At 7/3/08 06:04 PM, slowerthenb4 wrote: so given this information, they are in fact not even close to being similar.

Well you just ended this thread before it began.

Kudos to you

lol my posts were deleted. I guess I'll take my query elsewhere

also, fireworks are illegal in New Jersey

At 7/2/08 11:57 PM, Frank-The-Hedgehog wrote: Death penalty is just wrong.

Agreed

Interesting... I might get a sumo sack if I have any leftover cash once my summer job is done.

At 6/26/08 11:53 AM, Elfer wrote:

At 6/24/08 07:23 PM, Grammer wrote: Because at least we have correlational evidence for Jesus (his tomb), and many of the holy sites mentioned in The Bible actually exist.

So, you have evidence of someone who exists but is now dead, and the existence of certain places.

I'm not sure how that translates to veracity of God,

It gives my religion more credit than any shit you can come up with on the spot.

or veracity of a no homos policy.

I think we've jumped past that topic a while ago. I blame pox.

Stonehenge exists and birds are secretly wizards.

I can provide verifiable evidence for Stonehenge. Does that lend any credibility to the wizard bird hypothesis? Not really.

How do the birds relate to Stonehenge in any way?

At 6/24/08 07:37 PM, Ravariel wrote: You don't know what my book of goblins has in it, so you can not reliably say that yours is more accurate historically.

Show me evidence of goblins, kthx

So are you, so I guess we're even.

I'm not telling you what to believe. I'm not banging down your door telling you to convert. You atheists always pull this shit, you try to tell every religious person you see about the "truth" that you

At 7/1/08 09:40 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Is this blatant violation of separation of state and church

No

No it isn't

http://youtube.com/watch?v=QRLNs2i0qLU
WATCH IT
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QRLNs2i0qLU
WATCH IT
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QRLNs2i0qLU
WATCH IT
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QRLNs2i0qLU
WATCH IT
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QRLNs2i0qLU
WATCH IT
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QRLNs2i0qLU
WATCH IT
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QRLNs2i0qLU
WATCH IT

At 7/1/08 12:19 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: Thanks to Fox, Newgrounds is now receiving more exposure for a moment.

yay Fox News ^^

At 6/30/08 10:28 PM, BoMToons wrote: Tom, what would you do if you had $100?

Okay, I lol'd

PS: I believe desertion during a draft is a totally acceptable if not the American thing to do. This is not such a case.

You don't sign up to protect your country for the missions that you'd like to participate in. I feel for those soldiers, since Iraq was in retrospect such an unnecessary war, but they still need to do their duty.

What's the punishment for desertion, anyways?

I do hope you guys over at the NG office thought to make sure alts couldn't win the prize. It wouldn't be very fair for someone with 10 or so alts to win :/

At 6/29/08 11:32 AM, Idiot-Finder wrote: In a way I'm helping you since in the Politics section you'll have to be more careful when it comes to certain things such as this.

I debate 9/11 CT because it pleases me to see them fail

At 6/26/08 05:51 PM, FUNKbrs wrote: Ok, so he's brown. Granted. But what does "black" mean in america? IT MEANS THE CHILD OF OLD SLAVE STOCK.

Is that really how you define being black? I mean, really.

Well I can understand that Burnzoid, moles are disgusting.

Saudi Arabia pays like what, 45 cents per gallon? Something along those lines. Gas prices are insane everywhere. More so in European countries, which is weird because we Americans are the biggest gas guzzlers next to China.

At 6/26/08 04:43 PM, morefngdbs wrote:

I'd usually say "Happy Aniversary" or something along that line....but me thinks you don't,,,, G-a-S

I love Newgrounds

The Supreme Court has been making consistently good calls, as of late.

I signed up for NG four years ago today, and I still get a bad taste in my mouth every time I come here.

At 6/25/08 04:46 AM, fli wrote: opps...
forgot the pic:

I'd tap that

At 6/25/08 11:21 PM, jackkniphe wrote:

At 6/25/08 11:06 PM, SolInvictus wrote: answer me this;
why would the government painstakingly rig WTC 7.

7 was a government building, The CIA and the NSA where both housed there. If there files held any thing incriminating, well it looks like they destroyed evident.

But the entire CIA and NSA were in on it, right? Wouldn't the government destroy the files without the building, hmm? :o

At 6/25/08 10:28 PM, jackkniphe wrote: check this out this.

Leaked NIST Docs: "Unusual" Event Before Collapse Of WTC 7

http://www.counterpunch.org/darkfire1128 2006.html

infowars is not a valid source for anything

I wouldn't trust it to tell me the date

At 6/25/08 05:40 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 6/25/08 12:27 PM, Grammer wrote:

Well, Japan invaded Alaska for a short time, but that isn't sufficient reason to suspend Habeus Corpus, in my opinion

That's your opinion, but not the nature of how Habeas Corpus has been used, during invasion OR the threat of invasion.

