Interviews with captured ISIS...

[fj1200]

Tyr isn't confused. He spots you thinking as a Leftie would. He calls you out on it. Talking of which ...

He is very much confused. He probably even thinks you are a conservative.

All blessed with natural rights, eh ?

Well, that statement would certainly serve, for example, in defending the UK's National Health Service. Lefties over here would argue that 'free' and easy access to the fullest possible medical care was a 'Natural Right', and they'd say that only a State-run system of it could do the job.

Who guarantees that 'Natural Rights' are satisfied, unless the State sees to it ? So, IN FACT, the logic of your argument is one which argues for the flourishing of Big Government, and State control.

State control is the pet project OF THE LEFT. 'Nice' to see that you support the logic which underpins its enforcement, Mr Leftie.

Isn't this exactly as I've promised ? I told you, long ago, that the more you reveal what you believe in, the more obvious it'll be that your thought processes are actually Leftie in nature. No matter how much you protest, the reality is that you think in a particular way, and you can do nothing to stop it.

This is why, when you enter threads, you initially prefer to snipe, instead of just declaring your beliefs from the very start.

Are you know arguing that the Declaration of Independence (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness), the Constitution (life, liberty, property), and John Locke (Natural Rights) are lefties? I'd like to see that argument of yours further fleshed out.

Your lefties "over there" might make that argument but they would be wrong as lefties and you typically are. Preserving the Natural Rights of its citizens is different than taking the Rights of one (property by taxing for example) to pay for the "rights" of another. Their argument involves theft from one to give to another. Try again, your "fact" is again wrong.

That's not to say of course that the government does have a role to play in preserving the Natural Rights of its citizens but it only takes minimal government to provide police protection, preserve liberty, and preserve the rule of law. But there's nothing leftie in any of that.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You even scamper away from your own cage threads.

Once I destroyed you there why should I hang around.
You are still free to post there a thousand times--go for it idiot.
I, the victor went onto other conquests and my daily life.
You are still trying to undo the results of that battle as is quite evident by your comment!
I find that amusing as hell.....-Tyr

[Gunny]

Because you're confused. Now scamper away again.



We are all blessed with Natural Rights; one could argue whether they come from God or not but life, liberty, property, should not be in question; it is the basis for the DoI and Constitution IMO. When those are violated then watch out.

There is ZERO "right" to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Those are words on a piece of paper that is only as good as what backs it up.

I have been watching out. I've watched this President violate that piece of paper at every turn, and not allow those of us that back it up to do a damned thing.

[fj1200]

Once I destroyed you...

psst. we've been repped the same number of times.

[fj1200]

There is ZERO "right" to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Those are words on a piece of paper that is only as good as what backs it up.

I have been watching out. I've watched this President violate that piece of paper at every turn, and not allow those of us that back it up to do a damned thing.

It's the basis of our founding but that aside it does take some form of government to ensure those rights or 2A rights to ensure them individually.

And yes, BO sucks.

[Gunny]

It's the basis of our founding but that aside it does take some form of government to ensure those rights or 2A rights to ensure them individually.

And yes, BO sucks.

And those rights have ALWAYS been backed by those who are willing to fight for them. You can't slap words on paper and say "it's so". Tell that to ISIS. The Crips n Bloods. That piece of paper means a whole bunch to THEM, right? Until they chop off your head or shoot you.

You fight fire with fire. Guess what fire does to a piece of paper?

[Drummond]

Your lefties "over there" might make that argument

They do. They say that the only way to guarantee it is for the State to govern in accordance with ensuring their State-given implementation.

but they would be wrong as lefties

They'd never dream of agreeing with you.

Preserving the Natural Rights of its citizens is different than taking the Rights of one (property by taxing for example) to pay for the "rights" of another. Their argument involves theft from one to give to another. Try again, your "fact" is again wrong.

HOW, operationally speaking, DO you ensure those 'rights' are preserved ? Lefties say they have the answer to that .. and since you seem to want to argue strongly in favour of the 'ensured' advancement of such 'rights', I can only believe that your thinking, and theirs, are fully in agreement.

You are correct in one way .. that of saying that 'their argument involves theft from one to give to another'. It does indeed. But their answer is to say that the sacrosanct nature of those 'rights' justifies the taking of those taxes, and that it's irresponsible to object to that.

That's not to say of course that the government does have a role to play in preserving the Natural Rights of its citizens

HOW VERY 'BIG GOVERNMENT' of you !!

but it only takes minimal government to provide police protection, preserve liberty, and preserve the rule of law.

That's not been the British experience, in fact, there's an ongoing debate about how necessary it is to protect, maybe even increase, a GREATER Government role in such things. For example, arguments about maintaining funding for our police force, not cutting numbers, even increasing them in light of terrorist threats. And there's an argument about whether far greater State surveillance is necessary for much the same purpose (our CONSERVATIVE Government wants powers increased).

But there's nothing leftie in any of that.

Our Labour Government traditionally argues for greater State intrusion and control. The surveillance debate originated with them, for example. CCTV cameras multiplied on our streets on their watch (we have the greatest capacity for surveillance from CCTV cameras, per head of population, anywhere on the planet !!).

Come over to Britain, and argue your core beliefs here. You'll find Brits identify you, very readily, as a Leftie thinker.

[Gunny]

Y'all need to get your own fussing thread or subforum.

I look at some of the topics and click on them and all I see is y'all fussin'. And I don't care if you fuss. Y'all don't like each other and that's fine with me. Everything doesn't have to devolve into a personal pissing contest. Crap, I don't like half the junk Rev posts, but he doesn't bother me as a person.

