It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Seattle-Area Restaurant Refuses To Serve TSA Agents

page: 13
101
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   


The US news media's fascination with TS^ ineptitude (and rampant illegality)
seems to have cooled since Thanksgiving/Christmas.

Too bad because things are better (read that: worse) than ever.

Now the TS^ is showing up at train stations, but you already knew that.

But they've got a new angle...

They're searching people AFTER they disembark from their trains.

No choice either. As soon as you step off the train, you're herded into a pen.
At least at the airport, you can walk away.

Prime targets for the full body pat down: young children. Who else?

Big thanks to John Pistole (TS^ head), Janet Napolitano (DHS), and the
ever-lovable Osama Bushbama.


www.brasschecktv.com...


What is going on here, searching children after they disembark from a train, this is getting sicker and sicker, when are the American people going to stop this invasion of privacy and stop being treated like criminals.




posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by freedish
But do you think these employees 'enjoy' feeling up disgusting people all day? ........um doubtful


Since they seem to pick and choose people to frisk, can they not just chose NOT to feel up a 4 year old or an old man and break his colostomy sac?... Do they really think those two are a real threat while others are just waved through? Most cases many people are just waved on through and they spot pick victims.

So why are they targeting little kids and old men and women. Why do they make a woman remove a breast prosthesis in public view so that even a news team caught it and made it national news?

I guess the old man had nitro in that colostomy bag, the woman had C4 in the prosthesis and the 4 year old kids leg brace were disguised gun parts.

The terrorist have won... we are afraid of our own shadows.

And I am willing to bet we are pointing our finger at the wrong group when we say 'terrorist'



I agree we are crapping our pants over here in american- in terms of terrorist paranoia. I blame the media for broadcasting fear every week. We can't go an entire day without hearing about some 'attempted terrorist attack'. Regardless of the legitimacy and accuracy of these reports, they are still be broadcasting into the eyes and ears of citizens, and whether or not people buy it, the constant barrage has done some damage in the average american.

But with the TSA, we must remember that there are always bad seeds. There are bad cops too; ones that have abused prison inmates, trafficked drugs, stolen money and violated privacy rights. Does this mean all cops are bad? No. Same goes with TSA. Most are just doing there jobs. I agree though that the people at the top are corrupt.
edit on 25-2-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 





I've heard this several times now in this thread, and I'm at a loss as to the relevance of whether they "like" doing it or not. Exactly why does that matter? They are DOING it. Is that not quite enough?


And our troops are killing & illegaly searching innocents in Afghanistan, should we refuse to serve them food too? (Some of those troops DO enjoy killing innocents.)




Then bring the fire on. The sooner it comes to a head and reaches resolution, the better. So, yeah, one way or the other it can solve the problem. If they'd rather fight than stop the violation, then I'm sure Americans can accommodate that.


Well I guess that's your opinion. I don't think anything good will come from these types of dissension.




A variant of the "I was just following orders, Your Honor" defense. It's not sufficient, especially in light of the fact that they can STOP following illegal orders at any point in time.


So a giant majority of the country is following illegal orders...hmm including cops and troops, government officials and some doctors...well I guess you're right then it isn't a government problem. Since people are ultimately the source of these violations of our rights then maybe it's a people problem?

-----------------------------
I said: "Sure they could quit their jobs, but would you?"





Yes. I did. Not this precise situation, but it still wasn't right, so I walked.


Looks like your manager or whoever is part of the problem i mentioned above.




To NOT take the actions attributed to the restaurant falls under the heading of "giving aid and comfort to the enemy". make no mistake about it, violating rights by government personnel, especially on this widespread of a basis, places them FIRMLY in the enemy camp. You've heard the oath - "...defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC". You know, if the US were invaded by anyone, even aliens, tomorrow, I wouldn't be taking THEM a plate of brownies and blankets either, and this is no different. When folks start trampling your rights, they are no longer friends.


Oh is that right? So then I guess every restaurant in America that isn't doing this should be charged under high treason and declared an enemy of the state...because they are also "giving aid and comfort to the enemy". Maybe we should just go ahead and bomb the TSA agency too. Do you realize how ridiculous your logic is?


IF your going to be a dissenter, do it intelligently. Blind hatred is ignorance. Deny it.
edit on 25-2-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by freedish
And our troops are killing & illegaly searching innocents in Afghanistan, should we refuse to serve them food too? (Some of those troops DO enjoy killing innocents.)


