Who was the Conservative Republican Senator who gave this speech?

Yup, it's become a sport. People want their team to win the Super Bowl/World Series/Stanley Cup/etc, and they want their guy to win the election. Regardless if there are better options out there.....the people want to WIN. Unfortunately at the expense of the American Dream.

It's exactly what George Washington warned us about in his farewell address. He saw it coming from the very beginning but no one listened.

 

I think that was all you said. Where were the lies?

?

 

Totally agree man. It is enough to make anyone a cynic, and part of the reason I haven't voted in the last couple of elections.

 

The lies are in the whole premise of being cost-effective and lowering the budget. He has spent more than Bush, in his first term alone.

"Fast and Furious," was discovered due to the murder of a US Border Guard.
For all we know, he can still be smuggling guns into mexico. They said it was "to track where guns are going," but with no tracking devices, (or anything of that nature,) in the guns, it was probably just another Criminal-Government Racket.

Then, with Syria. Several of the groups are Jihadist.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ouches-for-jihadist-group-in-court-affidavit/

They've also kidnapped (and possibly killed,) all prominent Bishops and priests, and raided a Christian town. On top of that, there is no true Civil War going on in Libya. NATO has stated that 90% of Syrians from Syria support Assad- that's more support than Obama has.

 

In the speech... the lies in the speech.

I thought that was what you were referring to...
Did you not imply that he was purposely supplying guns 'to mexico' - I presume you were implying he purposely provided guns to drug cartels so they could protect themselves...

Need a bit more than that...

 

I think "rhetoric" or hypocrisies explain it better. It's not a lie to contradict yourself, but it shows their true deceptive nature, and the problem with American politics in it's entirety; Americans are too ill-informed of the facts, and too accepting to emotions and whim. Obama's charm won him the 2012 election (if our voting process isn't rigged totally.) He had virtually the same policy as Mitt Romney.

I mean, over 60% of Americans want a Third Party Candidate; That should tell the Democrats who believe in "democracy" to see there's a problem. That's enough people to start 2 more parties the size of the mainstream ones.

But a lot of people are too ill informed about the true issues to vote. To them, I say "don't vote!" That's how we keep ending up with these crazies in office- public whim and mental colonization.

Mexican drug cartels kill kids, and, stuff their bodies with Cocaine. They kidnap Mexican men, and force them into Drug Dealing and smuggling and, there are parts of America, where Americans can't go, because there are hostile drug cartels sneaking drugs into our border. So I didn't say they did it to "defend themselves." But I, not only think it's possible, but probable, since government does all types of criminal activity to make money from bad policies.

The Drug cartels are a result of our failed drug policy, but instead of ending the drug war, we're selling them guns to "track guns." How many guns were "tracked" other than the ONE that was used to kill the border guard?

To me, it's astounding people are still caught in the Matrix of Government Propaganda, when we catch them red handed CONSTANTLY. The one question you need to ask, with any terrorist attack or potential war is Cui bono? Who benefits?

When one examines how government has gotten us into nearly every single war, and you realize there's industries that make money for war, you just put 2 and 2 together.

For the record, I also posted a mainstream report that shows the US government was supporting a Syrian rebel group, with a website, that depicted militants riding away on horseback, with the white house burning behind them, but Odon "needs more." You just side with the government on every issue, and refute any argument with this. My point was that Obama's a hypocrite for trying to take guns, when he supplies guns to shady characters; and I have made that point.

Government is not supposed to be above the law; It is apathetic and complacent people who allow them to get away with stuff. Or it's the belief that it is for the "greater good." But that's a relative term. None of this is "good" for citizens who don't like endless war, Constitutional violations, unfettered government power, propaganda or, loosing freedom!

To believe we're gaining freedom by loosing freedom is a huge fallacy of lethargy.

 

Unfortunately, I think you're spot on.

 

My point was that Karen isn't participating in this thread, so who are your posts directed towards? Your posts would be much better received if you made it obvious who you were talking to, by either quoting them or mentioning their name at the beginning of the post. When I said you were making an argument I didn't say that your arguments were incorrect, but just that the way you make those arguments is flawed since you're basically arguing against someone who doesn't exist (or at least, someone who is not defined to anyone but yourself).

For example in this post, you for some reason mention Karen (who, again, is not actually here, unless she posted and I didn't see it), but then divert to 'they', and 'you guys', and 'Obama supporters', instead of actually indicating who you're talking to.

An example:

Then who were you referring to? What specific policies, and who supports them? Give us some names and tell us what you're talking about, so that we can actually understand what you're trying to say.

 

Good grief, I'm talking about THE SPEECH. NOT your general opinion. WHAT lies where mentioned in THE SPEECH. If you have no idea, just say: 'I have no idea'. It's simple enough. All of this skirting around the issue is quite draining.

Well, you don't say. This is news to me.

This actually means nothing, you do realise that?

Why were guns 'sold'? That's the point. What was the reason?

I don't think you posted anything related to Obama supporting AQ.
You are not providing much.
You are providing 'evidence' that can be depicted as...
That is VERY different than providing actual 'proof'.
You have NOT provided an argument.
You know as well as I know 'supplying guns' is far from the truth.
YOU characterise it as willingly giving guns to drug cartels and AQ for their wishes - which is far from the truth.

Blah, Blah, and some more Blah.

Blah, Blah, and some more Blah.

We call people like you BS artists...

 

Don't yell. I'm not 'skirting around the issue,' I clearly said his words have no substance when stacked next to his policy of raising the debt perpetually. The man is a hypocritical con artist.

Financing anti-American rebel groups isn't much to you? I think the evidence we've seen, is quite damning. How much "evidence" do you need to have "proof?" There's a lot of evidence that the governments corrupt, but one can always say there's "no proof." But government has planned terrorist attacks, and have let citizens die as an excuse for war. To many, that is proof right there. To government sympathizers, everything is for their "safety" or well-being. That's not how the actual government works though. They do what is mandatory, and, whatevers gonna make them rich, by screwing the middle class.

I've provided plenty of examples, on this thread, and, throughout my time here.

How do YOU know what their intentions were? There was no way to track those guns, and they weren't tracked. Therefore, I strongly believe that it was a government lie. People can say anything, it doesn't make it true. The truth is that drug cartels ended up with guns, from the Federal Government. Your problem is, you take the governments story as pure fact, and don't believe otherwise, unless someones has pictures or incriminating evidence; Even then, I doubt you would question government much.

The comment in this thread was about OBAMA. It's an Obama speech, after all. You're just using a bunch of fluff, attempting to discredit me.

The topic was Obama's speech, (one of many of his hypocrisies,) and I named others. I wasn't attacking anyone, I was simply stating my opinions on Obama and his flip-flopping.

I was talking to 'Obama supporters,' you just said it yourself. I didn't indicate who I was talking to, cause I wasn't talking to anyone. I was talking about contradictions of Obama, I didn't mean to offend anyone. I was merely saying that you can't have your cake, and eat it too. His supporters pretend like he's this perfect president, when he's one of the most deceptive and, corrupt. I want people to investigate the other side of the story, (in many instances,) and question the official story. It's not "UnAmerican," to question authority with perceived absolute power. The Federal Government shouldn't be judge, jury and, executioner. This is America, and our policians must adhere to the Constitution, or the people will revolt. (Not Obama supporters, but American citizens and patriots.)

Our Human Rights are above government; It is obvious today, government thinks they're above the law, but they're not! and they're certainly NOT above our Human Rights either!

I was saying that he misled people, or changed his ways since being president, because he has skyrocketed the debt. But, his other contradictory policies are: Not closing Gitmo, claiming the right to detain American citizens, Re-enstated the patriot act, (which he spoke against in 2008,) has executed innocent teenage American citizens, sells gun abroad,(for whatever reason,) made an UnConsitutional regime change in Libya, attempted the same in Syria, Drone strikes countries we arn't at war with, etc etc etc.