How does precedent matter when it's another president? It just means the other president did something unconstitutional.

The very fact that they are sleeper cells does it make worse.

It's the only argument you have of invasion, assuming there is sleeper cells.

They are not a military force fighting against a military force.

Well there you go.

They are members of insurgent and terrorist organizations attacking a civilian population on OUR land.

That's funny because they haven't

Pearl Harbor. A military strike by several bombings on military targets which claimed the lives of over 2000 people.

Habeus Corpus should not have been suspended in WW2

9/11. Members of a terrorist organization who infiltrated the country, hi-jacked two planes which were able to kill 3000 CIVLIANS within a single instant.

And are no longer in America. Those who are, aren't doing anything. Hardly an invasion.

We are fighting an insurgency. A group of people who operate within a civilian playing field with the capability to strike at a moment's notice anywhere during any time in almost complete secrecy; moreso than a military force.

If it was a massive onslaught and we were being attacked daily, I could maybe see the argument for invasion working. But even if there was sleeper cells, which is your only argument concerning invasion by the way, they're not doing anything.

An enemy who if given the opportunity, would launch a nuclear strike

We don't suspend Habeus Corpus because the enemy would do something really bad if they could, but hasn't because they can't.

on the United States and attempt to over-run its society and governmental structure.

Yeah they've been really good at that. I'm living in constant fear.

You're telling me, that's not a threat?

Not enough to suspend Habeus Corpus for combatants that we aren't even capturing in America.

Were we invaded full-scale during WWII?

No

Do you honestly believe a lowly amount of Mexicans citizens could possibley over-run the United States and destroy its social structure? But we intercepted a message from Germany to Mexico to invade during WWI which prompted us to finally enter the Great War.

Haha, that's funny. You learn something new everyday.

How many attempts of terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11, and how many of those have failed? The answer to the second question is 100%

And why have they failed?

Because America is awesome? What's your point.

I was being sarcastic and humoring your point. We weren't invaded on 9/11. Anyone in their right mind (i.e. anyone not in bed with the Bush admin) knows we weren't invaded.

Not in your traditional military sense. We don't live in those times anymore. We don't fight enemy nations, 1 on 1, military force against military force.

And as much I don't really care what the founding fathers would've thought, what do you think the founding fathers would've thought about that?

You're only strengthening my point now. We can't be occupied, so how can you claim invasion?

I can claim the threat of invasion, which was more than enough to justify Habeas Corpus, countless times in the past.

Okay, so let me get this stuff straight.

We were attacked seven years ago by people who snuck into the country, but aren't alive anymore. We both believe there are sleeper cells in America, whether they're in bed with Al Qaeda, Hamas, what have you. Let's say there's about a hundred, spread around the country, plotting terrorist things. They're not doing anything, but if they could they would, but they can't so they don't. This is one of the reasons why we must suspend Habeus Corpus for combatants we capture not in America, but are brought to a military prison near a country we hate. These combatants we capture should not be able to attest to their supposed innocence, because challenging your charges is a bad thing, unamerican, expensive, yada yada yada.

Did I get that all right?

Are the Chinese planning a massive naval assault on California? Are the Russians para dropping conscripts into New Mexico?

That's not just a threat. That IS an invasion.

That's what I'm saying, yeah. That would be an invasion.

At 6/24/08 11:01 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 6/24/08 07:19 PM, Grammer wrote:

We were not invaded. We were attacked. Al Qaeda isn't in America, and if they were, they'd be in sleeper cells. To say we've been invaded when we don't know where the enemy is if they were in America, is outright silly. You know it, I know it, don't argue it because it'll just make you look silly.

Did Japan invade?

Well, Japan invaded Alaska for a short time, but that isn't sufficient reason to suspend Habeus Corpus, in my opinion

What makes it so different whether or not someone invades with an army or if an organization invades by sneaking into a nation to carry out bombings across the nation where no one can predict?

Because:

a.) Where are they? Are we being bombed daily? At worst, there's sleeper cells

b.) THERE IS AT MOST 100 DUDES RUNNING AROUND OUR COUNTRY. Are you going to suspend Habeus Corpus because there's a sleeper cell or two in some area you don't know about?

Which sounds like more of a threat to you? And how does one constitute the label of "invasion" while the other does not?

The former. A full scale invasion is much more frightening than 100 or so towel heads in a sleeper cell that aren't doing anything and couldn't pull off an attack if they tried. How many attempts of terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11, and how many of those have failed? The answer to the second question is 100%

We bombed Japan in WW2. Did we invade Japan? No, we bombed the fuck out of them.

...I should slap you.

We didn't invade Japan. Some minor outlying islands, sure, but we never barged into Tokyo with a million plus soldiers.

Were we invaded on 9/11? Maybe,

Oh... Good answer.

