Dr.Worthless

....... Even if i did say, Your country is full of INBRED HICKS, that has nothing to do with race. People of every skin color can be inbred hicks. Please, stop being so ignorant...

Feel free to research for yourself further, I've done nothing but hand you facts all thread long. I suggest you work on reading comprehension before coming to the grown ups table. So I take it you're against discrimination based on skin color, sexual orientation, or religion but you're for discrimination based on how much money you make? Bottom line is the "Rich" are taxed enough, there is no such thing as "Tax Cuts for the Rich", the rich have paid the vast majority of collected taxes under this administration just like they have in every other administration since the 40's.

So I guess your whole arguement would be blown out of the water if I told you that I made $2500.00 last year, right? I demand you send me money, Astro, because its not fair that you get to live off of more than what I live off of, here in government housing. PM me for a mailing address. You just hate wealthy people, Astro, your problem isn't with the tax code its with the ability to ac!@#$%^&*ulate wealth. The fact remains that the majority of millionaires in this country start off as working class. Why hate people just because they have wealth and you don't? If the wealthy were taxed anymore, we'd be getting a free ride and they'd be paying all of the taxes. Why should people be treated differently than anyone else just because they have more money? Your whole arguement is based around fairness, isn't it?

ROFL Since when is "pretentious, ignorant !@#$%^&*holes" a racial slur? I really shouldn't waste my time....

Ah, so do they breed pretentious, ignorant !@#$%^&*holes there or is it a byproduct of the upbringing? Sorry, that was uncalled for I know..

..... You're being purposefully ignorant just like the professor Astro, stop being a dumb!@#$%^&*. NEWSFLASH, THE RICH ALREADY PAY THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE TAXES, AND THATS HOW THE SYSTEM WAS INTENDED TO WORK!!!! Remove that thick outer s!@#$%^&* around your brain called partisanship and let the facts slip in, they'll set you free. Its a miracle that even with all these tax cuts for the rich, the rich still pay 4 out of every 5 dollars of taxes... BTW, how !@#$%^&*ing funny is it, Astro, that you linked "socialistworker.org" I suggest you move to France, I'll be a dead man before half my paycheck goes to pay for some lazy slobs coke habit, I'm already slated to be paying close to 20 !@#$%^&*ing percent of my paycheck to taxes once I get out of school... LETS TAKE AWAY EVEN MORE OF THEIR MONEY, ITS NOT FAIR THEY ONLY PAY 5000X THE TAXES I DO!!!

http://www.lekarev.org/images/misc/Occupation.jpg OH THE HORROR...

Tell your liberal professor that she's full of !@#$%^&* and that she needs to stop being purposefully ignorant. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/250.html Data provided below is for the 2005 tax returns. There were 1,286,098 returns that cons!@#$%^&*uted the top 1% of earners in the United States, together they paid $256,340,000,000 in income taxes, or $199,316.07 each on average. There were 64,304,893 returns that cons!@#$%^&*uted the bottom 50% of earners in the United States, together they paid $25,912,000,000, or $402.95 on average. There are roughly 50x the people in the bottom 50% than in the top 1% of the earners bracket, yet the top bracket pays 9.89x as many income tax. Each person in the top 1% paid roughly 4930% more taxes than a person in the bottom 1%. The top bracket on average paid 24.31% income tax. The bottom 50% paid 2.95% Oh the horror!!! Stop the tax cuts for the rich!!!! .....

I mean ok, if the ground your standing on is "I can develop an opinion based on anything" then thats cool, good for you. Though, you better get used to people ignoring your opinion =). THREAD CLOSED!

If you have no proof that bush has links to the drug-business, and you admit that your opinion isn't based on facts (proof), how is what I said incorrect? You can't jump to C from A, like I said. A = drug production increased since invasion. B = Bush has links to the drug business (which you said you have no proof of. C = Bush invaded afghanistan for drugs and profit. Stop while you're ahead dude.. In order for me to assign any value to your opinion, it needs facts or proof to back it up. The justification you use for not having those facts to tie Bush to drugs is "With Bush doing everything in his power to stop anyone from getting proof". So what you are saying is, Bush is keeping the facts hidden that would make your opinion correct. /boggle. You've shown me that your opinions aren't based on anything but the "gross generalisations" you accuse me of using. Opinions not based upon facts are worthless, so I'll continue to file your opinion in the "not worth my time or consideration" category. Good day.

So, your opinion isn't based of any facts and the justification for it is that the president is keeping the facts from you? Do you realize how completly !@#$%^&*ing stupid that sounds?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/06/unc.crash.ap/ Afghanistan was chosen because it was a hot bed for AQ, and likely strategic implications of its location relative to other nations. The fact that it was a relative "easy" target likely didn't hurt the decision either. As far as the opium thing, you're way out in left field grabbing for straws. The cost of the war far outweighs the profits that could be made from opium. Please don't try and tell me he did it for personal wealth, or the wealth of a select few friends. That'd be even more radical.