That is what I call a BS Artist. That's why I can't help but to be critical of him, and, anyone who supports them. They literally legitimize everything we fought against with Bush!

 

For starters, you've quoted me but attached Odon's name to it. Secondly, I think you missed the entire point of my post, and I'm tired of trying, so I'm just going to not bother anymore. This is a lost cause.

 

I didn't do it purposely, I just "pasted" the name, thinking I had your name.

Entire point? What was the point? You're just trying to make it look like I'm attacking people over nothing, and I'm not.

I didn't miss your post, I read it. But, I get this shit all the time from people here. It's not my fault you want to think highly of a man who kill citizens and violates fundamental Human Rights daily. If that wasn't your point, what was it?

I'm too mean and critical? When one looks into Obama's policies, it's hard not to be critical of people who support such violence for their own (perceived) comfort and safety.

The only reason I'm getting such resistence, is because it is OBAMA. If I was talking about Bush, or his supporters, you leftist would be totally silent.

However, because I'm talking about a black Democrat, everyone has to fly off the handle, and make invalid arguments against my opinion. I have laid out clear and concise facts about Obama and his malicious policies. The only way someone can fight back, is name calling or otherwise putting the blame on me (or Republicans.)

Neither one of those excuses work with me, so yeah, you're wasting your time.

Plus, the two people I'm conversing with, obviously don't know or respect the US Constitution or, American Human Rights. Defending Obama is just like defending Bush. In fact, supporting Obama is supporting the Elite, constant war, domestic spying and, government being above the law.

I don't care if they say they don't believe in this stuff, it's obvious when you look at Obama's policies. People idolize him like a god, and that's really scary when you can see the power grab he's involved in. He wants to take our guns, when as I said, he supplies guns to violent criminals. (for WTVR reason,) He still does it!

If you support Obama, you support domestic spying, failed drug policies, bigger government, government being above the law and, an endless war on "terror," which, will soon be targeting American citizens like me, who believe in the US Constitution.


Already the DHS is telling their agents to watch for "People with 3rd party bumber stickers" and, patriots who believe in the American Rule of Law.

Not only is it pointless to support Obama, it's dangerous too. He's destroying the founding principles of this country, in the name of tyranny, and, there's plenty of "Evidence;" But no, you wont find a speech from government or the mainstream media TELLING you what's really going on.

But how can you explain that to people who ignore history and cold hard facts? You can't, because they will ALWAYS divert the blame, or change the subject.

 

Bah, one last post on this.

I'm not trying to make it look like you're attacking people over nothing! I'm trying to point out that you're attacking a fictional character that you have constructed in your head! Less than 20% of Americans now say they trust their government 'most of the time', so who are you arguing with? Almost everyone says that they don't trust the government. You're inventing an opponent and then repeating the same shit over, and over, and over, no matter if anyone has disagreed with you at all. It gets old. Fast.

 

I'm 'yelling' because you are NOT answering the question.
You can say: 'his words have no substance when stacked next to his policy of raising the debt perpetually' at any point and at any time you like. It's not answering the question.

Clearly more than what has been given so far...

How do YOU know what their intentions were?
People can say anything, it doesn't make it true.

The difference between you and I is that I don't try and imply something based on fresh air.
You won't even admit it's your opinion or it could be false.
I know the intentions were not to provide guns to drug cartels for giggles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal
You don't have to believe everything - you just have to base what you are saying on something.
What you have is: guns were given to drug cartels.../end

= Obama lies /end

 

I'm not inventing anything, and you should know that. It's most obvious here on this forum. There are TONS of people who still blindly follow Obama and the Government.

Your poll is misleading; Obama and Government is two different things. Obama supporters blame republicans, like I said, who, also constitute as Government.

I do admit, Obama's approval rating is dropping from the start of the year, when he was over 60%, but, 42% approval rating today, is WAY more than he deserves!

You KNOW I'm talking about real people, the ONLY reason you say otherwise is because his supporters don't believe they support certain policies. But, to support a man that does these things, is virtually the same as supporting these policies yourself.

No one can defend his policies, if not through blind faith and government conformism. To say these people don't exist, is insane.

Read around a bit; You'll see people saying Obama "doesn't support terrorists," and, other members accusing Bush and Republicans of Obama's faults (like the patriot act.) Bush may have started it, but Obama signed it TWICE.

You say you don't support Obama, but do you give this much of a hard time to people mad at Bush after 6 years? Doubt it. But today, we have a president who is literally thrashing our Constitution, and you think my anger toward him isn't justified? Or you think there is no one who still supports this man?

He has a 42% Approval rating, which is totally mind blowing. I don't see how anyone would still support him.

I'm just distinguishing the difference of Obama hypocrisies and lies, as opposed to the reality of his policies, because Democrats don't know, or they turn a blind eye, in the name of colonized conformity.

That may work for Canada and the UK; But not in a land that has fundamental Human Rights, and a Founding document to the contrary.The laws Obama has passed are a disgusting abuse of power. For which, he should be tried for High Treason. There's NO reason for me to shut my mouth, and conform with everyone else. I want to see something done, to set an example for any future presidents. Plus, he deserves a punishment for attempting to overrule the Constitution, and American Rule of Law.

Killing US citizens is serious shit, and should be treated as such. I would go to prison for a LONG time, if I killed someone.

Obama's approval rating is just above Bushes 6 years into his presidency; He had a 39% approval rating. I wont be happy till Obama's is a 30 or lower. He really doesn't even deserve 1% of support, but he'll always have that, cause the "1%" overwhelmingly support Obama.

As I said, I'm just exposing the hypocrisies of Democrats. I'd do the same with Republicans, if they were at fault. I believe it's BOTH sides at fault, and people need to learn to see through the propaganda. I'm critical because I'm giving tough love; I want Democrats can see what they actually support, so they can decide if they want to be hypocrites forever, or, if they want to fight government force on innocent people.

They claim to be "different" and the "lesser evil," but moderate citizens like me, can't see that. They actually support government force the same as republicans, without a pesky declaration of war, or a Constitutional reason!

 

Yes, it is. I didn't mean there were literally lies in the speech, I meant it was Obama's propaganda. He has raised the debt by 8 TRILLION dollars (with a T.) So, obviously everything in this speech was rhetoric. He isn't trying to FIX the debt, or the economy; People who still believe this jargon after 6 years of just the opposite, are being lied to in a way. He says one thing, and does another. That's dishonest, and technically lying.

No, it's not. Obama supporting a group that hung an Al Qaeda flag has been presented as well as, a mainstream media outlet stating that the Government was financing groups who depict Muslims riding away on horseback, from a burning White House. How is that NOT proof, or at least, damning evidence that we are supporting Al Qaeda??

It's possible it's false, but not probable. The government is known to get us into wars and commit criminal activity. You're making my point for me, with that link. NO GUNS were 'tracked' other than ones found in crimes in the US and Mexico. To me, the "tracking guns" thing, sounds like a petty excuse to hide the truth. Again, you believe anything the government says. We found out Mexican drug cartels got guns from our government, and you automatically believe this absurd "gun tracking," government story.

This is one of hundreds of Contradictions of Obama, though. One example; HE said before the election the president didn't have power to attack a country without Congress, and that went out the window twice, since he's been in office (Libya and Syria.)

There's MANY MANY more, but that's good for now...

I was saying he's a hypocrite. He gives guns to radicals, while trying to take them away from law-abiding citizens. He kills tons of innocent women and children with his drone strikes, then he acts upset when children die at home, or mad when women/children die in Syria. He's a "Constitutional scholar," yet, constantly violates the Constitution.He believes in the 1st Amendment when people want to talk about taking the 2nd away, but he doesn't support it when one's protesting the government, or, in a religion opposed to contraceptives.

He is a total hypocrite. I could tell you other contradictions and lies, but that could take all night. Plus, I know you wont listen anyway. Idk if you're this apathetic with your government, or you don't care, because you're not American (I'm guessing the former.) However, the American Constitution is important to many citizens, soldiers and, police, who many, are totally opposed to Obama as well.

Democrats hold an ignorant perception of anyone who dislikes Obama as either racist, republican or, rich. That's just a misguilded perception, helping his supporters drown out any facts, with anger. If they can keep us hating each other, we can never join together and collaborate against the true enemy, (them.) At least I'm talking about a group who believe and support things I find morally reprehensible. It is better than hating someone, because they dislike my "team!"

 

Finally, a straight answer.

What 'group' is this?
Who hung it on the top of the courthouse?
Is it still there?
How long was it up there for?
What does one flag flying somewhere actually mean?
What evidence is there that Obama supported/financed this group?
What evidence is there that: Government was financing groups who depict Muslims riding away on horseback, from a burning White House.
Would you like to quote that part of the articles that mentioned any of this?

It doesn't really take much to be: 'damning evidence that we are supporting Al Qaeda' in your world does it?
I guess where lies are not lies, anything is possible.
It's nice to know that your bar is so high with regards to 'damning evidence'.

You did not mention what the given goal of the operation was/is.
The guns were tracked but lost.
'ATF monitored the sale of about 2,000 firearms, of which only 710 were recovered as of February 2012'
Again, your level of 'damning evidence' is incredibly high here.

I would believe what ATF officers have said: It's a FU. A major FU.

I think you might be missing out 90% of the story.
I guess that helps you.

 

The Fox news article I posted;

RT gets more into it, saying she vouched for their financing. Also, you don't find it a little odd that people were arming the opposition, but allegedly not us? Also, most media "experts" on CNN were lies.

A majority of Syrians don't support the rebels because they're Jihadist. They raided a christian town and kidnapped Bishops. Here is proof Jihadists are receiving guns from America.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/15/w...eceiving-most-arms-sent-to-syrian-rebels.html

Read the Fox news Article like a page back.

When someone is consistently guilty, it's more of a "usual suspect" type thing. The US government has been corrupt. They believe they're above the law. Americans have been a bit complacent the past hundred years,but some of us are starting to read between the lines. Once you realize The Defense Industry ties into our government, then, the wars, bogus stories, government criminality and, scandals actually start making sense.

'I guess where lies are not lies, anything is possible.' This is funniest remark, coming from someone who believes government lies, without even pondering other explanations

It's nice to know that your bar is wherever the government tells it to be.

That's what we know of. They could've had several 'operations,' the citizens don't know about. When our government doesn't want information getting out, they hide it, under the HUGE blanket of "National Security." I can tell you things we've recently found out, that's been classified since the 60's- The Gulf of Token incident and, Operation Northwoods.

America doesn't make sense with the governments lies. We fight for.. freedom? We don't even have freedom here at home! They believe they can take that stuff away if they can scare us.

You should read into the things I talk about, and maybe you'd realize why I feel how I do. Government has gotten too big, and has broken the Constitution repeatedly, which shows they have no regard for our Human Rights.

So again, you're just trusting the government, without even contemplating another side of the story. It wasn't proven that this was about tracking guns, and we don't know if they're still "tracking" by selling guns. My original point was that he is a hypocrite to try to take our guns, when he gives guns to people far worse than American Citizens! And, I believe I have proven that point.

Do you mean the 90% government coverup? It helps them to have the power of public information. You're just trusting high ranking government lies. A lot of people in government is bought by businesses. I also remember you saying the FAA should regulate themselves on Domestic Drone use, and that would suffice. I'm just the opposite; I think when government's wrong, the wrong factions of government should be punished, and, the problem should be corrected. Instead we've been overtaken by businesses and Lobbyist. That's not opinion, that's a fact. I've said to you before, there may never be anything substantial enough for you to see as proof, but, once you put the pieces together, the pictures in front of you face.

 

StpLSD25

'Obama supporting a group that hung an Al Qaeda flag'
'The Fox news article I posted'
'Read the Fox news Article like a page back.'

The Fox News article you posted was referring to Al Aqsa Islamic Brigade in Syria. The Courthouse is in Benghazi, Libya...

Your article doesn't mention anything about:

• What 'group' is this?
• Who hung it on the top of the courthouse?
• Is it still there?
• How long was it up there for?
• What does one flag flying somewhere actually mean?
• What evidence is there that Obama supported/financed this group?

Do you want to give that one another go?

'What evidence is there that: Government was financing groups who depict Muslims riding away on horseback, from a burning White House.'

'RT gets more into it, saying she vouched for their financing.'

Wouldn't it have been better to post the RT article that supposedly mentions that she: 'vouched for their financing' - rather than a portion of the Fox News article that doesn't?

'Her writings had been used by U.S. officials to bolster their case for military action against the Assad regime.' doesn't mean she 'vouched for their financing' (all the articles I have read just mention she has been discredited and that John Kerry referenced her article)

'I guess where lies are not lies, anything is possible.' This is funniest remark, coming from someone who believes government lies, without even pondering other explanations

I probably ponder other explanations about as much as you do.

'Here is proof Jihadists are receiving guns from America.'

Well, not really.
And not in the manner in which you insinuate (directly)...

Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle Eastern diplomats.

'A majority of Syrians don't support the rebels because they're Jihadist.'

How would you know?

I suppose you are saying all the 'rebels' are terrorists...?

For months, Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been funneling money and small arms to Syria’s rebels but have refused to provide heavier weapons

Saudi officials here said the United States was not barring them from providing shoulder-fired missiles, but warning about the risks. The Saudis and Qataris said they hoped to convince their allies that those risks could be overcome. “We are looking at ways to put in place practices to prevent this type of weapon from falling into the wrong hands,” one Arab official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity in line with diplomatic protocol.

The Obama administration has made clear that it has no desire to deepen its efforts, mostly providing logistical support for the rebels.

'That's what we know of. They could've had several 'operations,' the citizens don't know about. When our government doesn't want information getting out, they hide it, under the HUGE blanket of "National Security."'

Well, you was referring to one operation. I didn't realise we were speculating about others.

'I can tell you things we've recently found out, that's been classified since the 60's- The Gulf of Token incident and, Operation Northwoods.'

You already have approx' eight times.

'You should read into the things I talk about, and maybe you'd realize why I feel how I do.'

I do sometimes.
You just interprete information differently than I do.
Or you choose to interprete information differently.
(See above with you saying: Obama (is) directly financing terrorism and directly providing arms to terrorists. Or, suggesting all the 'rebels' are terrorists - so that you could claim Obama was directly supplying arms to terrorists.)

'So again, you're just trusting the government, without even contemplating another side of the story.'

What that the 'operation', I accept was occurring, FU? Why should I?

'It wasn't proven that this was about tracking guns, and we don't know if they're still "tracking" by selling guns.'

What would you like to see - government barcodes on the guns?

'I also remember you saying the FAA should regulate themselves on Domestic Drone use, and that would suffice.'

Well, you have a shocking memory.

 

Idk what group it is, and I realize the difference between Libya and Syria. I was getting a little ahead of myself on that post.

Whoever hung it, was affiliated or in support of Al Qaeda, and that courthouse was also the birthplace of the "Libyan revolution."

No, it isn't still there, once it hit American news, it was removed. But, if you look into Gaddafi's story, he met with Obama 6 months before he was killed, came to America, used some harsh words regarding the UN, and, perhaps most importantly, his country is very gold rich, and he was about to invest in the Gold Dinar to contest the dollar.

It's just really odd to me, that dictators that work with the American government, are boosted and supported by our government; However, Leaders with high regard from their people, can turn into "brutal regimes," with the help of American media, practically overnight.

Gaddafi said his people love him, and that the people robbing his armories and, causing havoc on the streets, was Al Qaeda, and youth that Al Qaeda drugged, and manipulated. And,I believe him, because, America had so many other motives, and it happened so quickly and pointlessly.