So we should treat those ones as Heros protecting our safety?




posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by freedish
And our troops are killing & illegaly searching innocents in Afghanistan, should we refuse to serve them food too? (Some of those troops DO enjoy killing innocents.)


So we should treat those ones as Heros protecting our safety?



Not sure what you're saying there...
If you're saying that the troops are heroes because they are protecting us then you are horribly mistaken.
How has the war in Afghanistan done anything to protect our safety?

The only justification we had for going into the middle east was the September 11th attack, which I'm still not entirely convinced wasn't an inside job.

And if were so -safe- then why is our government stepping up security measures at airports?

Maybe they aren't the heroes you thought if were still not safe after how many years in the middle east?

Let me add, that I have the utmost respect for anyone in the military. Soldiers have the toughest job in America, except for maybe crab fishermen. However I don't see how fighting an invisible war across the world is protecting our safety? I would give more credit to the FBI.


edit on 25-2-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Yeah they`re only doing their jobs guys, they happen to work at a government agency with certain policies and they cannot do anything about it. Just like the people at the restaraunt happen to work at a company with certain policies that keep them from serving TSA employees. Nothing to see here... Oh, and if they don`t wear their uniform I`m sure they will get served unless they are recognised which would be difficult because I`m sure there are a lot of TSA employees at the SEA-TAC airport... The idea I got is that they are just trying to prevent them from eating there while on duty. Something about the idea of having to sit and eat next to one of those people after they just did god knows what to god knows who... kinda like someone who works in the sex/porn business... but with the added stigma of involuntary participation... it`s just not appetizing. If they come in off duty, no harm no foul. Unless of course they mention it, then it`s "on the table" again and we are forced to acknowledge this is what you do for a living. Not to go off topic, but next to the mason hall in the town I used to live in, theres a "masonic printing" shop with a very clear sign in the window stating the right to refuse service. made me wonder is it only for masons? I don`t know but wouldnt that right allow you to refuse to "everyone except..."? Interesting area of law.



 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 08:10 AM
link   
This is a reply to Mizbeach
I am sorry But, you are acting precisely the way those that instituted this TSA program want you to act.

"these TSA agents are just DOING THEIR JOBS"

Well, The nazi just did their jobs.

"YES! But if the passengers would follow guidlines and not put up a fuss, the lines would move faster."

Thats it, be good little sheep and do as you are told. It will be over quicker.

"I for one will be glad to jump through hoops to show I have nothing to hide, and that i am not a threat. AND I expect everyone else on that same flight to keep themselves and the other passengers safe! "

Oh my god, first of all, no one can protect you but yourself. It is your responsibility to keep your self safe. Dont expect anyone that wheres a uniform to do your job. Well, as for the hoops,they come in many differnt sizes and shapes. And, the can get smaller. OH, and, Hoops can be set on fire to burn those going thru. What you will have enoticed about the poilicies developed by the TSA, the hoops do get smaller, they have, and they will until we get our government back in line and for the people.

"!!! Had there been TSA agents back in 2001, then the tragedy of September 11th may NOT have happened. No towers crashed, no innocents murdered, no current war!"

Sorry, but we did have airport security back in 2001. Secondly, tower seven was brought down by demolition. And the same could probably be said about the first two. Do some research into the security firms that ran security for the world trade center. You may be surprised by whos name pops up. As for the war, Yes with Cheney and Bush and thier group involved. it was only a matter of time before they took us to work for oil and other things.

"Why are we so spoiled as a country to think that we have the right to bitch and complain about everything, that MAKES our country BETTER than the others? "

What MADE our country better is that our founding fathers did bitch and complain and then fought to provide those freedoms for all of us.

"I will take a TSA agent over political murderers like Kadafi any day of the week!"

Well, as for The terrorists, if we would not go around training them and exporting our war machine for the Cheney's and bushs (look into the links between bush fam and Nazi germany) then we probably wouldnt have people in other lands trying to bring their war to us... the way we train them too. There is evidence that we trained Bin Laden here in America. We know we built Tora Bora (not sure of spelling) for the Taliban back when Russia invaded Afghanistan, we trained these guys an supplied them. Khadafi, We made him very rich a few years back... I wonder why? Look at some of the planes he has in his air force... hmm you dont give American Fighters to your enemy.
I fully support the actions of this Restaurant owner. I wish more all over this land would do the same and would include the politicians as well.
Remember, theree is no middle ground on freedom, either you have it or you dont. I heard a discussion a short while back between a friend and someone esle. The guy my friend was talking to said " if you dont like this country, then get out" MY friends response was " I love what my country was and NO, I think i will stay and take it back"

Well, maximise freedoms across the board for all. Your saafety is your responsibility, If you want to feel safe, buy a fire arm, learn how to use, and resign yourself to using when needed. Or, do anything that will give you a sense of safety.

