If there is a 9/11 scale attack on US soil in the next 24 months

[paisjpq]

I can't believe I actually read this thread...Dala are you high? you've written a bunch of ridiculous buillsh*t but this one ranks up there with PG1985

[MaTH716]

I personally don't think that there will be another 9-11 style attack. Security is too high at airports. Plus most importantly, people won't sit idle anymore. The days of being hi-jacked to just go to Cuba are over. Passangers know what the end result will be and band together to try to stop the terrorists.

That being said, I really don't think it matters who is in office. These people hate America and what America stands for. Therefore they would try to attack us no matter who the president is, given the opportunity. I believe that eventually there will be another attack, but nothing to the scale and devestation of 9/11.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by paisjpq

I can't believe I actually read this thread...Dala are you high? you've written a bunch of ridiculous buillsh*t but this one ranks up there with PG1985

why do you feel this way? Is it ridiculous to think that there could be another attack? Is it ridiculous to think that the new administration would probably be blamed?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

why do you feel this way? Is it ridiculous to think that there could be another attack? Is it ridiculous to think that the new administration would probably be blamed?

Way too soon to establish blame for an act that hasn't occurred! It's foolish to think there aren't plans in motion now to harm this country and its' citizens, here and abroad. Our initial response will probably be good, as our security infrastructure is secure(needs tweaks) What happens after that is up to the leaders of our country....Then you can blame and debate it!

[hi_im_god]

i'm way ahead of you. i've been working out the math on who's to blame for sarah palin's election in 2012.

it's narrowed down to 2 demographics. humorless conservative's and horny guys. i'll report back when i've finalized my results.

and the answer to your question is no. it isn't obama's fault. it's the jews.

i mean...duh!

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

i'm way ahead of you. i've been working out the math on who's to blame for sarah palin's election in 2012.

it's narrowed down to 2 demographics. humorless conservative's and horny guys. i'll report back when i've finalized my results.

and the answer to your question is no. it isn't obama's fault. it's the jews.

i mean...duh!

I see you've been talking to the Pope again!.....we'll probably be ready for your report in 2010....when the new campaigns start up

[ateamstupid]

The only thing I predict if there's another attack is that, just like last time, the people farthest from the actual destruction will be the ones who act the most outraged and hurt.

"It was so sad watching those towers fall ON TV".. "I can't believe they attacked US like that".. "How are WE ever supposed to recover from having to watch that on TV?"

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

The only thing I predict if there's another attack is that, just like last time, the people farthest from the actual destruction will be the ones who act the most outraged and hurt.

"It was so sad watching those towers fall ON TV".. "I can't believe they attacked US like that".. "How are WE ever supposed to recover from having to watch that on TV?"

Yes because there wasn't a shortage of New Yorkers wearing NYPD and FDNY hats.

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

why do you feel this way? Is it ridiculous to think that there could be another attack? Is it ridiculous to think that the new administration would probably be blamed?

Uh..excuse me ...but are you insane?



Do you know who she is?

Ever see the movie Indiana Jones...the first one? Recall the girl who owned the desert bar and slammed down whiskey by the quart? The one who doubled as her own bouncer?

That character was based on Thebby.





Don't let those two giant mice of hers with the strange looking ears fool you. They are every bit as mean as she is.

I took this time to warn you.I hate this place.

So I hope you appreciate what I just did for you.



Don't ever question her again...or you will turn up "missing"....just like the rest.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Mortimer

Uh..excuse me ...but are you insane?



Do you know who she is?

Ever see the move Indiana Jones...the first one? Recall the girl who owned the desert bar and slammed down whiskey by the quart? The one who doubled as her own bouncer?

That character was modeled after Thebby.





Don't let those two giant mice of hers with the strange looking ears fool you. They are every bit as mean as she is.

I took this time to warn you.I hate this place.

So I hope you appreciate what I just did for you.



Don't ever question her again...or you will turn up "missing"....just like the rest.

[Mortimer]

Thanks,KGB, but no need.You are too kind.


Dala.....May I make a suggestion?


Send her a pm.Tell her how much you look up to her;how she does her job with amazing efficacy. Tell her you think her filthy animals are the cutest things you have ever seen.

Close by asking what exercises she does to keep her admirable breasts in such good shape and also ask for her hair stylist.

This may get you off the Hate List







( p.s......keep away from mentioning her comment about not knowing whether her latest horsey acquisition was pregnant or just fat.Don't ever bring that one up.)

[Mortimer]

Dala;

I rethought things. This may be a better pm idea:


Tell Thebby you apologize profusely for any distaste she may have experienced over your post. Let her clearly know that Andy Panda suggested you open this thread and that you should have never listened to him.

Mention how lucky she is to have such a handsome and wonderful fellow as Steve for her primary squeeze.

This time close by saying you know Carla has been talking in negative terms behind her back and you felt she should know this...and that you don't for one second believe she wears a penalty bra and that you also don't believe she plays out her strange sexual fantasies in her large fish aquarium downstairs.






Strike " downstairs"---just leave that part out.


(p.s....never talk about facial ornaments either)

[Mortimer]

Oh..one final thing,Dala.


Let her know you and CowGirlInTexas are good friends and that if Thebby is "interested" ( she will be---I promise you)...well just to let you know and you will be happy to make the "arrangements."


Don't forget to insert the at the end.








OK....all that should really help you.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by paisjpq

I can't believe I actually read this thread...Dala are you high? you've written a bunch of ridiculous buillsh*t but this one ranks up there with PG1985

I couldn't have said it better myself.
This thread is stupid, and I mean like Sarah Palin stupid.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I couldn't have said it better myself.
This thread is stupid, and I mean like Sarah Palin stupid.

Yeah, keep telling me about how scholars arent calling the bush admin socialist either.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Yeah, keep telling me about how scholars arent calling the bush admin socialist either.

I am in no mood to have this argument with you again since you seem completely unwilling to grasp basic concepts, but I'll give it a shot.
What do you think the socialist parties in America think of the government bailouts? By your logic they should be happy about it right? They aren't. Why? Because they see it for what it is, which is an attempt to prop up global capitalism, which is exactly what true socialists do NOT want.
I encourage you to read this article: http://socialistworker.org/2008/10/15/comrade-in-chief
The whole thing is interesting, but the real key comes at the end:
"The transition from capitalism to socialism can't be a gradual or incremental process by which the state enacts reforms and progressively takes ownership of more and larger chunks of the economy. Rather, socialism represents a radical break with the present system--and depends on the active struggles of workers and their subsequent engagement with every aspect of governing society in their own interest, under the guiding principle of human need before corporate greed."

As for what scholars think, I can only tell you that as someone that works in academics in a department where about 75% of the people are marxists, I can assure you that none of them would call the actions taken by the administration in recent weeks/months socialism.

Now please feel free to go back to calling people names like hillbilly and loser. It is real classy.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I am in no mood to have this argument with you again since you seem completely unwilling to grasp basic concepts, but I'll give it a shot.
What do you think the socialist parties in America think of the government bailouts? By your logic they should be happy about it right? They aren't. Why? Because they see it for what it is, which is an attempt to prop up global capitalism, which is exactly what true socialists do NOT want.
I encourage you to read this article: http://socialistworker.org/2008/10/15/comrade-in-chief
The whole thing is interesting, but the real key comes at the end:
"The transition from capitalism to socialism can't be a gradual or incremental process by which the state enacts reforms and progressively takes ownership of more and larger chunks of the economy. Rather, socialism represents a radical break with the present system--and depends on the active struggles of workers and their subsequent engagement with every aspect of governing society in their own interest, under the guiding principle of human need before corporate greed."

As for what scholars think, I can only tell you that as someone that works in academics in a department where about 75% of the people are marxists, I can assure you that none of them would call the actions taken by the administration in recent weeks/months socialism.

Now please feel free to go back to calling people names like hillbilly and loser. It is real classy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...l.creditcrunch


Is Roubini a scholar? I would say so. Not to impugn your place in the world of scholars, but i would say his word carries more weight. He calls Bush a socialist. You said No scholar would call Bush a socialist.

Wouldnt that make you...WRONG??????

Now try to talk your way out of it classy guy.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...l.creditcrunch


Is Roubini a scholar? I would say so. Not to impugn your place in the world of scholars, but i would say his word carries more weight. He calls Bush a socialist. You said No scholar would call Bush a socialist.

Wouldnt that make you...WRONG??????

Now try to talk your way out of it classy guy.

Roubini is certainly a scholar. If I did say that NO scholar would call Bush a socialist than yes, I was certainly wrong. I should have said that the overwhelming majority of scholars would not call him a socialist.
You can always come across a few guys that disagree. The same holds true with global warming. The people that deny global warming all trot out the one or two guys who deny that it is real and then argue that there is disagreement among scientists....when there isn't really much of a disagreement at all.

The fact remains that by MOST intelligent estimates, Bush is not a socialist. I think it stands to reason that the people that actually ARE socialists would be a pretty good judge of who qualifies, and they certainly wouldn't classify Bush as being one of them.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Roubini is certainly a scholar. If I did say that NO scholar would call Bush a socialist than yes, I was certainly wrong. I should have said that the overwhelming majority of scholars would not call him a socialist.
You can always come across a few guys that disagree. The same holds true with global warming. The people that deny global warming all trot out the one or two guys who deny that it is real and then argue that there is disagreement among scientists....when there isn't really much of a disagreement at all.

The fact remains that by MOST intelligent estimates, Bush is not a socialist. I think it stands to reason that the people that actually ARE socialists would be a pretty good judge of who qualifies, and they certainly wouldn't classify Bush as being one of them.

This is your quote:

Secondly, I assure you that no serious academic would ever categorize George W. Bush as a socialist. He's not even close.

Roubini is one of the most respected economists in the world. His opinion would trump 99.9% of any group of scholars out there. I provided a link to his stated opinion which goes with what i am saying.

Can you provide anything to prove yours or am I supposed to take your word for it? Not to say that you are dishonest sir, I just want to know if you have anything to substantiate your point that now MOST scholars would not call
Bush socialist?