Whistle blower faces 100 years for blowing the cover CIA Plantng False evidence

only the right doesn't realize lower taxes means less bullets.

 

ISIS wouldn't even exist if it weren't for neo-cons like Cheney and Bolton, and the wars that the neo-cons have started over the years have killed far more people than ISIS has or ever will. The Iran-Iraq war, which was instigated by the US, caused the death of millions, and the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003 has caused millions of deaths.

And what right or authority do they have to destroy the Iranian government? Do you think the people of Iran should sit idly by while a foreign power like the US attempts to dictate to every Iranian what their government should be?

 

Not necessarily. That is why not even the most hardcore statist in America is proposing a 100% tax rate, because they realize that taxation has a negative impact on economic growth and development, and that there is an optimal tax rate that maximizes revenues.

And failing that, they can simply print the money and finance their wars through inflation.

 

Yes, necessarily for any good Capitalists; but, maybe not socialists who merely allege to be capitalists. Wartime Tax rates as a prerequisite for Any delegation of wartime (social) powers could preclude wasting the (other) People's tax monies on a generational basis while not calling it a form of theft; through the Burdens on Commerce well regulated, known as our "wars" on the abstractions of crime, drugs, poverty, and terror.

 

Daddyofall said:

And there I was thinking that I was something of a thoughter. I'm devastated.

I'm not a big fan of the BBC to be perfectly honest. Were you aware that the Beeb have a permanent officer from MI5 (known as "the man in the raincoat") in situ to vet any sensitive story? But then I'm not a big fan of any major news outlet either, as I'm really quite old fashioned and like to have my news unadulterated or spun.

It's important to view all stories with a degree of cynacism, in my opinion. Do they make internal sense in and of their own accord? In the BBC story in question, the logic of the piece is of a media corporation journo, 7 days after 9/11, trying to develop background on the person the US had decided was responsible for 9/11 (which as I said earlier I simply don't hold to be true). Therefore, the article is less likely to be tainted by editorial overlay. In other words before the fix was fully in place.

Sorry, but for me critical thinking and honesty are the important things. Whatever it is that you're selling, I don't believe either of those two attributes form the basis of your posts.

 

You live in a different world than I do. In mine, Saddam provoked the war. The argument that ISIS was created by neocons is ridiculous, considering the world context, and all the other extremist struggles. And I think it's clear to all who don't have an agenda that the deaths in Iraq, as well as those in Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Egypt, Somalia, Kenya, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, are the result of Islamic extremists.

Self defense.

 

Any time I see a headline that includes the initials "CIA" I know I don't know what to think of it.