This is why I believe how I do. I see the governments many lies and simular situations, and I put 2 and 2 together. We don't just intupret information differently, we also have a difference in our faith in government; I have very little faith the US government.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2U_GmK6SRs"]Libya: The Fall of Gaddafi - Stuff They Don't Want You to Know - YouTube

Because, you've clearly stated you don't trust RT. Besides, I was searching for it, and I couldn't find it. So fair enough- I can't "prove" that. But again, you have more faith in government than me. But the point was, Obama gives guns to radicals, and tries to take guns from citizens who are only protecting themselves.

Ok. I'm just saying that our government plays the good guy, when really they'll prop up dictators, Al Qaeda or, whoever, if their Defense industry buddies are profitting somehow.

That's not where I got the whole story. I had read/listened to Syrian websites, and Syrian citizens.That's how I know they don't like the Jihadist much. Syrian troops took back the Christian town I was talking about, and Syrians (believing in free religion,) held up signs in support.
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/New...ops-retake-Christian-town-from-jihadists.html

Because Assad has 70% support of his country, and I've read Syrians articles who are afraid of Muslim extremists, and support Assads secular world views, for Syria.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article178779.html

No, but the biggest one's are. Still, it's only 30% of their population, and they're trying to change Syria for the worse, and Syrians realize that.



Here is evidence Assad has tons of support, and the Syrians respect his government over the rebels.
http://friendsofsyria.co/support-in-syria/

For months, Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been funneling money and small arms to Syria’s rebels but have refused to provide heavier weapons

So, you're telling me the government is sending them weapons, even considering rocket launchers, but, "looking at ways to put in place practices to prevent this type of weapon from falling into the wrong hands"

Let's look at the American media, and the way the portrayed the Syrian "civil war;" They lied with regards to "Syria Danny," they lied with regards to who the rebels were, and we didn't get the full story of the chemical "attack." Thank you though for proving that the is a lot of interests in Syria. Mostly probably oil.

The only reason I brought it up, was to prove it's hypocritical to take our weapons, while supplying really shady people with even more high tech weapons, and, I believe all the evidence is sufficant to say the government does supply shady people with weapons.

I don't think I said directly. But we've known from the start, the "Free Syrian Army" are loosing guns and people to Al Qaeda. Why would you keep send them guns then? The reason is because America's businesses have interests in Syria.

Idk what you're talking about. I think everything in Syria was a bunch of lies, to get Americans to hate Assad, like we did Saddam. I think the "Civil war" consists of outside Al Qaeda groups, and very few Syrian citizens. I believe the businesses at the head of the US government, had some type of interests there.

If you're trying to track something, maybe something like an RFID chip. It makes no sense why they think they can track guns by selling them off. Anyway my point was that we don't know what all the government does, except when we catch them, in cases like this; However, we need to analyze
and interpret the information, and, a lot of times when I do that, I realize they're not really allowed to do most of the stuff the get away with. I know you take information like I do too, but I feel like you're not looking at the big picture; The government has consistently crossed it's bounds in the name of "peace," and, "Security," yet, we have neither. We also don't have the freedom of which our country was founded. We don't interpet differently, we perceive differently. You have a trust for the American government, and all governments, that I do not share. I see everything the government has done, and I blame our enemies and the collapse of our economy, on government, and the businesses who control them.

They're not "above the law," as it seems in America today. That is why i feel how I do, and the Constitution or (the Magna Carta in the UK,) is supposed to protect against unfettered power. To a degree, you are supporting government being above the law, because you're telling people fighting it, to back off, and rely on government to fix itself. And that's why I brought up the FAA thing; It is my personal opinion, that allowing the government to regulate itself, is essentially unfettered power. I also think it will lead to problems down the road, as the government is watching citizens on facebook and, on their phones.


And that's all I can really say. Government today is working against the Human Rights of the Constitution and Magna Carta, and all they have to offer us is empty promises, and all they've given us our empty promises.

Government can't even run thei roads as nicely as private businesses, the premise that we "need" government, is where you and I differ. I think we pay them for services, and when they charge too much, and kill our fellow citizens, it is time to re-examine them and their role in our lives. That's where we differ I think...