I hope you dont think i am being mean... I am not, in fact if you were here I would probably give you a hug, a warm smile and a heartfelt "welcome", no strings attached. Love your fellow man. Dont trainthem to kill and expect it not to come home. It will come home. One reaps what one plants. evil begets evil, slavery quite often comes in little baby steps and camoflouged and there are some that open their arms to it not knowing.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 08:19 AM
link   
blogs.seattleweekly.com...#

apparently a hoax.

just a thought; it is impossible to determine how many terrorists acts are being prevented by TSA's enhanced security.
and no one is groping any penises.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   
A tester just made it through with a gun in her bra
every time.

If I went into a restaraunt and saw they were serving TSA agants, I'd want to know if they were fresh or frozen, were they harvested humanely, and if there was a choice of light meat or dark.

Oh silly me, acordining to Jessy Ventura they groped his buns...
of course the TSA agents are fresh..
to be a TSA agent obviously the lights aren't home, and there is nobody on
dark meat of course...

oH darn!
I'm sorry,
i don't eat irradiated food so sorry
I'll eat somewhere else thank you...


edit on 26-2-2011 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-2-2011 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   
good riddance why should we pay tax and they shouldnt its just outrageous good on him



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by freedish

And our troops are killing & illegaly searching innocents in Afghanistan, should we refuse to serve them food too? (Some of those troops DO enjoy killing innocents.)


Question: how are our troops illegally searching innocents? Why do you stress innocents here, as if that's ALL, or even the majority, of what the troops are doing? You've heard the terms "war", "insurgency", "insurgent" and "Taliban" mentioned, haven't you?

What is the comparison, logically, between what the TSA does, with NO ONE shooting at them, and what the troops do, with SOMEONE shooting at them?

It may assist you to gain some familiarity with what's actually going on in Afghanistan before attempting to draw that invalid comparison.




Then bring the fire on. The sooner it comes to a head and reaches resolution, the better. So, yeah, one way or the other it can solve the problem. If they'd rather fight than stop the violation, then I'm sure Americans can accommodate that.


Well I guess that's your opinion. I don't think anything good will come from these types of dissension.


There were people who thought like that during the Revolutionary war, too. They were called "Tories". Had we listened to them, you would still be paying a hefty tax to the Queen on every cup of tea you drink, and begging Her Majesty's leave to do so.





A variant of the "I was just following orders, Your Honor" defense. It's not sufficient, especially in light of the fact that they can STOP following illegal orders at any point in time.


So a giant majority of the country is following illegal orders...hmm including cops and troops, government officials and some doctors...well I guess you're right then it isn't a government problem. Since people are ultimately the source of these violations of our rights then maybe it's a people problem?


How did the TSA suddenly morph into "a giant majority of the country"?



I said: "Sure they could quit their jobs, but would you?"



Yes. I did. Not this precise situation, but it still wasn't right, so I walked.


Looks like your manager or whoever is part of the problem i mentioned above.


Problem solved.





To NOT take the actions attributed to the restaurant falls under the heading of "giving aid and comfort to the enemy". make no mistake about it, violating rights by government personnel, especially on this widespread of a basis, places them FIRMLY in the enemy camp. You've heard the oath - "...defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC". You know, if the US were invaded by anyone, even aliens, tomorrow, I wouldn't be taking THEM a plate of brownies and blankets either, and this is no different. When folks start trampling your rights, they are no longer friends.



Oh is that right? So then I guess every restaurant in America that isn't doing this should be charged under high treason and declared an enemy of the state...because they are also "giving aid and comfort to the enemy". Maybe we should just go ahead and bomb the TSA agency too.


Argumentum ad Absurtium. You accuse ME of having flaws in my logic?



Do you realize how ridiculous your logic is?


See above.



IF your going to be a dissenter, do it intelligently. Blind hatred is ignorance. Deny it.


Nice. Use a catch-phrase if you have no logical argument. What "blind hatred" are you accusing me of?




edit on 2011/2/26 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 





It may assist you to gain some familiarity with what's actually going on in Afghanistan before attempting to draw that invalid comparison.