Seriously, don't be a dumb!@#$%^&*. If the only proof to your claim is the fact that production went up you're not using sound logic, you can't jump from A to C without B. The infant mortality rate went up, the USA went in to kill babies! More people in Afghanistan eat beans on a daily basis than 5 years ago, the USA invaded to help the bean farmers! I've heard alot of dumb!@#$%^&* theories before, but invading to increase opium production ranks up pretty !@#$%^&* high.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/de...html?page=5&c=y Alex Jones claim #1. Bombs took down the WTC Alex Jones claim #2"You can see the missles undearneath the planes as they fly up to the WTC" Alex Jones claim #3 "Fox News Reporter says he saw no windows on the plane, No windows = no 757!!!!" There's 9 pages of this on the link provided, or do you think the flash movie proves PM wrong?

..... Like I said, you're willing to take the word of a guy that has a voice editing program and some flash skills over engineers, scientists, and studied professors.. Yes, I watched the whole video. I don't believe the planes were strapped with missles, I don't believe I want to take people's quotes taken an hour after they witnessed planes fly into the WTC as proof, I don't believe that it was a huge conspiracy, and I don't believe you're actually willing to believe unsubstantiated claims in a flash video over people that really know wtf they are talking about. Like I said, the links dont provide you a flash video so you wont take the time to actually say "hmm, a 30 year professor of physics says this, BUT ALEX JONES SAYS THAT HE'S WRONG IN A FLASH VIDEO WITH SOME HIP MUSIC!!" "What, engineers that have spent millions of dollars studying what caused them to fall say this?, BUT ALEX JONES SAYS NO BUILDING IN HISTORY HAS FELL BECAUSE OF A FIRE!!" If you can't take the word of sources such as snopes, CadDigest, PBS, and the literal millions of other qualified, ligitimate sources out there that say the truth, continue to believe the governments out to get you. BTW, work on your reading comprehention, I know its tough cause they don't make flash videos for that either....

Nor did I say they ever were. You honestly don't believe that someone would have blown the whistle if they found out that the government setup 9/11. FFS you can't go a week without hearing something about some "super secret government program that no one heard about until our SECRET INFORMANT came forward". Seriously... Stop being purposefully receptive. I shouldn't have to s!@#$%^&* feed you information for you to research the validity of claims that a flash movie makes over !@#$%^&*ing google video.. Any more rediculous than claiming the government snuck in bombs and detonated them in plain view for the whole world to see? Ok, I'll s!@#$%^&* feed you like a child. Hopefully you'll believe the links I post, they wont provide you a nice little flash movie with a creepy voice and hip music so I don't know if they'll hold your attention for to long. http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pe...e_evidence.html http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml http://www.caddigest.com/subjects/wtc/index.htm http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html Thats all for now, the information isn't hard to find. Slightly harder than some other subjects because as mentioned before you've got all the "OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS OUT TO GET US MAN THEY WERE IN ON IT FOR OIL !@#$%^&* BUSH MAN HE'S HITLER" websites that all feed off of one another, cross posting and filling their sites with hearsay and no actual backing from anyone that would know wtf they were talking about. All resulting in an 1 hour 30 minute flash video that gets slapped on google and entrances folks like you, good sir.

A.) The government consists of so much beuracracy that if even 1 person got a sniff of any government involvement in 9/11 it'd be leaked to the press faster than (insert cliche) B.) If the government really wanted to bring down the towers to send us into war and decided they wanted to setup a scheme where saudi arabian terrorists hijacked airplanes and rammed them into the world trade center, don't you think with all that planning involved they'd be smart enough to detonate the bombs inside the WTC at the moment the plane hits the building, instead of eh, 30 minutes afterwards? Hey, we spent years pulling off this huge hoax successfully, and part of our plan is to detonate the bombs that bring down the world trade center 30 minutes after the plane hits, that way everyone in the united states of america can see them go off and they'll be tipped off to our plans.. That just doesn't make any sense. If you assume the government has the capability to plan and execute something like this, you've gotta assume they'd be smart enough to cover their tracks. C.) Just do a google search, weed through all the "OMG THERE TOTALLY IS A CONSPIRACY" from sites such as "greensagainstbush.com" or "bushi!@#$%^&*ler.net" and you'll find legitimate explinations refuting everything loose change accuses. D.) http://www.infowars.com/ is the website of the man who made loose change, Alex Jones. The website speaks for itself.

