on something!   I love Ron Paul.   Ever notice how the media tries to discredit him at every turn.  They outright laugh at him.   He truly is a challenge to the status quo.




    That's because he's the only one that isn't owned out of the lot - meaning, both parties, and the media.

    ^ Is anybody shocked that Obama didn't end Iraq any sooner than Bush was going to, still hasn't ended Afghanistan, signed the Patriot Act when he said he wouldn't, started more military actions, spies on everybody in sight and didn't close Guantanamo?

    Wake up.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    Hillary is the Democrat in 2016...question is can the Republicans put up a candidate that can beat her.....Only one I see winning is Paul....

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    Come on Wozzy.

    Don't equate phony news with a FEMA Human Roundup Theory.

    I don't trust ANY news source for ANYTHING.  They are all pandering for a slice of the audience pie.   Nancy Grace?   My wife had her on one night and I swear every sentence was "Tot Mom" this, "Tot Mom" that.  I said to my wife, I bet she trademarked the phrase.   Sure enough - she did.   There is no bigger phony on cable than her.

    Here's my viewing in total:

    (1) Sports

    (2) Nat Geo Wild

    (3) Smithsonian

    News?    As Paul Simon sang "I get the news I need from the weather report ..."



    So there's nothing "conspiratorial" about the news, a most honorable profession, being as fake as Duck Dynasty?  

    If I had framed it the opposite way and had simply said all the major news outlets are owned by the same multinational companies, of which the same 1% of the population sat at the heads of these companies you would have called me a conspiracy loon again.  

    But when I show you footage of CNN faking war stories, or video of the taliban supposedly beheading Americans or gassing cute little puppies or endless chatter about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq/Iran/Syria that encourages young men to join the service to go fight for freedom or in the case of this faked CNN story, feel OK about sending billions of dollars in financial aid to Israel, a country that simply doesn't need it, you just shrug it off.  

    So you don't believe in conspiracies, but when given a hundred examples like this one, Iran/Contra, etc etc you just write it off to one bad apple ruining the lot, a blip on the radar?

    People are funny; they'll believe in ghosts, aliens, bigfoot, lochness monsters, angels, miracles, chupacabra, magic bullets, lone assassins, building number 7 at the World Trade Center falling on it's own without having been touched by a plane and a god in the sky who sits in judgement of them but the one thing they won't believe in is that another human could pull the wool over their eyes, a conspiracy of men.

    Truly as Mark Twain once said, "it is easier to fool a man than convince him he has been fooled."

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from CatfishHunter. Show CatfishHunter's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    So there's nothing "conspiratorial" about the news, a most honorable profession, being as fake as Duck Dynasty?  

    If I had framed it the opposite way and had simply said all the major news outlets are owned by the same multinational companies, of which the same 1% of the population sat at the heads of these companies you would have called me a conspiracy loon again.  

    But when I show you footage of CNN faking war stories, or video of the taliban supposedly beheading Americans or gassing cute little puppies or endless chatter about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq/Iran/Syria that encourages young men to join the service to go fight for freedom or in the case of this faked CNN story, feel OK about sending billions of dollars in financial aid to Israel, a country that simply doesn't need it, you just shrug it off.  

    So you don't believe in conspiracies, but when given a hundred examples like this one, Iran/Contra, etc etc you just write it off to one bad apple ruining the lot, a blip on the radar?

    People are funny; they'll believe in ghosts, aliens, bigfoot, lochness monsters, angels, miracles, chupacabra, magic bullets, lone assassins, building number 7 at the World Trade Center falling on it's own without having been touched by a plane and a god in the sky who sits in judgement of them but the one thing they won't believe in is that another human could pull the wool over their eyes, a conspiracy of men.

    Truly as Mark Twain once said, "it is easier to fool a man than convince him he has been fooled."



    Not sure where to start.

    I'll start with this - I didn't call you a loon, I call the "Conspiracy Theories" loony.  If you won't accept the distinction that's unfortunate.

    As you've said before to another poster, anyone can throw out their own radical theories and expect everyone else to disprove them.  Then the author and adherents to the theory feel empowered to say "See, no one can prove me wrong". 

    Here, I'll start one ... thesis:  We have all died in the earthly sense and we are "living" in an alternate reality.  Prove my theory wrong.

    I could start a million such theories, post them on the internet, some would gain momentum and go viral, and pretty soon fiction becomes accepted "fact".

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    I could start a million such theories, post them on the internet, some would gain momentum and go viral, and pretty soon fiction becomes accepted "fact".



    Even simpler, just put them on FOX News . . .Wink

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from CatfishHunter. Show CatfishHunter's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:


    Even simpler, just put them on FOX News . . .Wink




    Haha.

    I think the liberal handbook calls for the moniker "Faux News".   Stick to the handbook, or you could lose your credentials. 

    Even as an independent/conservative guy I can look at that network and see the blatant bias and distortion of news and events.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    Come on Wozzy.