What some of y'all fail to get through your grapes is, we the vets, fought and plenty have died, for your right to say what you want. In two threads now someone's said somethings about "natural" rights. You have the rights you're willing to fight for. NOTHING is free.

Attack me personally and I WILL dish it back. Otherwise, why not enjoy the freedom others have died for to give you?

[Drummond]

Y'all need to get your own fussing thread or subforum.

Not at all. FJ could admit the truth about himself. It would only take a single post. In fact, he could manage it in a single sentence.

I look at some of the topics and click on them and all I see is y'all fussin'. And I don't care if you fuss. Y'all don't like each other and that's fine with me. Everything doesn't have to devolve into a personal pissing contest. Crap, I don't like half the junk Rev posts, but he doesn't bother me as a person.

Same answer ..

What some of y'all fail to get through your grapes is, we the vets, fought and plenty have died, for your right to say what you want. In two threads now someone's said somethings about "natural" rights. You have the rights you're willing to fight for. NOTHING is free.

I fully agree ! Rights, you fight to have and keep. Nothing is free. Currently, we've got terrorists whose fondest wish is to tear down the rights and freedoms we take for granted. Fighting them to defeat their goals is, and will prove to be, the only solution to them.

I do enjoy the freedoms I have. Though ... I do so responsibly - since, with freedom comes responsibility. Sadly, not everyone agrees, though.

[namvet]

just like Vietnam. they all look alike. there's the danger



A self-described ISIS operative has claimed the organization has smuggled more than 4,000 terrorists posing as Syrian refugees into European nations.

The operative claims that the undercover operation is the beginning of a large-scale plot to carry out attacks against the US and its European allies.

“Just wait,” the operative was reported to have said.

The massive surge of Syrian refugees into Europe over the sparsely secured Turkish border has become a major world concern. Germany’s resources have been exhausted, as they struggle to take in approximately 800,000 refugees from war torn Syria.

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/u...yrian-refugees

[namvet]

And those rights have ALWAYS been backed by those who are willing to fight for them. You can't slap words on paper and say "it's so". Tell that to ISIS. The Crips n Bloods. That piece of paper means a whole bunch to THEM, right? Until they chop off your head or shoot you.

You fight fire with fire. Guess what fire does to a piece of paper?

might have upgrade your hardware

[Gunny]

might have upgrade your hardware

I got an M40A1. THAT upgrade is complete. How to post a pic of it is NOT.

[fj1200]

And those rights have ALWAYS been backed by those who are willing to fight for them. You can't slap words on paper and say "it's so". Tell that to ISIS. The Crips n Bloods. That piece of paper means a whole bunch to THEM, right? Until they chop off your head or shoot you.

You fight fire with fire. Guess what fire does to a piece of paper?

I agree, but that's not the point when talking about the founding of our country.

[fj1200]

I can't edit a post for relevant information but you can cut sentences in half trying to parse out some sort of meaning?

They do. They say that the only way to guarantee it is for the State to govern in accordance with ensuring their State-given implementation.

I can't control them making a wrong argument.

They'd never dream of agreeing with you.

Lefties are often wrong.

HOW, operationally speaking, DO you ensure those 'rights' are preserved ? Lefties say they have the answer to that .. and since you seem to want to argue strongly in favour of the 'ensured' advancement of such 'rights', I can only believe that your thinking, and theirs, are fully in agreement.

You are correct in one way .. that of saying that 'their argument involves theft from one to give to another'. It does indeed. But their answer is to say that the sacrosanct nature of those 'rights' justifies the taking of those taxes, and that it's irresponsible to object to that.

Your belief is wrong. Try sticking with a valid discussion point rather than your incorrect beliefs. The Founders believed so much in those rights that they were placed in the founding documents; your logic demands that they were also Leftie. I'm waiting for you to flesh out that argument a little further.

HOW VERY 'BIG GOVERNMENT' of you !!

That's not big government. A police force, national defense, and 2A rights are not big intrusive government.

That's not been the British experience, in fact, there's an ongoing debate about how necessary it is to protect, maybe even increase, a GREATER Government role in such things. For example, arguments about maintaining funding for our police force, not cutting numbers, even increasing them in light of terrorist threats. And there's an argument about whether far greater State surveillance is necessary for much the same purpose (our CONSERVATIVE Government wants powers increased).

Big government is not conservative.

Our Labour Government traditionally argues for greater State intrusion and control. The surveillance debate originated with them, for example. CCTV cameras multiplied on our streets on their watch (we have the greatest capacity for surveillance from CCTV cameras, per head of population, anywhere on the planet !!).

Come over to Britain, and argue your core beliefs here. You'll find Brits identify you, very readily, as a Leftie thinker.

It appears your Labour government has much in common with your Conservative government in expanding. Finally, please tell me how limited taxes, limited government, etc. is leftie.

FJ could admit the truth about himself.

I have. Repeatedly; small-government, pro-Constitution conservative.

[Gunny]

I agree, but that's not the point when talking about the founding of our country.

How is it not? IIRC, this country was founded on a rebellion against our King. A war.

Truth is, everyone thinks our "founding fathers" were these high-minded idealists when they were mostly elitist businessmen who didn't want to pay their taxes. The US Civil war was fought for basically the same thing. Just a different government doing the same thing. We can't pay tax on our tea to King George, but by God, you WILL pay your whiskey and stamp tax to the founding fathers.

In both wars, it was the poor that fought them, and it was mostly a bunch of rednecks that wanted to just be left alone BUT ...

THEY were willing to fight for their freedom and their yards.