Look up wikileaks war diaries...that's all I gotta say about that.




There were people who thought like that during the Revolutionary war, too. They were called "Tories". Had we listened to them, you would still be paying a hefty tax to the Queen on every cup of tea you drink, and begging Her Majesty's leave to do so.


So what? We traded one tyrant for an even bigger one. And I rather enjoy the English accent.




How did the TSA suddenly morph into "a giant majority of the country"?


I exaggerated a bit....but did you read the rest of the paragraph...?




Problem solved.


Nice





Argumentum ad Absurtium. You accuse ME of having flaws in my logic?


just goin by your own logic buddy.
You said: "to NOT take the actions attributed to the restaurant falls under the heading of "giving aid and comfort to the enemy"
so by your own logic any restaurant that doesn't take similar actions of this one is "giving aid and comfort to the enemy"...





See above.

Backatcha!






Nice. Use a catch-phrase if you have no logical argument. What "blind hatred" are you accusing me of?


Your hatred of the TSA has no direction, plan, or logic. -Any- savage act done against this group is deemed good by you, regardless of it's impact. Seems blind to me.

Think about your protests, what are you trying to accomplish? Are you just trying to piss off regular government workers? If so then this restaurant should hire you!
Or are you actually trying to change the corrupt system. I agree it has to start somewhere, but refusing to serve food to TSA agents is just a bad start imo.


Here's an idea: you and some friends march down to the TSA headquarters and strip to your boxers and march around the building blocking all entrances.

Arguing is fun!

edit on 26-2-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Now if they could do the same thing for cops.



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   
A little story:

A friend of mine (Fred) had a Bar called "The Barley Mow" in Newcastle-upon-Tyne in England. Every Friday a bunch of guys in suits would come in, have a few beers and leave.

One of Fred`s friends came back from a holiday with some cigars he had been given. He offered them to Fred as a gift. Well, Fred didn`t smoke cigars. So he put them up on the shelf behind the Bar in case anyone wanted to buy one.

On the following Friday the bunch of suits came in and ordered some beers. As they were leaving one of them said to Fred "Those cigars behind the Bar, have they had Tax paid on them?" Fred said "God knows, I doubt it, there`s only 5 in the box anyway so who cares?" "Well," says the suit "We are from Customs & Excise. It may be that we will take you to Court for evading Taxes on these."

Next Friday at the usual time in comes the crowd of suits.
"Six Pints of beer(or words to that effect) says one of them."
"No" came the response.
"What do you mean "No"?
Fred says I`m not serving you, that`s what it means."
"We were just doing our job" says the suit.
"Yes" says Fred and its my Pub and I can refuse who I like, so on your bike."

I think Fred was right. And I think the guy in the Restaurant is right too. What do you think?



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by freedish
reply to post by nenothtu
 





It may assist you to gain some familiarity with what's actually going on in Afghanistan before attempting to draw that invalid comparison.


Look up wikileaks war diaries...that's all I gotta say about that.


So my point still stands, then.





There were people who thought like that during the Revolutionary war, too. They were called "Tories". Had we listened to them, you would still be paying a hefty tax to the Queen on every cup of tea you drink, and begging Her Majesty's leave to do so.


So what? We traded one tyrant for an even bigger one. And I rather enjoy the English accent.


Head east, turn left when you get to Spain. Then everyone is happy. See ya!





How did the TSA suddenly morph into "a giant majority of the country"?


I exaggerated a bit....but did you read the rest of the paragraph...?


Yes. Found no substance therein, only argumentum ad Absurdum.





Argumentum ad Absurtium. You accuse ME of having flaws in my logic?


just goin by your own logic buddy.
You said: "to NOT take the actions attributed to the restaurant falls under the heading of "giving aid and comfort to the enemy"
so by your own logic any restaurant that doesn't take similar actions of this one is "giving aid and comfort to the enemy"...


And the conclusions you reached were extended so as as to be absurd, far beyond what was suggested. That's how wars are started. Are you trying to start a war?




Nice. Use a catch-phrase if you have no logical argument. What "blind hatred" are you accusing me of?


Your hatred of the TSA has no direction, plan, or logic. -Any- savage act done against this group is deemed good by you, regardless of it's impact. Seems blind to me.


I suppose it WOULD seem blind to you, especially if you think you're detecting some sort of "hatred".



Think about your protests, what are you trying to accomplish? Are you just trying to piss off regular government workers? If so then this restaurant should hire you!


MY protests? MY protests accomplish their objective - that I be left alone in peace. I thought we were discussing an alleged restaurant's protests... How do "regular government workers" enter this discussion, and why should I care whether they get pissed off or not?



Or are you actually trying to change the corrupt system. I agree it has to start somewhere, but refusing to serve food to TSA agents is just a bad start imo.


I don't care if it "changes" or not. My objective is to be left alone in peace. What they do in their own dime is their own business. The last "change" we got re government isn't working out all that well.



Here's an idea: you and some friends march down to the TSA headquarters and strip to your boxers and march around the building blocking all entrances.


Why? That would sort of defeat the purpose of not wanting the government to strip and violate us.

Real men don't wear boxers - they are a waste of otherwise useful cloth.



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 





So my point still stands, then.


um.....no?
in case you forgot, these were your words:


Question: how are our troops illegally searching innocents? Why do you stress innocents here, as if that's ALL, or even the majority, of what the troops are doing? You've heard the terms "war", "insurgency", "insurgent" and "Taliban" mentioned, haven't you?

What is the comparison, logically, between what the TSA does, with NO ONE shooting at them, and what the troops do, with SOMEONE shooting at them?

The problem here is that you actually think everyone in afghanistan is 'Taliban' or an 'insurgent'

If you did some research we could end this retarded discussion. I used to be ignorant like you until I stopped being spoon fed by the media.

Again, look up wikileaks war diaries or "Restrepo' (restrepothemovie.com...) and you'll see how many kids and women and innocent, non-violent people have been killed and searched.





There were people who thought like that during the Revolutionary war, too. They were called "Tories". Had we listened to them, you would still be paying a hefty tax to the Queen on every cup of tea you drink, and begging Her Majesty's leave to do so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Head east, turn left when you get to Spain. Then everyone is happy. See ya!

What an ignorant response.

And what good has come of the revolutionary war? Are we really better off then England? Aren't we still paying taxes for tea? Not only that but state tax, fed tax, property tax, med tax, ss tax... And do you know how many people had to die so we could have this 'freedom'?




Yes. Found no substance therein, only argumentum ad Absurdum.


You're an idiot, lets just agree to disagree. K, bye.



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by freedish
reply to post by nenothtu
 





So my point still stands, then.


um.....no?
in case you forgot, these were your words:


Question: how are our troops illegally searching innocents? Why do you stress innocents here, as if that's ALL, or even the majority, of what the troops are doing? You've heard the terms "war", "insurgency", "insurgent" and "Taliban" mentioned, haven't you?

What is the comparison, logically, between what the TSA does, with NO ONE shooting at them, and what the troops do, with SOMEONE shooting at them?

The problem here is that you actually think everyone in afghanistan is 'Taliban' or an 'insurgent'

If you did some research we could end this retarded discussion. I used to be ignorant like you until I stopped being spoon fed by the media.


If it's all the same to you, I'LL decide what I think. You don't get to. Have you BEEN to Afghanistan? No? It shows. I have. Educate me. Unfortunately, MY research didn't come from Wiki - either leaks or pedia.

Since we're making broad, sweeping, assumptive generalizations about what the other thinks, the REAL problem here is that you think nothing exists other than "innocents". Yes, this discussion IS "retarded", but that's not MY fault - I'm not the one jacking his jaws about things he hasn't a clue about.

USED to be ignorant? Like ME? Nice. That's what most folks do when they've got nothing - resort to personal attacks. Keep going with that - it displays your colors. I note that you spewed forth a lot of words to AVOID answering the questions I put to you. Bet there's a reason for that.

Your reference to wikileaks is a definite non-sequitur to my statements and questions. It has no bearing on what I said, and was nothing more that a lame attempt to support an insupportable argument. Here's a tip: when attempting to support an argument, it's generally held to be best if you address points brought up in opposition to it. So far you have failed to do so, spectacularly I might add.



Again, look up wikileaks war diaries or "Restrepo' (restrepothemovie.com...) and you'll see how many kids and women and innocent, non-violent people have been killed and searched.


Since we're bringing up precise quotes, here's what YOU had to say:


Originally posted by freedish

And our troops are killing & illegaly searching innocents in Afghanistan, should we refuse to serve them food too? (Some of those troops DO enjoy killing innocents.)


I note there that you make no allowance for any possibilities other than "innocents". Not "how many", the contention you make is that ALL are "innocent". I need neither wiki nor restropo to explain to me what war is. Didn't get my education in it while sitting in an armchair.

Good move trying to shift the discussion form your uncomfortable inability to explain why SEARCHES over there are "illegal" (per your exact statement, and what I questioned), to "killings" now. Inadequate, but a nice try all the same.




There were people who thought like that during the Revolutionary war, too. They were called "Tories". Had we listened to them, you would still be paying a hefty tax to the Queen on every cup of tea you drink, and begging Her Majesty's leave to do so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Head east, turn left when you get to Spain. Then everyone is happy. See ya!

What an ignorant response.

And what good has come of the revolutionary war?


"Ignorant". Personal attack again. Nice. Got anything germane to the discussion at hand?

I personally think a LOT of good came from that war, and I'll not cheapen the deaths involved by claiming otherwise. You apparently aren't encumbered with any such sentiment.



Are we really better off then England?


Depend on your viewpoint, I reckon. From my perspective, that's a grand YES. From yours, apparently, not so much so. If living here bothers you all that much, and you feel you'll be better off in England, I urge you to take advantage of the directions I gave you. You'll be a lot happier for it.



Aren't we still paying taxes for tea? Not only that but state tax, fed tax, property tax, med tax, ss tax... And do you know how many people had to die so we could have this 'freedom'?


I'm not. I don't know if you are or not. I give no money to any foreign crowns, for any purpose. Re "how many people had to die", I daresay I'm quite a bit better acquainted with the subject than you are. You've no business at all trying to explain death, dying, or war in general to me.




You're an idiot, lets just agree to disagree. K, bye.


Again, Nice. End with a personal attack, and then run squealing away, all because you just can't answer simple and direct questions.

Have a nice day





edit on 2011/2/27 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 

Let me point out that we are getting extremely off topic, and most of this could easily be resolved if you typed in google "wikileaks Afghan War Diary"



I note there that you make no allowance for any possibilities other than "innocents". Not "how many", the contention you make is that ALL are "innocent".


I did not say that they are ONLY killing innocents...rather innocents ARE being killed. It's a FACT. Dur.




Good move trying to shift the discussion form your uncomfortable inability to explain why SEARCHES over there are "illegal" (per your exact statement, and what I questioned), to "killings" now. Inadequate, but a nice try all the same.

i'm not shifting anything except my brain trying to figure out where you're coming up with these odd conclusions?

Wasn't avoiding anything...I answered the question by stating that not everyone in afghanistan is a freaking taliban enemy man...I guess you can't wrap your head around that?

There are numerous illegal searches on citizens who are 'suspected' Taliban. Soldiers make mistakes....people who are INNOCENT are searched even if they are NOT part of the extremist jihad. They are regularly searched. and Guess what that's exactly what TSA Does to us! Uh oh, someone is right



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by freedish
reply to post by nenothtu
 

Let me point out that we are getting extremely off topic, and most of this could easily be resolved if you typed in google "wikileaks Afghan War Diary"


I did so, just to keep you happy. Now can you elaborate on the relevance of it? Specifically, I failed to find anything to support your initial contention that somehow "illegal" searches were being performed in Afghanistan on "innocents". Perhaps you could be more specific as to where to find that....



I did not say that they are ONLY killing innocents...rather innocents ARE being killed. It's a FACT. Dur.


Again, you said:


Originally posted by freedish

And our troops are killing & illegaly searching innocents in Afghanistan, should we refuse to serve them food too? (Some of those troops DO enjoy killing innocents.)


I see no mention of the Taliban there, nor do I see any allowance for it, i.e. "some of the searches are done on innocent persons". It's a flat statement saying that our troops are killing and "illegally searching" innocents there. The conclusion intended by those leading statements is that there are no enemy to be dealt with, it's all innocents.

I note again, for the umpty-zillionth time that you have STILL failed to show any evidence at all of the illegality of these searches.




i'm not shifting anything except my brain trying to figure out where you're coming up with these odd conclusions?


From what you are typing. What was that word you used? Oh yes, "Dur". That's not an English word, is it?



Wasn't avoiding anything...I answered the question by stating that not everyone in afghanistan is a freaking taliban enemy man...I guess you can't wrap your head around that?


That in no way addresses the legality of the searches in Afghanistan, Taliban or civilian. That would be the umpty-zillionth and first time you've failed to back your statement, so I will accept that as an admission that the statement was in error.



There are numerous illegal searches on citizens who are 'suspected' Taliban. Soldiers make mistakes....people who are INNOCENT are searched even if they are NOT part of the extremist jihad. They are regularly searched. and Guess what that's exactly what TSA Does to us! Uh oh, someone is right



Simply re-stating that the Afghan searches are illegal does not make it so, it just re-states the error. You DO understand that Afghanistan is a foreign country, right? You DO understand the difference between being shot at and NOT being shot at, right?



Us searching the homes of afghan citizens would be like if KKK attacked Nigeria and Nigeria decided to invade America and search your home because they suspected you of being in the KKK.


That would be too cool. Can you arrange such an absurdity?



How is some afghan farmer with a pitchfork gonna argue with a rifle wielding soldier?


It would probably be best if he didn't. Oddly, I never saw a pitchfork in Afghanistan. I'm sure they must have them, though. Generally, if you're going to argue with an armed soldier, it's best to retrieve your own AK before initiating the dispute.



If a US soldier wants to search their land they can and will.


Absolutely, and there's nothing illegal about it. Furthermore, soldiers don't have a lot of time to waste just searching farmsteads at random. Those searches are generally followups to actionable intel.



And again this whole freaking argument would be resolved if you just took my damn advice and looked up wiki war diaries. Anytime there is a search, a killing, shots fired, ANYTHING that happens is recorded by the officers and put into a database. Guess what? The information IS ON WIKILEAKS. But you choose not to look there


I actually have had that entire collection since the day after they released it last year. Just to keep you happy, though, I perused it again, and still failed to find any evidence of illegal searches. Again, it might help if you could be more specific, and tell me which of those 75,000 or so reports provides evidence to support your contention.



LOL. So fine, stay ignorant, its your choice man, but I'm done arguing with you b/c you are frustrating the daylights outa me.


It should be a simple matter to provide some evidence to back your statement up, and shut me up. Who would be frustrated then? Since you've failed to do so, preferring to remain frustrated, it certainly narrows the options for WHY you choose that course of inaction.



BTW I highly doubt you've been to Afghanistan.



That bothers me nary a bit. What you doubt doesn't change in the least what I know to be so.




"Ignorant". Personal attack again. Nice. Got anything germane to the discussion at hand?


lmao you were the one who insulted me when you said



Head east, turn left when you get to Spain. Then everyone is happy. See ya!


oh and this


You apparently aren't encumbered with any such sentiment.

...hypocritical much?


They are both simple statement of fact. It's nothing short of amazing that you find either of those statements insulting. They certainly can't compare with your name-calling (i.e. "ignorant', "you are an idiot", "I used to be ignorant like you", "What an ignorant response", etc), but if you are so thin skinned that you find them offensive, I apologize.

Hypocritical? Not at all. At no point have I been force to resort to calling you names in order to mask my lack of a point.




Depend on your viewpoint, I reckon. From my perspective, that's a grand YES. From yours, apparently, not so much so.


I bet you'd change your mind if you fought in that war and saw your brothers and father die. At that point a little tea tax aint so bad....and were still paying taxes....so was it worth all those deaths?


Actually, a large part of my family DID fight in that war, actively. Not me of course - I'm old, but not THAT old. However, it's mighty presumptuous of you to think that I don't know about war. I do. I know a lot more about death, dying, loss, and war than you seem to realize. I don't know how old you are, so I'm just guessing, but I'm willing to bet I was at war before you were even a gleam in your mother's eye. I fought in Nicaragua in 1979, Afghanistan in 1983 and again in 1986, and a few other places I don't care to get into.

The American Revolution was absolutely worth the deaths, in my opinion.

I had a lot of family fighting in the Civil War, too. That one was ALSO worth it.





I give no money to any foreign crowns


Guess how much crap we buy from China?

And oil too.



You are somehow equating purchases with a tax given to foreign governments? What a novel concept. So then when you buy bread, you are actually paying a tax to a farmer rather than buying bread? I could go on for any number of other purchases, but that single example should be proof of concept for my point. If you need more, I can oblige.



Oh the ignorance....


Indeed.




Lol except I've answered every one of them.........so......................


Yeah, all except the "answer" part....



edit on 2011/2/27 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Probably won't have much effect.. but the effort is noteworthy
I'd eat there



new topics

top topics



 
101
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join