    Don't equate phony news with a FEMA Human Roundup Theory.

    I don't trust ANY news source for ANYTHING.  They are all pandering for a slice of the audience pie.   Nancy Grace?   My wife had her on one night and I swear every sentence was "Tot Mom" this, "Tot Mom" that.  I said to my wife, I bet she trademarked the phrase.   Sure enough - she did.   There is no bigger phony on cable than her.

    Here's my viewing in total:

    (1) Sports

    (2) Nat Geo Wild

    (3) Smithsonian

    News?    As Paul Simon sang "I get the news I need from the weather report ..."



    So there's nothing "conspiratorial" about the news, a most honorable profession, being as fake as Duck Dynasty?  

    If I had framed it the opposite way and had simply said all the major news outlets are owned by the same multinational companies, of which the same 1% of the population sat at the heads of these companies you would have called me a conspiracy loon again.  

    But when I show you footage of CNN faking war stories, or video of the taliban supposedly beheading Americans or gassing cute little puppies or endless chatter about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq/Iran/Syria that encourages young men to join the service to go fight for freedom or in the case of this faked CNN story, feel OK about sending billions of dollars in financial aid to Israel, a country that simply doesn't need it, you just shrug it off.  

    So you don't believe in conspiracies, but when given a hundred examples like this one, Iran/Contra, etc etc you just write it off to one bad apple ruining the lot, a blip on the radar?

    People are funny; they'll believe in ghosts, aliens, bigfoot, lochness monsters, angels, miracles, chupacabra, magic bullets, lone assassins, building number 7 at the World Trade Center falling on it's own without having been touched by a plane and a god in the sky who sits in judgement of them but the one thing they won't believe in is that another human could pull the wool over their eyes, a conspiracy of men.

    Truly as Mark Twain once said, "it is easier to fool a man than convince him he has been fooled."



    You left out the UFOs in hanger 18, and empty Fort Knox ......

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    Here, I'll start one ... thesis:  We have all died in the earthly sense and we are "living" in an alternate reality.  Prove my theory wrong.

    If you provided me with tangible evidence of said theory, brought forth an overwhelming abundance of coincidences and anomalies that all point to this as being true, along with made for TV special with Einstein stating this as such, and I still called it a wild conspiracy theory it would be comparable to what has happened on this thread.  

    Any examples provided have been ignored or brushed off, instead of attacked head on, this is why this is futile, you have your mind made up so you'll ignore any evidence presented. 

    You don't believe that the 1% of the population that controls 90% of the wealth, who have handed this legacy down over generations to their heirs, have any undue influence over our political process, fraternal organizations, the value of paper money, the governments of the world, the military, the media or even religions... this seems like a conspiracy theory to you?

    If you need to be convinced of this, than I'm certainly not the one to show you.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:


    Even simpler, just put them on FOX News . . .Wink




    Haha.

    I think the liberal handbook calls for the moniker "Faux News".   Stick to the handbook, or you could lose your credentials. 

    Even as an independent/conservative guy I can look at that network and see the blatant bias and distortion of news and events.



    The liberals just can't do anything right, can they? Even in their sarcasm they end up sounding like cheese-eating surrender monkeys . . . 

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: DUCK DYNASTY.. thoughts? i say

    The term conspiracy theorist has got a bad rap because it tends to discuss things outside of the. Mainstream Beleif system and provide alternate theories, sometimes backed by proof that challenge the status quo. furthermore, folks that like to poke holes in conspiracies tend to conflate conspiracies backed by proof (some of which Wozz and Babe) presented above with more fringe type things like aliens or Bigfoot. Doing so makes some of the more important ones seem outrageous when taken under the same microscope as Bigfoot. It's important to focus on the ones that can be backed by proof And are rooted in how the world is shaping up or is being shapen.

    as I said about 5 pages ago, there are things happening, some of which Wozz noted like Dhs buying a crazy amount of ammo, that are supported by fact, which beg the question, why? There is no disputing DhS in this example did this. The question is why? This is a question everyone, whether you are liberal, conservative, demo, repub, independent or whatever should ask Because it has no political current to it. It is simply analyzing an action that was taken. 

    So putting your political leanings to the side, ask yourself the question...why would DhS need billions of rounds of ammo If its main charter is to protect the homeland? It doesn't fight wars abroad, it operates on US soil. I know I am zeroing in on this one example, but am trying to divorce action supported by proof from political leanings and more fringe things like Bigfoot. 

    Any takers want to address why? 

    1. They like to target practice?

    2. They are preparing for something to happen on US soil? 

    3. They are trying to dry up ammo purchases by the civilian population? 

    4. Whatever else you can think of?

    There are other happenings backed by proof we could argue all day as to why. I will throw another one out....the federal reserve has been in operation for 100 years now, printing our money and controlling interest rates, inflation, etc. why do they exist? Why has the power of printing money been given to a private entity when it clearly states in the constitution that this is the sole duty of congress? Why? Any takers?

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts