Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Politicalchat.org discussion boards > Politics and the Environment

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 04-13-2016, 06:24 PM
Denier Denier is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Heaven
Posts: 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas View Post
Do you trust the scientific opinion of s '60s acid burnout more than that of the global scientific community? Do you espouse metaphysical and dietary theories too? What were Owlsley academic credentials?
Do you always insult your liberal friends like that?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-13-2016, 08:25 PM
Boreas's Avatar
Boreas Boreas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denier View Post
Do you always insult your liberal friends like that?
Owlsley was a total burn out. You brought him up.
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-14-2016, 12:21 PM
CarlV's Avatar
CarlV CarlV is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SF east bay
Posts: 4,455
Quote:
However, the reality is much different from what Bush and Cheney would have you believe. The fact of the matter is that the Bush administration ignored hard evidence from its top intelligence officials between April and September of 2001 about an impending attack by al-Qaeda on US soil. There's no chance that the National Security Agency's domestic wiretapping initiative would have saved the lives of 3,000 American citizens if an intelligence memo titled "Bin Laden determined to attack inside US" that President Bush received a month before 9/11 couldn't move Bush to take such threats seriously.

Since the New York Times broke the domestic spying story last month, the Bush administration has launched a full-scale publicity campaign aimed at convincing an unsuspecting public that the program is legal and has saved thousands of lives. It's the administration's attempt to control the news cycle.

But to suggest that the 9/11 attacks could have been avoided if the NSA had had domestic surveillance powers is outrageous.

Simply put, terrorism was not a priority for the Bush administration during the first nine months of 2001. As former Bush administration counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke told the 9/11 Commission investigating the attacks in 2004: "To the loved ones of the victims of 9/11, to them who are here in the room, to those who are watching on television, your government failed you."

Clarke served as a White House counter-terrorism official in three presidential administrations.
http://truth-out.org/archive/compone...d-911-warnings
Quote:
The number of United States troops who have died fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had passed 6,800 at the beginning of 2015.

They died in a host of ways. The causes of death include rocket-propelled grenade fire and the improvised explosive devices that have been responsible for roughly half of all deaths and injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their deaths were also the result of vehicle crashes, electrocutions, heatstroke, friendly fire, and suicides in theater.

Official Pentagon numbers do not include the many troops who return home and kill themselves as a result of psychological wounds such as PTSD. The DOD does not report suicides among non-active duty reservists. However, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has released data on suicides among all veterans, in a comprehensive February 2013 report. The VA issued a public statement that it is using this data in order to implement rigorous suicide prevention measures.

The military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have also produced fatalities among large numbers of private contract workers. A full and accurate accounting of contractor deaths has not yet been done by the Pentagon. Over 6,900 contractors working for the US have been killed in the two war zones. The true number is likely much larger: the majority of US contractors are the citizens of other countries, many of whose deaths appear not to have been reported.
http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/c...ilitary/killed
Quote:
Researchers estimated there were 405,000 excess Iraqi deaths attributable to the war through mid-2011.

They also attempted to account for deaths missed because families had fled the country, and estimated 55,805 total deaths, bringing the total to nearly 461,000.

About 70 percent of Iraq deaths from 2003-2011 were violent in nature, with most caused by gunshots, followed by car bombs and other explosions, said the study.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/1...n_4102855.html




Nice, huh?


Carl
__________________
Russians who vote elect Republicans
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-14-2016, 01:00 PM
nailer's Avatar
nailer nailer is offline
Rational Anarchist
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 7,315
Environmental connection?
__________________
"We have met the enemy and he is us."
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-14-2016, 05:06 PM
CarlV's Avatar
CarlV CarlV is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SF east bay
Posts: 4,455
Quote:
Originally Posted by nailer View Post
Environmental connection?
Nah, besides mine's all factual and stuff so I reckon it doesn't belong in this thread.


Carl
__________________
Russians who vote elect Republicans
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-14-2016, 05:28 PM
Denier Denier is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Heaven
Posts: 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas View Post
Owlsley was a total burn out. You brought him up.
If he agreed with your insanity, you would call him a genius.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-14-2016, 05:30 PM
Denier Denier is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Heaven
Posts: 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by nailer View Post
Environmental connection?
Dominic Lawson: Democrat fingerprints are all over the financial crisis
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...is-949653.html

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis: Kevin Hassett
http://www.aei.org/publication/how-t...ancial-crisis/

Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.
Poison gas and biological weapons were found in Iraq. Sadam used poison gas on the Kurds and against Iran."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002



"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

Last edited by Denier; 04-14-2016 at 05:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-14-2016, 08:52 PM
68custom's Avatar
68custom 68custom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 846
denier your mom is calling you home for milk and cookies!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-14-2016, 09:38 PM
donquixote99's Avatar
donquixote99 donquixote99 is offline
Ready
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 19,122
14 quotes in one message. Denier can barely type a sentence of his own, but you have to give him credit. He's a believer, and he's in here fighting , the best way he can.

I'm even willing to say that part* of what he thinks he knows is true. Which is more than he will say about me. He think I'm evil and out to destroy the human race.

That, of course, is not part of the true part....



* no estimate of size of part specified
__________________
If you Love Liberty, you must Hate Trump!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-15-2016, 04:17 AM
Denier Denier is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Heaven
Posts: 120
Climate Refugees, Not Found

In 2005, the U.N. Environment Program (UNEP) published a color-coded map under the headline "Fifty million climate refugees by 2010." The primary source for the prediction was a 2005 paper by environmental scientist Norman Myers.

Six years later, this flood of refugees is nowhere to be found, global average temperatures are about where they were when the prediction was made and the U.N. has done a vanishing act of its own, wiping the inconvenient map from its servers.

The map, which can still be found elsewhere on the Web, disappeared from the program's site sometime after April 11, when Gavin Atkins asked on AsianCorrespondent.com: "What happened to the climate refugees?" It's now 2011 and, as Mr. Atkins points out, many of the locales that the map identified as likely sources of climate refugees are "not only not losing people, they are actually among the fastest growing regions in the world."

View the UNEP's climate-refugee prediction map .The program's spokesman tells us the map vanished because "it's not a UNEP prediction. . . . that graphic did not represent UNEP views and was an oversimplification of UNEP views." He added that the program would like to publish a clarification, now that journalists are "making hay of it," except that the staffers able to do so are "all on holiday for Easter."

The climate-refugee prediction isn't the first global warming-related claim that has turned out to be laughable, and everyone can make mistakes. More troubling is the impulse among some advocates of global warming alarmism to assert in the face of contrary evidence that they never said what they definitely said before the evidence went against them.

These columns have asked for some time how anyone can still manage to take the U.N.-led climate crowd seriously. Maybe the more pertinent question is whether the climateers have ever taken the public's intelligence seriously.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...ooglenews_wsj#
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:05 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.