I was being sarcastic and humoring your point. We weren't invaded on 9/11. Anyone in their right mind (i.e. anyone not in bed with the Bush admin) knows we weren't invaded.

but by 20 or so hijackers who are now dead. We sure as Hell aren't being occupied,

Do you honestly believe that with the US military, anyone can "occupy" the United States?

You're only strengthening my point now. We can't be occupied, so how can you claim invasion?

And even still, how does that negate the threat of an invasion?

Are the Chinese planning a massive naval assault on California? Are the Russians para dropping conscripts into New Mexico?

At 6/25/08 03:34 AM, brainface wrote:

At 6/24/08 10:14 PM, Grammer wrote: It's not up to me to "look at the information and decide what makes sense". I have no experience in engineering, and neither do you. Therefore, it only makes sense that we go to what the experts say, which is conclusively that 9/11 was not a conspiracy

OR it would make sense to base your decision on the only info you can know for sure.

Who knows for sure? The Canadian College student who can make a spooky video and pass it along the internet, or the American Society of Civil Engineers?

I'll let you figure that out. Don't hurt yourself thinking.

At 6/25/08 12:28 AM, jackkniphe wrote:

At 6/24/08 10:14 PM, Grammer wrote:

It's not up to me to "look at the information and decide what makes sense". I have no experience in engineering, and neither do you. Therefore, it only makes sense that we go to what the experts say, which is conclusively that 9/11 was not a conspiracy

But you have taken basic physics. You know 9.8 meters per second per second is how fast things fall. You know that p=m(s) you know that objects in motion take the path of lease resists. I learned this in 9 grade and that is latter then most.

I've already debunked your free fall fallacy. Face it, you have nothing. You have no proof, no real structural or civil engineer buys your story, the media won't pay attention to you, a Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll says uneducated, poor, Democrats tend to believe in a government cover up, it's just pathetic

Here's a ball buster for you: If you had any real evidence of 9/11 being an inside job, why isn't the media reporting on it? Why isn't the international media reporting on it? Why isn't any major media outlet reporting on it? Are they all in on it?

First the Japan china and Italy has reported on it.

Have they? Really? Why haven't anyone else picked up on it? Don't you think a government cover up of 9/11 is big enough to make CNN's headlines? What about the BBC? If you were right, this would be 9,001x more important and significant than Watergate ever was. It would be perpetual headlines, followed up by impeachment proceedings and international outrage. You. Have. No one.

You don't even know why buildings topple. Why would the WTC fall over if no point of the WTC slanted over it's center of gravity?

At 6/24/08 09:27 PM, jackkniphe wrote:

At 6/24/08 12:15 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote:

At 6/24/08 12:30 AM, jackkniphe wrote:

I've already read this one before. This pushes the pancake theory.

So what made you believe your sources are any reliable?

You now what go to both sites www.debunking911.com, http://www.ae911truth.org/. Look at the augments and decide for your self.

It's not up to me to "look at the information and decide what makes sense". I have no experience in engineering, and neither do you. Therefore, it only makes sense that we go to what the experts say, which is conclusively that 9/11 was not a conspiracy

But since you think you have, go to there web site and brake there argument down and state in detail why it's a lie.

Here's a ball buster for you: If you had any real evidence of 9/11 being an inside job, why isn't the media reporting on it? Why isn't the international media reporting on it? Why isn't any major media outlet reporting on it? Are they all in on it?

At 6/24/08 06:13 PM, Ravariel wrote:

At 6/24/08 05:36 PM, Grammer wrote: How is that an insult at all? It's not a way of thinking.

.../sigh. Jesus, dude, lighten up.

You're not funny

You can believe in goblins if you want. Just don't try to compare it to God.

Why not?

Because at least we have correlational evidence for Jesus (his tomb), and many of the holy sites mentioned in The Bible actually exist.

Yawn. Come on, dude... bring something real. You're better than that. Ad-hominem doesn't help you.

You're not making an argument for me to attack. You're being a bigot, and you're trying to tell me what to and not to believe.

At 6/24/08 06:40 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 6/24/08 06:01 PM, Grammer wrote:

You underlined the wrong part. Here, let me show you

You fail, as usual with your utter ignorance of historical texts.

lolz

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Are the American people rebelling? No. Are we being invaded? No.

Were the people rebelling during the Civil War? Yes.

mhm

ie. Invasion (explanation below)

We were not invaded. We were attacked. Al Qaeda isn't in America, and if they were, they'd be in sleeper cells. To say we've been invaded when we don't know where the enemy is if they were in America, is outright silly. You know it, I know it, don't argue it because it'll just make you look silly.

We bombed Japan in WW2. Did we invade Japan? No, we bombed the fuck out of them. Were we invaded on 9/11? Maybe, but by 20 or so hijackers who are now dead. We sure as Hell aren't being occupied, so there is no conceivable way you can argue that we've been invaded, and that that constitutes suspending Habeus Corpus indefinitely.