Monte stop being purposefully ignorant. You are trying to dispute Ailerons claim that Saddam's leadership would have kept control of Iraq for prolongued periods of time by making a comparison of the Baathist government and the communist russia. You claim that since communist russia, which shares alot of traits with the Baathist organization fell in 70 years, that obviously the baathist regime would have lasted around the same number of years. However you know that the logic is flawed because an outside variable (the united states) was introduced into the equation that eventually brought the USSR down. You have no way of knowing how long the USSR would have lasted if the United States hadn't intervened the way they did. The same arguement applies to Iraq and Saddam. You know all this though, you're a sharp guy, you're just being difficult.

What would christians have done if something offensive was made about them? The same thing we've done for the past 200 years, grin and bear it. You've got to be !@#$%^&*ing kidding yourself if you think Christians/Jews/Buddhists/Catholics don't get made fun of/offended on a daily basis. All the muslims that are destroying property and killing people over cartoons should be shot, Its ignorance and intolerance like yours thats turned a faction of islam into a militant organization.

You're using the fact that the USSR's system fell flat on its face to support your !@#$%^&*ertion that the Iraqi system would have done the same. The USSR wouldn't have fell if it wasn't for the United States.

After his big long post about what makes communism self sustaining you commented that communism russia only lasted 70 years, as to discredit his !@#$%^&*ertion that communism is setup to prevent revolution.

So you're saying communism brought itself down?

If by "Europe" you mean France and Germany. I'm sure the crates stamped with their nations names full of weapons in the middle of Saddam International didn't play a role in their interpretation either...

So, if you're the leader of a country who for the last decade has heard "you better or the US will come !@#$%^&* you up", but the US never comes, you gonna keep listening to the cries of wolf or are you gonna start to think the US/UN really doesn't have the resolve? Hindsight proved him right. If you're guessing how many pieces of bubble gum are in a candy store "I think" will suffice. If you're dealing with how many WMD's a country has "I think" doesn't cut it. This goes back to Saddam proving he did destroy them, which under the 1991 agreement he HAD to do along with a laundry list of other things. However, he didn't. This left us in a situation of, Hans Blix says Saddam might have destroyed them, multiple intelligence agencies said they haven't. I thought it made tons of sense. If i've got a paramilitary group saying we'll attack the U.S, and take the blame for it, as long as you help us out with $$ or equiptment, and I'm Saddam, I'd do it in a heartbeat. A.)It hurts the US B.) It takes attention off of me.

So you honestly think the UN and its 3 seperate orders of inspections actually made Saddam destroy his weapons? Like what, let the UN keep running inspections only to get kicked out? ROFL Your first fact was only known after the fact, though I know you're one of the people who believed we shouldn't have taken the word of the US government, English government, Russian government, Israeli government, etc etc, and likely believe that Bush just made up the WMD threat. Comeon Monte, you're telling me that UN "inspections", the same ones that Saddam kicked out of his country twice, kept tabs on every second they were in his country, didn't allow them into areas unless he wanted them there, actually would have prevented Saddam from getting weapons if he wanted them? I'm seriously not convinced that he destroyed all his weapons, and was without desire to acquire them. Some people believe that. To me, If I'm genuinely interested in cooperating with the world community and doing what they want me to, I not only destroy weapons, I all in the UN to watch while I do it, do!@#$%^&*ent everything I destroy and hand deliver it to the Security Councle, and make every effort I can to show the world I'm not an insane !@#$%^&*. That's just me though. At the time of the war we thought there was a connection. Now that there isn't we move to option B.) Hopefully having a government that is friendly to the United States in the middle east. With the most recent hoopla over the "outrage" behind the danish cartoons, it just shows how critical it would be to have a situation like that come true. Interestingly enough, what is the 1 country in the middle east that you do not hear about any crazy violence over the cartoons? I'd give you a hint but you don't need one. The difference is we know Castro's full of !@#$%^&*. Multiple intelligence agencies were telling us different about Saddam. What baffles me is that if Saddam truely was destroying weapons, why didn't he just say "come watch me". Why have the monkey on his back for 10 years? You honestly want me to believe that if Saddam had the capability and the equiptment to attack the U.S, and do it through a third party who, even if they did say "Saddam told us to!!, we wouldn't believe, that he wouldn't do it? Seriously though, this is an old, tired arguement, instead of being stuck on "OMG THAT WAS !@#$%^&*ING STUPID TO GO INTO IRAQ OMG OMG" deal with the here and now? ffs, even Iraq in its current state is better than every other country in the middle east. It's one of the worlds fastest growing economies, extremely high voter turnout, forming its own government, over 20 free press agencies, etc, etc, etc, etc. Its got alot going wrong, but it also has alot going right.